Alright, I will accept Scott's original assertion that you can't entirely separate screen reader and operating system when judging efficiency. But I don't think it is really to the point anyway. Freedom Scientific added hotkeys in places where the operating system is inefficient. For example, Insert+f11 brings up a list of the system tray icons. So if you need to do something like change your skype on-line status, you can get there with a minimum of keystrokes.
It would be interesting to compare how many keystrokes it takes to do certain common tasks in voiceover & MacOS vs jaws & windows. I already posted on googling "wikipedia". Other ideas: 1. Send an email message 2. Connect to a samba share 3. Create a text file and save it to your desktop To: <macvisionaries@googlegroups.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:55 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac > Hi John, > > Just a very quick comment. I don't disagree with the some of the > criteria that you're using such count of number of keystrokes to > complete tasks to evaluate screen readers, and that ultimately things > like the efficiency of operation come into play. However, I'd like to > point out that a large number of the shortcuts, keystrokes etc, that > we use for our day-to-day operations with VoiceOver are built into the > Mac OS X operating system and not specific to VoiceOver. Just for a > recent example, answers on how to download files by pressing Option- > Enter is a Mac shortcut. Two of the problem questions we always have > from potential switchers is where to find a list of all the VoiceOver > shortcuts and is it possible to write scripts for this screen reader. > The point is, we all make daily use of a huge number of shortcuts > built into Mac OS X, both for all Cocoa Compliant apps (such as the > movement and selection shortcuts), as well as the shortcuts specific > to particular applications. Furthermore, scripting is also built into > the operating system -- from basic shell scripting, in terminal, to > AppleScripts, and even, to make things available to people without > programming background, Automator actions. So, to a certain extent, > Scott's statement that other issues of the Mac OS X operating system > really do come into play in determining how efficiently overall > someone can work with VoiceOver. Sure, I could teach somebody to read > only the VoiceOver Getting Started Manual and follow only topics and > examples covered there and work far less efficiently than I do from > day to day by exploiting the other efficiencies in the Mac Operating > system. As you say, ultimately, we all care about the results. > > Just my opinions. YMMV > > Cheers, > > Esther > > > > John G. Heim wrote: > >> No, screen readers can be judged subjectively independent of the OS >> they are >> used for. For example, a subjective measurement might be a count of >> the >> number of keystrokes it takes to complete certain tasks. Also, >> consistency >> can be a subjective measurment. Does the same keystroke move from >> one input >> field to the next? And finally, you can get an idea of the >> percentage of >> inaccessible controls in operating system applications. In fact, you >> could >> even include accessibility of third party applications even if you >> have to >> download add-ons to make them accessible. After all, who cares where >> the >> accessibility features come from as long as they work? >> >> Anyway, I'm not necessarily saying that my opinion is right. But your >> contention that its impossible to compare jaws and voiceover is >> incorrect. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Scott Howell" <scottn3...@gmail.com> >> To: <macvisionaries@googlegroups.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 5:19 PM >> Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac >> >> >> John, I think that is a very unfair statement. To say that VoiceOver >> is not >> up to the standard set by JAWS is inaccurate. That is like comparing >> windows >> and the Mac OS. Sure, they both are operating systems, but they are >> very >> different and that holds true with VoiceOver as compared to JAWS, >> Window-Eyes, and any screen reader running on windows or Linux for >> that >> matter. They are all screen readers, like windows or SL share some >> similarities, but VoiceOver and JAWS for windows are very different. >> Therefore, the supposed standards of JAWS do not apply to VOiceOver >> and >> therefore renders your statement inaccurate. >> On Dec 1, 2009, at 5:10 PM, John G. Heim wrote: >> >>> Several years ago, Microsoft began working on improvements to >>> narrator >>> that >>> would make it a realistically usable screen reader. But the National >>> Federation of the Blind asked them to stop. The reasoning was that if >>> Microsoft improved narrator, it might drive Freedom Scientific and GW >>> Micro >>> out of business. They thought that narrator would never reach the >>> quality >>> of >>> Jaws and window-eyes yet it might still be good enough to drive those >>> products out of the market. >>> >>> Obviously, that decision was somewhat controversial at the time. I >>> argued >>> that it made no sense to think that narrator could be at once too >>> crummy >>> to >>> be used and at the same time good enough to drive jFS and GWM out of >>> business. I didn't anticipate the development of the other free >>> screen >>> readers, voiceover, nvda, and orca. But certainly, that's another >>> point >>> against the NFB position. >>> >>> On the other hand, I don't think I'd like to switch to voiceover or >>> nvda >>> full-time. They are not quite up to the standard set by jaws yet. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Lynn Schneider" <canepri...@gmail.com> >>> To: <macvisionaries@googlegroups.com> >>> Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:54 PM >>> Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac >>> >>> >>> 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 macvisionaries@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 macvisionaries@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 macvisionaries@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 macvisionaries@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.
