Hi David, I've answered your points as part of the text. Thanks for joining the email list. its brilliant to have another developer on board communicating so directly with end users.
Will, I do not expect a third party to do something like that because of the following reasons: 1) Apple developed Voiceover because none of the third parties were really interested to do it. >From what I've heard this isn't correct. At least one company were interested in producing a screen reader but Apple wouldn't provide enough information about some of the OS X code even though the company involved were under a Non disclosure agreement. 2) A third party would run into the same limitations that VoiceOver does, namely applications that do not provide the necessary accessibility (including as you all know, some of Apple's own applications. On Windows and Mac OS 9 all kinds of dirty tricks were possible for screen readers to make things work in inaccessible applications. On Mac OS X that is harder, more dangerous, and would also be the end of any stimulus for third-party developers to make their applications more accessible. I am sure a large part of the issues you have with VoiceOver are not really VoiceOver's fault. Since Voice Over has been released I've come to realise that there is already very little stimulus for larger third parties to spend time and money making their programs accessible. A large amount of programs on the Mac are cross platform and as far as I know and I could be wrong, it's very hard to make these kind of programs accessible with out producing an individual code base for each operating system. An improved Voice Over should use all kinds of dirty tricks to game information from a programs user interface. Most other screen readers have been doing this for years and its absolutely necessary. With out it a huge amount of programs will remain inaccessible just because Voice Over and Apple takes the floored position that they've provided a product that works in optimum conditions and the third party developers should stop spending time improving there own software for commercial reasons and rewrite parts of there user interface just because, well, erm, it would be nice. 3) Making a screen reader and compete with Apple's free screen reader that is based on inside access to Mac OS X developments would be a pretty tough call for a third-party. I mean how many of you would want to pay $500 to $1000 for something like that? IF a third party released out a good quality screen reader that included access to programs such as I Tunes and other major products not yet accessible to Voice over people would spend 500 to 1000$. Obviously not every body would, but on windows people have been happily selling screen readers at that price for years. There are cheap screen readers for the Pc that do an ok job but VI customers still spend the extra to get the very best access available. Finally, I do not agree with your statement that Apple does not provide updates. I am sure there will be an update to VoiceOver with 10.5 and that it will take into account the most popular criticisms on the current version (but as always, not all). , There isn't any guaranty that 10.5 will include updates that I'm aware of, its just a case of every body hoping. Personally I do think there will be improvements included but releasing updates for a screen reader every 2 years is ludicrous. Especially when Apple distribute other updates through out the year for other products. On a more cheerful note, I do really appreciate the efforts you're making in producing access software for the Mac. Since coming across Proloquo I realised that it isn't meant to be a screen reader in any way and provides access in other ways. Good luck with its development and congratulations for making it Intel compatible already. Cheers Will
