Originally Posted by solipsism
Check out one of the YouTube videos. Vista does cursive, which InkWell doesn't do, and Vista's app seems to be much more accurate.
1) Newton did cursive. They have the algorithms, if they want to use them.
2) You're confusing HW recog accuracy with usability. Unless the methodology for going from ink to final text placement has *drastically* changed in Vista, and is available to all apps, all the time, anywhere, then it isn't as useful as InkWell has been.
I spent six weeks with my right arm immobilized, but was able to continue working very effectively by tossing a cheap Wacom tablet into my workflow (mounted at the end of my arm brace). It replaced the mouse and text entry without a problem. This was after trying a dedicated tablet computer running XP, and having nothing but frustration. *If* you were running an app that was already made 'aware' of handwriting recognition, it worked okay, but you couldn't use it as a *general* replacement for the keyboard without quite a few contortions. As usual from MS, it was an afterthought, not something that was well integrated with the system as a whole.
*That* is the number one reason, IMO, why they've failed consistently at tablets - they still want to treat pen input as something to just slap in there, and use it to sell more apps. "Now with Windows Live Pen Input 2008!" It needs to be as invisible and natural to use with any app as the keyboard. InkWell has gotten closest to that so far... I haven't used Vista's pen input, but I've spoken with those who have, and in their estimation, it hasn't changed appreciably from XP's workflow.