What users say about Instant Text

Continuations Are a Great Feature

by Jon Knowles

I agree with just about everything you say, Dave [Schanz].

Version 2 of Instant Text is a very good product indeed. I've been using it myself for a number of weeks now since finishing beta testing. I hope your review inspires more people who use Windows 95 to give it a try.

As you note, continuations are a great feature

With just that feature alone you save thousands of keystrokes every day and get an unbeatable keystroke-to-output ratio. I have early CTS and since using IT, I have had no discomfort and my fingers feel much less tired at the end of the day.

Some specific points: One glossary per physician

I found also that this is the best way to go.

I use very large glossaries, merging a bunch of the exchange glossaries which come with Instant Text (most courtesy of Robert Hill) as well as a large dictionary type glossary. I also sample as much text as I can get from previous work I've done for each doctor (about 200 letters or days of chart notes) and merge that into the jumbo glossary for each doctor also.

I top it off with my abbreviation system (which I'm hoping to make available soon) and with this much power at my fingertips actually go to the keyboard with enthusiasm each morning — this after about 16 years as an MT!

Instant Text is so deep a program...

Yet Instant Text is so deep a program that I think it may take me a while to figure out the best way to use it. The program is very flexible too, and different users may prefer different set ups and glossaries. As more people start to use Instant Text, it would be useful to compare notes to see what set ups and glossaries are most useful in different situations.

Jon Knowles