Hi Sheree,
I dare say that Organ investigation joins many others. again why the
double standard? If another business limited the use of service animals
in their facilities...it would be an Ada complaint.
Apple should consider the practices of who chooses to preach.
Somewhere in a file I have a newspaper story that still shakes my soul.
about a child in Minnesota who died at an nfb summer camp, from drowning.
the child was sent back to shore without an adult.
This is bad enough of course, butt the parents, devoted nfb altar worshipers,
felt their child died for the good of the cause. That is a quote.
Should Apple get a bunch of users in a room for a discussion? most
certainly, but that room should reflect their customer base, not the
doctrine of the NFb.
My opinion of course.
Karen
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Cheree Heppe wrote:
Cheree Heppe here:
regarding the latest NFB resolution on technology under discussion, it is
definitely not always possible to get a right outcome by sweet reason or long
deliberations and conferencing with the various parties.
However, every year at the NFB's conventions, one or more resolutions are
drafted and published decrying this or that. Usually, these resolutions tap
into an emotionally powerful trigger point for the blind community. Articles
are written favoring or poo-pooing this or that bit of technology in order to
give the following bllind a beacon toward which to look and to follow.
Where accessibility meets the road, the author of this NFB article mentions
driving on a famous race track in a car that operates driverlessly. This is
interesting because this example points up a developing technology not already
functioning anywhere but in very controlled conditions.
Apple's architecture works in the real world and has done so since as far back
as 2010, when I first became aware of it's usefulness. There are channels by
which blind consumers and everybody else may contact Apple to suggest
corrective solutions to accessible or not so accessible apps and architecture.
An organization, such as the NFB, rather than seek corporate contact at a high
level, chose to make an emotional and public issue.
Why aren't the NFB working to correct the vast inaccessibility of every day
kitchen appliances? Why does NFB practice repeat on emotional triggers among
the blindness community. Witness the dog guide access to rehab facilities that
came to suit. The outcome set dog guide access, and blind people's freedom to
choose their type of mobility aid, back to 19th century standards, where a
local fiefdom or agency with total power over its clients' lives dictated
policies and the clientelle had no option to follow. Where I live now, in
Oregon, this agency for the blind, which has been under investigation by the
state auditor and the Rehabilitation Services Administration, implement
policies based on their perceived right to control consumers' lives. Cane
travelers who are newly blind are have been deliberately harassed and put into
isolative and demeaning situations in the name of this sort of true grit
emotionality, this survive by your bootstraps ideal present in the NFB
philosophy. One blind guy who works at this agency spent hours going to work
in a dangerous snow storm, only to discover that the building was closed and
everybody else was safe at home. ?This guy traveled with a dog guide.
Where is support for mass transit that we all may use in the here and now?
Regarding Apple and accessibility, it has been my limited experience and the
experience of many others, that this company's products surpass other so called
accessible offerings to such an extent that the other guy isn't even in the
running.
Yes, we as a disabled community need to have choice in our accessible options.
We need to reach the place in society where accessible is the norm.
Regards,
Cheree Heppe
Sent from my iPad Mini
On 12 Jul 2014, at 17:40, Pamela Francis <[email protected]> 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.
--
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.
