Hi, I was told that Apple just told them straight up, they weren't going to allow them access to certain parts of OSX and, they were moving accessibility in house.
Ricardo Walker [email protected] Twitter:@apple2thecore www.appletothecore.info On Jun 24, 2012, at 6:08 PM, Andy Baracco <[email protected]> wrote: > You must remember that Berkeley Systems, the developer of Outspoken, did > their work with no cooperation whatsoever from apple. This is why they > ultimately gave up on the project. > > Andy > > > -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Chaltain > Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 3:00 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OT: Why Did Apple Create VoiceOver? > > Not to take anything away from Apple, or what it's done with it's > commitment to accessibility, but back in the late 80's and early 90's, > IBM developed a screen reader for both it's DOS and OS/2 operating > systems. Both products were state of the art for their day, and the > Screen Reader/2 product (the screen reader for OS/2) was years ahead of > it's time compared to any other screen reader for a GUI OS. IBM also > developed a talking screen reader, Home Page Reader, and user interface > guidelines (CUA) which would have ensured greater accessibility to all > applications. IBM's commitment to accessibility isn't perfect, but it's > work on accessibility has continued to this day with it's contributions > to accessibility API's, Firefox and Symphony (Open Office), and it's > efforts to make Lotus applications (Notes, Sametime and Symphony) > accessible. Again, I'm not taking anything away from Apple but just > trying to ensure that other companies' commitment to accessibility also > gets recognized and placed into the proper historical perspective. > > On 24/06/12 16:44, Timothy Harshbarger wrote: >> In Microsoft's defense... >> >> I believe their original plan was to create a full-fledged screen reader for >> Windows in the late 90's--that is what Narrator was supposed to become. >> However, many in the blind community as well as the screen reader vendors >> were very vocally opposed to this. >> The opposition to a built-in screen reader was based on concerns that it >> would put all the screen reader vendors out of business and then Microsoft >> would fail to keep up a commitment to producing a good screen reader in the >> future. Those people opposed didn't want to have to rely on Microsoft for >> their screen reader. >> I remember being present at one of the public announcements of Narrator. >> Microsoft was very careful to ensure people that Narrator wasn't intended to >> take the place of the other screen readers--that it was just intended for >> emergency use, not every day use. >> >> My guess is that Apple would have received the same response if there had >> been screen readers available for OSX. There wasn't, so things worked out >> differently. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >> Of Pete Nalda >> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 4:05 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: OT: Why Did Apple Create VoiceOver? >> >> I also think Apple did something else no other company did, by having us, >> the blind community,test what was then called "Spoken Interface", before it >> became VoiceOver, and released in Tiger (10.4). >> >> Egun On, Lagunak! Basque for G'day, Mates >> Louie P. (Pete) Nalda >> Http://www.myspace.com/lpnalda >> Http://www.facebook.com/lpnalda >> Http://www.linkedin.com/in/lpnalda >> Twitter @lpnalda >> >> >> >> On Jun 24, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Ricardo Walker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I totally agree here. >>> >>> It would have been easy, and truth be told, probably more profitable, if >> they decided to put out a weak screen reader, something like Windows >> Narrator for example, you know, just enough to satisfy the letter of the law >> and move on to other things. Instead, they decided to do it right, and put >> forth the resources and effort to make top notch screen readers. I think >> for that they should be commended. >>> >>> Ricardo Walker >>> [email protected] >>> Twitter:@apple2thecore >>> www.appletothecore.info >>> >>> On Jun 24, 2012, at 2:01 PM, Christopher Chaltain <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> I know you didn't want conjecture, but I've seen several times, from >>>> people who were involved with the issue at the time, that Apple did this >>>> because they had no accessibility story and were losing out to Microsoft >>>> and PC's in government and educational contracts. When Berkley Systems >>>> went out of business or stopped developing Outspoken, the 3rd party >>>> screen reader for Macs, there was no screen reader for Apple products >>>> and no other 3rd party company was stepping in to fill the void. In >>>> order to continue to have an accessibility story, and compete with PC's >>>> for these contracts, Apple chose to enter the screen reader market >>>> themselves. >>>> >>>> Like I said, I don't have any documents to prove this, only hearsay from >>>> people who were familiar with the issue at the time. I also wouldn't >>>> expect Apple to market the above story. For whatever reason, they >>>> embraced accessibility, and they can just market their commitment to >>>> full accessibility by everyone. I also don't think this takes away at >>>> all from Apple's commitment to accessibility and what they've been able >>>> to accomplish with VoiceOver. They are a corporation after-all, and if >>>> they saw a profit in making their products accessible, there's nothing >>>> wrong with that. >>>> >>>> I agree VoiceOver is a great product, and I can understand your >>>> willingness to support a company that builds accessibility into their >>>> product, but I don't think it's leaps and bounds better than every other >>>> screen reader out there. I think this is a highly subjective opinion. >>>> >>>> On 24/06/12 07:58, Daniel Miller wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I completely agree here. Just look at other companies, Microsoft for >>>>> example, a company that claims all their products are accessible to >> persons >>>>> with disabilities. That statement couldn't be any more wrong. I myself >> would >>>>> much rather pay a premium for an apple product with accessibility built >> in >>>>> out of the box, as opposed to paying the same price for another screen >>>>> access solution, on top of a PC with Windows. >>>>> Yes, VO isn't perfect, but it's leaps and bounds over what other >> companies >>>>> like Freedom scientific and GW Micro could ever dream of creating. >>>>> I'm sorry if my post strayed off topic, I just can't help but admit I'm >> also >>>>> a fanboy and an Apple geek. >>>>> >>>>> P.S.: I can't wait to see them try to make Windows RT accessible on >> tablets. >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf >>>>> Of Scott Howell >>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2012 7:37 AM >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: OT: Why Did Apple Create VoiceOver? >>>>> >>>>> Craig, >>>>> >>>>> I am not sure you will find a specific reason. I have heard stories that >>>>> range from Apple facing a lawsuit (not likely at all) to some child of >> an >>>>> engineer (more likely) who was blind. I suspect the real reason is that >>>>> Apple saw an opportunity and opted to take a risk which I should note >> has >>>>> paid in spades. Apple has done more than any other "mainstream" company >> has >>>>> ever done. In fact I will go as far as to say that VO on an iOS device >> is >>>>> revolutionary and really changed how blind people interact with >> touch-screen >>>>> devices. VO has really leveled the playing field in ways no other screen >>>>> reader has been able. I think Apple realized the success of VO on the >> Mac >>>>> and heard from users they wanted access to iPods, iPhones, etc. There is >> no >>>>> question that VO on iOS has been wildly successful. Oh and yes for the >>>>> record I am a fanboy and thrilled to be such. However, for the record VO >>>>> like any screen reading solution is not perfect; although it does one >> hell >>>>> of a job. :) >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 24, 2012, at 7:32 AM, Craig Werner <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Greetings to the list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Over on the vi-kindle email list from freelists.org, a user asked a >>>>>> penetrating question: "Why did Apple build accessibility into all of >>>>>> its products?" Knowing the answer to this query might prove helpful >>>>>> as blind and visually impaired people work with other companies to >>>>>> make their products more accessible. I have heard that Apple made the >>>>>> iPod accessible because it was looking out for motorists who might be >>>>>> better served by finding music by touch than by diverting their gaze >>>>>> from the road to look at a screen. However, this information is >>>>>> anecdotal. Can anyone point to evidence right from the company as to >>>>>> why VoiceOver was integrated into the Apple line? I'm looking for the >>>>>> facts, not conjecture. <smile> Since this question is off topic, if >>>>>> you'll email me off list, I'll summarize to the list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for all help. >>>>>> >>>>>> Craig >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >>>>> Google Group. >>>>>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. >>>>>> 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/viphone?hl=en. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >> Google >>>>> Group. >>>>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. >>>>> 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/viphone?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Christopher (CJ) >>>> chaltain at Gmail >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >> Google Group. >>>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. >>>> 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/viphone?hl=en. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >> Google Group. >>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. >>> 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/viphone?hl=en. >> > > > -- > Christopher (CJ) > chaltain at Gmail > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google > Group. > To search the VIPhone public archive, visit > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. > 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/viphone?hl=en. > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google > Group. > To search the VIPhone public archive, visit > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. > 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/viphone?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google Group. To search the VIPhone public archive, visit http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. 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/viphone?hl=en.
