Re: hardware synthesisers.

[Ken Perry <whistler blinksoft com>]

Well another thing to remember is while hardware synth might be in the 
minority there are a hell of a lot of them and when it comes to a free 
computer built for some person that needs one a hard ware synth that 
just happens to be sitting around and an old used p200 make a great 
linux box.

KenOn Thu, 6 May 2004, Bill Haneman wrote:

> Shaun Oliver said:
> 
> >just on that,
> >could speech-dispatcher not be used as an interface for gnopernicus and 
> >the various synthesisers? as opposed to writing a complete driver subset 
> >for gnopernicus itself?
> >  
> >
> Actually, this is what gnome-speech already does; gnopernicus doesn't 
> contain any speech-driver-specific code.  gnome-speech provides a 
> uniform interface for speech clients (as does speech-dispatcher, which 
> came later).
> 
> It would not require any extension to gnome-speech to support hardware 
> synthesizers, it would only require writing the appropriate drivers; in 
> fact I believe that Marc had a gnome-speech hardware driver lying about 
> at one time, but there may have been technical issues with it.
> The primary challenge is the need to support "end of speech" 
> notification from such a driver; I am not familiar enough with the 
> existing hardware to know how feasible that would be.
> 
> regards
> 
> Bill
> 
> >Mind you, that might be a major undertaking in itself.
> >in any event, hardware synth support would be a great plus and like 
> >janina said we're in the minority but, why throw the things away if we 
> >can still get good use out of them anywhere we can within our computing 
> >lives.
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
>