The difficulty of any product review done in this fashion is that it only
relates to the time of the review. In other words - two or more software
packages are placed alongside each other and we don't know how long was
spent with each and we don't know what applications were trialed.
I have to say that I am not a JFW fan; v31.35 still anoys me on some simple
matters. I use both screen readers and the review which caused this
thread to develop does at least help me in the constant quest for ongoing
evaluation of the merits of each programme. For me -as one who uses both -
it doesn't chnage my mind but it might be helpful for those who are just
starting out.
The best reviews I have seen are those conducted by the American Foundation
for the Blind as you can at least replicate the trials. Reviews of the
type we are discussing here are useful but not truly objective. V31.35 is
a great deal better than its predecessor but how are these improvements
factored into such a review?
Vaughan.
At 05:27 PM 10/22/99 , you wrote:
>There are certainly areas where WindowEyes is superior, and I'm glad
>he brought these up in his review. But why didn't he mention any areas
>where JFW is superior? I checked out both screen readers, and many
>others, before making my purchase. I found they all had strengths and
>weaknesses, and buying any of them would be a compromise to some
>extent. I just had to decide which features to compromise for my
>particular needs. The problem with this review is that it completely
>concentrates on the good of WindowEyes, and the bad of JFW. He also
>tends to exaggerate. While I don't like having to wait for a return
>call from HJ tech support, I found the support has generally been
>pretty good. And using Eric's tapes, I learned JFW quickly and easily.
>
>-
>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
-
Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
