Hi, all.  I've used Window Eyes with IE 4.0.  And another problem I've
encountered is that sometimes, with some web pages, the computer locks up
when trying to load the page using the MSAA buffer.  The computer I was
using was a gateway Penteum 200.  I do not have the problem with pages
locking up with JFW.  Not to mention the fact that the pages load much
faster with JFW than they do when using Window-Eyes with MSAA.
At 07:07 AM 3/22/99 -0800, you wrote:
>I don't want to get into the "my screen reader is better" debate and JFW is
>my personal screen reader of choice.  Having explored Window-Eyes
>extensively, I can say that while the MSAA mode makes reading long articles
>or web pages a bit easier, it isn't all some are cracking it up to be.
>First of all, it imposes a lengthy delay on the loading of a web page as it
>must be loaded into this MSAA buffer.  On many pages like the New York
>Times, CNN and such, this frequently takes 5 to 8 seconds on my Pentium 300.
>Second, if your web page has controls like edit boxes, check boxes and
>alike you have to disable MSAA mode to actually change the status of the
>control or enter information.  Window-Eyes dos this automatically when you
>press enter on the control but you must then turn on MSAA again and wait
>for the page to load into the buffer.
>I have found that JFW's ctrl-page down for reading web pages with the
>reformat option works pretty well.
>At 01:31 PM 3/22/99 +1200, you wrote:
>>There has been quite a bit of publicity from the various vendors of screen
>>readers on the subject of Active Accessibility.  GW Micro decided to stick
>>with it, and I guess where Microsoft has implemented it properly it means
>>that WindowEyes and other screen readers that have invested in MSAA are
>>ahead.  It would sure be nice to read internet pages in a proper edit box,
>>but really, once you're used to using the JAWS cursor, and you reformat
>>difficult pages, I think IE 4 certainly works quite well with JFW.  I'm not
>>saying it works as well as IE 5 does with WindowEyes.  
>>But there's also more to life than the internet.  There's a lot of stuff
>>that JFW works very well with and maybe in most cases it still out performs
>>WindowEyes.  Think about braille for instance.  I think, stick with JFW in
>>the meantime.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Les Kriegler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>>Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:23 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's
>>Hi David,
>>Keep in mind that as a new release of a screen reader comes out, it may
>>leap frog the competition for a while.  Let's see how well JFW 3.3 works
>>with IE5, and then I think some conclusions can be drawn.  This isn't
>>taking anything away from Window-Eyes; it's great that it apparently works
>>well in IE5; it didn't in IE4, particularly in the extremely slow response
>>to loading of pages, and that point was acknowledged by GW Micro.  I'm
>>confident that JFW will work very well with IE5.  Notice that HJ states
>>that they do not officially support IE5 yet.  That, to me is significant.
>>Best Regards,
>>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
>>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
>Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net

If you would like to contact me using ICQ, my number is 24669268.
You can also visit me on the web at: http://www.public.usit.net/gmquick

Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net

Reply via email to