Well, at my end I'll happily end this discussion by saying that no
matter what the accessability argument is, the Ipod shuffle is
perfectly useable so go and buy one and its nice to have a perfectly
usable product for a change as my DVD Player, VCR recorder are
perfectly usable because I sat down and spent time working them out.
The Ipod Nano on the other hand is something that I doubt you'll ever
get truly usable for a blind person because (the way it seems to me)
it has a touch screen so that goes out the window but I'm not going
to wage war against Apple just because they bring out something with
a flat touch screen, I'll just keep using the shuffle or find
something better such as an Iriver etc.
Dane Trethowan
Positive feeling and power from me is yours.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can use the above address for MSN Messenger contact.
mobile/SMS +61 425 777 508
On 30/05/2006, at 12:38 AM, David Poehlman wrote:
Turn this around just a bit. The shuffle lacks certain
accessibility features which would benefit blind and sighted
alike. Now, while it is true that accessible is the same or nearly
so for sighted and blind alike, we see that acccessibility can be
improved for both. I hope this begins to make sense. We don't
compair the accessibility of a product for different groups and if
found equally accessible say the product is accessible. We look at
what makes something truly acceessible. This product needs a lot
of work, but it is not alone.
On May 29, 2006, at 8:49 AM, Travis Siegel wrote:
I'm really puzzled here.
What exactly is your definition of accessible?
If I can access all the functions of a unit, and I can do it in
exactly the same way the sighted folks do, regardless of the
device, or the medium, isn't that accessible?
I don't care that the shuffle doesn't have certain functions in
it. I.E. voice feedback for song titles, or play counters or the
like. The important thing is that it works for us exactly the same
way it works for the sighted people using it. What about this
scenario is not accessible?
And what about a cd player isn't accessible?
I can put a cd in my player, move forward, backward, skip songs,
and even randomly play songs if I desire (assuming the player has a
button for this function) here, I don't see a difference between
sighted/nonsighted access either. Most cd players (except for the
portable ones) don't have a display for sighted folks either, so
where's the non accessible features?
I believe you're confusing accessibility with feature rich. Just
because something doesn't have a feature I'd like, doesn't make it
inaccessible, it merely makes it not robust enough for my liking.
That's a completely different issue than being able to use it's
functions without sighted assistance.
Please try explaining what exactly it is you're trying to say here,
because I for one don't understand your point.
