The text to speech is slow and it is a drab. I can open up Wikipedia and run through the content 5 times faster than that. You will have lot of impatient users waiting for the information they actually want. It is like calling your bank up and listening to their long IVR menu when actually you want to report your stolen credit card.
Imagine waking up every day to the same drab slow dull voice that tells you about the day's weather.. !!
I tried Qwiki too. Frankly I don't get it. Taking a few sentences from Wikipedia and then converting that to speech is not necessarily an information experience. Wonder what the Techcrunch Disrupt panel found exciting about Qwiki. It seems to matter if a startup has founders with some pedigree or at least associated with people with pedigree. I am sure there were better start ups in Techcrunch Disrupt.
Qwiki, this year's Techcrunch Disrupt winner seems to have a long way to go before it can really be an "Information Experience" that they claim it will be.
Comments
The text to speech is slow and it is a drab. I can open up Wikipedia and run through the content 5 times faster than that. You will have lot of impatient users waiting for the information they actually want. It is like calling your bank up and listening to their long IVR menu when actually you want to report your stolen credit card.
Imagine waking up every day to the same drab slow dull voice that tells you about the day's weather.. !!
I tried Qwiki too. Frankly I don't get it. Taking a few sentences from Wikipedia and then converting that to speech is not necessarily an information experience. Wonder what the Techcrunch Disrupt panel found exciting about Qwiki. It seems to matter if a startup has founders with some pedigree or at least associated with people with pedigree. I am sure there were better start ups in Techcrunch Disrupt.
Qwiki, this year's Techcrunch Disrupt winner seems to have a long way to go before it can really be an "Information Experience" that they claim it will be.