That bugs me as well, and I'm not even from the UK.

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:28 AM, marie Howarth <[email protected]>wrote:

> The RNIB seems to be ignoring apple. I'm currently working with their
> sister company as the RNIB and action for the blind merged recently so RNIB
> carries out the campaigning and such and action provides support. They
> didn't even know the mac could talk. This saddens me as I know there are an
> increasing number of UK mac users and to think a huge support organisation
> like this is either aware and choosing to ignore this or simply is not aware
> of it angers  me.
>
> On 15 Apr 2010, at 11:11, Krister Ekstrom wrote:
>
> > Nic, just out of curiosity, what is the danish organisation for the
> blinds view on Apple products?
> > I have a feeling, though i could be wrong, that the swedish blindness
> organisation is a bit on the conservative side when it comes to the Apple
> products, however i could be wrong.
> > /Krister
> >
> >
> > 15 apr 2010 kl. 09.14 skrev Nicolai Svendsen:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I seriously doubt that is the case. Apple accessibility has been around
> for six years now, not three. I doubt NFB had anything to do with it. Apple
> is going to keep it up because they are committed. The article about the
> lawsuit doesn't actually mention Apple much.
> >>
> >> There is actually a very good point of view. Apple poses a threat to the
> NFB of taking over the technical market. This is why NFB did not sue Skype,
> but Apple. Agreement or not, I'm pretty sure they listened to users using
> Outspoken and such, rather than an organization that can't even review the
> product properly when it is out. Apple has done far more than anyone for
> accessibility improvements. Apple said they had something in store, and they
> sure did. I of course realize that it is a pretty serious statement. Of
> course, I am not particularly a fan of the NFB at all. Saying that, NFB has
> made some seriously inaccurate statements as well, far outweighing mine. NFB
> actually has no reason to sue Apple. What would they sue them for, exactly?
> Because their products are accessible, and they want everyone to pay more
> than what a Macbook costs for assistive technology? That wouldn't actually
> surprise me much. It's all about competition. If they think they're about to
> be kicked out, of course they would consider Apple a threat. Because Apple
> has done something Microsoft has not. All these things sound really twisted
> and disgusting to me.
> >>
> >> Apple can hardly be sued for their effort. Their lawsuit had to do with
> iTunes on the Windows side. Fair enough, but that is a pretty ridiculous
> suit if it really is based on accessibility. That is not the case, however,
> as there are plenty of other useful programs for PCs that are not anywhere
> near as accessible as iTunes 9. And NFB doesn't care about that. Which,
> again, leads me to believe that, because NFB is scared of being kicked out,
> they do everything they can to stop people buying their product. That would
> make sense.
> >>
> >> Windows users rely on scripts all the time to use any application. I
> suggest you look through your jAWS folder to see what I mean. Have you even
> seen just the download size of a JAWS installation? It's outrageous. People
> who moan about iTunes not being accessible just because the interface
> accidentally broke, just need to use scripts like they do for everything
> else. I'm surprised that wasn't their first complaint. JAWS, or just Windows
> in general, isn't even that stable. If JAWS crashes, it's stupidly difficult
> most of the time to reload the product. Even if you manage to do so, you
> will probably run into the screen not being read correctly when reading list
> boxes or with the cursor. Or, the worst-case scenario. You have to uninstall
> JAWS 11 after attempting to install Video Intercept, reinstall JAWS 10,
> install VIdeo Intercept, uninstall JAWS 10 then reinstall JAWS 11.
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm slamming the NFB a bit, but really, they need a kick in the
> ass. I'm just happy the Danish blindness organizations are not this corrupt
> and twisted, and they actually review fairly and take a proper look at what
> a company offers before suing them. I'll always be negative about the NFB,
> though I am actually being neutral when talking about the actual lawsuit
> itself.
> >>
> >> Say what you want to, it won't change my mind. Even if it is someone
> from NFB saying it. Some NFB people are great. Some do incredibly good
> reviews. Some don't. And in whole, I think the organization just sucks for
> filing unnecessary lawsuits for nothing. Maybe I'm going on a childish
> tantrum here, perhaps. But once in a while, you need to. A company is trying
> to provide great accessibility for their products, and they are sued because
> of one problem. iTunes is actually still useful on the Windows side, people.
> Quit your darn nitpicking.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Nic
> >> Skype: Kvalme
> >> MSN Messenger: [email protected]
> >> AIM: cincinster
> >> yahoo Messenger: cin368
> >> Facebook Profile
> >> My Twitter
> >>
> >> On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Rob Lambert wrote:
> >>
> >>> I just got wind, from a friend of mine, that the only reason Apple is
> accessible to us is because of a lawsuit by the NFB. The term of the
> agreement was for accessibility improvements for three years. Here's a
> question. First, what's your side of this ordeal? Second, who thinks Apple
> will keep up with the accessibility improvements after this three year term
> is up? I apologize for making smooth waters mirky, I just wanted to know
> what your take on this was.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "MacVisionaries" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<macvisionaries%[email protected]>
> .
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "MacVisionaries" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<macvisionaries%[email protected]>
> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "MacVisionaries" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<macvisionaries%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "MacVisionaries" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<macvisionaries%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"MacVisionaries" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.

Reply via email to