There can be no better exemplar for lack of objectivity than the person who is of the notion that Macs are used by a higher percentage of creative people.
Where my comments on this subject are concerned, I think the following apply. To use the term "exclusively" to paraphrase my statement that was qualified with words like "more" and "less", tells of a person who is so abjectly moronic or in dire need of learning the English language. That's not you, is it Josh? Don't pick a fight with me. It's not the purpose of this board. For your information, I support a balanced approach. My position is simply that if this board is any indication, and given the failure of many I know to convince their counselors to get them the things that they need, as opposed to what the counselor thinks they need, my approach is the best bet. If you know anything about debate, persuasion or good argumentation, you would know that the key to winning is addressing the perceived weaknesses of your position. Because this is the area of dispute, it takes more energy than is required to argue the strengths, which are not in dispute. Would you like an example? Sure you do! Weakness: Mac OS X is not as well supported by major developers as compared to Windows Strengths: Mac OS X with VoiceOver is truck-loads less expensive than Windows with JAWS. In a real sense, if there is insufficient energy put on the first of the two, the strong point ironically becomes weak, and perhaps even irrelevant; because the response of the DR counselor would be, "Yes, cost is an issue, but we are more interested in getting you the right equipment". In truth, there is a really good multi-level answer to the issue of application support, one that I've yet to see here. But in addressing the weak point, ergo assuaging the apprehension of the counselor, the strong point becomes icing on the cake. Anyway, I have offered to help draft a talking points, but you seem more willing to question my objectivity. In point of fact, I am really good at crafting solid arguments, a talent for which I have received both state level and national championships. In so far as anyone's desire to approach State counselors on this issue, this is what I bring to the mix. In fact, I was able to convince my hard-nosed counselor to get me one. Also, the weakest argument you can make to a counselor in favor of a Mac, is "well, things are not as accessible now, but hold out just a bit longer it will get better." In the mean time, there are all of these other programs that sort of do what the standard applications do. The question that any counselor worth his or her salt should ask is, "well, how do you know it will get better? And why should we wait and not get you the PC with the programs that you need for school or work, that we know (well,) work! Besides, you cannot expect to find viable Mac alternatives for every single application you may need to use in an academic setting or work place." Again, there is a really good answer for this, none of which I'm willing to explain in this post, as it is already too damn long! My point, people don't know how to make their case to counselors. They think they do, but they don't. That's why most of them are entrenched. And, in my view, given their proclivity for platform loyalty, developers often make the worse advocates for issues like this. They are problem-solvers, who are excited about working their ways around obstacles. This is a respectable, admirable trait to be sure. But work-arounds, require a lot of energy, and it is already hard enough being a full time blind college student, or employee who has other problems (some more or less complex than others) to solve. [Ok, that was a really bad run-on sentence, but I'm too tired to fix it!] My proposal is that a few people work on a document, circulate a draft through the list, make appropriate edits, then post it on the Mac Visionaries web site. And perhaps with the document in hand, start an organized movement to get State organizations for the blind to look at the Macs viability. Ok, Josh, I'm done now, attack if you are inclined. Abdul -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Josh de Lioncourt Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 4:33 PM To: General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by the blind Subject: Re: Macs and a Viable Alternative for State Agencies to Consider Focussing exclusively on the strengths or weaknesses of any platform is by its very nature a lack of objectivity. A balanced approach is the way to go. If one tries to enlighten people of the reasons to use the Mac platform by sticking primarily to its shortcomings....well, I think the absurdity of such an idea speaks for itself. Office 2008 for Mac should be out later this year, and it is important to point out that it is the first version of the suite to be released since the introduction of VoiceOver. It'll be interesting to see if it is more accessible than the 2004 version. Either way, many many programs have the ability to import and export to Office compatible formats, and I expect that to become more and more the case as XML seaps its way into everything. Nowadays, I have much greater success finding software that works decently to stellar with VoiceOver than I do finding software on Windows that works well with the screen readers available for that platform. This was not the case two years ago, but I think is very clearly the case now. This has a lot to do with the tremendous amount of custom controls being used without a thought to accessibility under Windows, even when it isn't necessary. A high number of apps for Mac developed over the last two years are accessible simply because Cocoa makes them so with little or no work on the parts of the developers. The VO compatibility database we've been contributing to helps illustrate this point. I expect this to continue to broaden options on the Mac for blind users. Josh de Lioncourt [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...my other mail provider is an owl... On Jun 20, 2007, at 1:07 AM, Abdul Kamara wrote: > Hello Harry or Linda, > > This is an excellent point. Bring it up, and many would accuse you of > being an Apple basher. > > As it stands, Office is not accessible via Voice Over. Blackboard, if > it is the same here as it is in the States, is a web Application, and > depending on VoiceOver's capabilities, you should have no problems > accessing it. > > The key here is intellectual honesty. Counselors have good reason to > be skeptical of the Mac and its viability. As someone who is training > to be a Barrister, I would say that key to unearthing any entrenched > positions and switching them to yours is willingness on your part to > acknowledge the weaknesses of your position, and respecting why others > believe differently. > > Subsequently, any talking point devised to help counselors see the > light, must take into account the reason why they get the computers > for their clients in the first place. It's all about the education > and jobs. And they are going to support a platform that dominates, > supporting more applications for the disabled. As much as I love > Apple, this is an inescapable truth. > > To all who are planning on writing anything on this issue, I would > implore you to do the following. Focus less energy on wy you think > the Mac is "superior" and put more on addressing the actual weaknesses > (because they are there). They are not insurmountable, but failure to > address them will lead to dismissal and more hardliner points of view > on the part of rehabilitation counselors. > > > > >
