Slashdot Mirror
Mobile Phone for the Blind
Anonymous Coward writes "Owasys - a Spanish company - is launching a mobile phone for the blind next week. No visual display as a speech synthesiser reads everything that appears on the screen out loud. Also speaks the name and number of incoming callers."
would it be that hard to do a braille based solution rather than reading stuff out?
Here I thought Mobile Phones couldn't get anymore annoying.
It would.
I mean, those guys a must be pretty deep in the hole after trying to market that cell-phone for the deaf... ::ducks::
---- I'll take you in a Hunt deathmatch any day.
Just imagine...at home, wife and kids asleep, when all of a sudden your phone bellows:
:)
"DIALLING QUICKDIAL 1: HOT HORNY HOUSEWIFE LINE"
Or if you're playing away from home...
"Contact MISS PERT BREASTS is calling!"
in front of wifey.
Oh, the possibilities
If you're happy and you know it read my blog
BTexact did something similar ages ago (SMS for the blind, actually).
my blind friend was given tha tlink the other day and didnt quite like it. obviously the competitions good but the best solution at the moment is a nokia 3650 and a program called talx, thuogh its more expensive at the moment it wont be when the phone drops in price. he only got it recently and it made a big difference over having to give the phone to friends to read his smses.
"No visual display as a speech synthesiser reads everything that appears on the screen out loud." The device doesn't have a display because everything is read out via a speech synthesiser...or does it actually have a screen... Poor writing, sloppy editing.
vampirical
I once was blind, but now o-wa-sys
i guess a mobile phone for the deaf is next, think speech > text is easily do-able thesedays with LSI chips etc
this blind phone could also be a good boon for sighted people who can just navigate by feel, how many of you can operate the remote control without looking at it
First post got you beat on that one.
now even a blind person can instantly become the most despised person in a restaurant
equal rights for everyone
"Incoming message: 'Did you know you can increase your penis size overnight? ....'"
Of course then you'd at least be able to prove monetary damages due to the spam, since you lost your job over it....
Funny, but rather scary too.
Actually, my girlfriend is deaf and carries a cell phone. It works pretty well.
She has one of those T-Mobile Sidekick ones where you connect the Internet (web browser, AIM, and even an available SSH client).
It's actually quite useful. She can get her email, AIM and SMS messages in one place. There are even AIM -> TTY services so she can make "voice" calls on the road.
It's still a phone too. So if there's some sort of emergency and a hearing person is there- they could use it.
- SergeWhy is this just making news?
Sounds like a good idea
I have a feeling there may be more of a need than for those who drive around with a cell phone in one hand and a latte in the other.
Subduction leads to orogeny
All consumer electronics devices should be manufactured - at base - with the lowest-common-denominator user in mind.
If a device is made to enable someone with physical challenges, it should be a cinch to use for anyone who isn't challenged.
From there, a device could be addended with options, for those that want them. In fact, devices built this way would have a much higher "cool" factor than most of the poorly-desogned products we see today. Witness all the excitment every time an "easy-to-use" product comes to market...that alone makes my point.
If one considers that virtually all consumers will be physically challenged at some point in their lives (broken bones, aging, etc.), why shouldn't manufacturers be building devices with a "fail-safe" user mode that permits limted, but functional use?
Frankly, this design strategy alone would revolutionize consumer product manufacture in many sectors (auto, electronics, etc), and solve many of the "user-unfriendly" problems that plague consumers today.
Unfortunately, what we see today is engineering-driven design that frustrates all but the most determined users, and even those face barriers to seamless use that simply should not exist.
Except that the assumption is that someone who is physically handicapped in one area is less capable in others, when in fact, they may have had to become more adept in handling certain things as a result of the limitation.
As such, perhaps those people should be consulted not because they represent a lowest-common-denominator user but instead they may provide the vision of how the applications could really take off.
Subduction leads to orogeny
What? I don't think it's THAT unreasonable for manufacturers to assume a certain level of physical ability when they design a product. Think of all the disabilities a person could have; deafness, blindness, broken bones, no legs, no arms, cerebal palsy, how the hell can you design a car that's able to be driven by someone with any disability?? It would need to be virtually mind-controlled, unless you're suggesting that cars should be able to be driven by those in a vegetative state.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Well, niche devices are generally more expensive, like this $250 phone. Also, I don't know anybody who would want or use the features on this phone, unless they WERE blind. It's easy to glance at your cell phone screen if it vibrates during a meeting or during class.
Before reading the article, I was hoping it would say there was a active changing haptic brail system. (read: bumps that move) but I didn't find it. This phone is a step in the right direction, regardless if there have been products similar in the past.
Neil is that you? Yeah yeah, it's me... Neil...
Why would they only market it for the blind. This product should be highly recommended as car-kit. Most of current car-kits only allows you to communicate hands-free, but still involves manual operation and usage of the display.
S t r e t c h that mind.
Think where how many of these posts wouldn't even exist if Hawking hadn't been able to see what was going to happen to him as his illness progressed.
He started developing his own means of communication - taking the best of what had already had been developed - and adapting it to his needs.
If the technology had stood still at that time where he was - think of how much we would lose.
A mind-controlled car is pretty much what people have shown they would like - or a mindless one.
Subduction leads to orogeny
i thought those disposable cell phones already do this?
...does it sound like Stephen Hawking? If so, I may have to ask Santa for a new phone for christmas...
Slashdot is proof that Sturgeon's Law applies to mankind.
Last time I used one, phones used sound as a means of communication. You dial a number on the very position-standardized keypad (so even those with functional eyes can usually dial a phone without looking), and speak into the handset. The person you called then uses their end to do the same, and you can both hear each other.
It would seem that no one else has noticed this seeming absurdity yet...
"Normal" phones do not significantly hinder the blind! Wake up, people! This has no obvious purpose other than yet another way to bilk medicaid on another very expensive specialty device that actually has less functionality than a normal version of the same product (no screen? That probably halved the cost to the manufacturer).
And for those who would mention SMS or caller ID, I have a friend who already has an ordinary cell phone that will read those to him (no idea on the model, but nothing special). So even those two functions don't discriminate against the blind.
Will it sound like Stephen Hawkings?
"Hey, how did my phone figure out how to escape an event horizon?"
~/words_by_grainfed.txt
No visual display as a speech synthesiser reads everything that appears on the screen out loud.
Umm... if there is no visual, how does the speech synthesiser read off the screen?
If a device is made to enable someone with physical challenges, it should be a cinch to use for anyone who isn't challenged.
Yeah, because we folks with functional limbs find tongue-joysticks a piece of cake to use.
And I can't even tell you how much easier I can read braille as opposed to a quick glance at a screen...
Of course, we might have a problem accomodating both the deaf and the blind... Perhaps we could make everything communicate via pheromones. "Hey, did you just piss on me?" "Nah, just my phone ringing - I chose the new 'gazelle' scent, do you like it?"
Sorry, but the "cripple the product to accomodate crippled users" PC BS kinda peeves me. Humans have a basic level of sensory and motor capability. Where convenient, we can make life easier for those lacking some of those capabilities, but in most cases, a multi-sensory product will do its job more efficiently.
If one considers that virtually all consumers will be physically challenged at some point in their lives (broken bones, aging, etc.), why shouldn't manufacturers be building devices with a "fail-safe" user mode that permits limted, but functional use?
Because adapting a product to someone lacking a random human ability generally requires making that product less useable to everyone else (see my three sarcastic examples above).
As a simple example of this, we can look at the very product under consideration in this topic, cell phones. Although they can work such that they only use sound or vision, people generally have them set up to use no fewer than three senses (including touch for "vibrate" mode). Any manufacturer that removed any two of those three would find themselves pushed off the market by better products that appeal to as many of the user's senses as practical.
Although this is undoubtably a good idea, the article doesn't mention whether the phone will translate "TXT talk", as used by just about everyone today, into actual speech. IE "HI M8, R U GONNA GO 2 the pub l8r?" etc. Hopefully the phone doesn't just spell out the text in this format...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
tongue-joysticks a piece of cake to use.
An interesting statement - food juxtaposed with that ability.
It seems the kernel of the statement - good humor aside - is:
Sorry, but the "cripple the product to accomodate crippled users" PC BS kinda peeves me. Humans have a basic level of sensory and motor capability. Where convenient, we can make life easier for those lacking some of those capabilities, but in most cases, a multi-sensory product will do its job more efficiently.
First, who are you apologizing to?
Second, as you state it is the multi-sensory product that makes the market - So I don't see in what ways products are supposed to be "crippled" to accommodate "crippled users".
Third, you say you're 'kinda peeved' (in paraphrase) - in what ways has your life been negatively impacted by accommodating someone with a handicap - Other than perhaps having to park a few spaces further back? I'm curious if this is an abstraction or something that you have real experience with and in what ways.
Subduction leads to orogeny
'unless you're suggesting that cars should be able to be driven by those in a vegetative state'
i'm like that every morning on the way to work, i honestly have no idea how i get there...
I'm a rabbit startled by the headlights of life
What frustrates me is the fact that companies assume that there are deaf OR blind people.
They keep forgetting that there are just as many deaf AND visually-impaired people.
they need high-contrast displays for example - not speech synthesiser or all-text.
In Austria one of the UMTS providers offers a package for the deaf. ASAIK there is even content available in sign language. Otherwise the package offers video minutes at a very reduces rate allowing for video only communication all of the time.
The URL of the provider is
http://www.drei.at (in german, you might find the same at their UK branch at http://www.three.co.uk but maybe they don't offer this package)
First, who are you apologizing to?
A general sort of "I know this will offend some folks, but I intend to say it anyway" apology.
So I don't see in what ways products are supposed to be "crippled" to accommodate "crippled users".
The phone in question seems like a good example. Most of us could use it, and it also makes life more convenient to the blind. However, most of us would prefer an ordinary old text+sound+vibrate phone over one that could only communicate via sound.
I'm curious if this is an abstraction or something that you have real experience with and in what ways.
Offhand, I'd say virtually all (non-specialty) products on the market have functionality intended toward those with a full compliment of senses. So in that sense, I meant my peeve as an abstraction. I could probably come up with a product or two that had would serve its purpose better at the cost of excluding those with a given disability, but on the whole, simple market pressure has kept such products from popularity.
However, I also meant it as a very real, immediate point, in that the post to which I responded suggested all products should come as a fully-useable-by-all form - A noble ideal, but with the exception of purely passive objects (a fork, for example), not even remotely practical. That attitude, that we should all suffer less useful products so a small minority can use them as well as we can, peeves me in a very concrete way.
in what ways has your life been negatively impacted by accommodating someone with a handicap - Other than perhaps having to park a few spaces further back?
Mostly unrelated to my point, but since you did bring it up...
Personally I don't mind walking, and don't even bother with that "circle for a good spot" thing. I just park out in the boonies, and still get inside faster than those who play parking-spot-vulture. But it does irk me a tad to see packed parking lots, with every single handicapped spot vacant. And 90% of the time I have seen one occupied, the occupant has simply parked there illegally. At a mall or WallyWorld or other largish store, I don't consider that unreasonable for the convenience it provides those who do legitimately need them (although don't get me started on the politics of getting a handicapped plate - I've known people who could barely stand up who couldn't get them, and people who could run a marathon who do have them, all because of connections or the lack thereof).
However, while I think they seem reasonable at stores with large parking lots, I find it offensive that the law requires places like a tiny corner minimart, with only three parking spaces total, to dedicate one to handicapped parking. Anyone who can't walk the extra ten feet also won't make it from the car to the building and back. But with a small number of total parking spots, that one handicapped spot doesn't "help" anyone, it just means one fewer people can visit that store at the same time.
As do their in-vehicle computer systems.
All good stuff.
I can't wait to be in class and have everything come to a hault as a visually handicapped person's phone starts rambling about an incoming call. It's bad enough that we have phones playing near-mp3 renditions of 50cent and Metallica to destroy whole lecture halls' concentration simultaneously, now we've got THIS to get angry at as well. Do blind people really need caller ID that badly? I don't.
-"So today we're going to explore some new functions in PERL. You're going to be-"
-"Incoming message. Message is from... YOUR.... MOTHER. Incoming message. Message is from... YOUR.... MOTHER...."
-"Could someone please turn that thing off?"
-"Phone de-activated. You have left.... TWO... unanswered messages in your Inbox."
(note:lost password, I'm not really anonymous)
Now blind people will be able to talk on their cell phones while driving too! Damn!
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
Great. When can we expect text messaging for the deaf?
About the apology need - I still don't see the need - I think things should be said - And then we find out who is offended by the content - By using terms like 'PC BS' - that has a 'hot-button' appeal to a certain number of people (like the term - 'hot-button' does to others :))
I still think a good engineer actually designs with the thought in mind that we are all employing many senses all the time - leading me back to the parent - that no - products are not being crippled by the including the needs of the 'crippled' - in fact it probably makes life better for the rest of us
And it seems the real issues you have the parking thing are either about - enforcement - which should be applied more evenly - or the application - and there will probably always be some who abuse this - or some who may be getting those permits for others - or size of the store/lot and here - I think it just doesn't matter - A lot of those little lots are a real pain to park in I admit - but I think those spaces should be available as needed - maybe there will be a technology in the future(?) - but that's an opinion.
As for all those empty spaces, that's a good indication of how few have these needs - yet look at how disproportionately opinion is that people abuse this system. I think people generally don't.
General agreement on main points - perhaps a few points remain? Perhaps no need to go too much further - eh?
Subduction leads to orogeny
It's great how technology can level the playing field. Now the blind can use their cell phones while driving just like the rest of us. This is a great day.
So this idea comes from a Spanish company. For some reason I immediately pictured a phone with the voice one of those punch-drunk cats from a Speedy Gonzales cartoon saying "your seeestir in California says hhhhhhello'.
Anybody want a peanut?
leading me back to the parent - that no - products are not being crippled by the including the needs of the 'crippled' - in fact it probably makes life better for the rest of us
Fine, say they're not "crippled" then. Instead, we could say they are "six times as expensive to account for features fewer than 1% of customers will ever need".
Great!
All consumer electronics devices should be manufactured - at base - with the lowest-common-denominator user in mind.
That's an ambiguous statement. If you mean "all designers should be aware of the possible existence of LCD users", then it is so trivially true that it hardly bears saying. But if you mean "all products should be designed so that an LCD can use them", then you are completely insane.
Frankly, this design strategy alone would revolutionize consumer product manufacture in many sectors (auto, electronics, etc), and solve many of the "user-unfriendly" problems that plague consumers today.
Yay! Now every single automobile can be a 2-person vehicle the size of a minivan, with a robotic lift to pull wheelchairs into the driver's seat. I can't wait until we're all driving those expensive, slow, bulky, and fuel-guzzling monsters just on the off-chance a few customers will find it convenient or important.
And just wait for the hunting rifle for the blind...
http://www.alvabraille.com/mpo/
-- "Most people prefer a popular myth to an unpopular truth"
Can you see me now? Good!
What I'm saying goes back to the earlier post - that the multi-sensory experience is what many users want -Like being able to put that phone in vibrate mode - This is not as a result of people with a lack of those sensory inputs thinking of design.
I mean imagine if a group of humans 'suddenly' evolved some new sensory ability - it doesn't matter what - if it appeared everyone was going in that direction, it would be a smart move to consult with those people as to what the experience was like for them.
My point is that for many people who don't have visual or hearing abilities - or both - or some other 'deficit' - they in fact have made up for it by heightening other sensory input.
This isn't evolution, but those people may have 'insights' into what would matter for all of us. And in that case, I wonder where six times as expensive to account for features fewer than 1% of customers will ever need comes from.
BTW - It used to be - I don't know if it still is true - Mercedes Benz would employ blind people who had heightened their sense of touch input for checking for surface flaws on design models.
Subduction leads to orogeny
You obviously haven't seen Bowling for Columbine.
Subduction leads to orogeny
Not Spanish, you ignorant.
Yep...this is looking pretty attractive, even though my vision is fine.
Why? Because it's a phone where the designers are actually paying attention to how the user interface works! I'd love to have that on my current phone.
When the user interface is basically the image your company projects to the world, why do they apparently stick a solitary sophomore intern on the job of creating it? Wish I could program in my own interface.
...
They are - they're called consumers. You give them a piece of crap and they give you money.
I'd consider my old Sony phone to be for the blind too. I mean, it has all of like 14 buttons on it? And most blind people know the number pad already, it'd just be adjusting to send, end, power more or less.
Albeit I don't have much of a display on my phone, in fact it just tells the time. But that is what a phone is suppose to do....right?
Maybe I can license this old technology from Sony and make millions!
Bigdog is a hero of the people. I think that cell phones are moving in the wrong direction, they should be made of wood.
--Goat
CEO, Goat Software
Goatblog
a possibile workaround could be, an audio version of the 'key' along with the graphic. using slightly distorted audio, it could bypass any voice recognition software, as the slightly distorted graphic would bypass any OCR.
and worse case scenerio the few blind people without speakers (there may be some, with braille readers, or some other non-audio reader) could send an e-mail, that could be humanly determined wether it was a generated submittal..
(My father is legally blind, and uses readers also)
LostboyTNT MercyHosting.Com
Server-Status.Com
50Bux.Com
TLDR.Com