macfusion and sshfs
Anybody have any experience with the macfusion sshfs client? This is not fusion the virtual machine tool. I'm talking about macfusion for mounting a filesystem from an ssh server. I installed the google macfuse software and macfusion but when I run fusion, I get buttons that are unlabeled. VoiceOver just says"button, button, button" when I tab through them. And if I press control+option+space to click the buttons, nothing happens. -- 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=.
Pac Mate long shot...
I suppose this is a ridiculous long shot but is there any way to use a Pac Mate as a keyboard on a Mac? I am going to be away from home for a few weeks and I was thinking of taking both my Mac mini and my Pac Mate along. If I didn't also have to bring along a keyboard for the Mac it would save me a little space. -- 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=.
safari and google search results
I have a problem with safari and google. When google search results are displayed, the H3 headings for each result item are supposed to be links. But they are not and I can't click on them. This problem began maybe 3 weeks ago. What I have been doing is click the cache link. Google provides a link to the original page in it's cached version. I can click on that or I can listen to the cached version. But, of course, it's a bit of an inconvenience either way. -- 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.
Re: Economics and the Mac
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" To: 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
Re: Economics and the Mac
There is a new organization called the International Association of Visually Impaired Technologists that is planning on addressing some of these issues. I actually am the President of the group. http://www.iavit.org/ - Original Message - From: "Les Kriegler" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 12:16 AM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac Hi Lynn, Well-said. There are many blind individuals who wish to keep the status quo, and anybody who suggests otherwise is often criticized. I've been on enough lists to see that happen. It's a pleasure being on this list, as the intent of the list has really been maintained, to help each other access Mac systems. Best, Les -- 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.
Re: Economics and the Mac
1. Voiceover requires more keystrokes to use than does jaws. 2. Jaws provides greater access to Windows operating system functions than voiceover does for macos. For example, try configuring ldap/ActiveDirectory authentication on a Mac. - Original Message - From: "James & Nash" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 4:47 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac Hi, I'm not looking to upset anyone, but can I ask why do you think that VO and NVDA are not quite up to the standard set by JFW and We? Mac OS X 10.6 set the VO bar extremely high. This release has made VO a fully functional and viable solution for Blind computer users who wish to use a Mac. I am not saying that improvements do not need to be made, but that goes for all of the Screen Readers on all of the platforms and the operating systems generally. I admit that prior to this, whilst VO was very good, it did not quite hit the mark, and Apple's approach to accessibility seemed to be stagnating - andso I migrated back to Windows. This was a personal choice though. Keep in mind, that; NVDA, Orca and VO work in a very different way to JFW and Window Eyes. All three use object navigation - a concept which allows us as blind users to gain an idea of what our sighted co-workers etc are seeing on the screen. This is a radical concept, and one which Apple has been slammed for pursuing. It is also worth remembering that both Orca and Voice Over are being used on operating systems which are fundamentally and vastly different to Windows, both in concept and design. I do not mean this to be a patronising or condescending E-Mail, I am just curious as to why you think VO is not yet up to the standard of the commercial offerings of the Windows world? Please bare in mind, that these are just my opinions. If you'd like to discuss this further, please contact me of list as i think we may be going off topic here. TC James On 1 Dec 2009, at 22:10, 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" > To: > 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 acces
Re: Economics and the Mac
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" To: 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" > To: > 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 &
Re: Economics and the Mac
The real deal breaker was voiceover and nvda. Even if you buy the argument that Microsoft might have driven FS and GWM out of business if they'd improved narrator, FS and GWM are facing that same pressure as a result of voiceover and nvda anyway. - Original Message - From: "Chris Hofstader" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:10 AM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac Ted Henter, at the 1996 NFB convention made the argument in a speech he delivered that an MS solution would never be as comprehensive as JAWS or one of the other screen access tools from the niche companies because it would never be their highest priority (you can probably find the entire text of the speech online). In some ways, I think Ted had a point as MS may have built something that's "good enough" for let's say about 80% of blind computer users and, with their market cut by such a huge chunk, JAWS, Window-Eyes, etc. would not have the resources to serve the final 20% who would probably lose jobs as this is the area where the high priced screen readers do outperform more generic solutions. That speech was before Sections 504 and 508 which changes things as the federal government may stop purchasing or upgrading Windows if they do not have a comprehensive solution like JAWS. The Social Security Administration, the single largest employer of blind people in the US, has a whole lot of oddball proprietary software which really need the JAWS or now Window-Eyes scripting facilities to get right. If MS put out a solution that couldn't be customized properly and JAWS stopped developing solutions good enough to meet the needs of SSA, about 1000 blinks could be furloughed until a solution was found. It's all a nasty rat's nest in this biz. A combination of politics, technology, fiscal concerns and monopoly like behavior can be really discouraging. I've definitely spent too much time thinking about and writing emails on this subject the past couple of days than is healthy. I'm really enjoying Mark and the others on this list for making me think hard about these issues but I grow increasingly less hopeful with each email I write as the whole thing looks increasingly grim. cdh On Dec 1, 2009, at 5:10 PM, John G. Him 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" > To: > 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 chea
Re: Economics and the Mac
Well, you're all over the place in terms of the debate itself here. Do you think this is a matter of personal preference or not? If so, you shouldn't say I'm being unfair. Anyway, lets do a test. I really have no idea how this will turn out. Lets pick a common task we all do practically every day, google something. How many keystrokes does it take to go from a fresh boot to click through to the first match?Say you just turned your computer on, how many keystrokes does it take to google something like "wikipedia"? 1. Launch browser = 3 keystrokes windows,i,enter 2. Enter URL = 3 keystrokes, control+d, enter (I'm not counting entering the URL itself) 3. Enter search term = 2 keystrokes, enter [forms mode], enter (not counting entering the search term) 4. Find first match = 2 keystrokes, 2 [go to first h2 heading], 3 [go to first h3 heading] 5. Click through on first match = 1 keystroke, enter So it takes 11 keystrokes to open a browser, get to google.com,do a search, and click through to the first match. Note that I'm counting combination keys as 2 keystrokes. Feel free to count 3 key combinations as just 2. But if you have to use 2 hands, that's 2 keystrokes. Actually, in Windows, there is a quicker way to get to a web site than the way I've mentioned above. You can press windows+r, enter a URL, and press enter. That could take the place of steps 1 & 2 and leaves us at 8 keystrokes besides the ones it takes to enter the URL and the search term. But that is definately taking advantage of the operating system. I do not know if there is an equivalent feature in MacOS. - Original Message - From: "Scott Howell" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:34 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac And that is your opinion as well and I completely disagree with you. However, you as I are entitled to your opinion and having used both windows and the Mac on a regular basis, I find that there are many tasks, which are much easier to perform with VOiceOver than Window-Eyes. I have never used JAWS and of course at this point I wouldn't bother since I'm not interested in learning something new since I can do what I need with what I got. However, with the quick-nav feature of VO, I have found it takes less keystrokes then before. You can argue that interacting is perhaps one issue and with a windows=based screen reader that may be true depending on the screen reader, but at the same time I don't have the multitude of issues with VO as I do with WE when dealing with MSAA. It's obvious JAWS is your preference and honestly that's fine. What matters in the end regardless of whether we agree or not is that you have the tools to get the job done. That is one point I think we can both agree on. On Dec 2, 2009, at 1:23 PM, 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" > To: > 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 Fre
Re: Economics and the Mac
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: 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" >> To: >> 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 >>&g
Re: Economics and the Mac
Well, I wasn't actually arguing that voiceover and nvda are going to drive FS out of business. If FS isn't being challenged in any significant way by these free screen readers, it only supports my original assertion that the NFB logic was flawed. I don't know if FS is being pressured by nvda and voiceover but they lost out on at least one sale because of voiceover. I bought a Mac for home use instead of a Windows PC . I doubt that I'm the only one who has done that. I have linux on my laptop so that's another sale they missed out on in a way. And while right now I have a Pac Mate, next time I'll probably go with an Iphone. I don't know... Maybe FS can afford to lose all that business as long as I still have jaws on my work computer. - Original Message - From: "Chris Hofstader" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 1:27 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac I can assure you, FS is feeling no pressure from either VO or NVDA and only a tiny bit of pressure from System Access. Window-Eyes will continue to see their share decrease slowly but will maintain a slow growth in numbers of units sold as the market continues to expand annually. There is absolutely no evidence that FS is feeling pressure from any other screen reader. I do think that BrailleNote is beating PAC Mate pretty solidly and that OpenBook trails K1000 more and more each year but it will require a major tectonic shift to knock JAWS down a notch in global share. VO doesn't even try to work in many multi-byte languages like Japanese, Arabic, various Chinese writing systems and probably a few I can't think of right now. If you take a look at how programs called input method editors (IME) work, you'll understand the incredible complexity a screen reader must overcome to give the user reasonable feedback during input. FS sells more than half of JAWS units outside the US and is in far more languages than anyone else with Dolphin coming in second. Any screen reader can do a decent job in the Western European languages and writing systems but toss Japanese which can have four separate writing systems combined in a single document plus lots of words that sound very similar but have terribly different definitions and, unless the screen reader gets it right, a user may tell his boss that he loves him very much and, with the same set of phonemes but different glyphs, tell his wife that he wants to share an umbrella with her. With help from IBM, we got JAWS to work pretty well in Japanese and in the modern Chinese Mandarin writing system. Hal does a pretty good job with the Microsoft IME but users still find them accidentally signing a note with the name of a flower instead of the equivalent of Fred which can be very embarrassing On Dec 2, 2009, at 1:28 PM, John G. Heim wrote: > The real deal breaker was voiceover and nvda. Even if you buy the argument > that Microsoft might have driven FS and GWM out of business if they'd > improved narrator, FS and GWM are facing that same pressure as a result of > voiceover and nvda anyway. > > - Original Message - > From: "Chris Hofstader" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 8:10 AM > Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac > > > Ted Henter, at the 1996 NFB convention made the argument in a speech he > delivered that an MS solution would never be as comprehensive as JAWS or > one > of the other screen access tools from the niche companies because it would > never be their highest priority (you can probably find the entire text of > the speech online). In some ways, I think Ted had a point as MS may have > built something that's "good enough" for let's say about 80% of blind > computer users and, with their market cut by such a huge chunk, JAWS, > Window-Eyes, etc. would not have the resources to serve the final 20% who > would probably lose jobs as this is the area where the high priced screen > readers do outperform more generic solutions. > > That speech was before Sections 504 and 508 which changes things as the > federal government may stop purchasing or upgrading Windows if they do not > have a comprehensive solution like JAWS. The Social Security > Administration, the single largest employer of blind people in the US, has > a > whole lot of oddball proprietary software which really need the JAWS or > now > Window-Eyes scripting facilities to get right. If MS put out a solution > that couldn't be customized properly and JAWS stopped developing solutions > good enough to meet the needs of SSA, about 1000 blinks could be > furloughed > until a solution was found. > > It's all a nasty rat's nest in this biz. A combination of politics, > technology, fiscal concerns and monopoly like behavior can be really > disc
Re: Economics and the Mac
Well, given your examples I don't know how you can say that jaws misses more than voiceover. You've given 3 significant examples of things voiceover misses and just one fairly obscure thing for jaws and windows. Plus, it would seem to me that if you can use the jaws cursor to get something done, that's a point in favor of jaws, not against it. - Original Message - From: "Chris Hofstader" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 1:35 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac I actually think VO provides much better support for the stuff that ships installed on a Macintosh than JAWS does with a lot of the Windows stuff. VO may miss a few things (I find TimeMachine restores pretty hard to use with VO and Spaces is far from obvious with VO) but JAWS still doesn't work with the built-in dictation program and misses a whole lot of stuff in a lot of Windows utilities - sure, an expert user can get at stuff using the JAWS Cursor and by writing scripts but, out-of-the-box, VO gets far more of the basic Macintosh stuff right than JAWS does with Windows. Also, the Trackpad Commander provides a wholly new and very exciting way for a blind user to navigate that, when people get used to it, will improve efficiency enormously while JAWS remains in the unidimensional world of a long list of semantic blips. cdh cdh On Dec 2, 2009, at 1:34 PM, Scott Howell wrote: > And that is your opinion as well and I completely disagree with you. > However, you as I are entitled to your opinion and having used both > windows and the Mac on a regular basis, I find that there are many tasks, > which are much easier to perform with VOiceOver than Window-Eyes. I have > never used JAWS and of course at this point I wouldn't bother since I'm > not interested in learning something new since I can do what I need with > what I got. However, with the quick-nav feature of VO, I have found it > takes less keystrokes then before. You can argue that interacting is > perhaps one issue and with a windows=based screen reader that may be true > depending on the screen reader, but at the same time I don't have the > multitude of issues with VO as I do with WE when dealing with MSAA. > It's obvious JAWS is your preference and honestly that's fine. What > matters in the end regardless of whether we agree or not is that you have > the tools to get the job done. That is one point I think we can both agree > on. > > On Dec 2, 2009, at 1:23 PM, 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" >> To: >> 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 na
Re: Economics and the Mac
- Original Message - From: "Esther" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 1:55 PM Subject: Re: Economics and the Mac > Hi John, > > John G. Heim wrote: >> >> Actually, in Windows, there is a quicker way to get to a web site >> than the >> way I've mentioned above. You can press windows+r, enter a URL, and >> press >> enter. That could take the place of steps 1 & 2 and leaves us at 8 >> keystrokes besides the ones it takes to enter the URL and the search >> term. >> But that is definately taking advantage of the operating system. I >> do not >> know if there is an equivalent feature in MacOS. > > Yes there is: in Safari use Command-Option-F then type in your search > term and press return. This will run a Google search of your entry. > In addition, Command-Option-S will always snap back to the search > results page if you launch your Google search this way. > > Cheers, Well, it's not really the same thing because the shortcut I mentioned was to launch the browser in the first place. It occurs to me that my comparison might not work because you wouldn't have to enter the URL in safari. Actually, Internet Explorer has a default search option too. If you type words into the address bar, it will do a search instead of treating what you wrote as a URL. But I disabled that feature so long ago I'm not sure how it works. -- 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.
Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium
I wouldn't count on the traditional style keyboard going out any time soon. The technology to make a perfectly flat keyboard has been available for many years. You probably have a perfectly flat control panel on your microwave oven. It hasn't caught on for keyboards because people like being able to feel the keys. Most keyboards even have extra bumps on the f, j, and numpad 5 keys so people can find them easier. I just bought a mini USP keyboard from the Apple Store. Its way flatter than a regular keyboard but its not perfectly flat like a touch screen. You might ask yourself why Apple didn't manufacture this keyboard like the control panel on a microwave oven. Actually, keyboards like that are available. But generally, you don't see them because people don't like them. - Original Message - From: "Mark BurningHawk Baxter" To: Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:38 AM Subject: Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium > Keyboard, or touch-input alphanumerical devices, sure, but they'll be > touch screen or nonstandard shapes and sizes; it behooves the blind > person, I think, to get used to the fact and start breaking away from > traditional QWERTY; I never learned DVORAK or any other of the > keyboard configurations, but I'm betting the standard typewriter > interface will come to an extinction soon. > > -- > > 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.
Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium
Yeah, as long as we continue to deal with the written word, I don't know how normal keyboards can go away. Human beings are designed to do things with their fingers. I'm not poo-pooing technology. I think it won't be long until we all have telepathy. They already have sound systems that can be set up so that only you can hear them. They actually cause the bones of your skull to vibrate and since everybody's skull is different, only you can hear it. They also have devices that allow you to think a word and the computer recognizes it. So if you think "call mom" it knows. When those technologies mature to the point where they can go on an iphone, you'll essentially have telepathy. But businesses still deal primarily with the written word. There used to be very efficient voice recognition systems in every work place -- they were called secretaries. Remember how in the old movies bosses called their secretary in to dictate a letter? Nobody does that any more, they fire off an email. To some degree that is because of cost. But mainly it's because it's more efficient to compose an email yourself than to have your secretary compose it for you. - Original Message - From: "Scott Howell" To: Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 12:48 PM Subject: Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium John, that is true and in talking to a friend of mine who has really taken to the iPhone as I have and he is sighted, has also said that having some sort of tactile feedback would be preferred. I have to agree, it would seem and this is purely my own opinion, but not having some sort of feedback would feel really odd and abrupt on the fingers.. On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:19 PM, John G. Heim wrote: > I wouldn't count on the traditional style keyboard going out any time > soon. > The technology to make a perfectly flat keyboard has been available for > many > years. You probably have a perfectly flat control panel on your microwave > oven. It hasn't caught on for keyboards because people like being able to > feel the keys. Most keyboards even have extra bumps on the f, j, and > numpad > 5 keys so people can find them easier. > > I just bought a mini USP keyboard from the Apple Store. Its way flatter > than > a regular keyboard but its not perfectly flat like a touch screen. You > might > ask yourself why Apple didn't manufacture this keyboard like the control > panel on a microwave oven. Actually, keyboards like that are available. > But > generally, you don't see them because people don't like them. > > - Original Message - > From: "Mark BurningHawk Baxter" > To: > Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:38 AM > Subject: Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium > > >> Keyboard, or touch-input alphanumerical devices, sure, but they'll be >> touch screen or nonstandard shapes and sizes; it behooves the blind >> person, I think, to get used to the fact and start breaking away from >> traditional QWERTY; I never learned DVORAK or any other of the >> keyboard configurations, but I'm betting the standard typewriter >> interface will come to an extinction soon. >> >> -- >> >> 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.
Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium
But again, if it's just a matter of getting used to it, why do keyboards have those little bumps on the f, j, and numpad 5 keys? Those little bumps exist for a reason. Technology already exists to manufacture perfectly flat keyboards. But they haven't caught on. If you think touch screens are the wave of the future, you first need to explain why flat panel keyboards haven't caught on and then you have to explain why every keyboard in existance has those extra little bumps on the f, j and numpad 5 keys. I think those 2 facts... That flat keyboards haven't caught on and that even conventional keyboards have extra tactile cluse on them show that people prefer a keyboard they can operate tactilly. I suppose that eventually, people may sacrifice the feel of a keyboard for the benefits provided by a touch screen. But I wouldn't count on it. Most likely, there will always be a way to connect a keyboard if you want it. - Original Message - From: "David Denne" To: Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 7:42 PM Subject: Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium >I think that if you get a touch screen device of any kind really it's > just something to get use to. > > On 12/4/09, Scott Howell wrote: >> Secretary? Do they really even have such creatures or even call them >> secretaries? :) Seems the secretary role has changed significantly over >> the >> years. However, to keep this somewhat on topic, the written word is >> likely >> not to go anywhere any time soon. :) I have heard of various systems >> people >> have been developing, including a hat you could ware that would basically >> interpret brain waves and Apple has even filed a patent on a technology >> to >> capture/decode facial movements. Interesting times are ahead for sure. >> >> On Dec 4, 2009, at 5:45 PM, John G. Heim wrote: >> >>> Yeah, as long as we continue to deal with the written word, I don't know >>> how >>> normal keyboards can go away. Human beings are designed to do things >>> with >>> their fingers. >>> >>> I'm not poo-pooing technology. I think it won't be long until we all >>> have >>> telepathy. They already have sound systems that can be set up so that >>> only >>> >>> you can hear them. They actually cause the bones of your skull to >>> vibrate >>> and since everybody's skull is different, only you can hear it. They >>> also >>> have devices that allow you to think a word and the computer recognizes >>> it. >>> So if you think "call mom" it knows. When those technologies mature to >>> the >>> >>> point where they can go on an iphone, you'll essentially have telepathy. >>> >>> But businesses still deal primarily with the written word. There used to >>> be >>> very efficient voice recognition systems in every work place -- they >>> were >>> called secretaries. Remember how in the old movies bosses called their >>> secretary in to dictate a letter? Nobody does that any more, they fire >>> off >>> >>> an email. To some degree that is because of cost. But mainly it's >>> because >>> >>> it's more efficient to compose an email yourself than to have your >>> secretary >>> compose it for you. >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Scott Howell" >>> To: >>> Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 12:48 PM >>> Subject: Re: no mac for blind people in Belgium >>> >>> >>> John, that is true and in talking to a friend of mine who has really >>> taken >>> >>> to the iPhone as I have and he is sighted, has also said that having >>> some >>> sort of tactile feedback would be preferred. I have to agree, it would >>> seem >>> and this is purely my own opinion, but not having some sort of feedback >>> would feel really odd and abrupt on the fingers.. >>> On Dec 4, 2009, at 1:19 PM, John G. Heim wrote: >>> >>>> I wouldn't count on the traditional style keyboard going out any time >>>> soon. >>>> The technology to make a perfectly flat keyboard has been available for >>>> many >>>> years. You probably have a perfectly flat control panel on your >>>> microwave >>>> oven. It hasn't caught on for keyboards because people like being able >>>> to >>>> feel the keys. Most keyboards even have extra bumps on the f, j, and >>>> numpa
Re: It's pointless!
Well, could you be convinced that a Windows PC is better? I challenge anyone to change the mind of a die hard Mac user that a Windows machine is better. There are just as many people on this list who couldn't be convinced that Windows is just as good as a Mac. Its not like Windows users are genetically predisposed to be bull headed. Mac users are just as bad. - Original Message - From: "Jess" To: Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:47 PM Subject: It's pointless! > Folks, if you want to argue with a die hard Windows user and try to > convince him or her that the Mac is better, good luck. I challenge anybody > to convert a Windows user to the Mac. Can it be done? > > Jess > > -- > > 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.
Re: Microphone
I believe that you need a special microphone for a Mac mini. I tried several headsets and none of them worked either. You get output but no input. I also tried a microphone from an old cassette deck and it did work. The microphone jack is a little longer than that on a headset. Instead of buying a headset with the longer microphone jack, I just bought a USB headset. - Original Message - From: "Marc Grossman" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 5:34 PM Subject: Microphone >I have a headphone/microphone combination headset with two male jacks. One >is for the headphone and one is for the microphone. On the back of my Mac >Mini, I can only feel two female jacks and they are located right next to >each other. > > When I plug in the headphone jack, I can hear the audio with no problems. > > When I launch Skype and connect to another user, I can hear that person > talking to me but the microphone does not appear to work and the person > cannot hear me. I tried a second headset with similar results. > > Is there anything in Skype or the Mac system preferences that I need to > adjust in order to use this microphone? > > Thanks > > -- > > 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.
Re: watching (analog) tv on the mac?
I can't find the beginning of this thread and I can't give any info about watching TV on the Mac but for $5 you can buy a cable that allows you to connect a VCR, DVD player, or a digital converter box to the sound input jack of your Mac. I don't have a TV any more. I just have a converter box. But I don't want a picture, just sound. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
iphone vs pac mate
I am thinking of selling my Pac Mate in favor of an iphone. My main question is whether I can get a comperable GPS system to a Pac Mate with StreetTalk. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
mac mini mic jack
I am trying to use skype on my mac mini. But the microphone doesn't work. I know the microphone I am using works because I just made a skype call with it on my Windows machine on Monday. I also tried connecting a stereo imput line to the jack and recording something with Garage Band and that didn't work either. I went into system preferences and found the imput tab. I turned the lin-in volume up to 100%. Still no luck. Any ideas? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: mac mini mic jack
Yeah, I checked all my configuration settings in skype. I am no skype expert but I know enough to get it working on a Windows machine with 2 sound cards. I had jaws speaking via one sound card and skype working through the other. Very nice. But that's on a Windows machine that I really need to get rid of. Anyway, I got smart and asked the google after I posted my question here. So now I'm about as sure as I can be that it's a hardware problem. I guess I can understand that Apple was in a bind. They didn't want to have a mic jack on the Mac mini that is incompatible with all the other Macs out there. But I shouldn't have to buy a new headset to use with my Mac mini either. - Original Message - From: "Dane Trethowan" To: Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 11:47 PM Subject: Re: mac mini mic jack > Hi! > > Okay, just because the microphone worked with the Windows PC doesn't > mean its going to work with the Mac I'm afraid and if my hunch is > correct - that you're using a microphone which plugs into the > microphone jack of a PC and you're expecting it to work plugged into > the Line in jack of your Mac - then you're going to be a little > disappointed I think . > > I can't answer your garage Band question I'm afraid so let's deal with > Skype then. The first thing you need to do is set the audio > preferences in Skype, these are independent o the System Preferences > for the Mac and are found by pressing command-, in Skype, go to the > Toolbar, interact with it and press vo-space on the "Audio" button. > From here you select your input and output, make sure the input > reflects the microphone or whatever you're using. > > I bypassed a lot of this trouble by using a simple USB microphone, > Logitech sell one for about $40.00 which does an excellent job, its > the same as the one I use. You may also like to consider a USB > headset though be a little careful here, some microphones on some > sound as though you have your finger stuck up your nose . > > One final thing, to determine what you sound like on Skype, make a > call to "Skype Test Call" which should be in your contacts table > somewhere, if you can't find it then go into the "View" menu and > select "Show offline contacts" > > > On 22/08/2009, at 12:46 PM, John G. Heim wrote: > >> >> I am trying to use skype on my mac mini. But the microphone doesn't >> work. I >> know the microphone I am using works because I just made a skype >> call with >> it on my Windows machine on Monday. I also tried connecting a stereo >> imput >> line to the jack and recording something with Garage Band and that >> didn't >> work either. >> >> I went into system preferences and found the imput tab. I turned the >> lin-in >> volume up to 100%. Still no luck. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> >> > > > > ** > > Dane Trethowan > From Melton Victoria Australia > mailto:"grtd...@internode.on.net > Twitter: http://twitter.com/grtdane > blog: http://www.grtdane.wordpress.com > Phone United Kingdom > 02032874641 > Phone Australia > 0390058589 > Phone United States > 8159261869 > Fax: > +61 3 9743 7954x > MSN grtd...@dane-trethowan.net > skype:grtdane12 > > ** > > > > > > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: iphone vs pac mate
One more question though... Which GPS app do you use on your phone and is it as good as StreetTalk? I'm afraid that I'll buy an iphonly to discover that I can't find a decent, accessible GPS app. - Original Message - From: "John Sanfilippo" To: Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 9:40 AM Subject: Re: iphone vs pac mate personal opinion, The pac mate and street talk are both dead animals. The only thing I like about the pac mate now is the braille display and the ability to use it or the pac mate itself if either is not working. The braille display is the better part of the hardware, in my opinion. My experience with the pac mate and street talk, is that: 1, the gps receiver provided with the package can be far too tardy in tracking satelites, or being tracked by them, take your pick. 2, you need a blue tooth card installed in one of the cf slots, and your maps installed in the other, which means you need to do some jiggling around and setting up before you can get going. 3, I found that the entire setup was a hoffible drain on the pm battery. This is true on the cel phone as well, but at least there, I can bring along a spare battery and there is no setup. My two cents. js - Original Message ----- From: John G. Heim To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 12:11 PM Subject: iphone vs pac mate I am thinking of selling my Pac Mate in favor of an iphone. My main question is whether I can get a comperable GPS system to a Pac Mate with StreetTalk. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: iphone vs pac mate
Maybe it's the same guy. - Original Message - From: "Rich Ring" To: Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 8:34 AM Subject: Re: iphone vs pac mate > > When I visited my local Apple store, we had to tell the sales person that > there was a thing called Voiceover for the iPhone, and how to turn it on. > So, in a sense, we educated that individual. He did say that he'd heard > about Voiceover for the Mac, but he had never seen it work. > - Original Message - > From: "Scott Howell" > To: > Sent: Sunday, August 23, 2009 4:39 AM > Subject: Re: iphone vs pac mate > > > > Yeah, I plan to do that. They were so busy I really couldn't get at > the manager and didn't even get a chance to get the guys name. He had > customers crawling all over him, but the reason I had a chance to ask > my question is the alarm started up when we were looking at the > phones. No idea why, but hey it did help get a quick question > answered. Damn near lost my hearing, but chalk that up to education. :) > On Aug 22, 2009, at 10:47 PM, Daniel Crone wrote: > >> >> Hello. If I could go to that store, I would talk to that person's >> manager, and give that knowlegable sales person a commendation. It is >> rare, and a joy when finding someone who knows about voice over. >> On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Scott Howell wrote: >> >>> Funny, I had the opportunity to play with the iPhone at the AT&T >>> store today and I so wanted one. The big thing holding me up is >>> that AT&T doesn't have enough coverage quite yet in our subway >>> system and VZW does have better coverage in general, but that didn't >>> stop me from reaching toward my wallet at least once. The only >>> tricky part I couldn't really figure out initially is I had open a >>> note and tried typing, but that wasn't quite as successful, but then >>> I also had the phone tied to the alarm cable, which didn't let me >>> get to far. :) Then I hit home and tried to navigate to another app >>> while the notes was open and I heard letters and application names. >>> Well, for not having used the phone ever, it wasn't bad and I really >>> didn't have a good environment to play in, but the volume was just >>> loud enough for me to do a bit of playing. I think it would have >>> been easier if I had been able to just hold the phone without any >>> wires and walk around/out the door, I mean really get into playing >>> with it. Now here is the best part. I asked the gent at the store >>> about accessing the menu to turn VoiceOver on and damn if he didn't >>> know exactly where it was and even knew what VoiceOver was. I was >>> quite impressed. >>> >>> On Aug 22, 2009, at 11:08 AM, Rich Ring wrote: >>> >>>> The iPhone is wonderful in many ways. I wish I could send contacts >>>> via bluetooth as I could with a Nokia phone, and I wish it was a >>>> bit easier to delete text messages, and I truly wish the battery >>>> life was better, but I do love the little critter. >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: John Sanfilippo >>>> To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 9:40 AM >>>> Subject: Re: iphone vs pac mate >>>> >>>> personal opinion, >>>> >>>> The pac mate and street talk are both dead animals. The only thing >>>> I like about the pac mate now is the braille display and the >>>> ability to use it or the pac mate itself if either is not working. >>>> The braille display is the better part of the hardware, in my >>>> opinion. >>>> >>>> My experience with the pac mate and street talk, is that: >>>> >>>> 1, the gps receiver provided with the package can be far too tardy >>>> in tracking satelites, or being tracked by them, take your pick. >>>> >>>> 2, you need a blue tooth card installed in one of the cf slots, and >>>> your maps installed in the other, which means you need to do some >>>> jiggling around and setting up before you can get going. >>>> >>>> 3, I found that the entire setup was a hoffible drain on the pm >>>> battery. This is true on the cel phone as well, but at least there, >>>> I can bring along a spare battery and there is no setup. >>>> >>>> My two cents. >>>> >>>> js >>>> >>>> >>>> - Original Message - >>>> From: John G. Heim >>>> To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com >>>> Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 12:11 PM >>>> Subject: iphone vs pac mate >>>> >>>> >>>> I am thinking of selling my Pac Mate in favor of an iphone. My main >>>> question >>>> is whether I can get a comperable GPS system to a Pac Mate with >>>> StreetTalk. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
directory utility & ldap authentication
I've been trying unsuccessfully to get the Macs in my department to authenticate versus our ldap database. It works with ldap but not ldaps. I upgraded one machine to snowleopard hoping it would work better. But now I can't get into the ldap configuration at all. On google I've seen messages that say you now need to configure ldap authentication via the System Preferences -> Accounts utility. But I cannot find it in there. Any hints? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
