Another comment about NVDA. NVDA is fully developed by volunteers. The reason it is free is because the people working on it are not being paid. Even then, it has almost gone under a few times already. Because it is completely reliant on donations, and because the people who benefit from it represent less than 0.5% of the market, and because a significant portion of these people are taking advantage of the developers' generosity without providing any donations in recompense (as easily proven by the fact that it has almost folded a few times already, I would not expect it to be around forever. The model is not very sustainable.
David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA Email: dchitten...@gmail.com Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 Sent from my iPhone > On 19 Dec 2013, at 15:26, "Littlefield, Tyler" <ty...@tysdomain.com> wrote: > > I have two points here. > > Firstly, OCR is a very CPU and memory consuming process. If you expect to get > this on an an EReader, you're totally 100% insane. There are OCR engines out > there, but the question of licensing comes to mind, which is actually > something I forgot to mention on my last post with screen readers. You need > to license (or put in the amount of money it would take to research and > develop a synth), which is a pretty big issue. There's ESpeak, but that > license may not work for some proprietary software. > > Finally, I'm not sure what issues you have with windows or why you trash > them, but the standards you point out are actually followed. Microsoft has > developed quite a few standards, usually to improve accessibility that screen > readers are expected to adopt and have made them accessible for screen > readers, which was the actual purpose behind them. It was for all intents and > purposes the same idea Apple had with their adoption of Cocoa, with the minor > fact that Apple can just adjust as much as they need for Voiceover while > Microsoft needs to provide an API that can be accessed. As for Linux, there > does not currently exist an API like MSAA or UIAA that can be used for screen > readers. Each window manager has their own (at-spi, etc). So no, writing > screen readers is not at all trivial. > > you also mentioned NVDA, which brings up another issue. They have done a > great job at it, but they have also been working on this project for years > and have the ability to use open-source projects and libraries they can tie > into. They do this quite well, but it is yet another issue proprietary > software would have to contend with--if no suitable licensed libraries are > available to perform a specific task, some reinvention of the wheel will have > to take place. >> On 12/18/2013 8:37 PM, eric oyen wrote: >> I can see the problems I have raised. However, the E-book readers actually >> do have an audio port (how else are you going to hear other multimedia >> content). THe authors guild doesn't necessarily represent all authors (in >> fact, a lot of them are actually starting to publish via amazon and others). >> If you look at their actions over the last 20 years, you will see that they >> have actually acted to defend major publishers. >> >> Now, the issue of scanned images containing text can be worked around >> effectively (there are several inexpensive OCR apps for windows or OS X that >> work well). >> >> THe purpose of a library is the same as its always been: the free sharing of >> information. We the blind have as much right to access to this information >> that the sighted take for granted, yet the onerousness of copyright laws >> makes this extremely difficult. This situation is not improving (as >> evidenced by recent actions against both Apple and Google for their books >> online). Again, we get left out of consideration when such actions are taken. >> >> Now, complaining does work, if done correctly and to the right people. If >> the vendor doesn't want to listen, one can always spend money elsewhere. >> THere is also legal action (I would use this as a last resort when all other >> negotiations fail). As for voting with your wallet, this only works when >> there is enough people doing the same thing. This also only works if there >> is more than one vendor offering that product with those features desired. >> One other way that also works is to be able to produce a competing product >> cheaper (NVDA is an example of this).If its as good or better, people will >> flock to it, thus forcing the higher priced vendor to improve their product >> or lower the price. This is simple economics 101. >> >> As for adding accessibility to an OS, the API's have already been developed >> for Linux and OS X. Windows has one as well, but it (like the rest of the >> OS) is practically a joke. THe problem here is that MS doesn't stick to >> their own standards, so you end up with different versions of the OS not >> being able to do some specific things. These days, coding in accessibility >> to an app is pretty much a trivial affair if the proper API is followed >> Developers don't have to go reinventing the wheel when it comes to TTS. >> Again, we need to go back to the original point here. Should we, as blind >> people, suffer in silence as we get second or third class treatment? Being >> treated as less than human is demeaning and insulting. It may make me look >> like an ass, but there are times when furious anger will get the point >> across (I just wouldn't use it except as a last resort). It is incredibly >> hard not to fly off the handle when someone insults me. >> >> Anyway, I think I have ranted enough. >> >> -eric >> >>> On Dec 18, 2013, at 1:33 PM, David Chittenden wrote: >>> >>> Wow, such interesting arguments. When eBook readers do not have built-in >>> speakers, speech output is impossible. When the page of the book is a >>> picture of the page, a scanned image, speaking that page is impossible. >>> When the law is written such that the copyright holder has more rights >>> around who can and cannot access the book than the potential reader has, >>> accessing the book may not be legally possible. >>> >>> If you want to just flail around ineffectually making lots of noise but not >>> necessarily getting very far, your stated approach can have limited >>> success. However, would it not be better to learn the specifics in any >>> particular situation so you can actually become effective? For instance, >>> the author's guild is focused on keeping the copyrights law strong since >>> writing and controlling who and how the book is read specifically effects >>> the author's income. Authors do not earn any money for books which are >>> checked out of libraries. However, people who really like books they read >>> in libraries have a greater chance of purchasing their own copy. The >>> argument against text-to-speech in all eReaders has actually been, if text >>> to speech is used, people will not purchase the recorded versions of books, >>> and the recorded versions are much more profitable. This is why NLS is so >>> strict about who can access their professional recordings. >>> >>> When software is being designed, adding text-to-speech is significantly >>> less difficult than adding TTS access at a later date. The same is true for >>> wheelchair access to buildings. >>> >>> Depending on how the code is written, adding TTS and screen-reader >>> navigation may well be extremely complex. In some cases, the entire >>> operating system needs to be rewritten in order to add TTS and spoken >>> navigation. To rewrite an OS can take a few years. You have no idea how >>> long the original software was being developed before the company released >>> the product, so the blanket statement that adding speech is a trivial >>> matter, is completely incorrect in most cases. >>> >>> Bugs should be fixed quickly. I love this statement. It demonstrates >>> complete and total ignorance. Bugs usually take a lot longer to track down >>> and correct than adding new features. Operating systems are extremely >>> complex. Bugs may have several causes. Changing code to repair one bug may >>> cause a worse bug somewhere else in the system. Back when I studied >>> programming in university, I spent most of my programming time tracking >>> down, correcting, and then tracking down the bugs that the corrections >>> generated. Sometimes, I left minor bugs because they did not impair the >>> program's primary function, and I could not get the program to run any >>> other way. >>> >>> All that said, unless you can either get a strong public upswell behind you >>> to get laws changed, or you can develop good will between you and the >>> developers, ineffectual flailing around may cause as much harm as good to >>> your efforts. >>> >>> David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA >>> Email: dchitten...@gmail.com >>> Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On 19 Dec 2013, at 8:35, eric oyen <eric.o...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> well, when I get what I want in a timely manner, I don't worry about it. >>>> Its when I get substandard service, features or it takes a lot longer than >>>> it should to get them,, then I am one of the most complaining bastards out >>>> there. I make no bones about it, I expect excellence and anything less >>>> deserves attention to resolve. >>>> >>>> Take, for example: the book famine for the blind. We have the same rights >>>> as the general public to access media, yet there are those that are >>>> fighting us tooth and nail because they don't want to deal with the >>>> problem. The American Authors ild is particularly strident on this. They >>>> won't allow the publication of content for the blind unless we sign up on >>>> a special registry (does anyone at the library have to do this just to >>>> borrow a book?). >>>> >>>> How about the E-book consortium which is trying to get a waiver based on >>>> flimsy reasons (such as design modifications to the hardware, etc). Most >>>> all functions on these devices are in SOFTWARE and is not difficult to >>>> code for. Yet Amazon (and others) seek to get that waiver knowing full >>>> well they are locking out a non-trivial market segment. >>>> >>>> Now apple did give us accessibility. However, that wouldn't have happened >>>> if these two conditions were not met: >>>> 1. we bitched to them for 4 years before they took notice >>>> 2. the blind represent the 2nd largest market segment for computer and >>>> smartphone technology among the disabled. >>>> >>>> in the 1970's, the deaf demanded (and got) close captioning (which started >>>> showing up on TV in the early 1980's). >>>> 2. wheel chair users fought for 20 years for accessibility rights (and got >>>> them with the ADA in 1992). >>>> Now, we the blind are the last to get anything and we are having to fight >>>> tooth and nail to get it. >>>> >>>> My point is this: we are being put last before anyone else. We get treated >>>> like incompetent idiots, yelled at because they think blindness equals >>>> deafness and generally get disrespected in general public. If you are >>>> happy with this situation, fine. Just don't expect the rest of us to just >>>> lay down and accept it. I want whats mine and I will work to get it. If >>>> this means that I go into court to get what is legally mine, I will. Why >>>> be satisfied with anything less than what everyone else gets without even >>>> asking for it? >>>> >>>> If anyone says I can't do a thing because of my blindness, then they had >>>> better stay out of my way while I prove them wrong (in the most public >>>> manner possible). >>>> >>>> We have rights and its time we had them enforced. >>>> >>>> -eric >>>> >>>>> On Dec 18, 2013, at 2:52 AM, Krister Ekstrom wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, and it doesn’t matter if we get what we want, because then we >>>>> whimper and whine about the fact that we have gotten what we want, either >>>>> it is too late, too little, too much or just plain spoken the wrong way. >>>>> I know that what i now will say is gonna offend people and i apologize in >>>>> advance for that, but if we bash Apple accessibility and Apple decides >>>>> that they don’t want to have anything whatsoever to do with the blind >>>>> community then it’s a catastrophy that we deserve. Don’t misunderstand >>>>> me, pointing to bugs and things that aren’t right isn’t wrong and shall >>>>> be done provided it’s done in a constructive, polite and creative way, >>>>> complaining serves no purpose and in the long run could end up really >>>>> badly for us. >>>>> /Krister >>>>> >>>>>> 18 dec 2013 kl. 03:42 skrev David Tanner <david.tanner...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, Robert it probably does more to hurt all blind users of Apple >>>>>> devices than it ever will to help make things better. But, as I am sure >>>>>> you known blind people have a long history of being hateful, spiteful, >>>>>> not appreciating what is done for them, and constant complainers. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my accessible iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 7:53 AM, ROBERT CARTER <nc5rn...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the idea that accessibility is less important to Apple since >>>>>>> the death of Steve Jobs is nothing more than pure speculation and if >>>>>>> anyone can prove otherwise, I would love to see the evidence. I see no >>>>>>> value in such comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Robert Carter >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2013, at 7:42 AM, Scott B. <sb356...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Absolutely right. They can talking to engineering. But engeeniering >>>>>>>> has the final say. I agree since the great Steve Jobs has passed >>>>>>>> we're probably not seeing as much interaction from Accessibility as >>>>>>>> people saw before. To sum it up very briefly Accessibility is where >>>>>>>> you take the accessibility suggestions or problems. They either act >>>>>>>> upon them y supporting you the person who needs help or passing it on >>>>>>>> to the engineering team by escalation. Please also keep in mind these >>>>>>>> are tier 2 support personnel so they can't know everything either so >>>>>>>> be easy on these people. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 12/17/2013 03:37, Ray Foret Jr wrote: >>>>>>>>> Of late, I have noticed complaints against the Apple accessibility >>>>>>>>> team as if to suggest that we are being ignored. It seems to be the >>>>>>>>> belief of some that the Apple accessibility team fixes accessibility >>>>>>>>> bugs and problems with Voice Over. I do not believe that this is the >>>>>>>>> case. It is my belief that the Apple accessibility team has, in >>>>>>>>> fact, a very limited role at Apple. Frankly, with the passing of the >>>>>>>>> late great Steve Jobs, that role has perhaps demenished greatly. I >>>>>>>>> believe that the Apple accessibility team never has had actual >>>>>>>>> decision making capacity with respect to actual implementation of >>>>>>>>> fixes for Voice Over. They didn’t even have this power under Steve >>>>>>>>> Jobs. Unless I am very much mistaken, all the accessibility team has >>>>>>>>> any power to do is to forward our findings over to the development >>>>>>>>> teams but nothing more. They cannot even tell us whether or not our >>>>>>>>> reports will be acted upon. Now, this last is most likely a part of >>>>>>>>> Apple’s non disclosure policy: however, I suspect that even if this >>>>>>>>> was not so, Apple’s accessibility team would not be informed in any >>>>>>>>> case. In short, it seems that the only function that this >>>>>>>>> accessibility team has and will ever have at Apple is not much more >>>>>>>>> than a kind of clearing house of feedback from us blind users. I >>>>>>>>> cannot help wonder how many Apple app developmental teams look at >>>>>>>>> submissions from the accessibility team and say to themselves, “Oh, >>>>>>>>> no, not again.”. I suspect that this explains why it is that our >>>>>>>>> reports seem to go unheeded. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sent from my Mac, the only computer with full accessibility for the >>>>>>>>> blind built-in! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>>>>> The Constantly Barefooted Ray, still a very happy Mac and Iphone 5 >>>>>>>>> user! >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Scott Berry >>>>>>>> Email: sb356...@gmail.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus >>>>>>>> protection is active. >>>>>>>> http://www.avast.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>>> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. >>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- > Take care, > Ty > http://tds-solutions.net > He that will not reason is a bigot; he that cannot reason is a fool; he that > dares not reason is a slave. > Sent from my Toaster (tm). > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
