Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Zi-Corp (ZICA), formerly MCUAF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BRONCO BILLY who wrote (713)	1/5/1999 12:22:00 PM
From: John Stichnoth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2082

Thanks yours. No, I'm not going to Calgary. Too cold. Let me ask a couple of questions perhaps better asked earlier. I have not seen the system work, but understand that it works by choosing successively from a series of choices on screen; based on each choice the screen gives additional choices as you work through the different parts of the "Zi". The top is completed first, then the lower left, then the lower right--which is the order characters are handwritten. This differs from traditional Chinese typing, which requires finding the entire character. (In Japan they do it by typing phonetically, and then choosing from the homonyms--Japanese has lots of homonyms). My question: How many keystrokes are required by Zi-8 to complete a typical Chinese character? For instance, the character "Zi"? My supposition was that it would require more than three strokes, because you always have more than 8 choices for each position on the character. By using a fuller keypad/keyboard, a typist would have more choices on each stroke, would be more likely to find the correct alternative immediately, and therefore needs to make fewer keystrokes for each character. Of course the keyboard need not have qwerty on it--that is just a software convention convenient to western users--but a fuller keyboard gives the typist more alternatives. (A qwerty-sized keyboard makes sense because all of the keys can be easily reached without excessive movement--needed for speed of each individual stroke--and because they are already manufactured in abundance). All of which addresses the point of my earlier post--isn't the principal attractiveness of Zi's system in its useability on a standard cellphone keypad? That doesn't necessarily make it the best alternative for real letter-writing or composing in an office. And it seems that the door is open for an office alternative that would preclude Zi making much headway on the desktop. Cellphones (and perhaps webTV) is where the opportunity lies for Zi. I'd appreciate your reaction to the above. js