excellent points, Chris. I am glad that they did give apple that award for the iPhone, and also hope that apple will continue to implement full access into it's products. How exciting that you were there to see apple get such a deserved award! Olivia On Apr 15, 2010, at 3:27 PM, Chris Blouch wrote:
> Two bits I didn't notice in the thread so far. > > 1. In the marketplace of ideas there are those who will enlist and those who > comply. Compliance is all about rules and regulations to set up some 'minimum > bar' and is the basis of things like Section 508, WCAG, ADA and international > varieties. As most people know, you can comply and still have something > totally unusable or inaccessible. When somebody enlists in an ideal they see > it's value and want to do it. I think Apple has enlisted in accessibility. > Not only do they meet most standards for the minimum bar, they went beyond > and made it surprisingly usable. In business speak they call it delighting > users and you don't get that by doing just enough to not get sued. So > irregardless of what legal action may or may not have happened, I think it's > obvious that Apple is playing at a higher level than mere compliance. > > 2. The NFB, being made of fallible people, is also made of divergent > viewpoints. It's really quite silly to say that the entire NFB thinks X about > Y. I was there at the NFB headquarters when they gave out the award to Apple > for the iPhone and the praise was tangible and real. They noted that Apple > had done what others for years said couldn't be, make a non-tactile interface > accessible and usable. Recognizing that some NFB folks didn't do their > diligence when reviewing VO and other bad behavior, to toss the whole org out > as a useless shill to entrenched external powers is a bit extreme and glosses > over the complexity of any large organization. As some say, there is no such > thing as bad publicity and it's possible that the NFB missteps also brought > attention to Apple's technology that many were unfamiliar with. It also > stirred up a vocal minority to work harder at getting the word out about a > different way of working and playing. I'm not convinced the net effect was > entirely negative even if the intent was otherwise. > > CB > > 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 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. > "Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower" Steve Jobs -- 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.
