<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/7/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">A. Scott McCulloch</b> <<a href="mailto:mylists@ascottmcculloch.com">mylists@ascottmcculloch.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
There are a couple (at least) of different "types" of speech<br>recognition... what is built-in to OS X is capable of "recognizing"<br>commands (this is similar technology to voice based automated<br>telephone systems), but is not capable of "recognizing" the spoken
<br>word to turn it into text (which requires a very different<br>technology). For transcription, you need something like ViaVoice or<br>iListen. </blockquote><div><br>
Yeah, I can understand now how it might just be a little different to
recognize speech as one of a certain few commands vs. one of possibly
millions from a dictionary. <br>
<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">You can find iListen here: <a href="http://www.macspeech.com">http://www.macspeech.com
</a> -- I don't know<br>the current status of ViaVoice, it was done by IBM, but I think they<br>may have abandoned it.</blockquote><div><br>
I took a look at iListen ... but you're right ... it probably won't be of much help if it can't learn the interviewees voices.<br>
</div><br>
</div>matt.<br>