Tim, some of your history is a bit scued. Apple had to stay alive during the years when microsoft was the sole entity for the enterprise out there. Apple concentrated on providing for specialized markets and kept themselves alive. Microsoft would never have provided for accessibility were they not forced into it and even then, they left much of it up to third party developpers. On this point, all we are saying is that when apple did move though it might have not been soon enough for some of us, they did it in an apple elligant way by providing a path that is hard to resist and that will prove to be a winning strategy for all in the long run.
The recent developments in the screen reader arena bear this out in what they are doing to attempt to counteract this. Our main objection to what you do is to make claims like "blind people will believe whatever they are told" and "apple users will lie and not tell the truth". Look how long it took the mainstream linux community to bundle a talking kernel into their products. Now, you will say and rightly so that this is open source, but the fact remains. You still have not backed up your asertion that what you say is a simple fix is a simple fix. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Grady" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by theblind" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 8:23 AM Subject: Re: iTunes Accessibility Let me just say a few things. I have not like some of you perceive attacked apple or the Mac, although I do think users of the Mac are quite silly sometimes about their defense of the Mac, for example, you seem to think I have some kind of personal grievance against Apple. You couldn't be more wrong. I just happen not to agree with you about all of the plaudits you are giving Apple. I like what Apple is doing, but I have to ask, why did it take them so long to start? Ever since I started working with the LISA you could see that Apple's equipment had great potential for accessibility. Instead of putting a lot of time and effort into making their systems accessible they chose to only give this a minimal effort and were almost put out of business by Microsoft. Now, I'm not saying that was the only mistake Apple made. To my mind they made a lot of bonehead mistakes that caused their problems. Now, back to the Itunes thing that seems to have gotten your bowels in an uproar. I simply stated that it wouldn't be hard for Apple to fix Itunes so that every time Itunes was updated you didn't have to get sighted help to click on the button to agree to the Itunes store terms. Calm down and take a stress pill. I won't be publicly critical of Apple again on this list if it gets you'll so upset, although the lists description is for the general discussion of the Mac. On Aug 24, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Scott Howell wrote: > John, your wasting your time because Tim just doesn't feel anyone is > looking out for his best interest and because we're blind, we're > subject to being snowed. Got news for you Tim , that isn't the case. > Instead of taking such a negative approach, why not take the > opposite and realize that things don't happen as quickly as we like. > Point is your statements might be based on personal experience, I > don't know, but they are way off the mark from my perspective. I > assume your using the Mac? If so, do you find anything about your > experience you do enjoy? I'm just a bit confused by this entire > thread once we got beyond the issue of iTunes. I use iTunes actually > a great deal as a musician. Itunes isn't perfect, but (and we go > full circle) it is over 90 percent accessible. I find the store is > the greatest challenge, but for nearly everything else, I've had > great success with it. YOu want to talk about software that's not > accessible, lets talk about iWorks which is something I'd like to > see Apple get going. Open Office is getting there, but it's not even > there yet. In the end Tim, you need to look at the amount of time > invested and the results of that investment. In the scheme of > things, Apple really is years ahead in terms of making OSX etc. > accessible as compared to how long it took for windows-based screen > readers to achieve the same results. Does this make sense now? > > On Aug 23, 2008, at 10:59 PM, John Panarese wrote: > >> No Tim. You are falling back on a weak defense that is pointless >> to debate. You are implying that the blind, overall, are lied to >> or can be spoon fed anything from anyone. Both assertions are >> baseless and foolish. One can make the same claim for the sighted >> as well and be equally wrong. In regard to this topic, since the >> advent of VoiceOver, I believe Apple's progress speaks for itself. >> Thus, who is being forced or fooled into believing what? It amazes >> me that when one personalizes an issue, the grounds to defend that >> issue become blurred at best. The original subject was iTunes >> accessibility. You don't think it's good enough nor will it >> improve. Others believe otherwise. I think that's perfectly clear >> after all of this, and, again, comes back to opinions. In this >> case, though, the body of evidence indicates the latter, as opposed >> to the former. >> Take Care >> >> John Panarese > >
