Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
if MS are going to make a screen reader then it better be able to do everything that JFW can, I'm not stepping backwards in the computer world. simonAt 05:07 21/03/99 -0800, you wrote: I would bet that Microsoft will develop a screen reader. Not for the blind community but for other areas that will develop into it. One of the quiet reasons for the development of all the software synthesizers etc. is so that ultimately a company's web site can be integrated into more sophisticated voice mail systems. It doesn' t take a lot of foresight to see this. We are probably only a few years away from not only the push 1 for this, push 2 for that, but push 124 for information about this or that product. It will be html readers that retrieve this information. If this indeed happens, you can bet that eventually there will be a Microsoft button somewhere to do it. A lot of what Microsoft does is catch up, hell Windows is catch up from MacIntosh. Many of the features in their systems came first from third parties. Let's all enjoy it and leave the cynicism elswhere. Michael Seelig At 12:17 AM 3/21/99 -0500, you wrote: Hey guys: do you really think that microsoft is going to dedicate any serious resources into developing a superior screen reader. Look how long its taken to get MSAA in to a reputable state, and it still isn't implemented by most of the software out there. I doubt that a microsoft screenreader is going to work as well as those developed by companies who have made a commitment over the past ten years or so. MS would only be playing catchup, and the bean counters would neversee it as proffitable to devote many man hours in the project. That's just my cynical point of view Gordon - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net Don't let what you don't know stop you from doing what you do know. Most learning is circular in nature, each time around you pick up something else. - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net Simon Fogarty Dunedin, NZ Hm ph: ++64-03-4771633 WK ph: ++64-025-2230355 Email: hm : [EMAIL PROTECTED] sch: [EMAIL PROTECTED] bus: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
RE: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
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. CJL -Original Message- From: Les Kriegler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] 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, Les - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
RE: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
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. CJL -Original Message- From: Les Kriegler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] 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, Les - 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
RE: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
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. Ginny 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. CJL -Original Message- From: Les Kriegler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] 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, Les - 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 Ginny Quick, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
Let's hear it for JAWS! Harry -Original Message- From: Ginny Quick [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, March 22, 1999 11:46 AM Subject: RE: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] 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. Ginny 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. CJL -Original Message- From: Les Kriegler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 12:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] 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, Les - 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 Ginny Quick, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
Hey guys: do you really think that microsoft is going to dedicate any serious resources into developing a superior screen reader. Look how long its taken to get MSAA in to a reputable state, and it still isn't implemented by most of the software out there. I doubt that a microsoft screenreader is going to work as well as those developed by companies who have made a commitment over the past ten years or so. MS would only be playing catchup, and the bean counters would neversee it as proffitable to devote many man hours in the project. That's just my cynical point of view Gordon - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
These are exactly the kinds of features we need in JFW. Unfortunately, when I had to buy a screen reader, Window Eyes was way behind JFW. Now it seems like they're ahead. I don't want to slo progress at HJ but these screen readers are so damn expensive that I'll stick with the one I have until something quite superior comes along. -Original Message- From: David Poehlman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: jaws for windows mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 7:27 AM Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] Play nice Please I do not necessarily disagree with this hasty conclusion but it has implications for the future. Original Message Subject: Fwd: A comparative review of Windowless and JFW's InternetAccess Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 20:39:10 +1100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (pattist) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Jonathan Mosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the recent release of Internet Explorer 5.0, there has naturally been discussion about screen readers for Windows and Internet access. A number of generalist statements have been made, resulting in some list members asking for substantiation of those statements. For what it is worth, here is my view, complete with feature examples, on why Windoweyes provides superior access to the Internet than JFW. This comparison looks at IE 5.0 using the beta scripts on the JFW Mailing List home page. These scripts are essentially slightly modified versions of the IE 4 scripts, compensating for the fact that the IE 4 scripts mistakenly think that IE 5 is IE 3. So the functionality when using JFW with the IE 5 scripts mirrors that of IE 4 access with JFW. Apart from a huge speed improvement when using IE 5, access to the Net with Internet Explorer, Windoweyes offers the same feature set under IE 4 and IE 5. On this basis then, I believe the feature comparison is relevant. I should also add that Window Bridge and Winvision, having made excellent use of Active Accessibility, offer similar functionality to Windoweyes. In some areas there are differences though, and while I have used demonstration versions of these two products, I don't feel proficient enough with those packages to make comment. The heart of the superiority of Windoweyes over JFW for Internet access is the fact that the entire HTML document, or web page, is loaded by Windoweyes into a buffer, which it calls the MSAA buffer. This allows the user to read a web page as if it were a document in Notepad or Word. This means, for example, that the continuous read feature reads a web page from top to bottom in Windoweyes. This web page loading process eliminates the need for any reformatting to be done on a web page, as is necessary with pages with a complex visual lay-out in JFW. Windoweyes has a feature which immediately alerts you to the fact that a page has frames when it appears on the screen, thus reminding you that you can use control+tab to move quickly between frames. A status hot key specific to the MSAA buffer will tell you the line of the page you're on, which frame you are in, and how many frames there are on the page. Both Windoweyes and JFW have the excellent feature allowing you to bring up a listview containing all the links on a page. However, Windoweyes offers two choices within this list view. One choice executes the link, in other words it takes you to the page pointed to. The other option puts the MSAA cursor on the link, allowing you to move your cursor around the current page to get an idea of the context of the current link. This is a great feature for all those obscure links that say things like "click here". Searching an entire web page is significantly better with Windoweyes. Instead of using the standard Internet Explorer search, one instead uses the Windoweyes search. In most circumstances, this searches only the screen, but when the MSAA buffer is turned on, you can search the entire buffer. This means that you can search for text on the entire web page, and have the MSAA cursor placed right at the result for you to continuously read from there or for you to explore the context further. Filling in forms is about even in my view. It is annoying and potentially confusing to novice computer users that one has to turn MSAA mode off in Windoweyes when filling in a form, then turn it back on again when you've submitted the form. I hope this will be remedied in a version of Windoweyes in the not too distant future. Finally, and I've saved the best for last, there is no comparison between the ease with which the screen readers get you past those annoying contents margins. By this, I refer to the list of common links you so often find taking up at least a screen full at the top of each web page. With one simple key press, Windoweyes will instantly take your cursor past that material and straight onto the stuff you want to read. It literally saves
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
I think it is important to point out in this discussion that, like the rest of the computer industry, screen readers are always changing and developing. I'm sure HJ will catch up quickly with Window-Eyes and IE5. As we all know, GW Micro fell behind in the IE race there for a while and are now catching up, and I'm sure Jaws will catch up too. Remember when HJ put Jaws on a CD-ROM with speech-assisted installation and we all thought that was the best thing since sliced bread? Well, now they're all doing that. It's a constant race for these screen reader companies and it's not going to stop any time soon. And I'm not worried about Microsoft taking over the screen reader market. We are a very small part of the computer market and we have traditionally been a thorn in their side. Besides, they've got their hands full with legal troubles and may even be broken up by the Justice Department soon. Lynn K. Schneider - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
Hi there Gord, I agree, this is the problem! if they put there toes in to developing a screen reader that is bought with the cd of windows on it then goodness nos what will happen! you will have a screen reader but its oporation for us will be not taken in to acount, they will give you access but limited access, the time alone like you say for them to spend on this side of the business wouldn't bee worth there wile and the bean counters would take there tole on this situation you are right, so they will give you access this way, but they will make all the other dedicated companies go out of business and get a skimpy job of a thing taking over and no others to choose from! so in my opinion this will be a step backwards not forward in my opinion! Regards Chris Cant..At 00:17 21/03/99 -0500, you wrote: Hey guys: do you really think that microsoft is going to dedicate any serious resources into developing a superior screen reader. Look how long its taken to get MSAA in to a reputable state, and it still isn't implemented by most of the software out there. I doubt that a microsoft screenreader is going to work as well as those developed by companies who have made a commitment over the past ten years or so. MS would only be playing catchup, and the bean counters would neversee it as proffitable to devote many man hours in the project. That's just my cynical point of view Gordon - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net Chris Cant of Second sight Picture framing service, order your Picture frames from me! voice 44 01482 564199 ICQ number 22635936 - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
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, Les - Visit the jfw ml web page: http://jfw.cjb.net
Re: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess]
When it comes to the future, both JFW and Window-eyes (as well as any other third-party screen readers out there) had better be looking over their shoulder. Microsoft is reported to be working on its own screen readers for Windows products. If and when they succeed, the scheisse will hit the fan! From: David Poehlman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: jaws for windows mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fwd: Fwd: A comparative review of Windoweyes and JFW's InternetAccess] Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 06:50:30 -0500 Play nice Please I do not necessarily disagree with this hasty conclusion but it has implications for the future. Original Message Subject: Fwd: A comparative review of Windowless and JFW's InternetAccess Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 20:39:10 +1100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (pattist) Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Jonathan Mosen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] With the recent release of Internet Explorer 5.0, there has naturally been discussion about screen readers for Windows and Internet access. A number of generalist statements have been made, resulting in some list members asking for substantiation of those statements. For what it is worth, here is my view, complete with feature examples, on why Windoweyes provides superior access to the Internet than JFW. This comparison looks at IE 5.0 using the beta scripts on the JFW Mailing List home page. These scripts are essentially slightly modified versions of the IE 4 scripts, compensating for the fact that the IE 4 scripts mistakenly think that IE 5 is IE 3. So the functionality when using JFW with the IE 5 scripts mirrors that of IE 4 access with JFW. Apart from a huge speed improvement when using IE 5, access to the Net with Internet Explorer, Windoweyes offers the same feature set under IE 4 and IE 5. On this basis then, I believe the feature comparison is relevant. I should also add that Window Bridge and Winvision, having made excellent use of Active Accessibility, offer similar functionality to Windoweyes. In some areas there are differences though, and while I have used demonstration versions of these two products, I don't feel proficient enough with those packages to make comment. The heart of the superiority of Windoweyes over JFW for Internet access is the fact that the entire HTML document, or web page, is loaded by Windoweyes into a buffer, which it calls the MSAA buffer. This allows the user to read a web page as if it were a document in Notepad or Word. This means, for example, that the continuous read feature reads a web page from top to bottom in Windoweyes. This web page loading process eliminates the need for any reformatting to be done on a web page, as is necessary with pages with a complex visual lay-out in JFW. Windoweyes has a feature which immediately alerts you to the fact that a page has frames when it appears on the screen, thus reminding you that you can use control+tab to move quickly between frames. A status hot key specific to the MSAA buffer will tell you the line of the page you're on, which frame you are in, and how many frames there are on the page. Both Windoweyes and JFW have the excellent feature allowing you to bring up a listview containing all the links on a page. However, Windoweyes offers two choices within this list view. One choice executes the link, in other words it takes you to the page pointed to. The other option puts the MSAA cursor on the link, allowing you to move your cursor around the current page to get an idea of the context of the current link. This is a great feature for all those obscure links that say things like "click here". Searching an entire web page is significantly better with Windoweyes. Instead of using the standard Internet Explorer search, one instead uses the Windoweyes search. In most circumstances, this searches only the screen, but when the MSAA buffer is turned on, you can search the entire buffer. This means that you can search for text on the entire web page, and have the MSAA cursor placed right at the result for you to continuously read from there or for you to explore the context further. Filling in forms is about even in my view. It is annoying and potentially confusing to novice computer users that one has to turn MSAA mode off in Windoweyes when filling in a form, then turn it back on again when you've submitted the form. I hope this will be remedied in a version of Windoweyes in the not too distant future. Finally, and I've saved the best for last, there is no comparison between the ease with which the screen readers get you past those annoying contents margins. By this, I refer to the list of common links you so often find taking up at least a screen full at the top of each web page. With one simple key press, Windoweyes will instantly take your cursor past that material and straight onto the stuff you want to read. It literally saves you hours over a few days of
