Hi Dakotah, That all makes sense. The issue of quality control seems to be a double edged sword. On one hand as a developer I am a bit put out by the idea of having to pay money to develop apps and games for the iPhone, but on the other hand as a user I know everything I buy and download for the phone has to meet certain quality standards so that degree of quality control is a plus. On the other hand I don't have to have a big financial investment in developing apps and games for Android, but that also means anything I download won't have been tested to insure the same degree of quality control Apple has. So that's not too cool. So it requires some serious consideration before I put out that kind of money for a phone.
On 1/7/13, Dakotah Rickard <[email protected]> wrote: > I couldn't agree more with this last post. Honestly, I haven't tried > out Jellybean, though I'd like to do so, but when you compare the use > of the iPhone by sighted individuals versus blind ones, with the same > usage of an Android phone by sighted versus blind people, you find > that the iPhone usage ratio is close to a 1:1 setup than the Android > ratio. > > The difficulty is in quality control and accessibility concerns. > google released Android as a chance at scooping up market shares. > Essentially, it's free to implement, and they don't even really > control a lot of content that's out there. this is in comparison to > Apple, who released an exclusive device running proprietary software > which they wrote, produced, and assembled. Furthermore, anyone who > wants to develop for Apple products has to pay for it, and there's an > approval process. This is highly different from the Google Android > approach. > > Honestly, the problem I find is that with the iPhone I find plenty of > inaccessible apps in the store but no inaccessible apps on the phone, > and a good plenty of apps in the store are accessible. With Android > phones, the experience I've heard, though it is second-hand from good > friends, is that there are certain apps which are designed to be > accessible. It is possible to browse the web in limited fashion, > explore contacts, calculator, clock functions, and text messages, in a > general way, it is similar, if not less than, a phone running, say, > Windows Mobile 6.1 or 6.5 and Mobile Speak. Those phones are > smartphones, but only technically so. If you want a basic phone, go > with Android, because you'll get what you want, a phone with fully > functioning address book, dial pad, and the like, but if you want to > truly engage the smartness of the smartphone, go for the iDevice, > because you'll be getting an experience which more closely parallels > the experience had by your sighted colleagues, an experience which > doesn't depend on specific apps developed for accessibility but > depends on a wide range of apps whose development often encourages > accessibility concerns simply by haing to be written that way. > > Sorry for the slightly rambling nature of this message, and good luck, > no matter what your choice turns out to be. > > Signed: > Dakotah Rickard --- Gamers mailing list __ [email protected] If you want to leave the list, send E-mail to [email protected]. You can make changes or update your subscription via the web, at http://mail.audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org. All messages are archived and can be searched and read at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the management of the list, please send E-mail to [email protected].
