Just because something dominates a market, doesn't mean it is a monopoly. On 9/10/2017 11:51 PM, Sky Mundell via Talk wrote: > The problem is that FS has too much of a monopoly in the paid market. > Monopolies are illegal. > -----Original Message----- > From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Dennis Long via Talk > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 8:51 PM > To: 'Window-Eyes Discussion List' > Cc: Dennis Long > Subject: RE: window-eyes open source? > > It is far from being as good as jaws! > > -----Original Message----- > From: Talk [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Loy via Talk > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 6:55 PM > To: Window-Eyes Discussion List > Cc: Loy > Subject: Re: window-eyes open source? > > NVDA is not far from being as good as JAWS and I can see it happening that > people will download the free program instead of paying hundreds of dollars > for a very similar program. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Josh Kennedy via Talk > To: Window-Eyes Discussion List > Cc: Josh Kennedy > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 4:23 PM > Subject: Re: window-eyes open source? > > > Why couldn't it happen? > > > > On 9/10/2017 3:47 PM, Dennis Long via Talk wrote: > > I don't see that happening. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Talk > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Josh Kennedy via Talk > > Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 1:08 PM > > To: David; Window-Eyes Discussion List > > Cc: Josh Kennedy > > Subject: Re: window-eyes open source? > > > > I wonder what VFO would do if NVDA starting eating into their business > profits? If free open source NVDA would become way more popular than jaws > and would still be open source? > > > > > > > > > > On 9/10/2017 2:54 AM, David wrote: > >> Matter of fact, this question was raised a couple of days after the > >> anouncement of the discontinued development of WinEyes. I will get > >> back to what Doug said back then. First of all, let's take a quick look > at facts. > >> > >> Had it been as easy as WinEyes would have been a stand-alone software, > >> with all its coding done 'in-house', things would have been pretty > easy. > >> And had it been that Doug and Dan had been the only ones to develop > >> the software, they could have decided whatever they wanted. > >> > >> Things are not that easy! > >> First of all, what doug pointed out, was that to get the better > >> functionality of WinEyes, they had to reach certain agreements with - > >> for instance Adobe - to get access to third-party software, kind of > >> behind the scene. If they open-sourced the code, now these techniques > >> might be disclosed to the public, threatening the products of the > >> third-party manufacturer. In turn, this of course would lead to > >> people, not working on assistive technology at all, to get hold of the > >> key for the backdoor of - say Adobe's reader - and use it for unwanted > >> activity, or even malware development. > >> > >> Secondly, WinEyes had a feature of offering you loads of apps. Many of > >> them are open-sourced, but WinEyes holds a chance for the app > >> developer to cryptize his code, for protecting against peekers. This > >> was a benefit, for instance when the app has to access a server, and > >> maybe even use some login credencials, to perform the activity. > >> Without me knowing for sure, we could think of an app like > >> WeatherOrNot, which has to access a server, retrieve weather details, > and process them for you. > >> Now if the developer has reached a given agreement with the > >> weather-server provider, that his app will gain free access, under the > >> condition of not disclosing the login credencials, we are in trouble > >> in open-sourcing WinEyes. By doing so, we would disclose the > >> cryptizing code, opening up for people to break the cryptized code of > >> the app, get to the credencials, and then misuse it. > >> > >> Part of the agreement GW made with their app developers, by providing > >> the cryptizing feature, was to keep the app code an enclosed program. > >> They might get into legal issues, should they disclose the cryptizer, > >> thereby lay bare the very code of the app developer, who in turn might > >> sue GW for breaking the agreement. This is kind of backed up, by a > >> message Doug posted several years back, when someone claimed they had > >> broken the cryptizer. > >> > >> Furthermore, it has been confirmed from Aaron, that some of the apps > >> directly from GW, like AppGet, do hold credencials for accessing the > >> servers of GW. It is unlikely that they want to have these credencials > >> open-sourced. In particular so, if you remember the attack someone > >> gave them a few years back, when the code of the GWToolkit was hacked, > >> and gave many a WinEyes user quite a shock the morning they turned on > >> their computer, and got a threatening message on their screen. > >> > >> Mind you, GW got into a cooperation with Microsoft, when they > >> introduced the WEForOffice program. Even here, they told that this > >> agreement would put them in specially close relationship with the > >> ingeneers of Microsoft. Who knows what closures might be involved > >> there, and which would be broken, had WE got open-sourced. > >> > >> Now let's move back to the answer Doug gave back in the spring this > >> year. The above is a bit of an elaboration of what he said. You will > >> find his answer in the archives, but in very short terms: > >> NOPE! WinEyes code CANNNOT go open-source; If for no other > >> reasons, due to the infringement of third-party agreements involved. > >> > >> All of this, actually leads me to once again raising the very question: > >> Does VFO even have access to the WinEyes code? > >> VFO might have bought AISquared, thereby also the former GWMicro. But > >> they might not have bought the copyright of the source-code. And > >> perhaps that was never intended either. Seems all they wanted, was to > >> rid the market of any competition, period. Who knows, maybe Doug > >> simply hit the Delete-key, the last thing before he handed in the key > >> for the Office front-door? > >> > >> And to assume that VFO's tech personel would bother to plow the > >> thousands of lines of coding for WinEyes, in hope of hitting the > >> technique used to perform a simple task, is out of range. It would > >> take hours, days or even weeks, to figure why things have been done > >> the way they were. Or, to find the part of a signed contract, that > >> possibly could be renewed in VFO's favor. Far more cost-effective, and > >> resource sufficient, to simply look at the behavior of the WinEyes > >> product, and sit down developing the same bahavior from scratch. Even > >> calling Adobe, Microsoft, AVG, Avast and so forth, asking for a brand > >> new contract. A contract VFO already has in place. So my big guess is, > >> VFO DO NOT NEED the code of the WinEyes screen reader, and never did. > >> They needed the market, and that is what they've currently got. > >> > >> > >> On 9/10/2017 3:01 AM, Josh Kennedy via Talk wrote: > >> > hi > >> > > >> > Is there any possibility since window eyes is no longer supported > >> to get the window-eyes source code make it open source and put it up > >> on the github website? then other developers could keep developing > window eyes. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > -- > > sent with mozilla thunderbird > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the > author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/dennisl1982%40 > gmail.com. > > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the > author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/joshuakennedy2 > 01%40comcast.net. > > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > -- > sent with mozilla thunderbird > > _______________________________________________ > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the > author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/loyrg2845%40gm > ail.com. > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > _______________________________________________ > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author > and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/dennisl1982%40 > gmail.com. > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > _______________________________________________ > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author > and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/skyt%40shaw.ca > . > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > > _______________________________________________ > Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author > and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared. > > For membership options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/nicksarames%40msn.com. > For subscription options, visit > http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > List archives can be found at > http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com > . > _______________________________________________ Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ai Squared.
For membership options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/options.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com/archive%40mail-archive.com. For subscription options, visit http://lists.window-eyes.com/listinfo.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com List archives can be found at http://lists.window-eyes.com/private.cgi/talk-window-eyes.com
