All,
So far I tried to avoid confrontation with Charles but with these ongoing
attacks I think a clear response is in order.
The rants and personal attacks we see now from Charles contain about as much
truth as his 'technical' postings, i.e. very little, never mind how convincing
they may sound. The amount of nonsense in his posts is so overwhelming that it
often is nearly impossible to respond in a meaningful manner.
The good thing about the personal attacks we are seeing now is that anyone
willing to do a little research can verify that Charles is talking nonsense.
Don't fall for his numerous red herrings (check out:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Red_herring_fallacies), he is
talking about all kinds of things I never have said or done. The very post I'm
responding to now is another classic red herring: I obviously never made such a
claim.
To further demonstrate his nonsense, let's just pick the very first thing he
wrote when starting his current attack (archive link:
//www.freelists.org/post/optacon-l/More-frame-designs,5), that is: "I
wrote no such note to Richard which apparently is somewhere below within the
thread here." Please check for yourself in your own mailbox, the message will
be right there, coming from Charles' own email address, including a CC to
Richard Oehm (archive link:
//www.freelists.org/post/optacon-l/More-frame-designs,2).
And that is just the start of his barrage of nonsense. I'm not going to waste
my time picking Charles' postings apart, why don't you check the facts for
yourself (and check their relevance, beware the red herrings!), then draw your
own conclusions.
In a sick kind of way, what Charles has written at least supports my statement
that we are not associated, which should be clear by now.
Here is a short quote to ponder about, taken from wikipedia
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_characteristics):
"The 2013 study found that trolls often have a high expectation of what it
means to be successful, which is higher than they are able to attain, and this
results in them resenting others who think they are successful but who fall
below their standards."
I understand much better now why real engineers I talked to, and heard about,
avoid this list.
- Reinoud
On 04/06/15 02:00, C. Pond wrote:
I suppose that this Reinoud will now claim the research of Dr. Cranmer andto view the list archives, go to:
the Israelis as his own, even though he would have otherwise remained of his
mindset without their indirect feedback.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Carolyn Arnold
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 8:48 PM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: Single- or Multi-finger display. Was: Re: More
frame designs
I'm not qualified to dispute the idea of more than one finger to see the
bigger picture, as it were, but have read apartment and condo floor plans
with the standard Optacon and gotten a clear picture.
GIFT (God is forever true),
Carolyn
----- Original Message -----
From: "reinoud" <rrreinoud@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 7:34 PM
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: Single- or Multi-finger display. Was: Re: More
frame designs
David,
That's some exceptionally clear argumentation for single-finger displays,
everyone agrees, so do I. It wasn't my intention to suggest using
multi-finger displays for reading. Actually I don't even expect the
smaller 'mobile' single-finger display to be all that useful for reading.
It's quite clear that the original Optacon R1 layout is the golden
standard for this purpose.
There probably have been two misunderstandings here, my fault for not
communicating this more clearly:
1) My interest is both in reading text like with an Optacon, and scanning
images or surroundings with the support of more sophisticated image
processing than an Optacon is capable of. For reading, standard Optacon
layout should be used, no arguments here.
For scanning (real-world) images, other layouts may well be more
appropriate. Having high resolution for at least one fingertip may be
important but so is having a large 'field of view'. For example, when
exploring images you will get an overall impression fastest using multiple
fingers, only when homing in to examine details most people tend to focus
on one finger.
Also, when 'keeping an eye' on a scene in real time, like with a video
camera, being able to notice movement in a large field of view is very
valuable. This, again, is easier and costs less when using multiple
fingers.
Anyway, that's why there are multi-finger display options, I sure would
like to run tests with these.
2) There is no reason to remain limited to just one model. From a
technical and manufacturing point of view, models with different frames
are mostly the same. Most of the complexity and cost is in actuators,
drivers, controllers etc. and these are mostly the same. Supporting just a
few different frame models is't nearly as expensive as it used to be with
modern manufacturing.
- Reinoud
On 03/06/15 21:22, David wrote:
I sure appreciate all the research and Pre-production work being done onto view the list archives, go to:
a followup Optacon. If you want some testing, and it can be done
off-site (am unable to travel), please contact me off-list:
trailerdavid@xxxxxxxxxxx
Yet, one tiny point to make, in connection with your alternatives for
display models. One of the big advantages I find with the Optacon, is
its SINGLE-FINGER design. First, long-term reading causes fattigue, and
swapping fingers have been a real saver for me. Second, if you are
designing something that requires multi-finger recognition,what then
with people who has damaged one of the required fingers? Even if I cut
my one finger, and it is one of the three your design relies on? Even a
standard Braille display can be read with just one finger, should the
user be limited. An Optacon, designed to rely on more than one finger,
may seem great in the first token - since you then can display higher
amount of info simultaneously. Yet I dare claim it soon will prove
little effective, and limit its own market value.
Thirdly, I have tested equipment earlier years, that depended on
multi-finger operation. Trouble was to interpret signals from all
fingers at the same time, and coordinate them in your brain. I thought
it was me, so I let a couple of students and others test it as well, and
they reported same issue. OK, it was more of a Braille mouse product, so
not exactly the Optacon. Still, I know there has been other products
that based their activity on multi-finger reading, and honestly, have
not seen any of them make it to the market.
About a year ago - or something like that - there was a discussion on
this very list, where the question came up: Which hand/finger do you use
to read Braille. Funny how many reported that they had one MAIN finger
for reading Braille. The rest of the fingers are more used for
coordinating and positioning on the paper. Just to back up my point:
If you base your display on more than one finger, you are likely
restricting your product out of the main market. Few people may be able
to do the mental/sensitivity acrobatics of making sufficient usage of it.
Also, be aware of a lot of people who are blinded at a grown-up age, and
who will have their full day busied, just to train enough sensitivity in
one finger.
My real-life based advice, for you and any other developer, is to keep
the display for ONE-FINGER reading. It definitely will give the product
the highest tayloring chance, and serve the most users' interests.
David
On 6/2/2015 6:15 PM, reinoud wrote:
More frame designs, this time some lower cost options, images can be
found here: https://tactact.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/frame-design-5/
These frames consist of one part, typically made of plastic, with
actuators mounted directly below the finger plate. This way they can be
relatively low cost and low profile. Compact coils are used like with
the previously shown high-res display, and they aren't necessarily
limited to low power operation despite being mounted in plastic, as
explained below.
The first example (tctct2-frame-open-mini.png) accomodates a 10x16 array
of 160 pins in roughly the same finger plate area as the standard
Optacon display. With a horizontal pitch of 1.5mm and a vertical pitch
of 1.8mm, this layout is not really appropriate for Optacon-like reading
use (vertical resolution is relatively low) but it may be an attractive
alternative for the 'mobile' version proposed before. Smaller versions
with lower vertical resolution (e.g. 10x10, 100 pins, just covering a
fingertip) may be more suitable for low cost and low power applications.
Disadvantages of this first design are resolution and power limitations,
and high precision manufacturing requirements due to the actuator
packing density. Also, interconnect cost will be high because of the
curved actuator array without a common node available, requiring two
connections per actuator.
The next design (tctct2-frame-open-mini-wide.png) improves resolution by
increasing width rather than height, intended for use with more than one
finger at a time. The example in the image has the same pin pitch as
before but has a less curved finger plate and is rotated 90 degrees.
With 28x14 pins at 1.8x1.5mm it provides for 392 pins on a 48.6x19.5mm
active area, usually enough for 3 fingertips.
This arrangement has several advantages besides an obvious higher
overall resolution. Pin pitch is smaller in vertical direction now (like
Optacon displays), and even though the density is lower than an Optacon
display it covers a larger total area, all of which consists of the most
sensitive part of fingertips. Because of this I expect this display to
perform quite well at lower power and frequencies. Like the previous
design, it still requires a high precision plastic part and interconnect
cost will be high.
Cost (including precision and interconnect requirements) can be brought
down by moving to a flat lower density display as shown in the third
image (tctct2-frame-open-mini-flat.png). This example has a 24x10 array
of 240 pins on a 46x18mm active area display similar to the previous
one. The lower density allows for somewhat higher efficiency coils,
mounted on a lower precision, more heat resistant plastic frame, which
allows driving at high power. Also, with actuators mounted in a flat
plane coil contacts can be made to fit a printed circuit board below to
simplify assembly.
This last frame design is quite a departure from the Optacon standard
layout but seems promising: it is relatively high resolution yet low
cost, suitable for high and low power modes, and has a simple low
profile construction.
I am calculating costs for the various designs, will post on that soon!
Signatures for reference:
tctct2-frame-open-mini.png:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJVbMxBAAoJEFRnUmrjvQPl7H8H/2fe6V79GtGgQLqivL3Z1FoX
lBSwuP6qiB78pmXcjdH5X0M8u20eUOYCEOarkvIEkKrSXtMr3p3SKoENytbUa82I
z8Or9/EACkMF9fITSm1FzK1O1N9yj8F+5SNc0S/Y6CrJPp/XBH4HlPaF9l0NrEYk
QDN8F53y1FxfSQ15gv1QSi3GYh4K+YRwQrlTKWhm9uoi1dIv6Wrg7t+70vjkxlUp
igDhrWLjd7vSArLpZK2xuMvvzASalq9PkQPhiloADSGvjHMSxPQMC8bqY85AADrN
qpAYizSJAchlfkMnW6KHyl9ZMVyAkF+ZlhfW++CWkMDtROcrxNkvfyWnMLUMDpI=
=pm2S
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tctct2-frame-open-mini-wide.png:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJVbMyBAAoJEFRnUmrjvQPlsxMH/14lzBJwEECvPX/b+MYi1Zpw
ueNS1CSi5KM7dyp/KF9UBiqgwQhZOb+MSTRrB0rwu+uJ6U8bvvLyHScLdhY4O3J+
gWOZ54RxtL5QomU3iNIHxXhSRhQqen7/Pmh9DoNBJUAYqI+QMtMX0kzw+76PevbY
EznetKoq52GBo9euHvFgCNCAsCsWI1clEml12BpYGBOak13GS34F1N1R2BSIx9MU
RWC1G3x17aadY2UK3Rxfy56gKjMrWq8INau2klqIr/hcgqc3pEa3S2LKv8W2VsdE
LM8pVI5faudbx/MD9YrHQsOZxW4gEXn6umLSPA94gs90Z/EI1kzDyWih25abm3k=
=SMwR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tctct2-frame-open-mini-flat.png:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJVbMv6AAoJEFRnUmrjvQPlMSMH/jKYToLRiHyUq0y33E6nzTCn
iO8EyZ8oXjFHooghsTkbe00t0dPtDvmdwLQlbF+VyG+7+NfGAIy70K2F9AWsYc30
M5/Te/dbUCKhsYn9DpwGYODJHYR31gS6WyNw1Zgkg9d17UCzBlgeoodmte+g/1Zz
AYxC0jy/7Kr8P4RRw2n7EnUnbH1aI1PX6o0kpdARzMe1UjF/LJB7zoBQgO24s37M
9L38Y4ZUtXfkjIT0M+AOdJF83nBhMFMEDEf7w0joSZRBQ1uPIDo6CwZRox4gOK9F
bmuekh6/s2V6MyPWuWRKX06TT9kD6liX1Hx5UN8jRiS61H1ECe32zQyFRTvSpLs=
=Llbp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tctct2-frame-open-mini.pdf:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJVbMwhAAoJEFRnUmrjvQPlSUMIAI8jELLhyQDbdBzHterCf9/f
ShYhDwipoF0rg1rvvyncFxN3qfPsAEqU8X51Rc/yBdUpSufoob9eiws0nw4qHfNo
0PpydJOK10+/qqm7laNdeLAGXaVIiYVSWVtGY6yMeWN77MMp5clTO2CYheKt0PmL
2jAbtyZcENLaI/UMTHA0MD28NXNkySg/abtTGDdSx7ANACmjQSxhPZSE8x55GqUC
iZwASsM1pfXFUwy8A3Jhxq1c97ZVf1XQ0ADPgp4+vHGHX+Qq1w+Iity3CZXTcBLh
E+RK+izr9pG/Or5kHoqVCREg5fStqfMmug6vlHtazmamvmOAbxxnQu97phRFt64=
=6MZp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
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.
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.
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1434 / Virus Database: 4311/9430 - Release Date: 06/03/15
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.