and we are supposed to have less access to a computer than the sighted because it would be something in the platform just for us? That makes no sense. If I ever need another Windows computer I hope that this group will buy me the software needed as I can't afford it. What are they thinking? They single us out as having special needs rather than integrating us into society which should be their goal. As I said I could write essays on this, so I'll stop. It's bed time anyway, and if I stay at this computer I'll keep thinking of more to say. What a sad situation this is. On Nov 30, 2009, at 8:54 PM, Lynn Schneider wrote:
> I purchased my first Apple computer about three months ago. I will never > forget the feeling of complete surprise and joy at being able to just turn > the iMac on and get it talking within minutes. Microsoft is not to blame for > not having default Windows access out of the box, blind people are to blame. > As Mark said, thinking outside the box can get you into hot water. A few > years ago on a blindness-related list, I made the cataclysmic mistake of > expressing my wish that some day, windows would be accessible out of the box. > You would not believe the hate mail I received from tons of blind people > basically saying that I wanted a free lunch, I was ungrateful for all the > hard work and research of the screen reader companies, etc. etc. Honestly, > it was totally shocking to me that I would get such ire for simply suggesting > that we ought to have access to something our sighted peers take for granted > without having to pay thousands of dollars extra. But, being on this list > and seeing all the other blind switchers out there, I feel at least a tiny > bit vindicated, as blind people are starting to see the benefits of universal > access. I really think it is the young blind people who are going to demand > universal access, at least I hope so. They are the ones who are going to > benefit most from being able to buy an iPhone or iPod Touch like their peers > and just start using the thing, and they are hopefully going to demand more > of that. With chips being so cheap now, there is absolutely no reason why > universal access cannot be built right into things. The best thing we can > all do is to spread the word far and wide about what Apple has been able to > accomplish with their products and make them an example of what can be. > > On Nov 30, 2009, at 9:27 PM, Richie Gardenhire wrote: > >> I have changed the subject line to more reflect on the discussion at >> hand. If Apple can set aside resources to make their Mac computers >> universally marketed across the board, there is no reason why >> Microsoftshouldn't, (and they definitely have the resources and the >> technical expertise throughout the company) to do so. And if it >> brings the prices down, and Microsoft does, for example, develop a >> mechanism by which Windows can be installed out of the box without >> sighted assistance, companies such as Freedom Scientific would then be >> forced to either go with the trend; otherwise, they would lose their >> economic dolars; after all, isn't that what competition for tax >> dollars and marketshare is all about? In my humble opinion, for what >> it's worth, the only reason Freedom Scientific survives in the market >> is because they have contracted with some state agencies and >> government entities, and we bare the brunt of the expense ineirectly. >> I paid less for my car than I have for braille displays costing $8000 >> to $12,000 dollars at a time. In Alaska, for example, the biggest >> majority of vision loss occurs in the elderly population and baby >> boomers who are about to reach retirement age. We have no school for >> the blind in Alaska; therefore, if parents want to send their blind >> kids off to a residential school, they would have to send them >> Stateside, which costs the state thousands of dollars which they could >> probably find other revenues to use elsewhere.There are a handful of >> us who are blind and visually-impaired Macusers, but that numberis >> increasing, as the word about VoiceOver gets out. Richie Gardenhire, >> Anchorage, Alaska. >> >> >> On Nov 30, 2009, at 1:21 PM, carlene knight wrote: >> >> I know that the companies take huge advantage of the fact that they >> have a guaranteed nitch and can charge whatever they want. That's why >> I will not upgrade my JAWS SMA. For one thing I don't need it and >> secondly, I don't want to pay that kind of price for an upgrade, but >> FS knows that they can get away with it because of a guaranteed >> market. I'm not saying things could not change, but simply stating >> that you can't get JAWS or a Braille display from a home electronics >> ore software store, and I wouldn't expect to happen any time soon if >> ever. In their eyes, why should They bother as they won't sell enough >> of them to make it worth their while. There is a cell phone put out >> by Capital Accessibility in Europe. I've seen one and it's no big >> deal. The speech is great, but there is no camera, digital screen, or >> anything that might ad a bit of a price to the phone. It's built like >> a brick, but it is over $500 and though the speech is clear, it's very >> robotic. Tell me that's not ridiculous? I don't know that agencies >> are responsible for this one, but the phone is so tailored to our >> needs that somebody will buy it. Not me. Granted, if more people >> were learning braille and speech software as they were dealing with >> macular degeneration, and there was a big enough demand for it, things >> might come down a bit. That's great about the scanner. I'd better >> stop typing now as I am misspelling more things than I am typing >> correctly and am about to throw this keyboard, though it's not at fault. >> >> On Nov 30, 2009, at 1:46 PM, Richie Gardenhire wrote: >> >>> With all due respect, that argument has been used time and time >>> again. To that, I say this: the best example of a product that has >>> gone down in price because of the acceptance of it by the sighted >>> community, is the optical scanner, which was originally intended for >>> use by the blind for scanning newspapers, magazines, and othr >>> documents in their computers or reading machines. Back then, you had >>> to pay thousands of dolars for the machine, and ys, state agencies >>> bought it for us, if we were lucky. Now, one can buy a scanner and to >>> a certain extent, software for scanning pictures, text, and other >>> document forms into one's PC, at a fraction of the cost it was in the >>> 1970's. The point here is that it found a marketable niche among the >>> sighted community, and once they were mass-produced, prices started >>> coming down and people could afford said scanners. While braille >>> displays are another issue, there are companies who are working to >>> make even displays more affordable and accepting to the universal >>> design market. In the 1980's, Apple tried an experiment, using an >>> ordinary, dot matrix printer, to produce braille. It wasn't the best >>> quality braille, but it was an experiment that, had it been popular, >>> might have flown. Richie Gardenhire, Anchorage, Alaska. >>> >>> >>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 11:50 AM, carlene knight wrote: >>> >>> Unfortunately you have to be realistic though. I agree with you in a >>> sense, but going into a store and buying JAWS or Window Eyes off of >>> the shelf? That would be nice? that's one reason I like the Mac and >>> accessories. The people in the Mac and Apple stores will likely not >>> be trained for extensive use with Vo, but they should be able to make >>> sure it works. Try going into a Best Buy >>> and asking them if JFW works. We probably make up less than 10% of >>> the population so it isn't going to happen. It would still be >>> expensive, and that's why I needed the agency to buy it for me. Again >>> don't get me wrong, in a perfect world that might happen, but we all >>> know the world is far from perfect. I'm not trying to defend anybody >>> necessarily, and I don't consider myself dependent because I need >>> assistance from them. I got my own jobs, take care of myself, go >>> where I need to go etc. A good organization helps people become >>> independent. I agree that whenever possible, we should do for >>> ourselves and not be too dependent on anybody, agencies included. >>> >>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 12:23 PM, Richie Gardenhire wrote: >>> >>>> And for this reason, I feel that many state agencies, (Alaska's, >>>> being >>>> one of them)will be cutting back services, in favor of other things >>>> and as Mark so eloquently pointed out, the elderly, the poor, and the >>>> disabled, will be hurt first. I know thisis a different subject line >>>> from what was originally intended, and I apologize for that, but I >>>> will say one more thing on this, and that is that I'm in favor of >>>> universal design so that blind people can walk into any store and >>>> purchase off-the-shelf software and get it working and we not be >>>> forced to be co-dependent on state agencies to purchase our stuff. I >>>> guess, in a way, I'm against state agencies for the reasons I stated >>>> above. Richie Gardenhire, Anchorage, Alaska. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 10:32 AM, carlene knight wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Mark: >>>> >>>> I certainly don't hold a grudge as everybody is entitled to their >>>> opinion. However, if it weren't for the Commission for the blind >>>> here >>>> in Oregon, there is no way that I could perform the job I was hired >>>> for. I had to have a programmer write JAWS scripts so that I could >>>> get to the buttons, read the drop down boxes that just had graphics >>>> for names, etc. I couldn't have afforded the thousands of dollars >>>> that >>>> has costed. He is working as we speak since the company I work for >>>> has changed software and everything we had done in the past regarding >>>> the original software is now null and void. I could have not >>>> afforded >>>> a Braille display at about 12,000 dollars. I can say with certainty >>>> that there are few if any companies that would provide any of these >>>> services. Unfortunately many government funded agencies, including >>>> the Oregon Commission for the blind do know little about Mac >>>> accessibility as they have contracts with certain vendors, and, face >>>> it,whether we like it or not, a majority of companies still use >>>> Windows based software. My husband and I both decided on our own to >>>> try the Mac, and though I've had some problems, I'm glad I did. I've >>>> learned it without an instructor. We nearly lost our Commission last >>>> summer so when I hear people talking about how we shouldn't have >>>> government agencies such as this, I have to disagree though they do >>>> have their problems. Yes, some people do rely on others to much, but >>>> not all of us do. Like you, I grew up in the public school system in >>>> a rural area. I was born blind also. I'll get off my soap box now. >>>> >>>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 10:51 AM, Mark BurningHawk Baxter wrote: >>>> >>>>> You, and I to a lesser extent, and others are the exception. I was >>>>> born blind, didn't go to any institutions for the blind, was raised >>>>> as >>>>> an only child, mostly in rural Vermont with minimal help from state >>>>> agencies. Graduated from Dartmouth when I was 20, again with >>>>> minimal >>>>> if any help from agencies--didn't have my first experience with any >>>>> agencies or institutions for the blind until I was 24, when the >>>>> Carroll Center was offering a medical transcription course and I >>>>> needed another, safer place to be. They kicked me out of their >>>>> dorm, >>>>> making me homeless, after six weeks there. Rehab flatly refused to >>>>> support me and my music career in any way, and pressured me to go to >>>>> the Carroll Center in the first place, then pressured me to get >>>>> therapy and reform my ways when they made me homeless. I only >>>>> started >>>>> cautiously learning how to deal with the agencies in 2007, when it >>>>> became clear that my failing hearing was going to force me out of >>>>> the >>>>> transcription career I'd had for 13+ years. I learned Jaws and >>>>> Windows essentially by myself, as I've always been good with tech. >>>>> Even now, while I may have learned a little about how to get along >>>>> with the agencies and get what I need, it's a very uneasy truce at >>>>> best./ I hope to be starting a job at another institution for the >>>>> blind soon, but this time as a trainer, not a student, which >>>>> hopefully >>>>> will turn out better. You can see why I advocate for the abolition >>>>> of >>>>> such systems. They do not foster independence of thinking, and tend >>>>> to punish outside-the-box people, in my experience. I do realize >>>>> that >>>>> people blinded later in life may not adapt as fully as those born >>>>> blind; I'm learning that as I lose my hearing, so I have the >>>>> privilege >>>>> of seeing both sides of the coin, but think about what that >>>>> implies-- >>>>> that the pressure on those whose world has already been blasted by >>>>> losing their sight will essentially become putty in the hands of >>>>> high- >>>>> pressure agencies who are set in their ways. The system seems to >>>>> punish at both ends--if you're too independent, you're pressured to >>>>> conform; if you're new to blindness, you're taught not to think for >>>>> yourself. Hell, I didn't even do mobility orienting stuff until >>>>> last >>>>> year, when Rehab here in CA suggested I ry it, and I decided, in the >>>>> interests of keeping the peace, what the heck; my mobility teacher >>>>> quickly realized that there was very little, beyond the immediate >>>>> rehearsing of directions, that she could improve upon what I and my >>>>> dog were already going. Since I got Trekker, that's even more so; >>>>> now >>>>> that Trekker is temporarily broken, I truly feel the loss. :) I >>>>> don't >>>>> see how the agencies really have done me any good, other than in the >>>>> purely material realm, and if I weren't as articulate as I am about >>>>> stating my needs, and as forceful as I am about what I need, which >>>>> most people are not, even that gain might be minimal, and even now >>>>> the >>>>> damage is significant. So, that's where my beef with the system(s) >>>>> comes in; sorry if that makes it a personal grudge, but there you >>>>> are >>>>> then. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mark BurningHawk Baxter >>>>> >>>>> Skype and Twitter: BurningHawk1969 >>>>> MSN: burninghawk1...@hotmail.com >>>>> My home page: >>>>> http://MarkBurningHawk.net/ >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>> macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >>> . >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >>> . >>> >>> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en >> . >> >> >> >> -- >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
