Could we please respect the list moderator's request that this discussion not continue on this list? Thank you.
Bruce -- An accessible captcha solution that does not take into account the needs of the deaf-blind is no acceptable solution at all. Bruce Toews Skype ID: o.canada E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] LiveJournal: http://masterofmusings.livejournal.com Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com On Sun, 8 Jun 2008, Darrell Shandrow wrote: > Hi James, > > I think that a bunch of blind people organizing a boycott wouldn't do any > good, however, if we can find ways to convince our sighted colleagues, > friends, relatives and neighbors to purchase only from companies that also > happen to pay attention to accessibility, then, we would have something > useful. :-) > > In many other areas, AOL has actually made great strides forward in > accessibility. AOL's Instant Messenger and Mail services are known to work > well with screen readers. I use AIM on my job to communicate with other > members of my team around the world. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "TheLearningCenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> > Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 4:32 AM > Subject: Ujnfortunate AOL News and Information > > > For as long as I can recall, which is ever since AOL has been around, their > services have not been that accessible to Blind people. I know I have heard > that they have done some things to make their services more accessible to > us, but it has been a struggle for them to even do anything. I guess I am > wondering why blind people continue to support companies who don't seem to > care anything about our accessability needs and continue to put out products > that make us work very hard at using them. > > Now, about the AOL's new CBS Player, AOL knew of their plan to change their > program, so why couldn't they test and make sure the product is accessible > to screen readers before they installed it. It makes absolutely no sense to > put out a product that is not accessible to all of its users. AOL knows > blind people use their service, especially radio and music playing > components of their system, so why do they continue to disregard us? Maybe > just because they can. > > I don't buy that argument that "business requirements forced them to rush > the product in prior to them wanting to do so. CBS has been around for a > while and I often access their stations and theeir player seems to be > accessible enough. Does the one AOL uses work differently than the CBS > stations would use? > > It sickens me when companies continue to cry about not making things > accessible because of business reasons. We blind people pay our > subscription fees to them, so shouldn't our needs matter too. I think blind > people make up a pretty sizeable market for their types of services. > > My question would also be, if it is so hard to do, then how do other > companies do it. Like someone said, doesn't they (AOL) own Winamp? Why not > use Winamp for their needs? > > I have had enough of this stuff and excuses. I will no longer spend my > money with companies who act this way. I can take my money elsewhere. We > should do this across the board and let those companies who don't seem to > care know what we are doing. Those companies that we have to use, then we > can sue them into complying with the law; those who we only use for pleasure > and entertainment, we should let go. You know, blind people get such > treatment because we accept it and continue to buy stuff that don't work for > us. Companies like Apple, who makes a cell phone with no keyboard or > bluetooth accessability; Intuit (Quicken), who produces an almost totally > inaccessible tax program, even though blind people have to do taxes to and > want and need to do their own taxes; and most of their radio automated > programs (OTSDJ), which require us to always script them into shape; and > many more, who just don't seem to care, should be dropped by us and not > used. I know we will say that we need some of these programs, but these > companies don't seem to care and only give lip service to making their > products more accessible. > > I would say to AOL, "Get your act in Order." Make this product accessible, > it is only a software thing and shouldn't take too long to take care of it. > Excuse time is over and better service is in order. > > Finally, every person who continue to use these types of products despite > their companies' failure to care about our needs are contributing to the > problem; stop keeping them into budsiness to discriminate against you and > put your money where your needs are. If they say, our money is not enough > to make a difference, then let's move on and find a product that meets out > needs. If we need the product and it is the only one around, then sue those > companies into making their products accessible. > > I heard this stuff fifteen to twenty years ago, when I got my first (PCXT) > and should not be hearing it now; we are trying, but business requirements > make us go backwards or do nothing at all. Let's get our butts in gear and > start demanding better service; there is absolutely no reason why any > software should be inaccessible to blind people, as the technology is there > to make anything accessible. AOL and similar companies should ask us before > emplimenting programs that don't meet our needs and maybe we can help them > know what route to take. > > James Robinson > > Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... > http://www.pc-audio.org > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... > http://www.pc-audio.org > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
