[optacon-l] Re: Operating the Optacon
- From: Jyrki Voutilainen <jykke.voutilainen@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Optacon Users <optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:02:05 +0200
I'm a bit behind in reading the posts sent on the list during nearly a week,
but many thanks to you, David, for a complete but still understandable
description of how an uni-manual Optacon could work and be manufactured and
operated.
And further more, like you or someone else has already said, nothing would
prevent the new Optacon being used in a one-hand mode or a two-hand one
depending on the user's individual needs and wishes. I would also appreciate
being able to use my other hand for making notes etc., but in some other cases
I would like to operate the Optacon in nearly the same way than the present one
has been operated.
And finally, also I am aware of the problems that mechanical sliding or
rotating ajustment controls normally have, and I've experienced those on my
relatively new hifi equipment such as a table radio etc. And that's _really
amazing_ that these controls on my Optacon have lasted all these years without
having such contact problems, or perhaps I haven't been aware of these? I
remember me telling you about some extra lines or columns that appeared on the
Optacon's display before the service operations, and that could probably
explain why Dave Godfrey wasn't able to replicate the fault; the device has
been without power for a relatively long time when being sent from Finland to
England and so on.
Regards,
Jyrki
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012, David wrote:
> _First of all, let me tell you, that only a couple of days ago, I was into
> one of these situations. You sit there, with your phone bill. You are to
> take notes of the payment information - account number, amount due and so
> forth. True, you could do a recording, then type it on your computer later
> on. But the benefit of doing it directly on the computer, is that you can do
> it real-time, and don't have to do the job doubled up. After all, operating
> a computer keyboard with one hand, is not much complicated, first you get
> used to it. Otherwise, how would a number of people - like those who has had
> a stroke - be able to operate their computers. Same goes with a cell phone,
> should you decide to use that kind of electronic gadget for your
> communication. Either of them can be operated one-handed - at least with a
> bit of training. So for you Catherine and the rest who thought the idea of
> having a one-handed version of the Optacon made little sense, hopefully this
> helps you realize that there is people who would greatly benefit from such.
> Maybe the idea - set out by one of you - to have a unit that can be detached
> into a two-handed operation mode, is the better one. That at least, would
> take care of both worlds. Unfortunately, I have a feeling, that would make
> it somehow more clumsy.
>
> Then over to the dream of having a one-hand unit, that is compact and
> portable enough. See, the technology of today, does open for such a dream to
> come true. And, basing this on only reading the website of the manufacturer,
> in one way the dream is a reality. Do a search on the net, for a product
> called TopBraile, and you will see. According to the description, it is not
> much bigger than a full-sized computer mouse. And, even should much resemble
> the shape of the mouse. You are supposed to rest your finger on the top of
> the unit, and it will have a Braille cell there, which will display the
> character you are moving across. There is, the way I see it, two main
> drawbacks of this unit - and that is why I haven't bothered to get my hands
> on it in real-life yet.
>
> First of all, the price (at least locally), was told to be something like
> 3500 US dollars, plus taxes and shipping. A total that I could not really
> see the benefit of, taking into consideration the second drawback. The
> second disadvantage of the unit, is that it is an interpretting piece of
> equipment. How else, would it be able to transfer the character under the
> camera, into a Braille cell. It even has a built-in speech synthesizer, that
> will read the character aloud, if you so desire. Clearly, an interpretter -
> and hence, I questioned the high price.
>
> Well, what do I mean by bringing this out? Simply that the technology is
> available. It is fully possible to throw quite a bit of electronics and tiny
> mechanics into a handheld unit, these days. Promise you, a Braille cell does
> take a bit of physical space, even more than what your fingers touch. If you
> had opened your Braille display for the computer, you would know, it does
> take three or four times as much physical space, as the field your fingers
> touch on the outside. Some might claim, at this state, that a Braille cell
> has only 8 small pins, and yet it takes that much physical space. The
> Optacon display originates with 144 pins, so how much bigger would that
> e - in physical terms.
>
> Well, there is a couple of things to keep in mind. First of all, the pins of
> the Optacon are much thinner, than the ones found in a Braille cell.
> Secondly, it is slightly two different technologies used to produce the
> Optacon display, and the Braille cell. My whole point here is, that it
> should be fully poswsible to make a sufficient displaying array, that would
> fit into a hand-held unit. After all, even the original Optacon array, is
> not all that big. IF you ever happened to open the Optacon unit, you would
> realize that it only takes up a certain part of the space inside.
>
> When comes to the camera of a unit, I mind you the fact, that we have tiny
> cameras built into cell phones and laptop computers, these days. Cameras
> that have several megapixels - or transfered into human language, several
> million points per square inch. That is, even the lowest resolution of these
> cameras, would by far outrange what the camera of your Optacon has for a
> resolution. I recently had my hands on a hand-held scanner ofor the
> computer, only half the size of the Optacon camera unit, and with a
> resolution that would make for several Optacons. To sum this point up - not
> even the camera part of the project, would make it unrealistic to build a
> hand-held version of the optacon.
>
> What then about the electronic and battery part? Is that where we will get
> stuck, in our dreams of a handheld unit? Doubtfully. The modern LiOn
> batteries, are light-weight, long lasting, and rather compact in physical
> size. Take a look at a 20 year old cell phone, and compare it with one of
> the credit card sized phones we have today. My first cell phone, you would
> be lucky if it lasted two days on one charge. My modern one, is only about
> 40 percent of the size, and yet it might last for up to a week on one
> charge. The battery of my first cell phone, was big as an old cassette tape,
> and weighed something like a third of a pound (130 grams or so). The battery
> of my modern phone, is half the size of a credit card, twice as thick as a
> credit card, and weighs something like an ounce (30 grams) - I guess. Point
> is, that the battery for an Optacon, even the original model, could be by
> far much lighter and smaller, had the Optacon had the chance of supporting
> this kind of modern batteries.
>
> Comes to the electronics, the Optacon is filled with "Old" stuff. I dare
> say, that much of the electronic pieces inside your Optacon units, could
> have been greatly compressed. It was not possible with the components that
> they had access to back then, but it is definitely possible with modern
> components. Even without specially designed components. In the risk of
> becoming too techie here, let me give you but one simple example. Simple as
> can be, at least.
>
> Inside all electronic equipment, we have one sort of components, called
> resistors. In the 70's and 80's - when the Optacon was manufactured - these
> components was about half an inch (1,5cm) long, and had a diameter of
> everything between a tenth of an inch (3mm) and up to three times that.
> What about modern resistors? Well, now aday, you can get resistors that are
> nothing thicker than the aluminium foil, you wrap around your chicken in the
> oven. Same goes with a number of other electronic components, they have
> become extremely tiny, light-weighted, and low power-consuming. Low
> power-consumption, is of high interest here, as that would mean prolonged
> battery life, and the chance of reducing battery physics.
>
> Then, someone mentioned the benefits of being able to easily adjusting the
> intensity and thickness, as well as the magnification. Let me add on to
> that, how often I wish there had been a contrast knob on my Optacon. That
> might have solved many a trouble, in reading printed text on glossy or even
> colored paper. If we imagine a handheld unit, something similarly shaped to
> a computer mouse, we could have wished for two identical sets of adjusting
> buttons. One on each side of the unit. That way, your index finger could
> rest on the displaying array on top of the unit, and your thumb could easily
> have operated a set of buttons on the side of the unit. Since the buttons
> would be truly copied on both sides of the unit, it would fit for your
> thumb, no matter if you are right- or left-handed. We could have argued
> whether we want turning knobs, or just a set of up- and down-buttons.
>
> The benefit of a turning knob or wheel, is that you could have markings on
> it, that could be good referencing points. We all know that, from the
> marking bars on our current Optacon's knobs. But there is a couple of
> disadvantages of turning weels or knobs. First of all, they are mechanic.
> Mechanics have the tendencies of becoming less accurate, as they wair. They
> even might turn rather sluggish, as time goes by. The second drawback of
> mechanics, is the physical size they need. At least so, if you want a size
> that is workable. Electronic buttons, like the up and down volume buttons on
> your cell phone or MP3 player, have none of these disadvantages. Even though
> they have a mechanic move when being pressed, they literally can withstand
> millions of opperations. They can be rather small, not only on the outside,
> but they hardly take up any more space on the inside of the unit. And, they
> do not turn sluggish, or inaccurate, the same way a mechanical knob or wheel
> would do. Just put your hands on one of the more advanced computer mouses,
> and you will realize it has a number of buttons on at least one of the
> sides. I do dare to say, that we could easily have fit in four or five
> buttons, on the side of the unit. These could be fairly placed, so that they
> easily can be operated with a slight movement of your thumb. And if
> necessary, you still got a couple of fingers left-over on your hand, so a
> button or two for each of them, and your unit can be fine-tuned to an extend
> that the old Optacon only could be dreaming of. The biggest challenge, would
> be to have enough for fine-tuning possibilities. As you might be familiar
> with, your Mp3 player tends to either be too high on the volume, or too low.
> Sometimes, you simply had wish for a middle step between the two settings.
> My advice would have been, that there might be something like between 30 and
> 50 steps, from the minimum setting, to the maximum - for each of the tuning
> buttons on our new Optacon model. Such a resolution, would mean the optimal
> fine-tuning posibilities - if it is done in a linear scale.
>
> As I hope to have shown to you all, the technology for a far smaller
> Optacon, is a reality of today's world, And much of the technology is
> already being manufactured. Just think, for one thing, of the cameras. If we
> could get hold of the cameras from old, outranged cell phones, we would have
> more than enough for resolution of the Optacon camera. Well, if we don't
> want to use outranged cell phone cameras, the manufactures of such
> electronics, might have brand new products to offer us. Mainpoint here is,
> that the technology is available, and that is in a mainstream production,
> which calls for a far more affordable price. Bakc in the 70s and 80s, this
> was not the case, and the Optacon camera had to be specially manufactured -
> with whatever that would mean for a pricing issue. Electronic components are
> sold for give-away prices, and can easily be obtained in great quantiities.
> This all should call for highly reduced production costs. I guess, the real
> obstacle here, is to get in touch with a manufacturer, who could give us
> access to the displaying array. Or, at least, the components for building
> such an array. Yet, this should not all be impossible. After all, there is a
> couple of technologies to be considered for the array. I would have to be
> techie, should I describe the technologies in my mind, but will leave that
> for those who really cares to know. Let them contact me off-list, and I can
> go into details on the more techie part of the story.
>
> Well, finally, there is the real big challenge, on getting in touch with
> someone with the right attitude and eagerness, to get the project off the
> slate, and into production. Since this kind of a project will take a fair
> amount of time in developing and testing, even before getting into
> production, I doubt we will have any luck, on the comercial market. None of
> us, would like to throw a million dollars on the table, asking any group to
> get the project going. And, doubtfully enough, I dare say, no authorities or
> organization is going to come up with such an amount of money either. Not
> even the 100 thousand dollars, in case we would be lucky. Smile. After all,
> that is why I think we will have to be looking on some idealistic project.
> If this was something that some group of people could trhow togehter in a
> couple of weeks, in their late nights, I am sure we would have had the new
> Optacon a reality long time ago. But due to the time factor playing its role
> here, I doubt we will get this done on a sparetime basis. That is why, I did
> throw out the idea on the board recently, to have got a group of engineering
> students interested in the project. They would have the time, the knowledge
> and access to the technologies, required to get a project of this dimention
> going. They might even more easily get their hands on the technologies
> involved, as many manufacturers are quite eager to give access to parts,
> that normally are not available to the market, when students come and ask.
> The manufacturers look on this, as a possibility to get their hands on new
> markets, and the educational institusions like colleges and uneiversities,
> often have quite easy access to far-ahead technologies, soon as they can
> define the project into a scientific context. Furthermore, the group of
> students that would develop a new Optacon, would have done something really
> outstanding, giving them a real kick into the employment market. Any future
> employer, who would realize they could get hold of a person who had been
> involved in a developing project, would see it as a great gain. And since
> the students would have been working closely with part of the blind
> community, and deeply emerged in the assistive technology world, they likely
> would bring their experiences with them into the manufacturing industry. We
> then could hope for that to make a slight move toward more accessible
> mainstream products, like tomorrow's microwave-ovens, cell phones, computers
> and so forth. Dreaming? Oh, well, but why not do a bit of dreaming, on a
> Sunday morning.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nick Dotson" <nickdotson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 5:36 PM
> Subject: [optacon-l] Re: Operating the Optacon
>
>
>> I too read Braille and have in the past read books with the Optacon in
>> bed... (smile) Sometimes Margie and I both did, so we had an Optacon
>> chorus...
>>
>> Anyway, trying to think as realistically as possible, I can't imagine even
>> with the best available miniaturization of electronics, and the need for a
>> closely fitting display so it could be easily felt with the reading
>> finger--just what kind of form factor a one-handed device would have which
>> wouldn't be awkward and clumsier for prolonged reading than what we have
>> today. Power and battery mass--as well as the controls for optimizing the
>> image would seem most critical here. I wouldn't want them to become so
>> small they were more difficult to make the sorts of minute modifications
>> required for handling various types of print. Maneuverability of the
>> camera
>> is one of the best aspects of the current device, as are--at least to
>> me--the ergonomics of allowing one hand to read and optimize the image,
>> and
>> the other hand to attend to the job of tracking.
>>
>> To make a couple of crude analogies: one could have a one handed piano, or
>> guitar, but either instrument's possibilities would have become seriously
>> limited by going uni-manual. On a guitar, played by a right-handed
>> person,
>> one frets chords with the left hand and picks the strings with the right.
>> On a piano, most often, rhythmic cadences are played with the left hand
>> and
>> melodic ornamentation is carried out with the right hand...
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Fran
>> Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 9:48 AM
>> To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [optacon-l] Re: Operating the Optacon
>>
>> Catherine,
>> I've read in bed too, but did you really find it comfortable???
>>
>> I record my notes, so I only need one hand.
>>
>> Try to think of all the things you could do with the other hand if the
>> optacon could be used with just one hand...And think how comfortable that
>> would be.
>>
>> Fran
>>
>> to view the list archives, go to:
>>
>> www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
>>
>> To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
>>
>> optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without the
>> quotes) in the message subject.
>>
>> Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a message
>> to:
>>
>> optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without the
>> quotes) in the message subject.
>>
>
> to view the list archives, go to:
>
> www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
>
> To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
>
> optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without the
> quotes) in the message subject.
>
> Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a message to:
>
> optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without the
> quotes) in the message subject.
>
>
--
Jyrki Voutilainen
mailto:jykke.voutilainen@xxxxxxxxx
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without the quotes)
in the message subject.
Other related posts:
