I too would have to agree with scott! On Sep 5, 2009, at 8:33 PM, Donna Goodin wrote:
> > Nice post, Scott. These are all very good points. > donna > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Chesworth <scottcheswo...@gmail.com> > Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 6:44 PM > To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [Mac-cessibility News] FaceBook iPhone Application > Updated With Accessibility Fixes > > > Cara - Appologies if it came across as less than constructive critique > at your end, I thought I made it pretty obvious that I wasn't knocking > Josh's efforts at all. Perhaps it was the comparrison that came over > wrong, for what it's worth, it was written light heartedly at this > end. Not everyone thinks the same, hence why I kept it on list and > suggested either a poll or for more folks to chime in. > A few thoughts from the slow costly access and mobile camp, of course > they're going to be from my own point of view, can't help that, but my > thought processes aren't too outragious (most of the time): > Surely the majority of people who'd be browsing high traffic lists > like this on a mobile device would have some sort of data plan in > place, or risk bankruptcy. Seeing as how not every platform is as > slick and quick as the iPhone though, wouldn't it make more sense for > those people to receive a couple of extra kb of text in their email > per day at most rather than launch their browser, wait for a whole > webpage to download on what could likely be a flakey connection, then > take on the frustration of navigating the content (no disrespect, it's > a well laid out site, my point is that mobile browsing in the main is > fairly horrible). > For the pay-per-minute folks or similar, again, sticking in one app > and downloading an email with the full content as a couple kb of text > verses firing up their prefered choice of browser and downloading a > whole page of HTML would save time and money would it not? > All I can say is that, although it's from my own point of view, I'm > moving to a new pad next week and will be getting my net access from a > horrid mixture of those two options, and the above makes more sense to > me as I'm fast approaching the week or so of access-less trauma lol. > Plus, I'm not sure if you've made it through the whole thread yet, but > you seem to have quite a few people not minding the updates, but > prefering the full content. Clearly not everyone is as grouchy as us > troublemakers that started the debate, but that part of it doesn't > seem to be going away. > > Scott - I get why you forward your posts linked to stay on the right > side of people's terms and conditions, but seeing as all the posts I > can remember have been written by a contributor to maccessibility.net, > I'd hope they have permission to republish there own stuff. > > Hopefully this doesn't tread on anyone's toes too hard, just my 2 > cents worth. > > Scott > > On 9/5/09, Cara Quinn <modelc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Once again you all really do need to remember here that just >> because those of us here in America seem to have basically fast, >> free- >> flowing internet access, that's just not the case in all areas of the >> world, or even in this country. (US) >> >> There are many people whom pay based on bandwidth used. So, each >> additional minute they spend downloading email is more money they >> spend out-of-pocket. >> >> This isn't even touching on the vast audience on mobile devices… >> >> Quite simply put, this model of posting with a summary and link >> really is the best balance we know of, currently, to work well for >> everyone. >> >> Honestly, since when is it so very difficult to click on a link?… >> >> As I said, this is not some push to get traffic to the site. this >> is simply meant as a quick, courteous way of posting good, relevant, >> timely info that everyone can benefit from, in a way that they can >> easily work with. I hope this makes sense… >> >> Just as a side note here, you all really should know (not to put >> poor Josh on the spot here :) ) but Josh has really out done himself >> here with the Maccessibility network site, putting extreme amounts of >> hours / effort into it so that your user experience really can be >> superb. And, I for one, think he's done a fab job! >> >> So once again, might I simply ask that we consider contributing >> suggestions / critique in a positive way, and perhaps share >> suggestions with Josh and I, which you feel might actually benefit >> the >> larger user base, rather than just yourself or a small group?… We'd >> definitely appreciate feedback in this way. >> >> Thanks for reading and once again, do have a lovely weekend!… >> >> Smiles, >> >> Cara :) >> --- >> View my Online Portfolio at: >> >> http://www.onemodelplace.com/CaraQuinn >> >> Follow me on Twitter! >> >> https://twitter.com/ModelCara >> >> On Sep 5, 2009, at 1:22 PM, ben mustill-rose wrote: >> >> >> If the email contained the full text of the article I probably >> wouldn't have minded so much. If a user is going through a list of >> there emails and only reading the ones that interest them, assuming >> there not interested in yours, its not going to take any more time to >> skip over your email if the full text is included as apposed to it >> not. As it stands, I see this purely as advertising for your network >> since i'm going to have to visit your site just to get the full >> story. >> >> No hard feelings intended. >> >> On 05/09/2009, Larry Wanger <lsw...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I don't mind the updates from the Mac site but would rather get the >>> full posting rather than just a half paragraph. I know that one >>> reason >>> updates come in this way is to encourage people to visit the actual >>> site. But, I think its an extra and unnecessary step myself. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2009, at 7:56 PM, Maxwell Ivey Jr. wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Hello; I get a lot of email daily from the several lists I'm >>>> subscribed to. I don't personally have a problem with the news >>>> updates as long as they are really news. I think the more >>>> important >>>> question with this one is does this mean they have or plan to fix >>>> the >>>> regular facebook so mac users can start enjoying it again? I >>>> understand the iphone is the current wave and all, but I hope that >>>> doesn't mean the people at facebook have forgotten about how >>>> unaccessible their site is with a mac. Let me know if you have >>>> heard >>>> or experienced anything different regarding this issue. Thanks, >>>> Max >>>> On Sep 4, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I don't mean to come over as unsupportive Josh, because I'm 110% >>>>> behind what you do with lioncourt and maccessibility, to the point >>>>> where soon after Christmas when my schedule will have changed >>>>> significantly I'd love to start contributing myself or at least >>>>> figure >>>>> out some way of supporting more actively. >>>>> >>>>> Having said all that, that wasn't the reply I expected James and >>>>> Ben >>>>> would get man. The kind chap who offers me very competitive deals >>>>> on >>>>> Viagra usually slightly less than once per day isn't of dissimilar >>>>> mind when it comes to the actual principal here. It doesn't say >>>>> anywhere to my knowledge that this list doubles up as a kind of >>>>> newswire, so perhaps this would be a good point to have one of >>>>> Cara's >>>>> polls... she loves 'em! If it turns out that myself James and Ben >>>>> are >>>>> grouchy old men so be it, but if not then perhaps you could tweak >>>>> the >>>>> automation to deliver automatic posts to the most relevant >>>>> list? My >>>>> personal gripe here is that even when I don't pass over one of >>>>> these >>>>> automated posts, I only get a snippet of the story. As long as >>>>> the >>>>> subject lines are well thought out, which so far they always have >>>>> been, I'll know whether I want to read a news story or not - >>>>> having >>>>> to >>>>> load the extra page seems superfluous. >>>>> >>>>> Again, no treading on toes intended, I just think they have a >>>>> point >>>>> where the principal is concerned here and wanted to add a bit of >>>>> weight. >>>>> >>>>> Scott >>>>> >>>>> On 9/4/09, Josh de Lioncourt <overl...@lioncourt.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> iPhone discussion has always been welcome here. :) The other list >>>>>> is >>>>>> more strictly focused on the iPhone, but we would have to also >>>>>> ban >>>>>> iPod, Airport Express/Extreme, and all sorts of other things from >>>>>> this >>>>>> list if we banned iPhone discussion. After all, the iPhone is >>>>>> used >>>>>> in >>>>>> conjunction with your computer, one of those computer types is >>>>>> the >>>>>> Mac. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cara and I discussed posting the news updates to this list. They >>>>>> have >>>>>> pretty much always been posted by someone, usually me, manually. >>>>>> We've >>>>>> automated the process to give ourselves a little less work. Since >>>>>> the >>>>>> updates average less than a message a day, we feel they are of >>>>>> use >>>>>> to >>>>>> more people than to whom they are an irritation. >>>>>> >>>>>> You can also filter those messages, if you wish, using your mail >>>>>> client's message rules. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 4, 2009, at 12:02 PM, ben mustill-rose wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why am I getting these? When the 3gs first came out, I seem to >>>>>>> remember that Cara was quite adamant that discussion of it on >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> mv >>>>>>> list was off topic so she created a new list for it. Surely, >>>>>>> things >>>>>>> like this would fit in better on the other list? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry if I spelt your name wrong btw Cara. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 04/09/2009, Maccessibility <nore...@maccessibility.net> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> FaceBook iPhone Application Updated With Accessibility Fixes >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The FaceBook.com iPhone application has been updated to version >>>>>>>> 3.02. The >>>>>>>> update focuses on VoiceOver compatibility, and accessibility >>>>>>>> fixes. >>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> rapidity >>>>>>>> with which the developer has addressed the accessibility issues >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> extraordinary, and we applaud FaceBook for this response. >>>>>>>> The application is exceptionally usable now, with only a couple >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> unlabeled >>>>>>>> controls which can be quickly [...] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can read the rest of this news item at: >>>>>>>> http://www.lioncourt.com/2009/09/04/facebook-iphone-application-updated-with-accessibility-fixes/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Mac-cessibility Network >>>>>>>> "...it's all within our reach..." >>>>>>>> http://maccessibility.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Kind regards, BEN. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> email: bmustillr...@gmail.com >>>>>>> msn: benmustillr...@hotmail.com >>>>>>> web: http://www.bmr.me.uk (under construction) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kind regards, BEN. >> >> email: bmustillr...@gmail.com >> msn: benmustillr...@hotmail.com >> web: http://www.bmr.me.uk (under construction) >> >> >> >> >>> >> > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
