This is the point that dragonuser missed.

ViaVoice can be trained from installation in 15-30 minutes, depending on the speed and clarity of enunciation of the new user. I have seen this done by new users.

It is the document analysis which takes time, and depends on the number of words or phrases being added, and the speed and clarity at which one speaks. Obviously training in medical terms, including the Latin versions, must take time. However three hours is not, in my view, lengthy for this type of operation.

Surely one has to do this with DNS, unless one has the medical version.

The same would apply to legal terms, although this has become less problematical in the UK and Ireland, where the tendency is to use English speak, rather than legal speak, as opposed to the US, where I have noted that documents are written in lengthy archaic legal terms (that's because US lawyers want to make sure that their clients do not understand documents, and can then charge for the time spent in interpreting for them, and in addition they charge by the word!! [only joking] ). (I have noted US multi-page documents which can be reduced by over 75 %, and still have the same results.)

I would agree that it it appears to perform better in Windows 2000 than XP, and this is because 2000 is not such a resource eater. However this can be overcome by adding Ram, and with XP, I would always recommend not less than 1 Gb, and with XP, one needs a CPU of not less than 1.6 MHz for the best results.

Some time ago I reported on the performance of VV on a 1.6 MHz Core 2 Duo laptop with XP, where the speed was phenomenal.

It was also mentioned on this thread that one can buy VV on eBay very cheaply. One would have to be very careful about this, since there are VV 10 pre 10.5 versions for sale at very cheap prices. This is false economy. It is better to buy 10.5 from a reputable dealer, knowing that it is compatible with Microsoft Office versions up to 2003, as well as other programmes up to the same date.

Quentin

SOrry: I DID not put down DNS. I use both products inmy practice. Some of my employees like Dragon 9.5. . Some areas where Via voice is more user friendly:
1) creating digital voice signatures
2)creating Formatted Macros
3) Embedding time date stamps with little effort
4) Extremely high accuracy in technical writing, particularly in medicine.
I do not know the politics of companies and why IBM did what it did. If anyone at Nuance is listening, they need to make the Via Voice compatible with Vista ( just because these newer machines are cheaper, more freely available and faster) . The market is now really excellent. I would qualify myself as a power user of voice transcription technology. "The 90% out of the box" with or without 20 min training is hogwash with any speech product in the market today. The specialty vocabularies are not really that useful,certainly not worth the price. Each user has to formulate his own vocab and macros to make these things work without a hitch. This is particularly true if you transcribe more than 20 pages of printed text/day as I often do. For occasional use like dictating a letter any product including the ridiculous Vista's speech engine will do.

Narayanachar S. Murali, MD,FACP, FACG
www.drmurali.com

I've been teaching DNS Legal and Medical to clients for years. I would agree with you that the average doctor and/or lawyer is not initially, and perhaps even in the long term, savvy enough to know how to make use of DNS Professional, Legal, or Medical to the fullest extent possible, or even, perhaps, as simply as you have done with ViaVoice. However, I can usually bring them up to speed with a minimal amount of training. I do look at the needs of the end-user as well is at their experience when considering speech recognition. However, I take issue with you on ViaVoice vs. DNS Re: professional transcription. DNS doesn't fall down in this area. In fact, take a look at CustomSpeechUSA and look what they are doing with transcription and SR. This is only one example of what is being done with regard to speech recognition and add-on programs and capabilities. CustomSpeechUSA actually uses a multiple combination of ViaVoice, DNS 9.5, and Windows Vista a speech recognition in a multiple approach to dictation and transcription using a workflow environment, over the telephone, via a digital voice recorders, etc., etc. I worked with them for a couple of years. My point here is simply that there is a lot more going on out there then simply SR in and of itself.

I also presented DNS at over 800 user groups across the country between 1997 and 2002. Even though I'm no longer associated with Nuance, I still do presentations to user groups, physicians, dentists, lawyers, hospitals, etc.

In addition, the court system in Canada uses in DNS for court reporting and transcribing court records. With some add-on macros, court reporters in Canada are able to dictate at over 250 words per minute with virtually 99.99% accuracy, and their requirements far and exceed what the average physician needs.

Keep in mind that I'm not putting ViaVoice down. Personally, I didn't find it very effective except in terms of its strengths, which both you and I have already outlined. However, as an overall speech recognition program I find DNS to be much more accurate and practically useful for my purposes. However, that's a personal opinion. I'll stress again if ViaVoice works for you, or for the physicians that you work with and/or know, that's fine. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I stress this to everyone that I've ever trained or spoken with. It doesn't matter what version of any speech recognition application you're using. If it works for you that's the end of it, and I won't try to sell anybody on anything else. Choosing a speech recognition application is not a matter of what application is better or worse, it's a matter of what works best for the particular end-user, and which application they prefer and like best. That's the most important factor. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense for somebody who finds ViaVoice to be effective and practical for them to switch over to Dragon NaturallySpeaking simply because someone else has taunted that as a better SR application with more power. That doesn't make sense to me. That's like going out to buy a car knowing exactly what I want and allowing a salesperson pressure me into buying something I don't want or need. You really don't have to make that point to me that you make in the beginning of your post. You're preaching to the choir on that one.

My point was simply that, even though I threw a lot of extras into it, ViaVoice is basically dead. That is perhaps unfortunate, but fact. It is not going to be updated anytime now or in the future. Both Nuance and IBM are ruled by the Almighty dollar, and their conclusion is that there are no $$$$ in any future development or distribution of ViaVoice.

Chuck Runquist
Former Dragon NaturallySpeaking SDK & Senior Technical Solutions PM for DNS

Education is what survives when what has been learned has been forgotten. - B.F. Skinner (1904-1990)

I think it's like telling the only water company in town that you don't want any more of their product. They (Nuance) are the only well in town for a lot of people. It's either their way or make your own right now.

That may be changing with Vista S/R on the market. It appears to be gathering a following. I guess we'll have to see where it all leads.

Not if you buy the medical version... If you want a professional tool you have to pay a professional price - the ROI is incredibly fast.