Sean I'm sorry that you took issue with my response. However, I feel it necessary to vigorously critisize those who would go so far as to mischaracterize my wors or intent on this board. It's not (in my view) reasonable to expect civility where it is easy for many to cast aspersions.
ACTUALLY, I think you make an excellent point regarding VoiceOver. It's not the issue of whether voiceover is accessible as much as whether the application adhere's to standards of accessibility. So, you are using voiceOver with MS Word, and you have full functionality? Please tell us more... By the way, my conclusions about MS Word aren't in anyway a product of prejudice, as much as my own experience. You make an excellent point about parameters and functionality. Where objectivity is concerned, this is where I'm inclined to put my focus when evaluating either platform per any situation. Based on this, an objective assessment renders both sides, as having relatively equitable levels of strengths and weaknesses. This is often misconstrued as "Apple bashing". Regarding expense, I don't thik the numbers come in all that close. The Mac is by far the least expensive option. Ok, nap time... Take care, abdul -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sean Tikkun Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 7:59 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 Sincerely Abdul I was taken aback by your reply. I hope folks can remain civil here. With regard to applications: - criticizing Mac when the true responsibility of accessibility lies with the application manufacturer is falling for the age old excuse that has made screen readers the standard. I repeat, VO is not a screen reader... It is an audible interface. A screen reader is a third party application that interprets visual information and converts it to audible. VO has options and interface abilities the standard GUI user doesn't get. It is a whole new creature! - MS could make all of their apps accessible tomorrow. We all know this is true. I watched as a programmer tinkered with an app for 10 minutes and gave me access via VoiceOver to certain menu items. The fact remains as it has always been the case. MS is not interested in accessibility, if they were they would make their OS fully accessible out of the box. Perhaps Vista is, but from the rush for JAWS and WindowEyes to get betas out I gather this is not true. - The case remains that the person ordering the computer relies on experience and prejudice, frequently sighted prejudice. MSWord remains a standard argument, and yet I have used MSWord on mac since 1998 and never noticed a compatibility problem. Most people don't know Office works on mac! How is this possible if the person is actually knowledgeable about computer options? - I'm not savvy with the rehab field, but in education specific products and computers can not be noted. Parameters and function can be noted. It should be noted that these rules are not followed, but the rules remain there to combat prejudice and encourage objective comparison. With regard to Apple Computers: - When the cost of a machine that runs a screen reader (additional memory and Mhz) is compared to a bottom line mac I think the numbers come in pretty close. (If not please post the numbers so I can be more accurate) Not to mention that the machine will most likely come with a possibly unnecessary monitor (Mac Mini anyone?). So having access to 2 platforms at the same cost would seem to be a more responsible use of funds. I have used both platforms in my professional training. My recommendations are always to go with what is most familiar and comfortable to the user. The philosophy of compatibility with the work environment certainly is not true in education as I've seen more all mac schools buying PC's I'm going long... I'll stop here Your Friend, Sean Richards Tikkun [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your Friend, Sean Richards Tikkun [EMAIL PROTECTED]
