Yes and that is why APple is so innovative. I have always felt that there would be a way for blind people to use a touch interface and Apple made it happen in a much more meaningful way than Code Factory did with their approach. I'm not saying CF was wrong in their approach necessarily, but it certainly did not provide the type of meaningful interface that would bring the level of productivity that iOS has. Of course this is just my opinion. :)
On Sep 17, 2012, at 5:01 PM, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> wrote: > The fact is, before apple came out with their revolutionary touch-based > screen reader, it was not believed blind people could work with touch screens > in such a way. The closest thing was Mobile Speak who turned the touch-screen > in to 4 large buttons, and created an invisible talking keyboard that covered > the entire display. The professional research questions were all focused > around how to ad tactile feedback in a way that would be meaningful to blind > people. The basic premise has been that blind people could not effectively > adapt to an ever-changing visual interface. As I read through the > professional research and literature, this theme remains constant. > > David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA > Email: dchitten...@gmail.com > Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 > Sent from my iPhone > > On 18/09/2012, at 3:28, Scott Howell <scottn3...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> You know I've not been much a fan of Chrome or the ChromVox, but you know I >> understand it is still early in its development. WHat I am pleased by is the >> fact that GOogle also is investing in accessibility and I hope other >> companies will see the benefits and jump on the wagon as well. Do I want to >> see vendors such as FS or GW Micro go out of business? No, but at the same >> time if that were to happen it means that finally accessibility has reached >> a "mainstream" status and that can be a good (as well as a bad ) thing. All >> this means is if you looked back just five or so years ago, who ever thought >> we would have access to these touch-screen devices to the level we do today. >> Actually when you consider the entire 20 plus years of screen reading >> technology and look just in the last five or six years at what has been >> accomplished, well it is pretty amazing. >> >> On Sep 17, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Christopher Chaltain <chalt...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Just two other points here. Accessibility like any other project may >>> have it's priority rise and fall as other projects priorities change or >>> as Apple perceives it's lead in the accessibility area growing or >>> shrinking. this is no different than any other project. >>> >>> I agree that Apple has done a lot as a main stream company with respect >>> to accessibility, but I'm not positive that their investment is light >>> years ahead of other main stream companies. I know for example, Google >>> has quite a bit invested in accessibility right now between ChromeVox, >>> Android and their on line services, such as Google Docs. IBM also came >>> out with their own screen reader for OS/2, which I know is ancient >>> history, but their investment to accessibility has continued with >>> contributions to FireFox and the accessibility of products such as Lotus >>> Notes, Sametime and Symphony. >>> >>> I also don't see Apple changing on a dime just because Steve Jobs is no >>> longer with them. Who knows how this will effect Apple in the long run, >>> but I'm sure he delegated some things before his death, and I'm sure >>> there are others at Apple who shared and understood his vision. >>> >>> On 17/09/12 09:36, Marc Rocheleau wrote: >>>> Hey Scott, >>>> >>>> I totally understand what you mean. Like I said, I'm trying not to >>>> jump the gun or anything -- it's more a paranoia of mine than a valid >>>> fear. I fully acknowledge that Apple has too much money to lose if >>>> they drop accessibility from their products, especially with the >>>> communities that have been created online (such as this one) because >>>> of it. >>>> >>>> I think it's more a case of it feeling too good to be true still. No >>>> other mainstream companies provide this level of support for the >>>> blind/visually-impaired, imo, and sometimes it feels like the other >>>> shoe should be dropping at any second. I know Apple does it for money >>>> but I don't really care as long as I am getting value for my money. >>>> >>>> There's a reason I'm switching to an iMac in the coming months, after all. >>>> :) >>>> >>>> -Marc >>>> >>>> On 9/17/12, Scott Howell <scottn3...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Marc, >>>>> >>>>> Before folks go running off on a tangent about accessibility, Steve Jobs, >>>>> and so forth I think it is important to point out: >>>>> 1. Steve Jobs, although a great man, was not the exclusive determining >>>>> factor for Voiceover in Apple's products. >>>>> 2. Just because Steve has passed on does not mean Apple will abandon >>>>> accessibility. >>>>> 3. There has been articles posted by the U.S. Department of Treasury (a >>>>> year >>>>> or two ago) that indicates there are over 100,000 blind/visually impaired >>>>> users of iPhones. Note iPhones and the article did not mention iPads etc. >>>>> 4. Apple has to balance accessibility against all the other projects that >>>>> are ongoing. There are resources dedicated to many projects and some >>>>> projects get more resources than others. Fact is accessibility may not get >>>>> the same level of resources as other projects; however, you have to >>>>> understand it is always a challenge trying to be sure resources are >>>>> managed >>>>> in such a way to ensure overall mission/goals/objectives are addressed >>>>> without impacting the largest user community. I may not be explaining that >>>>> as well as I could, but the idea is you put the resources on whatever will >>>>> maximize profits and make no mistake that Apple is about making money. Oh >>>>> and I'm all for Apple making money and buckets of it. MOre money means >>>>> more >>>>> resources and more resources means more likelihood accessibility gets >>>>> attention. >>>>> 5. Apple is the only "mainstream" company to my knowledge that has >>>>> invested >>>>> so heavily into accessibility. >>>>> 6. A lot of developers have committed to making their apps accessible, so >>>>> accessibility has really gained such a considerable amount of attention >>>>> that >>>>> there is support beyond even this community. You can bet if Apple ever >>>>> decided to drop accessibility, we would have a good deal of support. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not lecturing you here Marc, but merely pointing out (because this >>>>> comes >>>>> up on the list from time to time) that APple has committed to >>>>> accessibility >>>>> and like any other aspect of software things get broken and hopefully >>>>> fixed. >>>>> I think a lot of the issues we all have experienced from time to time and >>>>> still do in some cases is not being ignored. When you consider the size >>>>> and >>>>> scope of a project such as iOS itself, you can imagine the number of >>>>> people >>>>> working on such a project. Add to that the layers of management and >>>>> development protocols etc… I'm not surprised that it takes a while to >>>>> address problems. >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 16, 2012, at 10:34 PM, Marc Rocheleau <marcrochelea...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Wow, I sincerely hope that app developers who use VoiceOver have been >>>>>> reporting these problems to Apple's accessibility team. This is >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> 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/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> 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/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> 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/viphone@googlegroups.com/. > To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > 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/viphone@googlegroups.com/. To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en.
