Why certainly I read it. followed the link and read the posting from the
president explaining the resolution, the criticism still flowing etc.
And to answer your question, most certainly I know that innovation comes to
products outside of the nfb's dictionary of limitations. fortunately some
companies realize there is far more to the experience of sight loss than
what gets fed through the very narrow and limited lens of the nfb.
If the organization does not choose to recognize unique in how those with
the same label travel live work and use devices, they have no place
suggesting to anyone that they are an authority.
Just my take,
Kare
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, 'David Goldfield' via MacVisionaries wrote:
If you are one of the readers who are openly critical of the NFB's
resolution, I'm wondering if you Have actually read Jonathan Mosen's
excellent and balanced response? If you have not, may I kindly suggest that
you do so. Some of you may not care if all apps are accessible and are
willing to use itunes to locate alternatives which are. While you do that,
please bear in mind that the reason for why your beloved iTunes is so
accessible is due to advocacy on the part of the NFB. Do you seriously
believe that all of these companies who have implemented so much
accessibility into their products and services did so out of the goodness of
their heart or because it was the right thing to do. I truly wish that had
been the case but it often is not. Honestly, this is like criticizing a rule
which gives you the right to criticize.
Feel free to visit my new Web site
http://www.DavidGoldfield.info
Feel free to visit my LinkedIn profile
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-goldfield/12/929/573
Visit my blog
http://davidgoldfield.wordpress.com
Follow me on Twitter
http://www.twitter.com/davidgoldfield
David Goldfield,
Founder and Peer Coordinator
Philadelphia Computer Users' Group for the Blind and Visually Impaired
On 7/12/2014 9:51 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
I cannot imagine it being about anything else but nfb getting money in
exchange for building in limitations.
Granted I make no secret of choosing my own dictionary.
But why on earth in the 21st century is anyone still worshiping at the nfb
altar anyway?
So they pass a resolution...and?
The only reason apple feels they must entertain them, is because other
customers do not indicate they have minds imaginations and interests of
their own.
a bunch of people gave this organization power, those same people, who BTW
have within themselves the ability to write their own dictionaries about
blindness and anything else, can tell the nfb they have out grown the
need for such a body anymore.
I simply do not understand why one conformity is exchanged for another,
one person's ideas of limitations exchanged for those the nfb create with
their mindset.
Kare
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Littlefield, Tyler wrote:
> Karen:
> I fully agree. It really does feel like we're slapping Apple in the
> face, forcing them to conform. I really really hope this doesn't work,
> because it's going to create a huge mess and totally redefine apps. Not
> everything is accessible but that really is fine with me; usually I can
> find an app that is. It's what happens when you use anything, really. My
> thoughts are mainly money based: how much money will NFB get for
> consulting for something like this, and secondly how is this trash going
> to redefine apps on the iPhone? It's not going to be all that hard for
> NFB to use their power to force things into IOS/apps that don't need to
> be there, force things out, etc.
>
> On 7/12/2014 9:25 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
> > Let me see if I understand this.
> > Apple who has built in innovation on its own must discuss with the
> > nfb how
> > to now limit that innovation to fit the nfb's one size fits all
> > definition
> > of blindness? as in all blind people are interchangeable, and the nfb
> > is
> > the only source to tell you how to find a plug and play blind person
> > by
> > which you measure what works for them...all 400 plus million of them?
> > I wonder how much money they plan on extorting for this dialog?
> > Not only should it be a blanket resolution, BTW android phones are
> > the
> > most popular in use now according to annual surveys, but this
> > dialog
> > should involve many organizations, and a group of apple customers
> > who are
> > not members of a consumer organization whatsoever.
> > The very suggestion that a single body is in a position to speak
> > for every
> > child born of women who happens to have the label blind attached to
> > them
> > is a stereotypes that really needs to end. otherwise the
> > individuality
> > that is the rich experience of redefining blindness is not going
> > to exist
> > for the millions who need not buy the nfb line to live freely and
> > inclusively.
> > Why does the nfb not spend its energy training software developers
> > who fit
> > their one size fits all blindness box?
> > Many companies besides Apple would get the benefits that way.
> >
> > just my take,
> > Karen
> >
> > On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Pamela Francis wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > > I personally am not in favor of this resolution; not because I
> > don't > want accessibility. Apple took the lead in making its
> > products > accessible without government or organizational
> > intervention. Microsoft, > on the other hand, allowed third-party
> > vendors to do its work within > accessibility. Google, though it has
> > come along way, still does not want > to adhere to its own standards
> > unless it is pressed.
> > > If there was a resolution to be had, it should've been a blanket
> > > resolution for all companies dealing with accessibility. Picking
> > on > Apple, is as if we as a blind community are slapping it in the
> > face > given that it has continued its efforts to remain accessible.
> > I > understand the need for utilitarian apps such as maps, transit
> > maps, > notes, lists, etc. to remain accessible as they are a
> > necessary function > in normal life. However, just to use as an
> > example I don't necessarily > need Angry Birds to be accessible for
> > my benefit nor do I need it to be > threatened to be kicked from the
> > app store due to inaccessibility for > the sake of millions of people
> > who enjoy it.
> > > As we continue to strive for accessibility in all areas, we need
> > not be > a bully to the company that went out of its way to make its
> > products > accessible from the beginning.
> > > We also do not need to be put into a societal box allowing
> > electronics > manufacturers, appliance manufacturers, and the general
> > public to > believe that all we are capable of is operating an
> > iPhone. We are on the > cusp of choice. We have fought for choice
> > for a long time. This type of > a resolution makes us look militant
> > and ungrateful. What is fair for > one company is fair for all.
> > > Pam Francis
> > > > On Jul 12, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Terje Strømberg
> > <[email protected]> > wrote:
> > > > The NFB Resolution is very important for all blind and low
> > vision all > over the world. We all want accessible digital future.
> > > > A link to a comment from the president in NFB: >
> > https://nfb.org/blog/vonb-blog/comments-apple-and-nfb-resolution-2014-12
> >
> > > > Take care
> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to
> > the Google > Groups "MacVisionaries" group.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
> > send > an email to [email protected].
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected].
> > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries.
> > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d
> > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to
> > the Google > Groups "MacVisionaries" group.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
> > send > an email to [email protected].
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > [email protected].
> > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries.
> > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> > > >
>
>
> --
> Take care,
> Ty
> http://tds-solutions.net
> He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a fool; he
> that dares not reason is a slave.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "MacVisionaries" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MacVisionaries" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MacVisionaries" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
