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.
