Category: The Rave Board
Often times I’ve heard it said “Microsoft doesn’t do anything about accessibility.” Or Microsoft doesn’t do enough on accessibility.”
Many feel Microsoft should develop Narrator, so it is a full speech screen reader, and put GW Micro and Freedom Scientific out of business, because “the screen readers cost too much.” And “the technical support or customer service is poor.”
Many would like Microsoft to be more like Apple, so that we can walk in to a store, purchase a computer, and it has a screen reader installed. In short, Microsoft doesn’t care about the blind, or visual impaired.
Let me say here and now I have no financial interest in any of these companies, and I have not been recruited to write this. My opinion comes from personal experience, some research, and a sense of fairness.
I wonder how many of you have actually taken the time to examine all the things Microsoft does for disabled people? Do you realize how many features are built in to Windows alone, that aid, and assist the visually impaired along with many other disabilities?
We are only one disabled group Microsoft supports and I think they do a fine job.
No company can hit the bull’s eye every time on a product. No matter how large they are if they are going to diversify they’ll need innovation from other sources. Apple has learned this lesson in the last few years, and now has products that are accessible, while Microsoft, for as long as it has been in business has been striving to make, and keep their products accessible.
We have been able to use Windows based PC’s since the late 90’s, but only recently have we been able to use a Mac without changing it effectively. Sure, Apple is doing this to a degree, but how long has it been?
Apple, believe it or not, doesn’t develop everything, and the Mac computer you see isn’t all Apple. If you opened it up, and every company that had anything to do with it placed a label on the part they created, you be surprised how much a Mac is just a Windows ready PC with an Apple logo.
In fact, you can install Microsoft products on your Mac easy, but you cannot install Apples software on just any PC, it has to be a Mac.
Have we forgotten that the first iPod’s and later iPhones were not accessible, not even for persons with other disabilities?
We could use an iPod pretty well, but the iPhone no.
You might say Microsoft has not released a phone that is not accessible, for the blind, anyway, but you’ll remember Microsoft has never been in the screen reader business. It has always been a third party that developed something to make the Microsoft products speak, however, Microsoft strives to make all products available to screen reader applications, and even supports and works with the companies that develop them.
I was impressed with how easy it was for me to transition to a Windows 8 computer.
With a reasonable amount of sighted assistants my computer was ready to use, and I have not found a part of Windows 8 I cannot access.
I was so impressed I upgraded my Windows 7 Laptop to Windows 8. I was able to install the upgrade completely, and I believe if the screen reader had been configured to work after the upgrade I’d not have had to have any sighted assistants at all. That assist was extremely minimal. My helper only had to answer a few questions and my screen reader that was installed already could be turned on. I did not ask my assistant to try to turn my screen reader on, nor did I attempt to activate Narrator after the computer finished and restarted, so that may have been possible as well.
I’d like to direct your attention to a page I found that says lots about Microsoft and their commitment to accessibility.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/accessibility-on-office-com-HA101792264.aspx?CTT=114
Yes I am praising Microsoft.
The problem with people is that they expect everything to be pretty much handed to them. I would argue that this is just a blind people trait, but experience has led me to believe otherwise. Microsoft and other major companies are just doing what they can for the people that they serve. Like it or not, blind people since we're discussing them in this instance, are only a small, very small minority in the entire world which microsoft's operating system serves. With that noted, as well as the fact that there are companies out there making screenreaders, Microsoft is actually under no obligation to do what they do for that very very small minority. They choose to though, out of consideration and do as best as they can under the circumstances despite the fact that the increase on their profits in the end is probably insignificant at the absolute best in the end.
With regards to apple, yes their stuff might be a bit more accessible out of the box. However, their equipment and operating system cost double microsoft's if not more. furthermore, if your apple system breaks, you're either screwed into needing to buy a brand new extremely expensive system, or repair them only at an apple vendor which again, due to the usually proprietary parts that they use, screws you majorly once again.
That being said, with the major bitchyness i've seen from certain people with regards to certain things which aren't accessible from both microsoft and apple, as well as the way that blind people gone about reporting them to both of the above-mentioned companies, were I the CEO of one of those companies, I'd probably start to feel less inclined towards helping what seems to be an ungrateful minority that I'm ultimately not obligated to help if I don't want to.
BS. Windows frustrates me to bits, even though I use it on a regular basis. Microsoft doesn't care about making their products accessible, they just enhanced narrator a tiny bit lately to keep up with its fierce competition. Wayne, perhaps you dont' knwo this, but old, very old macs used to have a text to speech option which was fairly accessible in the nineties. so much so that totally blind people were able to use it without assistance. Apple revamped its platform in the late nineties and early two thousands to stop itself from going bankrupt, and they did a damn good job. Apple computers are more ruggedly built than most PC's. I mean, if you want to buy a tuffbook or a computer from alienware, you'll have to pay upwords from 2000 dollars. Buy a mackbook air today and you'll have a slimmer, more portable, and probably more durable computer and you can get it for a thousand. Never mind with buying additional screen readers, because it can talk to you right out of the box.
If truth be told, I believe we, like anyone else should have the right to be able to buy a single product and be able to use it without having to buy additional software to make it work. how do you think sighties would feel if they baught a laptop but the screen was unusable unless they spent more money on a piece of software to make it work than they did on the computer itself. It works for windows to be able to accomodate corporations like freedom scientific, sure. it gives them less work and provides for less financial risk, theoretically. But had they improved narrator to become a full-fledged screen reader, would it realy hurt anyone? Microsoft has enough money to buy you and me and the entire list of members subscribed to this site twice over. People arent' going to stop buying PC's. So why not spend a few bucks on a knowledgeable software development team to revamp and improve narrator. Apple is providing us with something that not many companies give a shit about: They're giving us the oppertunity to buy a product at a competitive price, meaning at the price that everyone else will pay as well. Last I checked, unemployment among the blind is rampant. Yet we've always been pushed to pay exorbitant prices for the technology that everyone else is privy to at a fraction of that price. And the offerings from the so-called blindness companies are often outdated technologically to boot.
So, let's say it's great that these companies exist, because every poor tom, dick, and harry that thinks their worth the money and the trouble will go and give them business. And spend his life savings while he's at it, or force tax payer money to buy it for him. But let's not poo-poo apple for the fact that they brought technological equality virtually into our hands. Who cares if IPods weren't excessible 10 years ago. Microsoft wasn't making players accessible out of the box then and it isn't now. Nor are their game systems, their tablets, or their computer systems accessible out of the box. And it's not going to happen anytime soon. So apple had apple had fervently caught up and far surpassed its competition on the road of accessibility in just a number of years. Whereas microsoft will never even bother. So praise them all you like, but they suck for not making themselves just a little more accomodating. WHy have narrator at all if it's only semi functional? come on... Give me a break.
I'll answer on the last post later when I've got more time.
I am aware of the Apple system, and I am also aware that it worked, but not well and not widely.
Now to be fair I'm posting this rant by a person I read often. He's got some complaints. Smile. No, he's not blind, but I understand his rant. I don't agree, but...
Last today Apple Fans You can if you hurry get a Mac Book for 799 at the Best Buy.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33153_7-57565383-10391733/do-you-hate-microsoft/
Apple might not use widely, but Window's screen reader droped from 90% of the market to 59% of the market. What do the rest use? Voice over perhaps. 41% against 59% rather than less than 10% against more than 90%? I think that stats tells a lot, don't you think?
If, one day, Microsoft produce something that as a blind person can use out of the box from the word go. Sure, i'll support Microsoft full heartedly. But, if not, till then, i'll still have half a mind about Microsoft and heading towards Apple.
Okay.
You did say that the market share was 90% once right, so that has just recently dropped, and not only because of Voice over
Screen readers are not Microsoft's business, they make software not including specific products for the blind.
Microsoft supports several forms of disability, and for a long time Apple did not at all.
Now that is except for the short time in the 90's and to be fair they had a little system going around 1979 or 1981 about, but they didn't stick with it, and you couldn't use it for much of anything except controlling your Mac.
My thing is even though Microsoft has not been making screen readers, they have been supporting them for a really long time. Not only one, but several can be run on a Microsoft Wiindows based machine.
This creates competition, and in a field of competition you will get a far better product, and that product will and does work across a wide application area, not just specific programs from a specific company.
We can't blame Microsoft for quality of computers, but we can praise them for creating software that greatly changed computing, and keeping that software able to be used on bargain systems.
I have agreed they are not perfect, but when I, a blind person, can sit down on a holiday, and install an operating system while I am totally relaxed and not being at my technical best, I smile.
If it had not been Christmas day, and I had not been in a relaxed mode I might have thought about testing the narrator, or even restarting the computer so that Jaws might start as it was configured on Windows 7, but no, I wanted to see what the layout was, so I simply did the key strokes to start my screen reader, and took another sip of my drink.
That folks requires praise in my book.
Hardly. I disagree
show me the stats and evident that microsoft support multi forms of disability wow apple don't? show me your evident and give me the stats.
Read my first post please and at the bottom you'll find a URL? Smile.
If you use Windows you can find something called Ease Of Access?
Next, in any program and on Web pages you can find accessibility settings?
I think both sides of this debate are missing the main point. To most consumers, it's not about what is possible, but what is currently functional. If I, as a user, can sit in front of a machine, press one keystroke, and then plug my braille display in and have it just start working without hassle, that's what I'm going to choose. Why would I choose that over something less functional that may require some technical knowledge? Let's say I get a new computer running Windows 8. Yes, I can launch nerrorator and go through the set up, but as someone who prefers braille instead of speech, I cannot just pick up that computer, and plug and play right away. Instead, I have to buy aditional software, install drivers for my braille display, and then, assuming I've done everything correctly, things will function as they should. I use this as an example of the things I deal with on a weekly basis. By far, the current trend toward Apple products reflects that functionality.
But to be balanced, I don't think that you can attribute all of the drop in marketing to VoiceOver. NVDA is certainly a viable solution for Windows at a much lower cost than any of the other screen readers while still offering a lot of support for braille, applications, and so on. The fact that it is open source is also a plus, as if someone wanted to develop a plug in for NVDA, they could easily do so relative to things with Apple. Then there is the issue of security. Android and Windows are much less secure because they're more open. Yes, Mac computers have had viruses, and I'm sure tablets will get them eventually as well as their usage continues to rise. But this closed system of sorts is also more functional to many users who simply want to do things like browse the web and read their email. There are many people in this world, both sighted and not, who are not even technical enough to figure out how to run virus software. Give them the web, socialization tools, and email, and that's all they want. And while not malware and virus free, the Apple products give them a sense of security in this rehlm which is still acceptable to the uneducated. So while the possibilities may be somewhat limited on what can be done from the Apple side, it's more functional for most, particularly those users who have visual disabilities. It's also why, in my opinion, the Apple smart phones and tablets are selling more than the Mac computers. The tablets run trimmed down versions of operating systems, and trimmed down generally means more functional for those requiring more basic needs along with more simplicity.
While I do give credit to Microsoft for trying, I do not give them credit for making products which will allow users to get things done effectively and more economically. Whatever you think about how this all came in to being, however you feel about changing from Windows to OSX: in the end, at this stage, it would seem that Apple is making a more functional product for blind users and others with disabilities. I, as a consumer, don't care what could be or what once was, I care about what is.
�š Blind Faith: A Decade of Apple Accessibility
10/February/2011 by Josh de Lioncourt AppleTV, Editorials, iOS, iPods, News
From time to time, various organizations and individuals have taken it upon themselves to either denounce Apple�fs accessibility efforts, or to call to arms the visually impaired community against imagined past or future slights by Apple�fs engineers. Thankfully, these occasions are becoming fewer as the Mac and iOS community of visually impaired users grows, and it becomes more difficult to perpetuate myths about Apple�fs platforms.
Not all these attempts, however, have been malicious in nature. In many cases, they spring from the well of false information that was seeded in years passed, or out of simple ignorance. In an attempt to distill these muddied waters, let�fs take a look at the history and myths regarding Apple�fs accessibility efforts in the last decade.
To find one of the most common stances of Apple�fs critics in the VI community, we have to go back a decade to Apple�fs transition from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. This was a complete rewrite of the operating system from the ground up. As a result, detractors will argue, outSpoken for Mac, the screen reader of choice for Mac systems of the past, was no longer a viable option, leaving Mac�fs visually impaired community without access. This is, however, a blatant manipulation of facts which does not hold up under critical scrutiny.
Outspoken for Mac was developed by Berkley Systems, and eventually changed hands to Alva Access Group. In the early 1990�Œs, a version was developed for Microsoft Windows as well.
As stated earlier, Mac OS X was a complete rewrite from the ground up. Version 10.0, its first release, was very much an incomplete product, as any history of OS X will readily admit. To help bridge the divide, Mac�fs during this time could run OS 9 as well as OS X. It was a bumpy transition for all users, and was always expected to be so. Users of outSpoken could continue using Macs under OS 9 during this time, and many users, visually impaired or otherwise, chose to do so. In fact, Apple continued shipping OS 9 with new Macs for quite some time following OS X�fs initial release.
As an incomplete product, the accessibility API�fs were not immediately ready in OS X. They became officially part of the operating system in version 10.2, released in September 2002, and just eighteen months after 10.0. OS X did not become the default OS shipping on new Macs until 2003.
The historical conclusion we can draw from the above is therefore quite clear: Like many, (probably most), users, visually impaired Mac users could continue to use OS 9 while Apple worked to complete OS X and the accessibility API�fs.
A related myth is that Apple did not allow third-parties to develop access solutions, such as screen readers, for the Mac platform. This is both inaccurate and perplexing in its disregard of the facts. The accessibility API�fs can be, and have been, used by third-parties to create access solutions. There is nothing stopping someone from building a third-party screen reader for Mac. Many third-party apps have used the accessibility API�fs to control the system, such as voice-recognition software, and Apple encourages their use in AppleScript and Automator development, as well.
The arguments regarding Apple�fs growing pains as it transitioned to the new OS architecture really start to break down when one takes into account the parallel events that were taking place in the PC universe at the same time.
Windows 95, 98, and ME were consumer versions of the Microsoft Windows OS released from 1995 through 2000. Windows NT was the enterprise/server grade version of the OS. At the same time, Windows NT was entirely separate from the consumer versions, similar almost exclusively in aesthetics. Henter-Joyce (now Freedom Scientific), for instance, during this time, had to ship two separate versions of Jaws for Windows, the popular Windows screen reading solution. One version worked with Windows 95/98/ME and another with Windows NT/2000.
When Windows XP was released, Microsoft dropped the legacy technology of its consumer operating systems, much of it still rooted in DOS, in favor of the more modern core of its NT system.
Outspoken for Windows, of which I was also a fan and user, had never supported Windows NT, and were left having to do a rewrite from the ground up in the fall of 2001 if they wanted to support XP. Alva chose to discontinue both Outspoken products for precisely the same reasons and more or less simultaneously.
I�fve been asked about, and occasionally mocked for, my steadfast faith in Apple�fs commitment to accessibility, and its visually impaired user-base in particular. Some of my confidence stems from the dedicated and innovative engineers at Apple with whom I have been fortunate enough to speak over the years I have worked on this web site. Still more is grounded in Apple�fs staggering display of commitment since the release of Mac OS X a decade ago.
Some of the communities more outspoken members have been exceptionally vocal about their displeasure that Apple does not reveal more of its future plans regarding accessibility, and thereby assume that Apple cannot be trusted to maintain its commitment. This point of view, however, shows an enormous ignorance of Apple�fs business practices across the board at best, or a sense of entitlement to special treatment at worst.
Anyone who has watched Apple�fs evolution over the past ten years knows that there is one overriding truth above all others when it comes to the company�fs public relations practices. That is, put simply, that little, or often nothing, is ever announced until it is absolutely ready. This prevents Apple from disappointing its customers, keeps the competition guessing about what is happening behind Apple�fs vail of secrecy, and provides other advantages. An entire industry has sprung up in the blogosphere around Apple rumors and predictions, which creates more buzz and keeps Apple�fs users engaged with one another and invested in the company�fs platforms.
This has caused more than a little backlash from the visually impaired community at times, who expect to be treated differently from the rest of Apple�fs user-base. Some justify this stance by saying that they only want a steady stream of reassurances from Apple that its commitment remains, but I believe this argument to be disingenuous for two reasons.
First, Apple makes its commitment to accessibility quite clear on its official accessibility pages. Users looking for reassurance can find it here.
Second, and more importantly, is that, while Apple has said little or nothing in advance of accessibility improvements in product releases, those releases have come with ever increasing frequency, and demonstrate not only a commitment to accessibility, but a growing enthusiasm for and investment in that commitment.
Personally, I find that actions speak louder than words. Adobe Systems, for instance, boasts frequently about its commitment to accessibility, but visually impaired users have seen very little of real-world results from this lip service.
Let�fs take a look at the highlights from Apple�fs accessibility efforts in the last decade. We will restrict this list to only relatively major points, as minor accessibility improvements here and there in various products are far too numerous to list.
1.Apple releases OS X in March 2001. By September 2002, as the platform gains stability, accessibility API’s are introduced. A gap of just 18 months, during which OS 9 is still quite viable and, in fact, used by most Mac users in general.
2.OS X 10.2 and 10.3 are released with accessibility features less complex than screen readers, many of which were aimed at users with partial vision loss.
3.In April 2005, VoiceOver is introduced with Mac OS X 10.4 after a lengthy beta cycle with actual users out in the field.
4.In the summer of 2006, Steve Jobs demos upcoming features of 10.5. He mentions VoiceOver and the new Alex TTS voice during his keynote at WWDC.
5.In March 2007, the iTunes application becomes nearly entirely accessible. The store front being the sole exception, though it is still possible to purchase individual tracks.
6.In October 2007, Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard is released with significant advancements in VoiceOver, including the Alex TTS, Braille display support, and more.
7.In September 2008, Apple finishes implementing accessibility in iTunes, making the entire store front accessible on both the Mac and Windows platforms.
8.In conjunction with the iTunes accessibility improvements,Apple releases iPod nanos with speaking menus, greatly enhancing their accessibility for blind users.
9.In June 2009, Apple releases its iPhone 3GS, equipped with VoiceOver for iOS, the first gesture-based screen reader. They accomplished what the visually impaired community has deemed impossible in making a fully touch screen interface accessible to the blind.
10.In August 2009, Apple releases Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, with huge advancements in VoiceOver, including scripting, gesture-based navigation, and more.
11.In September 2009, the iPod touch is updated to also include VoiceOver.
12.Through 2008-2009, various versions of iLife and iWork are released, gradually improving accessibility to Apple’s life-style and productivity suites.
13.In April 2010, the iPad is released with VoiceOver support straight out of the gate. In addition, VoiceOver has been subtly modified, as has the entire iOS operating system, for easier use on the larger screen of the tablet.
14.Also in April 2010, iBooks is released for the iPad, making it the first mainstream ebook platform fully accessible to the blind.
15.In June 2010, Apple releases iOS 4.0 with significant new features to the touch-based version of VoiceOver, including Braille support and more.
16.In September 2010, Apple releases iOS 4.1 with even more enhancements to VoiceOver, including full external keyboard support to the iOS operating system.
17.In October 2010, Apple releases iLife 2011 for Mac with tremendously improved accessibility in GarageBand, iPhoto, and iMovie, the only apps to be updated in this release of the suite.
18.In November 2010, Apple updates its second generation AppleTV to include VoiceOver, less than two months after the device began shipping.
In light of the above, it is difficult to understand why there are those in the visually impaired community who so energetically criticized Apple for not mentioning its accessibility plans during a very brief sneak preview of Mac OS X 10.7 Lion last October. That demonstration took place at a media event, aimed at typical users, and focused exclusively on flashy and easily exhibited features that will be part of the upcoming release. Indeed, shouldn’t the improvements to VoiceOver in iOS, the accessibility improvements in iLife, and the quick addition of VoiceOver to AppleTV be a clear enough signal that Apple’s commitment to equal access has not wavered? These additions all came within weeks of Apple’s demonstration of OS X 10.7 at its media event. Apple didn’t mention them, either.
Apple has proven its commitment to accessibility through its history, but never more so than in the last decade. I would much rather have a company like Apple that talks little and does much, than a company like so many others who talk big and do little or nothing.
Has Apple been perfect? Of course not. Specifically, the improvements to iTunes and iLife were far too slow in coming, and there will always be areas where Apple can improve its products, not only in terms of accessibility.
Apple has earned the faith that I, and so many other visually impaired Mac and iOS users, continue to have in its innovation and products. We will be the first to voice concerns if Apple ever does waver in its commitment to accessibility, as it will be those of us who have embraced its platforms who will be the first to suffer.
Until and unless that happenstance arises, Apple should be encouraged to continue down its path of ensuring users with disabilities are equal and simultaneous participants in the growth of its platforms. We should not expect or demand special treatment, but instead appreciate the fact that we can enjoy these new products alongside our sighted brethren as they become available.
This is why I have faith.
Website:
http://maccessibility.net/2011/02/10/blind-faith-a-decade-of-apple-accessibility/
Ah yes, plug and play. Yes,can't agree more. Can't tell how many trouble and problems i come across while trying to connect a piece of add on equipment like braille display or braille note taker to windows OS. Have not have that problem with any of the Apple device at all. In fact, the braille option is there, all ready to go. Unlike Windows OS, you need to look up for the drivers, download, install, then, some sort of plug in require again, install that, then, do some funny setting before it can be use, (provided that you are in luck that particular day).
Don't get me wrong, i'm not against Microsoft, and yes, they getting better. But there's a long way to go for Microsoft before they can even call themselves as user friendly when come to accessibility
More website to read
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Accessibility/Conceptual/AccessibilityMacOSX/OSXAXIntro/OSXAXintro.html
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/Accessibility/cocoaAXIntro/cocoaAXintro.html
https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#documentation/Accessibility/Conceptual/AccessibilityMacOSX/OSXAXModel/OSXAXmodel.html
Wayne, This is what i mean by research. If you can prove to me, such documents available for the windows platform, please do so.
thank you, Scott and Joann, for saying what I was going to. I especially like the wording in the above article about talking big, while doing little to nothing, verses talking hardly at all, allowing the products to speak for themselves.
Thank you; Post eleven summed it up perfectly. And joanne provided plenty of evidence to what I stated earlier. Poster of post eleven, I couldn't have said it better. Exactly...
If I can ever record a podcast with using Windows like this one below, I'll then consider it a very large step forward. Not only can I do everything in the set up with the keyboard, but I could also do it with braille.
MacBook Air: Unboxing and Initial Setup
That said, I hope that Microsoft does what they should and gets things to this level. If apple, a very mainstream company, can do it, so can they. Oh yeah, and Google can do the same. Looking at the Surface RT, I think we understand where MS is with accessibility. Nerrorator is still not usable, and since no screen readers have been made for the new OS, is all you have. A clunky screen reader that often looses focus and jumps around more than a chick at a raive on speed. However, I hope they'll get it together in the future.
Thanks for posting these beautiful articles. I did know much of that information and I enjoyed them. My point is not to bash Apple. I have said I don't take anything from them.
I am a believer in innovation, and any company that does this for me gets my vote.
However, I must stand in for Microsoft. They have continued to serve me well, and I'm not talking only at home. At home Apple is greate, but in the complete world, home and business, as far as accessibility no.
I have not been able to earn one dollar outside my home using an Apple computer.
The poster that stated he just needs his stuff to work is exactly correct, most just need this, but for a person like me it is very different. I need my stuff to be kind of compatible in the major section of the world I might move in and frankly I don't see Mac's on desk where I do business. If this were so, I'd be happy as well to say so.
In that great article it was stated that a third party screen reader could be created for Apple's products. If this is so, where is it?
Next if that were done wouldn't Apple be on the same footing as Microsoft in that a screen reader was needed to make the product completely work in a different setting then the home?
I stand in for Microsoft reasoning to give someone else the ball to get me the better product to attach to my computer. Neighed company is perfect, but Microsoft isn’t the bad news bear either.
I am curious. One poster lives in the UK, and the other in Australia. Are Mac’s used widely there in business? No, I don’t want to hear about graphic design, or artist, and that type of business, I mean the mainstream companies?
wayne, plenty of companies now employ the use of apple's macks rather than windows. Furthermore, many of apple's programs are cross-compatible, regardless of what most windows users think. For instance, you can open and edit word documents on an apple computer. You can do the same with many other microsoft-produced files. They're interchangeable.
Yes, I understand this, but word and such things are not what I'm talking about.
You do some type of work. Are you using a Mac?
Yes I am, actually. I use a mac all the time, exclusively.
And your job requires you work within a large company, or is it a small organization?
Also, did you take your computer to the job, or was it provided for you their?
Again, not putting Mac's down, but there just not used widely, and specially by the totally blind in the work place.
They simply can't be configured to do so, and are most times to expensive.
The reason for this is we bring the screen reader,and the script setup, but a company only need have a PC available.
Oh wayne. You're so wrong. lol. We can't bring our screen readers to the job site often times because employers are hesitant to allow us to install anything on them. let's focus on the more mainstream screen readers like jaws or window eyes. Employers dont' care what we need in many cases, unless they specialize in blindness products themselves it takes a lot of fancy footwork to have them allow you to install your own software on theirh computers. Now, let's say they were to purchase the software themselves, because by law they are supposed to. What employer wants to spend an extra few thousand dollars on software so that one employee can have one accessible workstation.
Now. Let's look at apple for a moment from the same standpoint. Say the company already owns and uses macs, which, sorry to bust your bubble there wayne, but here in the twenty first century many businesses rely on Appple computing now that everyone can connect their computers and their IDevices into the cloud that apple provides. Sorry, but you're just not up on the latest trends it seems.
Going back to what I was saying. If you tell an employer, great. I can use one of these macks without a problem--all I have to do is turn voiceover on. Well, guess what. No special software needs to be purchased, and voiceover is a standard feature on any apple device now. Which employer will see it less of a hassle to employ a blind person; The one running PC's in his office where several components need to be braught into the equasion in order to make windows accessible, or the one running apple products in his office where all you need to make the computer accessible is just a simple keyboard shortcut.
Really wayne. Apple is the present and future of computing. And it gives me a better feeling knowing that I can walk over to any apple computer and it's accessible to me regardless of where I am and what I need to do, just like a sighted person. Being surrounded by a bunch of windows PC's and knowing that you need to go through several unnecessary steps in order to make it even somewhat function for you as a blind person is a feeling not unlike claustrophoebia. I worked in a hospital where doctors and nurses alike had IPads and where the administration office runs on apple computers. So there's one example of such a company. There are plenty of schools which use apple exclusively, now and before the windows craze back in the early nineties. I remember distinctly as a little girl, walking into my elementary school's computer lab and encountering sixty or so apple computers. Apple used to have a contract with the government's department of education which meant that schools baught macks by the boatload.
Windows may have taken over for a while, but the apple resurgence is clear and unmistakeable. it is unavoidable. Just watch and see.
As for right now, I work as an independent contractor using my own computer, and I work with and for several different companies. I work remotely, thus everything I do for them has to be accessible by both them and myself. I've had no issues using apple exclusively for their projects, and not all of them have or use apple computers. Many do, but some are still stuck in the stone age and run windows. And they're still able to work seemlessly with me.
You'll say, no doubt, that this is because microsoft allows seemless interraction with other opperating systems, whereas apple does not. Well, as you know, you can install and use windows on a apple machine if you really cant' get around using that particular opperating system, and Apple being a closed line of software prevents from some of the nasty viruses that windows users often encounter, as someone's said before. I have to say, I may have crashed windows do to some type of viruse no less than six times. I've been using OSX for three years now and not a single time did I encounter a virus. Enough said.
Well you are doing well as an independent contractor, but note, you are a contracted worker not working at a set company.
Now, before you jump me, I think this is a good thing and you happen to be one of the lucky few. You don't say exactly what you are contracted to do, but if you are paid that is really great!
I don't know how many jobs you've had or how many companies you've applied to. I also don't know how much experience you have in job creation and I think not much at all.
I'll have to correct one notion having experience in all these fields.
Many companies allow you to bring your screen reader to the work place. It is the exact reason organizations like Rehabilitation services buy them for clients, so that they can work.
No, you don't bring your software in your pocket and install it, you have to have it installed usually via a qualified tech, but it is your screen reader.
Apple might be getting there, but not yet.
Last, as you pointed out many companies are set up for Windows, so you'll not bring your personal computer to that work place and simply connect it and it works. It just isn't that simple.
If that were the case, you could simply bring your laptop, no matter what type, to a work place and connect it and go to work, such as, as a hotel, or the Taxi Company, or Telephone Utilities and Cable Company.
If that were possible blind people would be on an equal footing with the sighted, and we'd not have a 70% or more unemployment rate.
If buying an Apple would make me able to just walk in to an interview and say "well I've got a Mac Book, so I'll be able to work here all I need is to hook up to your system, and install your programs, and I’ll be ready to train for this job just like the sighted person you interviewed before me that be wonderful, but sadly this just isn’t the case.
We can’t even attend high school, or university without special equipment, even if the school you saw had Apple computers all over the place.
Truly, and I do say this with all respect. If you know that it is possible to put blind people to work and all they need to have is Apple computers you really need to share this information with the rest of the world. As a consultant you’d earn great money.
I was just reading this morning that Office 2013 will not be ready for Apple use for 12 to 18 months. If even one company you wanted to work at decided to switch to this office suite you’d be out of work.
I also have not had a virus on my Windows computers either. Call it luck, or maybe it is my practices, but I just haven’t had to deal with it at all.
Well, you are both lucky. I've had two viruses in the past two years, but I've buckled down with Virus protection since then.
From reading everything above, and from personal experience with Microsoft, I'd have to say I'm with Write Away. Having VoiceOver built in as default is a plus, and I've had trouble recently trying to find some downloads I need from Microsoft.
However, at the same time, you need to realize we live in a sighted world. Not everything is going to be accessible, and there's no good in bitching and complaining in a corner because you can't access something. I haven't dealt much with Microsoft workers, so I can't back up those who say they don't care. Maybe they don't, but to me that seems ridiculous, and the people with that sort of aditude should be talked to. But again, they aren't necessarily put there to work specifically to make a product work with a screen reader. I'm talking generally here.
I happen to like both companies, but my main argument was that Microsoft has, and does do many things for us. That was why I posted not to bash Apple.
This topic become useless. I have the feeling that Wayne is argueing for the sake of argueing. Yes, undeniable Microsoft has improve and is improving from one OS to another in terms of accessibility wise, but there's alot more to be desire for. Look at both platform, While Mac on OSX, even with Tiger, you can pretty much use Mac with Voiceover. Yes, it is bad, is hard, but it is usable. Compareto XP, even Vista, even Window 7, you can't necessary depend on purely Microsoft Accessibility alone in order for it to work.
You can argue as much as you want, but that is the fact. Nothing can change the fact that Apple does put more effert in to their accessibility than Microsoft.
No, I'm arguing to hold up my end. If I didn't you'd say, well he posted, but then he had nothing to say.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't I suppose.
We will agree that we disagree however.
Smile.
That's how I felt with my board topic for a while. Good for you for going for what you believe, at the least.
Well, I didn't post it thinking everyone would agree. I posted it because I think Microsoft has done a good job for us.
I also think they should stay out of the screen reader business and allow someone else to earn a living.
What makes me happy is variety and oinovation. When we have several choices as blind people that is the spice of life.
Sighted people have these choices, so I say give me some big and small companies and lets sling it!
Looking at it from a business man's perspective, that is a benefit for apple. Microsoft and Apple are competators, but because Microsoft does not implement screen readers in to their technology directly, that puts Apple at an advantage above them. I know Microsoft has the capability to work with screen readers that are made from separate companies, but like some have said. If I was able to afford making a choice between a new Microsoft computer and a Mac, I would go for the Mac, because I wouldn't have to spend thousands of dollars on Software. I don't know enough about NVDA to use it, though I have heard it is free.
Okay, since Wayne you keep bringing up that developer that developed screen readers are blind, therefore Microsoft is comtributing to the blind employment rate. Now, where's the evidents and stats for that? how many percentage we talking about out of the blind community? let say, US alone? 5%? 10%? 20%? and, how can you tell that there're no blind people working with Apple Accessibility side of things? Also, have you ever thought, there're apps developers for Apple who's blind and vision impaired? And, what about other disabilities? What has Microsoft done for them?
I read your articles. Read the one at the bottom of my first post and you'll see exactly what Microsoft has and does do for other disabilities.
Sit down at any windows based computer and check out what is called ease of access and that also will show you what Microsoft does for other disabilities.
If Freedom Scientific and GW Micro employ 25 blind people that is enough for me.
Give a blind person a job and your company is doing something I like.
I also don't know how many Apple employs either, or Microsoft for that matter, but any company that is doing anything to make my life better gets my vote.
I can't justify bashing Microsoft only because they won't make a screen reader. It seems really silly.
Runner says he loves Mac's but has a PC because Mac's are to expensive? Now why does he feel that way? He's got an expensive screen reader doesn't he on his PC, so if you add that up it cost just about the same as a Mac right? Why doesn't he own a Mac?
Mac's are wonderful computers, but they are simply not able to be used in many applications for the blind at all. Is that Microsoft's fault?
I just remembered something.
Butter Cup, you also are a new Mac user. For years you owned and used a PC.
If Mac’s were so accessible all these years why did you own a PC for so many of them?
From time to time you still use a PC, why?
I think if people are going to knock something they really should stop using it and get rid of the offending thing. You’ve learned better right?
It makes me laugh, because on other places I see people posting “I hate Microsoft. I just got Windows 8 and it locks up every 3 hours. Before I had Windows 7 and XP and on my *new* computer this Windows 8 just sucks. I’m getting a Mac.”
“I’ve been using Office 2003 for years and I hate Microsoft. I’m not going to pay the $99 per year for Office 2013 they can go to hell.”
Why do these people continue buying and using Microsoft products?
Why do so many hackers put so much time trying to bring piss ant Microsoft down?
I have to scratch my head at human nature.
Go! Microsoft!
Wayne, people who are blind still use PC's because the state agencies have long been pushing them on the blind and everyone else. Del as well as Gateway and other companies have had contracts with the government to buy computers in bulk, and freedom scientific has had theri hands in the cookie jar as well, so to speak. So yeah, people like ryan know only the PC and probably use it because it was purchased by the state. And to tell you something else, a PC costs anywhere from two hundred to over a thousand dollars. A screen reader costs upwards from two thousand dollars. The cheapest mac is Nine hundred ninety nine dollars. Therefore, ryan would be saving money by buying a mac over a PC any day. They aren't the same price; The difference is that the state buys PC's for people.
I'll tell you one thing. If you are paying 2 thousand for your screen reader your store you are getting it from is cheating you badly. Buy it direct.
Yes, state agents buy PC's,and they do this for the exact reason I've been stating. A PC is more universal at this time and in the past specially.
Freedom Scientific is the main company they go to not because they are bribed, or it is the only choice. The product is good plain and simple.
To get the same quality of Mac as PC, the price is now about the same including screen reader for the PC. That wasn't always so, but is now.
Here's another problem I'm having with Microsoft currently. I want to download the Microsoft 2010 package, but when I go on their website it either automatically takes me to the area to download the 2013 package, or it takes me to an area where it has instructions but there are no links to download the correct one.
This is not adding to my post but answering the question for you Runner.
If you have your key for your product, or get that key from your computer manufactory that installed your copy of office here is how to get it back.
How do I download a backup copy of my Microsoft Office 2010 product?
1. Locate your 25-character product key found in your product package or confirmation e-mail. You must have a valid, activated Office 2010 product key to install and activate your downloaded software.
2. Go to www.office.com/backup
3. Click the Get backup button
4. When prompted, enter your 25-character product key and follow the online instructions.
5. When prompted, enter your Windows Live ID or create a new Windows Live ID account.
6. Select to download your software or order a DVD. If you order a DVD a fee will apply.
7. Once you complete the process you will be presented with a link to download your software. You will also receive a confirmation e-mail with a link to the download if you prefer to wait and download at a later time.
8. When prompted click the Download now button to start the download process.
9. Save the file to your desktop. Do not change the file name.
10. Once downloaded to your computer, click the file icon on your desktop to install your software.
A quick note. You can save the file to the location you already have setup for your downloads. It is suggested it go on the Desktop so it can be located easy.
Oh, and your windows ID is just your email address.
You could also try going to oldversion.com and see if they have a setup file for it. They might not, since it's not a free application, but I've found lots of older versions of stuff on that site when new versions became inaccessible.
If I can't find the 25 character key can I call some place to see if they can recover it somehow?
The key is either on a label on your machine if it was installed when you got it.
The company that built the computer will have it as well.
You also registered it maybe when you got it, so Microsoft has a record of it.
The serial number on your computer will also help, service tag and service code. These are also on a label on the machine.
If you purchased it from a store and lost your key, if the hard drive hasn't been wiped clean it might be recoverd.
Call Microsoft and ask how it might be recovered.
1800 642-7676
Thanks a lot, Wayne. Now I can breathe a little easier.
I have one more note for you forereel. You asked for screenreader competition for mac osx:
assistiveWare
There's the only other one I know of. Why aren't there more? Because precious few people will buy their new mac, say "There's voiceOver on this, but I just need to pay someone hundreds of dollars to do the same thing, possibly slightly better. So I'll go buy one." And making something no one wants won't earn you much money.
I won't bash windows 8's narrator. When I tried it, I thought it was quite nice, although my hatred of windows 8 in general caused me to delete that virtual machine and stick to windows 7 on my mac. Why do I use windows? Because I like pieces of it. I like pieces of the mac too. And thus, I use both on the same machine. Another thing is that yes, mac accessibility was worse in the early 2000s. Why? It was worse because macs weren't popular and few would buy them in either community, and the king was windows. Assistive tech manufacturers did not port their screenreaders to OSX because there were more windows people. We don't live in 2003 anymore. When did microsoft try to build their own screenreader, where XP's, Vista's, and Seven's dinky "foreground window. Blank. Blank. Blank" doesn't count? That's right. Windows 8. Last year. So, they have a magnifier? Great job. I bet it's great and does everything that people need. Actually, I'm not, because zoom text and magic and supernova magnifier exist. They wouldn't need to if windows magnifier was as good as you make it out to be.
Finally, none of the microsoft products other than windows are accessible. Windows phone? Forget it. XBox? If you memorize menu commands and have some sighted help, a camera, etc. Name one apple product, released in the last two years, that isn't accessible to the blind. You can't. Name one microsoft product, released in the past two years, that isn't accessible. In fact, I'll do it for you. XBox whatever the last version is. Windows phone 8. Microsoft office for mac. Microsoft is great for what it does, which is basically accessibility frameworks. But they can't hold a candle to apple in true accessibility, where no one needs access and someone can install the operating system without help. Can windows do it? No, it can't. I'm prepared to guess it never will.
Ah, but I did state that Microsoft was smart to stay out of the business of adapting. They do the frame work, and their products are created so that they can be made accessible and are compatible.
The cover a wide range of disabled persons, but do not try to be good at adaptivity. Allowing others to do this is a good thing as I see it.
You are correct on the phone, but Microsoft has not created a product completely accessible to the blind, just the frame work.
Before Apple did this with the iDevices, we had no company creating a product that was totally accessible out of the box, and we still do not.
While good, the accessibility factor is limited, and that is why I like a company that does a frame work over trying to be good at a total package.
Windows 8 was the first OS I could almost install without sighted help. I can do about 90% of it, and when I get the chance to install it again I've got some ideas in mind that might make it 100% possible.
I am only talking upgrading, so I do need Vista or 7 installed already.
But, when you compare it to basically any other OS, Mac OSX and many variants of linux, an install of a recent version can be accomplished completely with speech. No upgrade, no if another compatible OS is already there, just stick in your disc and install. Why should microsoft be the only one left out? Because, honestly, everyone else already did that, while MS leaves people with unattended answer files and instructions like
wait thirty minutes
press enter
arrow to your partition (usually 4 down)
press enter
Wait an hour
Try pressing windows r then typing narrator
if that doesn't work, wait thirty minutes
try again
if it still doesn't work, shut down, start up, and try a different partition.
Disclaimer: These instructions were not written by any microsoft employee, affiliate, other legal sounding word, etc.
You could try this and end up wiping out something critical just from pressing the arrow key too many times, effectively reducing your computer to the functionality of a high-tech brick with a dell, asus, etc. logo on the top. Whereas I have installed mac osx from scratch five times. These included public betas and other's computers, so this should not be used to claim that macs need a lot of reinstallations. Do I worry that I might convert my friend's computer into a nice-looking art form on her desk? No, I don't. All I do is put in my disc, wait a minute, press command+f5, and voila! VoiceOver is ready to talk me through the installation. I know what I click. If there are two partitions, I don't risk wiping the wrong one. I don't make abstract guesses about whether it's done based on whether the fan is running and the hard drive clicking. I hear "84% progress indicator, about five minutes remaining" and come back in five minutes. All good.
Also, about windows phone, neither versions 7 nor 8 include accessibility frameworks. A microsoft employee told people they had no plans to do so. Economically, this makes sense, as there are few people willing to accept a mobile platform from a company that brought them windows vista. Still, you have to ask why the great evener of the laying field said they don't have plans. At least, do what adobe did and say your working on it. It would maybe make us like microsoft more.
One last thing. You say the accessibility in apple's products is good but limited. I would like examples of its limitations. Currently, I see two features it lacks that windows screenreaders have (this is comparing a computer company to a company that has been spending the last twenty years in the screenreader field. I like OCR. It is a great thing (I use it in NVDA) and has saved me many a call for sighted help by allowing me to click images that contain text. VoiceOver currently lacks this, but so do window-eyes, supernova, and system access. Second, Mac OSX does not support as much modulation as do the windows screenreaders in the form of plug-ins. I would like to see this as well.
Any other problem can be related to another company, such as the lack of office support on OSX, which can be blamed entirely on your favorite company, microsoft, for not following apple's [emphasis starts here] accessibility frameworks [emphasis ends here] which have been around since version 10.2 and which microsoft ignored when they thought to redesign, of all things, the edit box. Why did they have to redesign the edit box? Now that was a stupid idea.
If you read above you see I don't say they are perfect, but for the masses Windows is the OS of choice.
I'd not say Microsoft was my favorite company, but I do believe in giving credit.
Microsoft products have served me well over the years, and when people that are using Microsoft products say they hate them, I have to say why are you using them?
All other OS platforms are simply not as versital as Windows or as widely used. When this happens, specially with Apple, I'll praise them too.
Wayne, I don't get why you keep going back to this "apple products aren't as widely used" crap, when several posters to this topic have given examples proving otherwise.
while I'm all for giving credit where it's due, I don't agree with praising microsoft, when, as has been said numerous times, and will continue to be, they don't deserve it, as they've done hardly anything in the way of accessibility for everyone, the way apple has.
also, you keep asking why people use windows devices when they're against them, but evidently, you haven't been listening to what has been said about that, either. so, let me try and phrase it for you one more time. people such as myself are using windows devices simply cause A, we don't have the money to buy a computer of our choice, and B, windows computers are what the state agencies provide.
that's all they know, especially when they're constantly dealing with people like you who so willingly waste time praising a system that, if I had my way, I wouldn't even be using.
I use both windows and mac OSX. For my job, which for the record is software engineering, our entire team uses macs. Why do I use windows? I like it. I like the tools it provides, and I have several programs I use that work better on windows in my opinion. I don't hate windows. I like windows. It's powerful, versatile, and does what I require. I just am not of a mind to praise a company for *accessibility efforts* when they haven't done this. Their accessibility efforts, though greatly improved, are as nothing to the efforts of google, apple, and various linux distro creators. I also noticed that you did not mention the installation of windows issue I mentioned. Does that mean you realized the fruitlessness of that line of discussion for praising microsoft?
You are correct, and I believe I covered the installing issue.
I was able to install Windows 8 for the first time about 90%, and I believe I could do it completely, so when I get the chance again I will learn this.
However, I have to had Windows Vista or 7 already installed.
A clean install I have not been successful, so you are correct their.
chelslicious, when you are talking personal use many things are used, but my point is that Windows is more widely used across the board, and Windows happens to be the most versital. That is why state agencies buy Windows based products.
Yes, I do understand that other use other products, even me, but in a work setting Windows happens to be dom.
I also like Apple, but I am not able to take an Apple computer like I can a Windows computer to many sites. At this time the structor simply isn't their.
I state this not because I think it is the best, it is how it is.
I also use both Apple and Windows, but I'm not going to sit and say I hate Apple, because they haven't gotten to the wide world use as Windows has. I am here to praise Microsoft for what they have done although it is not perfect nor complete. The company that does a complete job and gets excepted completely will be the company on top, but until that happens I can't discount Microsoft.
Just because someone says, well I use this or that isn't going to change my mind chelslicious.
The other day I read an article that said Microsoft made a major loan to Dell computers when Dell went private. I am interested if Microsoft will start doing computers, like they have phones, and tablets. I don't know if that will be a good thing or not.
I'm not here to change anyone's mind, Wayne. I'm simply helping back up what others have said, which I know to be true and accurate information.
Yes, I understand that.
So here ya go all, I will kill off my boot camp if a office sweet that holds a candle to microsoft office is on the mac and fully accessible. Open office, almost there but not quite yet. ;), I have updated that program on my mac just recently. Mudding, find me a mud that has sounds, then I will load it and test it with my fave mud, Marriani. :), I do love my mac for cerfing the web, it's browser kicks the crap out of IE when loading web pages. :) if any of you can do this then by, by windows. Also, if any of you can show me avaya's contact desktop express works on Mac with voice over just as well or better then jaws, I will kill off my boot camp of windows.
Scott
I did check out your podcast. the first thing i'll say is that i've never laid my hands on a MAC, so command key means nothing to me.
second, probably due to my hearing impairment (as you wel kno i have....), i couldn't understand a lot of what Alex was saying. when you first turn on the puter, is there a way to slow it down when it first launches Voiceover?
and isn't it true that with MAC you are stuck with the speech that voiceover provides?
Starfly, i know developers are working towards accessible MS Office on Mac. Perhaps, not too long from now, we going to have an accessible MS Office. :)
As far as others are concern, i think its rather useless. So, MS Office got praised by our beloved For Reel because of it's inaccessibility compare to the rest? And cause of it's inaccessibility, it let the minority, maybe, let say, around 5% of American blind population gain work at places like GWMicro and Freedom Sucker and that?
I must say, its rather amusing. :P
No, its not funny, its what pays my bills, if my work had a mac I would use it but it has a PC plain and simple. :), I have tried open office for the mac, word processing is great, the spread sheet part sucks. I had to use the trackpad to navagate around the cells, when I did some input VO did not tell me what I had typed into the spread sheet. Sorry not good enough for me, so I will stick with a boot camp of win7 until this gets better.
This is something I never understood, and maybe it is too simple a sollution. If Freedom Scientific really was in it to provide accessability to the blind, why not allow Microsoft to include JAWS on all computers for a small fee, spreading the cost to all computer buyers for a small increase to the cost of a computer which would not even amount to enough to be noticed, instead of selling software to a very small percentage of consumers for a very high price? Freedom Scientific would probably make even more money this way, and the blind could have accessability without paying any more than a sighted consumer, plus, it would have put the blind population on a more even playing field in the workplace since they could operate any computer without installing any special software on the companies computer. The government would not have to shell out all this money to purchase expensive software. Microsoft would not have to do a thing, third party developers would do the work, blind persons would be employed, plus more blind people would have oppertunitys in the workplace as a result. Seems to me the current way of doing things has only held blind people back, I for one could never afford to purchase JAWS, which is why I use system access.
That does sound ideal. The problem is that it will take negotiating on both companies which who knows how that will turn out.
That's true, but they should have done that a long time ago. I read on another board that the NFB sued Microsoft years ago claiming that if they developed a screen reader they would be creating a monopoly, and that it should be left to third party developers. I don't know if this is true, but if so, it only hurt the blind, and benefited Freedom Scientific.
And interesting concept.
Jaws would have to be included in the OS, and maybe that is the issue.
Jaws is not exactly a program that can be adapted to any situation unless scripted. Generally it works fine, but when you get in to special situations you'd limit it, because you'd have to give script writers access to Microsoft's Windows, and that is where the problem seems to be.
I don't think Microsoft would be willing to allow that.
These are my thoughts only.
Perhaps an idea would be to include NVDA, since its open source anyway.
No matter what someone will be unhappy. Some use Jaws, some use NVDA, some use Window eyes... if they work with one screen reader, they may as well either do away with all of them and make one that will work with Microsoft, or find some way to incorporate all of them.
I've thought of that too, Ryan.
Again, if you do any type of screen reader and include it in the OS you have to get Microsoft to open it to open source, and that won't happen. It doesn't matter the screen reader chosen.
Next, asking consumers to pay more for a computer because it now has a screen reader included might not go over well. If it had been done early sure, but now, I'm not sure.
Of course, people will pay, but the uproar. Lol