I think the problem is not with NFB, but the people who take NFB seriously. *smiles* Let us all just thank our stars, Apple is taking accessibility seriously, and making our lives easier.
On Apr 15, 6:28 am, marie Howarth <marie.jane2...@gmail.com> wrote: > The RNIB seems to be ignoring apple. I'm currently working with their sister > company as the RNIB and action for the blind merged recently so RNIB carries > out the campaigning and such and action provides support. They didn't even > know the mac could talk. This saddens me as I know there are an increasing > number of UK mac users and to think a huge support organisation like this is > either aware and choosing to ignore this or simply is not aware of it angers > me. > > On 15 Apr 2010, at 11:11, Krister Ekstrom wrote: > > > > > Nic, just out of curiosity, what is the danish organisation for the blinds > > view on Apple products? > > I have a feeling, though i could be wrong, that the swedish blindness > > organisation is a bit on the conservative side when it comes to the Apple > > products, however i could be wrong. > > /Krister > > > 15 apr 2010 kl. 09.14 skrev Nicolai Svendsen: > > >> Hi, > > >> I seriously doubt that is the case. Apple accessibility has been around > >> for six years now, not three. I doubt NFB had anything to do with it. > >> Apple is going to keep it up because they are committed. The article about > >> the lawsuit doesn't actually mention Apple much. > > >> There is actually a very good point of view. Apple poses a threat to the > >> NFB of taking over the technical market. This is why NFB did not sue > >> Skype, but Apple. Agreement or not, I'm pretty sure they listened to users > >> using Outspoken and such, rather than an organization that can't even > >> review the product properly when it is out. Apple has done far more than > >> anyone for accessibility improvements. Apple said they had something in > >> store, and they sure did. I of course realize that it is a pretty serious > >> statement. Of course, I am not particularly a fan of the NFB at all. > >> Saying that, NFB has made some seriously inaccurate statements as well, > >> far outweighing mine. NFB actually has no reason to sue Apple. What would > >> they sue them for, exactly? Because their products are accessible, and > >> they want everyone to pay more than what a Macbook costs for assistive > >> technology? That wouldn't actually surprise me much. It's all about > >> competition. If they think they're about to be kicked out, of course they > >> would consider Apple a threat. Because Apple has done something Microsoft > >> has not. All these things sound really twisted and disgusting to me. > > >> Apple can hardly be sued for their effort. Their lawsuit had to do with > >> iTunes on the Windows side. Fair enough, but that is a pretty ridiculous > >> suit if it really is based on accessibility. That is not the case, > >> however, as there are plenty of other useful programs for PCs that are not > >> anywhere near as accessible as iTunes 9. And NFB doesn't care about that. > >> Which, again, leads me to believe that, because NFB is scared of being > >> kicked out, they do everything they can to stop people buying their > >> product. That would make sense. > > >> Windows users rely on scripts all the time to use any application. I > >> suggest you look through your jAWS folder to see what I mean. Have you > >> even seen just the download size of a JAWS installation? It's outrageous. > >> People who moan about iTunes not being accessible just because the > >> interface accidentally broke, just need to use scripts like they do for > >> everything else. I'm surprised that wasn't their first complaint. JAWS, or > >> just Windows in general, isn't even that stable. If JAWS crashes, it's > >> stupidly difficult most of the time to reload the product. Even if you > >> manage to do so, you will probably run into the screen not being read > >> correctly when reading list boxes or with the cursor. Or, the worst-case > >> scenario. You have to uninstall JAWS 11 after attempting to install Video > >> Intercept, reinstall JAWS 10, install VIdeo Intercept, uninstall JAWS 10 > >> then reinstall JAWS 11. > > >> Maybe I'm slamming the NFB a bit, but really, they need a kick in the ass. > >> I'm just happy the Danish blindness organizations are not this corrupt and > >> twisted, and they actually review fairly and take a proper look at what a > >> company offers before suing them. I'll always be negative about the NFB, > >> though I am actually being neutral when talking about the actual lawsuit > >> itself. > > >> Say what you want to, it won't change my mind. Even if it is someone from > >> NFB saying it. Some NFB people are great. Some do incredibly good reviews. > >> Some don't. And in whole, I think the organization just sucks for filing > >> unnecessary lawsuits for nothing. Maybe I'm going on a childish tantrum > >> here, perhaps. But once in a while, you need to. A company is trying to > >> provide great accessibility for their products, and they are sued because > >> of one problem. iTunes is actually still useful on the Windows side, > >> people. Quit your darn nitpicking. > > >> Regards, > >> Nic > >> Skype: Kvalme > >> MSN Messenger: nico...@home3.gvdnet.dk > >> AIM: cincinster > >> yahoo Messenger: cin368 > >> Facebook Profile > >> My Twitter > > >> On Apr 15, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Rob Lambert wrote: > > >>> I just got wind, from a friend of mine, that the only reason Apple is > >>> accessible to us is because of a lawsuit by the NFB. The term of the > >>> agreement was for accessibility improvements for three years. Here's a > >>> question. First, what's your side of this ordeal? Second, who thinks > >>> Apple will keep up with the accessibility improvements after this three > >>> year term is up? I apologize for making smooth waters mirky, I just > >>> wanted to know what your take on this was. > > >>> -- > >>> 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 > >>> athttp://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 > >> athttp://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 > > athttp://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.
