[mailto:macvisionaries@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jimmy Podsim
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 9:31 AM
To: Mac Visionaries Mailing list
Subject: Re: Apple's accessibility strategy (was Re: To the NFB haters on
this list: was; Re: NFB Resolution)
Personally I think apple has done more than anybody
Personally I think apple has done more than anybody else in this field. I
think Android is trying, but personally I believe Apple is better. Then
windows, well, I haven't tried anything since 7, but that left a lot to be
desired. I've also tried 2 different versions of linux and while it's th
To me, and second post in 2 days:) it doesn't particularly matter why,
Apple has done it, and done it with style. How many times, folks, has
it happened that someone's done a marginal job that really doesn't fit
the bill for anything but the regulations?
On 7/16/14, Jason White wrote:
> Devin Pra
Devin Prater wrote:
> I don't think Apple added accessibility for the
> simple reason that it was a good thing to do, but with Jobs leading the way
> and how he thinks, he knew we were potential customers and if Apple got us,
> Microsoft and Android wouldn't have us.
It's true that accessibility
Or,
Possibly, some folks, who love their Apple products, might wake up & tell NFB
to shut up & go away. I already have congress making decisions that don't
reflect my values. I certainly don't need the NFB, an organization that I have
never supported, representing itself as representing me.
David,
I think you're exactly on target. NFB set blind-tech back, @ least 10-years,
by moving to block the addition of a robust screen reader into Window's
products after Non-Freedom Scientific's considerable contribution to the
organization. Now, between development's like Apple's Voiceover,
Mary,
Have you ever been a programmer? I was years ago & the idea of making every
program accessible to the blind, who will not buy every program just because it
is accessible, is a nightmare. The amount of unrecoverable man-hours, which is
recovered through net gain in revenue, just boggles
Hi, I totally agree with David here although i can understand the purpose of
the resolution that means i’m not in favour of it. I used to say that if Apples
economy would be in danger, the first thing that would go down the drain is
accessibility and i’m afraid, just like i think David is that t
David Chittenden wrote:
> Apple stated, in response to a challenge during a recent quarterly
> sstockholders meeting, that it costs them $35 per iOS device for VoiceOver,
> that they will not stop this practice even though they do not earn a profit
> from it, and that the stockholder can sell thei
I agree with this. I hope Apple is smart enough to know NFB does not
speak for all blind people any more than any other organization speaks
for all members of a group.
NFB may be forced to make some changes because that is what the
membership wants. If NFB does not represent the members they wil
I can totally agree with what you are saying. I think all companies
should work to make products more accessible. There are reasons why
that can't happen with Android but I believe they should be pushed as
hard. I believe in choices in all products.
I was not referring to Mark driving a car aro
marianne,
Perhaps this should be off list, but I want to voice it here. I'm not
directly attacking NFB, but I'm attacking what I've seen and how I feel
about what's happening.
Firstly, the resolution caught me off guard. While mark is the new
president, he was pretty much appointed by Dr. Mau
Ray,
No one is listening. They are hellbound to make their positions
known and they will defend their opinions to the end. In the end, this
is nothing more than a political debate and as such, will never reach a
consensus until everyone gets too damn tired to go on. Congress is
afflicted wi
I agree that Apple was singled out on this resolution. I don't know
what other resolutions they passed or if they have passed resolutions
related to other companies in the passed since I have never attended a
national convention. I hope NFB is working in many areas related to
accessibility whethe
Apple stated, in response to a challenge during a recent quarterly
sstockholders meeting, that it costs them $35 per iOS device for VoiceOver,
that they will not stop this practice even though they do not earn a profit
from it, and that the stockholder can sell their Apple stock if they have a
NFB and ACB are both organizations that work to improve the lives of
people in the U.S. who are blind. Their membership votes on
resolutions they believe accomplish this. I believe the internet, all
computers and all programs and apps should be accessible. I believe
it is possible and will suppo
If ACB passes a similar resolution, I will pick on ACB exactly and precisely
the same way. Why are you so profoundly defending NFB whilst claiming
otherwise?
David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA
Email: dchitten...@gmail.com
Mobile: +64 21 2288 288
Sent from my iPhone
> On 14 Jul 2014, at 15:09, Marian
No, Apple was singled out because of a resolution. Unless you can show similar
resolutions for all of Apple's competitors, or you can show that the resolution
actually says either each of the company names, or it says all tech companies,
the fact is Apple is being very specifically singled out.
I believe someone earlier stated that NFB was a cult. How can it be a
cult if there was resistance to this legislation. I hope there was
resistance and discussion. I hope that of all deliberative bodies.
We don't all agree on anything. I don't believe all is possible at
this point in time. I n
What an interesting way of completely avoiding the very real points I raise.
My answer is: follow the money. You will find the answers there.
In this particular case, I find it very coincidental that Kirtus Chung wrote an
article in June which very nicely attacked iOS accessibility. There was qu
Why should any single organization, no matter what it is called work from a
generalized stereotypes, that since all blind people are interchangeable the
same, that they can rightly speak as an entire population?
Frankly based on other wisdom, I feel sure Apple will smartly just ignore
the NFB's
Did you read the actual blog? stating that this resolution was voted on
passed in spite of Resistance, and will stand even with the criticism?
Apple is the only company subject to this all mandate.
It might surprise some of you that in the global mobile marketplace Apple
is second to android
If you will check out the website of NFB you will see two trainings
this fall that address trainings.
I certainly don't always agree with NFB or ACB and no organization
speaks for all of its members. Women's organizations don't represent
all women... The resolution passed represents the beliefs
I believe NFB is working with all of these companies to encourage
improved accessibility. You are just hearing about Apple because of a
news article.
On 7/13/14, David Chittenden wrote:
> Correct, until Apple released VoiceOver on the iPhone 3GS in 2009, it was
> well-known, and well-researched,
And i must add again, why is it the place of the nfb to presume that their
working with apple or anyone else translates into some sort of uniform
equal for speaking for every person who experiences sight loss?
why should they presume this right, this voice over say the very wise
individuals on
David, I am not sure why you hate NFB so much. I believe both NFB and
ACB have accomplished good things and there are things I do not agree
with. NFB now has a new president and instead of immediately
condemning him why not see how things work out? I believe all apps
can be accessible. Now may
David Chittenden wrote:
> So, let's consider what would most likely happen if Apple should be stupid
> enough to do what the NFB resolution is demanding, only from Apple. Apple
> creates a policy in their App Store which says all apps must be VO
> accessible. Considering that this will not be po
Correct, until Apple released VoiceOver on the iPhone 3GS in 2009, it was
well-known, and well-researched, that blind people would not be able to use a
touchscreen device the same way sighted people do. In fact, Google, in
conjunction with a major university, approached Apple in 2008 with a prop
Yes, the NFB president really wants to become "in" with Apple so he can attempt
to influence Apple's policies around VoiceOver access to apps written by third
party developers.
So, let's consider what would most likely happen if Apple should be stupid
enough to do what the NFB resolution is dem
According to what I read from the president, it is because Apple has
gone above and beyond the requirements to make things accessible. He
has nothing but praise for Apple and their response. There is no
threat in the resolution that was passed. It is an effort to work
with Apple. Microsoft and,
It is still doesn't discount the fact that NFB is picking Apple from
the rest o the bunsh. If NFB is so interested in promoting
accessibility across all platform, why not Microsoft? Why not Google?
Why target purely at Apple?
So, yes, is that a punishment for Apple from NFB because Apple has
been
You do bring up an interesting point. I don't think your analogy is
too good but Apple is doing a great job. I don't believe NFB is
punishing Apple. According to what I read, NFB is trying to work with
Apple to increase the number of accessible apps. One example is the
Microsoft suite of produc
So Erik, what you are saying is that, when your kid performing very,
very well at school, always gets 90 points in every exams, while
the rest is hobbing around 30 points, rarely pass the test, is okay
for the school principle to point your kid out in public, and punish
your kid by asking him to
When a resolution singles out one specific company by name, this means that one
specific company is being targeted! If the resolution was about multiple
companies being approached for increasing accessibility, it would have said so.
David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA
Email: dchitten...@gmail.com
Mobil
I also think it makes sense to push the one that is most accessible.
Some of the others make it very clear they just don't care. Apple
believes we are a market. Apple, like all other companies, is about
making a profit.
We give them our loyalty but ask them to do more. They have chosen to
tightl
So because it must be a difficult thing for a moderator to keep
order on a list that everyone can go way off course until they are told
to get back on track? That would suggest people lack common sense and
courtesy and are unable to control themselves.
So where is that line that is so bl
The below is the sort of thing I am talking about.
Furthermore, I would remind us all that back in 2011, the NFB failed a similar
resolution that sought to do the same thing. The reason it failed was because
of the condemeditory language it contained. The 2014-12 version does not
contain that
Cheree Heppe here:
It would seem a difficult task to be a moderater of a list such as this. The
topic does involve the IOS and MAC products, their development and future.
Running a list might almost be seen as a type of fiefdom or micro-ecology where
only certain items and iteas could be permit
Would you all please take the politics off the list? Go find a more
appropriate forum for this kind of debate that will continue to spin
endlessly.
Lets get back to OS X issues.
Quote of the nanosecond . . .
Do they ever shut up on your planet?
Robert & Annie Yanni ke7nwn
E-mail-
gone.to
I believe the resolutions of American Counsel of the Blind (ACB) use
very similar language in their resolutions. I believe both
organizations, and others around the world, do a lot to change the
lives of blind people around the world.
On 7/13/14, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> It's just my opinio
It's just my opinion, but I think it's the divisive and antagonistic way in
which the NFB makes its resolutions which is the source of all the trouble. I
don't doubt that what they're advocating for is valid, but their pompous,
self-indulgent manner of doing it is highly aggravating and inflamm
Hey Ray,
Don't think anyone is hating, especially on you. You're a pretty positive
contributor & have been since before I was on the list. i think what you're
hearing is people saying, "don't represent yourself...NFB I mean...as the voice
of all or even most of the blind people in the world.
Wow, what happened? Did I get sucked into a political forum and
dragged out of a Mac forum? Ok so Apple is memtiomed in the NFB thread
but holy cow Batman! If poliitics and philosaphy and religion is allowed
here, I am outa here. There are plenty of forums elsewhere better suited
for that nc
I don't think any of the conversations and dialogue within this thread has been
about hating anything or anyone. I read Jonathan Mozen's article. I thought it
was fair and balanced. However given the reasons I made in my initial post I am
not in favor of this resolution. It should've been a bla
Ray Foret Jr wrote:
> Okay.
>
> I am changing the subject because I think it's high time I said something.
It appears from some of the opinions expressed in this thread that the
politics surrounding blindness-related advocacy organizations in the U.S. are
still
very divisive. Were there always
Actually ray, I am personally indifferent to the nfb.
Your suggestion that a balanced mature discussion about apple products is
at least in my view, what such a resolution aims to prevent.
The nfb is presenting itself as a major authority, representing a single
concept of what the experienc
I'm writing this from a sock-footed perspective, so take that for what
it's worth...
None of this is "hate" directed at NFB. I don't agree with their
philosophy. I don't believe that one organization should have the power
to "resolve" to make a company like Apple do anything. This isn't a
matte
Okay.
I am changing the subject because I think it's high time I said something. I
well remember how many Mac users strongly criticized the NFB for their June
2009 Braille Monitor article on Voice Over. That criticism was fully
justified: let there be no doubt about that. On the other hand,
48 matches
Mail list logo
