Once again, Gabriel, you have succeeded in displaying your absolute ignorance in typical fashion. None of us blind Pro Tools users blame anyone for Pro tools not being accessible. In fact, Digidesign set a precedent by making Pro Tools accessible with outSPOKEN and we were glad to have been instrumental in making that happen. Further, nobody is blaming Apple for anything. In fact, we absolutely applaud Apple for making VoiceOver. That's why we're stressing the need to make Pro Tools accessible with VoiceOver as opposed to JAWS or WindowEyes. Once again, you're perception is scued. Did it ever occur to you that it would be far more desireable to have a company willingly make their product accessible rather than bringing on a costly lawsuit that may or may not succeed? You're clearly blissfully unaware of any details regarding this whole issue of Pro Tools accessibilty and our ongoing discussions with Apple and Digidesign and yet you spew what you think is wisdom. It never ceses to amaze me how off the mark you can be. You misunderstand, misperceive and yet you shoot off your mouth as if you know something. Well, I shouldn't be surprised. To add to this, I was amused to see you weasel back onto this list after having been kicked off. Nobody has said anything yet because I think we were all quite a bit surprised to see you back, especially after your behavior before your having been kicked off. Well, let me just say that you'll probably misperceive this as some kind of personal attack and I don't care one bit. First of all, I don't even know you. All I know of you is your behavior on many lists and you dish out the same crap everywhere. I'm sick of it and so are most of the people on this list. If you want to contribute to VoiceOver issues and are capable of doing it in a civilized, friendly tone rather than your usual condescending, arrogant default manner, go right ahead. However, when it comes to matters of which you know nothing about, do us all a favor and keep your baseless comments to yourself. Feel free to comment off list if you wish. I don't think anybody's interested in discussing this on this list any further. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gabriel Vega To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 11:11 PM Subject: Re: voiceover, a talking interface:
I see your pint here. but still have always stood by the point that is the only way we are going to get some action here for blind persons is by taking them to task. this is where the pro tools petition is going wrong because they really aren't sure who to blame but want to blame every one around. there is even some who blame apple. which sadly if they even started to begin to understand the underside of vo and coco accessiblity standards would realize the proper and most logical thing to do is to go after digi in a law suit and not an online petition. so which brings me to this current topic. I infact totally believe that apple took the right approach and it is up to us as the professionals who use apple macs to stand up for ourselves and get apps accessable.. Gabe Vega The BlindTechs Network Website: http://blindtechs.net Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (602) 476-2307 (562) 261-5277 (866) 714-4244 ----- Original Message ----- From: "yvonne thomson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by the blind" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 5:49 PM Subject: Re: voiceover, a talking interface: > Hi, all. > > As much as I agree with all this, and as much as I love the whole > "talking interface" concept, we all have to admit, surely, that it's > not without its problems. > > The main one, as far as I can see, is that it's far, *far* too easy > to make an application inaccessible, and it puts the onus squarely on > the software writer to do the right thing and make it possible for us > to use the software they've written. > > As far as I can see, unless the app is stock standard cocoa, you have > to get extremely lucky, or have someone specifically design the app > to be accessible for you. Reality check here, people. Software > designers are absolutely *awful* at this. That, from what I can see, > is in part why screen readers exist. software designers seem to just > *hate* whatever the stock standard interface is. It isn't fast > enough. It isn't pretty enough. It doesn't do what I want and so > theay write their own. That's happened for as long as I've been using > computers, and probably longer. We want it to be cross platform so > the toolkit they use isn't read by Voiceover. And the problem with > all of this is, that there's no solution other than hoping that the > writer of the application you want to use takes pity on you, or just > to do what I, at least, have always done. Decide you want an app to > do something, go to a site that catalogs as much software as > possible, and download practically everything in that category just > to find something that works, forget whether it's got the features > you want, worry about that later. First, can we use it at all? > > Now please, this isn't to say I'm not loving the Mac, I am. When it > works, it's incredibly easy to use and incredibly accessible, but I > honestly don't think *this* is the silver bullet for us, either. I > have no idea what the heck is, though. > > Yvonne who is probably now going to be thrown off the mailing list. > > >
