When it comes to the future, both JFW and Window-eyes (as well as any
other third-party screen readers out there) had better be looking over
their shoulder. Microsoft is reported to be working on its own screen
readers for Windows products. If and when they succeed, the scheisse
will hit the fan!
>From: David Poehlman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: jaws for windows mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's
InternetAccess]
>Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 06:50:30 -0500
>
>Play nice Please I do not necessarily disagree with this hasty
>conclusion but it has implications for the future.
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: Fwd: A comparative review of Windowless and JFW's
>InternetAccess
>Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 20:39:10 +1100
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (pattist)
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>From: Jonathan Mosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>With the recent release of Internet Explorer 5.0, there has naturally
>been
>discussion about screen readers for Windows and Internet access. A
>number of
>generalist statements have been made, resulting in some list members
>asking
>for substantiation of those statements. For what it is worth, here is
>my
>view, complete with feature examples, on why Windoweyes provides
>superior
>access to the Internet than JFW. This comparison looks at IE 5.0 using
>the
>beta scripts on the JFW Mailing List home page. These scripts are
>essentially slightly modified versions of the IE 4 scripts,
>compensating for
>the fact that the IE 4 scripts mistakenly think that IE 5 is IE 3. So
>the
>functionality when using JFW with the IE 5 scripts mirrors that of IE
>4
>access with JFW. Apart from a huge speed improvement when using IE 5,
>access
>to the Net with Internet Explorer, Windoweyes offers the same feature
>set
>under IE 4 and IE 5. On this basis then, I believe the feature
>comparison is
>relevant.
>
>I should also add that Window Bridge and Winvision, having made
>excellent
>use of Active Accessibility, offer similar functionality to
>Windoweyes. In
>some areas there are differences though, and while I have used
>demonstration
>versions of these two products, I don't feel proficient enough with
>those
>packages to make comment.
>
>The heart of the superiority of Windoweyes over JFW for Internet
>access is
>the fact that the entire HTML document, or web page, is loaded by
>Windoweyes
>into a buffer, which it calls the MSAA buffer. This allows the user to
>read
>a web page as if it were a document in Notepad or Word. This means,
>for
>example, that the continuous read feature reads a web page from top to
>bottom in Windoweyes.
>
>This web page loading process eliminates the need for any reformatting
>to be
>done on a web page, as is necessary with pages with a complex visual
>lay-out
>in JFW.
>
>Windoweyes has a feature which immediately alerts you to the fact that
>a
>page has frames when it appears on the screen, thus reminding you that
>you
>can use control+tab to move quickly between frames. A status hot key
>specific to the MSAA buffer will tell you the line of the page you're
>on,
>which frame you are in, and how many frames there are on the page.
>
>Both Windoweyes and JFW have the excellent feature allowing you to
>bring up
>a listview containing all the links on a page. However, Windoweyes
>offers
>two choices within this list view. One choice executes the link, in
>other
>words it takes you to the page pointed to. The other option puts the
>MSAA
>cursor on the link, allowing you to move your cursor around the
>current page
>to get an idea of the context of the current link. This is a great
>feature
>for all those obscure links that say things like "click here".
>
>Searching an entire web page is significantly better with Windoweyes.
>Instead of using the standard Internet Explorer search, one instead
>uses the
>Windoweyes search. In most circumstances, this searches only the
>screen, but
>when the MSAA buffer is turned on, you can search the entire buffer.
>This
>means that you can search for text on the entire web page, and have
>the MSAA
>cursor placed right at the result for you to continuously read from
>there or
>for you to explore the context further.
>
>Filling in forms is about even in my view. It is annoying and
>potentially
>confusing to novice computer users that one has to turn MSAA mode off
>in
>Windoweyes when filling in a form, then turn it back on again when
>you've
>submitted the form. I hope this will be remedied in a version of
>Windoweyes
>in the not too distant future.
>
>Finally, and I've saved the best for last, there is no comparison
>between
>the ease with which the screen readers get you past those annoying
>contents
>margins. By this, I refer to the list of common links you so often
>find
>taking up at least a screen full at the top of each web page. With one
>simple key press, Windoweyes will instantly take your cursor past that
>material and straight onto the stuff you want to read. It literally
>saves
>you hours over a few days of surfing, and makes the web a much more
>pleasant
>experience. This feature works well about 90 percent of the time, with
>an
>occasional requirement for several presses of this key combination to
>skip
>you past several contents margins.
>
>In conclusion, I think the gamble GW Micro took in relying on Active
>Accessibility to provide Internet access is starting to pay off. They
>tolerated many angry customers saying, "JFW supports IE 4, why don't
>you".
>There is no doubt in my mind that a blind person will be more
>productive and
>efficient with Windoweyes than they will with JFW when surfing the
>Internet.
>JFW will have to at least match these features in 3.3 in order to be a
>contender as a screen reader for serious surfers.
>
>Jonathan
>
>Regards Steve,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-
>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
>
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
-
Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
