Sounds interesting. Now, let me just ask you another question, when comes to handling the mouse. In Window-Eyes, we have the chance of moving the mouse, character by character, line by line, or clip by clip (or icon, if you want). Well, this, I do believe, differs a bit from a normal mouse movement, as the physical mouse might be moved seamlessly around the screen. In other words, you can move your mouse only pixels. You might even be able to move in between clips. Easy enough for you, who will see, and can adjust the mouse. But, in what way does your software ensure the blind user, actually is pointing on something. OK, I do believe you mentioned in one of your messages, that the user could hold the right mousebutton for a given time, so as to hear what's under the mouse. But when - in Window-Eyes - I move to the NEXT character, I do expect to get there, and am getting what I expect. If I tell the mouse to move to next clip, I can rely on the software to take me right there, and not end up in the middle of something, or between some icons. If i had to move a bit, then press a key for a second or whatever, then realize 'oh, no, there is nothing', then move a bit agian... Well, you get the point. So, how reliable is your software, when comes to taking the user quickly EXACTLY where he expected to get?
Also, a lot of times we do see screens that have a pretty 'fancy' layout. That is, for the one who see the screen with his two eyes. But for a blind person to navigate between columns, and around graphics, to read some text to the left of a picture, then scroll up to the top of the page so as to read the text to the right of a picture; well, one thing is, it makes little sense, the other is, he pretty soon gets lost. So, how does your software handle the layout of the screen? Does it only give the user access to the screen, or does it sort the content in any way? If you have taken your time to look at how other screen readers - Window-Eyes, Jaws, Hal, NVDA - handles stuff, you might have noticed that they all tend to sort the screen to some degree. If this has puzzled you, here you have the explanation why. When on a webpage, how do the user navigate? Do I have to move the mouse around the screen, trying to figure where the next link, heading, table, column, row, graphic and so forth, is located? Or, do you have implemented any means by which the user quickly can navigate the webpage. Well, you as a sighted person, might wonder why this should be any topic. For you, it means but a quick glance at the screen, and differences in font, style and colors, it all will tell you immediately what is a link, heading or plain text. But for the blind person... In what software have you tested your program. A screen reader, that really will make the blind person independent, will have to be able to handle a load of software. Even on this list, there is people who uses Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Internet Explorer, Firefox, ITunes, TextAloud, Winamp, Windows media Player, MaPlEr, Lotus, along with a numerous amount of other software. Many of us are using different shareware, freeware, or in other ways software that might not exactly be mainstream ware. Do you have test results that indicates to what extend, using your software will allow the blind user the same access in any of these above mentioned applications, as we can rely on from one of the mainstream screen readers. Well, what is under the mouse? Yes, I guess that is important enough. But what does your software do, when I type text in Notepad, for instance, and the mouse sits quietly in the upper right corner of my screen. Or, what does your software do, when in certain applications, simply howering the mouse over the buttons or other symbols on the screen, immediately forces the software to perform certain actions. I.e in a recording software, simply placing the mouse on the record button, will start the recording. Moving the mouse on the DELETE button, immediately will pop-up a question, whether you want to delete or not; throwing you out of the original window. Again, for you as a sighted person, in such applications, you can have a glance at the screen, make up your mind what to do, then bring the mouse right to the wanted icon, and click it. And bringing it safely there, will take for you to steer clear of any other icons, that might interfere with your navigation or operation. OK, in Window--Eyes, first we have the chance of moving 'our' pointer, that is, the Window-Eyes pointer, totally freed from the mouse pointer. That way, we can easily browse the screen, and when done, and placed where we want to be, by a single keypress, bring the mouse pointer into action, and right at the spot. How does your software handle that situation? Further, in Window-Eyes, I can either move my cursor to the position of the mouse, or the mouse to the position of the cursor. How does your software handle that? Yet, another scenario: Sometimes I want my mouse staying permanently in one spot, i.e because that is a button I frequently use, or it is the line where certain updated information keeps showing up. Meanwhile, I want to browse the rest of the screen, or do other operations. How does your software handle situations like that? Since you are only informing the user of what is under the mouse - well, at least, that is what I got from your rather short discription so far - that would mean, I'd have to leave my spot, so as to browse the screen, then fool around and refind my starting point, so as to do some kind of interaction. Just let me give you one example: In a recording software, I might want to leave the mouse on the START/STOP button; leaving me the chance of a quick press on the left button, for starting/stoping my recording. Whilst the recording actually is going on, there might be a spot in the middle of my screen, where the actual lenght of the recording is showing up. I want to keep track of this, and exactly at 1:54, stop the recording. Will your software require me to bring the mouse up on the timing line, and pressing, holding the right mouse-key for a second every time I want to get updated on the elapsed time, then hoping for me to make it in time to refind the START/STOP button in time, for me to stop at the exact time? Well, another user on the list, insinuated that we are just critical. Hopefully not. Yet, if you - or anyone else - intend to outform any of the established screen readers, the above mentioned points, are no more than a fraction of the tip of the ice berg. These are examples picked right out of the everyday work, hobby and living for many a blind user. The old days, when a blind user was using his computer for merely checking his email, typing a letter to his uncle, andbrowsing the website of his favorite newsletter; well, if they ever existed, they are long time gone! Blind users - along with sighted people - expect to use their computer for all sorts of things. There is several projects that are taking upon themselves to assist blind people in operating their computer. They all have one thing in common, they are called screen readers. Yet, for those of us, who has been in the game for several decades, we well know, that is just about the only thing they have in common. Each one tends to handle things slightly different. And fact is, as I mentioned in an earlier message, the only way to get the fullest accessibility, would be to use them all; each for its own purpose. A couple of screen readers, already known to the community, are doing a pretty fair job, yet are not the main screen reader of the choice. For one, I want to mention the freeware NVDA. It does a fair enough job, in many cases, and even might prove superb in give settings. Yet, it still ain't what people use for their daily activity. Why? Because it lacks several of the features of the big mainstream screen readers like Jaws and Window-Eyes. Why, am I pointing this out? OK; you have a new product for the community? That's great. Let's see it, and if it can live up to the expectations of every day life, it will be a winner. If not? Well, it still will have its place, and might even outform the mainstreams in given environment. But, noone will ever be able to release the perfect 'all-in-one' screen reader; hence noone should knock the head off any of the competitors. There is space enough for them all, long as they do a fair enough job. And to those of you who don't think I know what I am talking: I started out doing my computing way back in the 80s, and have done development in software several times. I've been putting together quite a few computers, all from scratch, and delivered some systems for the blind. Window-Eyes is but one of the long line of screen readers I been handling up through those close to three decades. Having taught computer for the blind, as well as the sighted, i in school and workplaces, as well as in private homes. I've been wearing out a good handful of Braille displays, from a number of vendors; and played around with several speech synthesizers, software or hardware. Taken from this line of experience, I find it right for us - when anybody comes around with something new, and claims it to be revolutionary - to ask some questions. This doesn't mean we are not interested, but there is too many people who has come up with 'nice' ideas - through the years. Nice ideas! Yet, not nice in reality. Or, at least, not all the time all that revolutionary in the blindtech. As I have already stated several times, your product might be really good. And if so, you will be the winner. Yet, as long as all we got from you was a good chunk of rushing at GW and their screen reader, a load of 'fancy' words about how you have invented the wheel, and two lines of real facts about your software's actual features; well as long as that, I think it is in its place, to ask some questions. Even being a bit reluctant. Let's have some more flesh on the bone. Let's have a real demo version. Let's have some answers - real ansewers - to our questions. Yes, and you will see you will have a good chunk of people looking at your software. ----- Original Message ----- From: shane findley To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 11:57 AM Subject: Re: GW Micro Responds to the Future of Screen Readers Discussion Panel Questions Thanks Chip! Another developer is always nice! I see there is some bitterness from failed attempts of the past. I understand the skeptics. Sorry to have upset any of the users. I think that will change when you see I have good intent, and good code. David you wrote alot, so I want to address you, especially your last paragraphs. The mouse is not free to roam wildly. In the totally blind option, the mouse is static and locked onto the control that you have scrolled to. No drifting. Mouse movement changes the category, with the diagonal movements ignored. The sensitivity to movement and wheel scroll is adjustable, which is really nice for those with minor tremmors, or similar mobility impairments. The concept is sound, simple, and it's virus free. If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending your message to [email protected] so the entire list will receive it. GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo. You can manage your list subscription at http://www.gwmicro.com/listserv. If you reply to this message it will be delivered to the original sender only. If your reply would benefit others on the list and your message is related to GW Micro, then please consider sending your message to [email protected] so the entire list will receive it. GW-Info messages are archived at http://www.gwmicro.com/gwinfo. You can manage your list subscription at http://www.gwmicro.com/listserv.
