Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Software Update Makes iTunes Accessible To Blind Users

Posted by timothy on from the rockbox-already-has-voice-guidance-note dept.

rickthewizkid writes "Recent updates to the iTunes software allow blind users to access the program without assistance. From the article: 'The new software — which transforms the written information on an iTunes-linked computer screen into speech or Braille — stemmed from an agreement between Apple, the Cupertino, Calif.-based computer company, the National Federation of the Blind and Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley.'" It's not just the actual iTunes app, though; the article notes that this update makes iTunes U useable as well.

148 comments

  1. iPod Nano speaks navigation and song titles too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Part of the same effort. User may turn on larger text, or enable spoken items from within iTunes.

    1. Re:iPod Nano speaks navigation and song titles too by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      good on them. i hope other portable device makers will follow in their footsteps.

      i was going to suggest that Sony should add accessibility features to the PSP, but the PSP's media player is still pretty much a bare-bone audio player. after all these firmware updates, the PSP still doesn't support playlists, much less the advanced media browsing features of the iPod (genres, artists, albums, etc.).

      though i don't have much use for it, adding accessibility features for the blind would at least be more productive than releasing constant firmware updates that are simply made to break backwards-compatibility with old firmware versions. i don't understand why Sony would waste development resources on their vain attempts to combat piracy, which also has the perhaps intentional effect of hindering homebrew development--something that actually adds value to the PSP and benefits users much more than the useless firmware updates.

      i guess it'll be up to the homebrew community once again to add this neglected feature.

    2. Re:iPod Nano speaks navigation and song titles too by cyber-dragon.net · · Score: 2

      I am all for accessibility for the blind and deaf but talking about adding this to a visual gaming system? That is going a little far don't you think?

    3. Re:iPod Nano speaks navigation and song titles too by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      the PSP is a portable entertainment device, it doesn't just pay games. i use it to listen to audiobooks and read e-books more often than i actually play games on it these days. i mean, there are blind computer users even though computers use a visual display for most output.

    4. Re:iPod Nano speaks navigation and song titles too by Rich0 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interesting.

      I use Rockbox and I've noticed that a large number of Rockbox users are blind (I am not). Rockbox has supported voice prompts for quite a long time now - obviously the word has gotten out since many of these users are not the sorts of people who would be flashing custom firmware onto an mp3 player otherwise. A fair amount of effort has been devoted to accessibility on the project, and I don't think that many other mp3 players can make that claim.

  2. Good start Apple by rampant+mac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Now how about incorporating this into every Cocoa app? Provide developers with an API so they can use it as well.

    --
    I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    1. Re:Good start Apple by ThrowAwaySociety · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Accessibility/Reference/AccessibilityLowlevel/index.html

      The problem was largely with the Windows version of iTunes, as well as the Music Store, which uses non-standard windows. But basic accessibility is built into OS X (they tell me its a little more clunky than the screen-readers for Windows, but it is free and built-in)

      Turn it on in the Universal Access pane. Try using it; you'll probably give up in frustration after about five minutes. Makes you appreciate having good eyesight.

    2. Re:Good start Apple by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      In addition, while they've added Closed Captions capabilities to iPods, iTunes and Quicktime, the shows on the store don't have them. Would be really nice if they could fix that.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    3. Re:Good start Apple by tyrione · · Score: 1

      OSXAXModel

    4. Re:Good start Apple by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      hey, all it takes is one lawsuit to solve that little problem

  3. Awesome! by WiiVault · · Score: 4, Informative

    As someone who has worked extensivly with the blind I have to say, its about time! I love the Mac but in so many ways it is difficult for blind or near-blind users. I hope Safari and other apps follow soon.

    1. Re:Awesome! by narcberry · · Score: 2, Funny

      If only they would make it more accessible to the deaf.

      --
      Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
    2. Re:Awesome! by The+Iso · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, many deaf people enjoy music. They experience vibrations from loud music in a way that you cannot, and appreciate rhythm. They also enjoy the experience of a concert; venues are required by law to provide interpreters for the deaf upon request.

      Beethoven, as we all know, continued to compose brilliant works even after he was completely unable to hear.

      --
      "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
    3. Re:Awesome! by gkearney · · Score: 5, Informative

      Safari and the many other application on the Mac are accessible to the blind. The Mac has a built in screen reader, VoiceOver, that permit the blind as well as the print disabled to have the screen read to them and to navigate to onscreen controls.

      Most Cocoa application are, by default, accessible to VoiceOver and there are simple and well documented steps a programmer can do to insure there Macintosh applications are accessible.

      Because VoiceOver is built into the OS and not an added services the blind users literally saves $1000s of dollars over the cost of a Windows PC.

    4. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, but he didn't have to listen to it. The best parts of his Ninth Symphony were just an editing of the Choral Fantasy. Have you heard his Eighth? Ugh.

      I'm completely in favor of deaf people composing music, as long as I don't have to listen to it. I like writing Chinese poetry, too, but I don't speak Chinese so I just make the little picture-letters look pretty together.

    5. Re:Awesome! by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 2, Funny

      Kindly call me the day that there's a DragonForce show that's interpreted for the deaf. I'd pay double the ticket price just to see someone keep up with them.

    6. Re:Awesome! by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected, this is very nice to know. I will pass it on.

    7. Re:Awesome! by FinchWorld · · Score: 1

      Surely translation would be "Lyrics are unimportant, rock out".

      --
      "I may be full of crap about this game, and I may be wrong, and that's fine." -Jack Thompson
    8. Re:Awesome! by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2, Informative

      In XP, just look under Start | All Programs | Accessories | Accessibility... You'll find a number of accessibility programs, including a screen reader, magnifier, and programs to configure manage these features (Vista has these too, of course). What added services are you thinking of that cost $1000s?

      There's plenty to knock Microsoft for, but I don't think accessibility support in their OS's is one of them. And honestly, are you seriously trying to tell me that buying a Mac is ever cheaper than a roughly equivalent Windows PC? Macs are great computers, don't get me wrong. But they're also *premium* devices, and cost more than PCs.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    9. Re:Awesome! by Taxman415a · · Score: 1
      Clearly you have not actually used the built in screen reader in Windows. (Not that you said you had.) Here's a quote:

      Narrator, the screen reader built into Windows XP and Vista, is so crude that even Microsoft admits that it is not suitable for daily use.

      So the actual alternatives that are usable (JAWS and WindowEyes) do cost about a thousand dollars each. And no VoiceOver, the one that comes built in to OSX, can't compete entirely with those, but it is usable. You can interact with the entire operating system, browse the web etc. It's just as someone else said, a little clunky. It doesn't have the advanced features the other screen readers have. What is nice is that you can sit down at any Mac with updated OSX and hit command-F5 and Voiceover will turn on.

      While we're on it, the Gnome screen reader Orca has made big strides recently and is rather usable now for browsing the internet with Firefox 3. It has many of the advanced features the expensive Windows software has, but it's not perfectly stable yet.

    10. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'd be more something like "Lyrics are unimportant, and so is a decent taste in music, get out."

    11. Re:Awesome! by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      Actually, many deaf people enjoy music. They experience vibrations from loud music in a way that you cannot,

      I'd say that anyone who's lived in an apartment has experienced that particular phenomenon. It's not all that fun. Of course, that could be because my neighbors have usually had shitty taste in music.

    12. Re:Awesome! by gkearney · · Score: 2, Informative

      In all due respect Narrator is not a screen reader and Microsoft never claimed it was. To gain access to the OS in Windows you will need to buy a Windows screen reader which will add a thousand dollars to the cost of what ever computer you will buy. Or put another way you can buy a entry level Mac for less than the cost of a Windows screen reader itself.

      While many here have said that VoiceOver is not as capable as it commercial Windows counterpart I would beg to differ. VoiceOver is fundimentaly different from Windows screen readers in several ways:

      VoiceOver is a integrated part of the OS. Therefor it does not attempt to step in an do tasks that the OS does. So it does not need commands to close a window, for example, as the OS provides that already.

      Second in Macintosh it is the applications that are changed to become accessible with the screen reader and not the other way around. So we gain accessibility each time a developer follows the rules and improves his applications (Microsoft did you hear that? Microsoft Office for Mac is not accessible but OpenOffice 3 is.)

      I would also point out that VoiceOver support most USB braille displays without having to install drivers for them. Anyone who has ever tried to get a braille display running under Windows will see the improvement in that.

      Now I'm not one of these Mac fanboys who will urge a Mac where it is not appropriate but for many blind users, and for most dyslexics who require a screen reader, who have usual computer need and who do not need a Windows computer for some specific task a Mac should be considered. It will perform the basic tasks, will cost less at the outset and will cost far less to upgrade over time as there will be not screen reader updates to buy. They support braille. They are less prone to spyware and such and the out of the box voice quality is hard to match on any platform at any price

    13. Re:Awesome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In XP, just look under Start | All Programs | Accessories | Accessibility...

      I'm blind you insensitive clod!

    14. Re:Awesome! by XnavxeMiyyep · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they could train some one to sign "FIRE FREE FREEDOM FLAMES" over and over again really really quickly.

      --
      I put the 't' in electrical engineering.
    15. Re:Awesome! by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      as a fife and drum guy I can tell you that the people who are often most impressed are the deaf ones. The drums, up close and personal at a demonstration in a school or out in a living history event, penetrate the chest and head quite effectively, and even people without any hearing at all can feel the open rudimental drumming just fine. They also make fine drummers, good tactile response mechanisms and all that.

    16. Re:Awesome! by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's why I asked the question - I was curious what was needed beyond the built-in utilities (I probably could have worded it better - and I think I sparked some ire by raising a question about the pricing issue). Thanks for the info.

      Computing for the blind is an interesting problem for me. I'm a game developer, and I specialize in audio programming specifically. I've long thought about creating more software that only requires audio to play - about what sort of games those could be and how one would go about playing them.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    17. Re:Awesome! by Taxman415a · · Score: 1
      It is interesting and there is actually a fair amount of it out there. Google for computer games for the blind or similar and you'll find a fair amount. Some are audio games designed for blind people and some are adaptations of sighted games so that they are accessible such as AudioQuake which runs on Linux.

      Here's an older article from Wired about games for the blind.

    18. Re:Awesome! by Sean0michael · · Score: 1

      Ironically, wouldn't some kind of system akin to Guitar Hero actually be useful for a deaf person to experience the music? Admittedly 5 notes is far to little, but with moving colors and notes, combined with watching the performers, it could at once convey the intricacies of the music. Imagine an overlay of the drums, vocals, lead & bass guitars -- could turn out quite awesome. In the end, aren't light and sound part of the same large spectrum of waves?

      --
      Funtime Candy Wow! - my plan for eventually conquering Japan.
    19. Re:Awesome! by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1

      You forgot "pain." I still love 'em, though.

      http://www.cracked.com/article_15123_five-most-unintentionally-funny-albums-2006.html

  4. OSX UI is great by electrosoccertux · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Personally, I never used the screen, anyways. The Mac UI is so wonderful, I just think what I want to open, and it practically opens it for me. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would use a screen.

    1. Re:OSX UI is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Silly, the screen is used to keep the embers out of your lungs.

  5. Braille? by AaxelB · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Pray tell, how does a software upgrade convert text into Braille? Does it just display a series of dots on the screen?

    Actually, now that I think about it, I'd be interested in the idea of a computer screen which could create slight relief, raising dots for the user to feel. I wonder if that, combined with a stylus for clicking and such, would allow for existing interfaces to be used by blind people... Does such a thing exist?

    1. Re:Braille? by Korbeau · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, blind people can see dots but not text =)

      Seriously, I think it requires specialized hardware that can somewhat mold some surface into Braille. Or text-to-speech etc (but that doesn't seem to be the case of the article)

      I have though seldom seen semi-blind people use specialized (big!) monitors and software that output text "really clearly" (size, contrast) so they can see it.

    2. Re:Braille? by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

      Pray tell, how does a software upgrade convert text into Braille? Does it just display a series of dots on the screen?

      Yes, if by "display" you mean "raise and lower a set of pins". On Wikipedia, see Braille display.

    3. Re:Braille? by FlyingBishop · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sort of. The interface is rather remarkable. See

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refreshable_Braille_display

    4. Re:Braille? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wonder what the Blue Screen of Death feels like. Prickly?

    5. Re:Braille? by Bambi+Dee · · Score: 1

      Good question... there're Braille output devices that mechanically display tangible Braille characters by raising the relevant "pixels" in a matrix (or running them by your finger character by character, says Wikipedia). I suppose you'd have to use one of those, or a Braille printer.

    6. Re:Braille? by theurge14 · · Score: 1

      Wet and sticky.

    7. Re:Braille? by SlowMovingTarget · · Score: 1

      The Braille warning, when translated back to Roman text, reads "You may feel a slight pinch."

    8. Re:Braille? by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      It was used in the 1992 movie Sneakers. If you don't know what I'm talking about, please leave your geek card at the front desk on your way out. d:

      --
      Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)
    9. Re:Braille? by binaryspiral · · Score: 1

      The Braille warning, when translated back to Roman text, reads "You may feel a slight pinch."

      This is Windows we're talking about. The actual text reads "You may feel a slight prick."

    10. Re:Braille? by i_liek_turtles · · Score: 1

      Delicious.

  6. Nice headline but isn't 1990 calling back? by Korbeau · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I must confess, I'm not really following what is going on in helping the disabled in the technology field, but I know it's been a big issue since at least one decade and I thought it had somewhat been solved at the OS / standards / specialized hardware level.

    I'm kindof shocked by this headline ... and also wondering what is the current state of supporting the blinds in other apps than iTune nowadays? Is iTune (pre-patched) the exception or the norm?

  7. The MUTE button!? by Speare · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Did they add the Dock Menu's MUTE option back into the thing? Seriously, WTF did they remove the mute option in a recent update? I'm playin' my tunes or watching a video, I don't want to go find and PAUSE it, I just want to kill the sound for a sec. while I listen to something else briefly.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:The MUTE button!? by woot+account · · Score: 1

      Then why can't you just use the pause selection in the dock menu? You don't have to go find it to pause it.

      --
      By what name do you wish to be mourned?
    2. Re:The MUTE button!? by Speare · · Score: 1

      Maybe your brain paused. I said "without pausing," as maybe I don't want the video to stop.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    3. Re:The MUTE button!? by Drakonik · · Score: 1

      Then you probably need to lay off the porn.

    4. Re:The MUTE button!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hit the mute button on your keyboard.

    5. Re:The MUTE button!? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Err... Then he couldn't "listen to something else briefly."

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  8. Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by meehawl · · Score: 0

    Apple's fondness for non-haptic-feedback touchscreens and zero-tactile-feedback panels with a distinct lack of buttons still means that using ipods and iphones without sight is a fraught experience. Rockbox can work on ipods, but it's a much better sightless experience on an older iRiver or Archos with lots of clicky, raised, mechanical buttons.

    --

    Da Blog
    1. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haptic feedback doesn't help if you can't see the screen. And what's a "zero-tactile-feedback panel" if not a non-haptic touch screen?

      Products sometimes just flat-out don't work for some people. The iPhone is a poor choice for the blind. That's why there are other products out there, not that ANY cell phone is "good" for a blind user.

      "Clicky, raised, mechanical buttons" are only half of the game--you still can't see what's on the screen. Using an iPod is no more difficult than using an iRiver or Archos with buttons, since you can't feel the labels. It has distinct zones and the orientation of controls can be readily determined by touch alone--how many people even take their iPods out of their pockets to use them? None I've seen, unless they need the screen for something.

      Honestly, did you even think this comment through in your head before posting?

    2. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by BMonger · · Score: 3, Funny

      I use my iPhone every morning without looking at it. I am a master of hitting the snooze area of the screen.

    3. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by iiiears · · Score: 1

      Apple just keeps getting better.

      --
      15TW = 15,000 Nuclear Reactors. (Approx. one accident a month.)
    4. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Confuzzled · · Score: 1

      It's much easier to hit the top button for snooze (the sleep/wake switch).

    5. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rockbox menus and buttons have talked back to us users for years now and theres a big difference from being permanently blind to having an iPod in a pocket. The iPod has no buttons for me to use, its just got those recesses that dont push in - I think they are "panels" not buttons.

    6. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course haptics help when one is blind and cannot see one's screen. Without that it's just dumb glass. You should try it sometime.

    7. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WITH IT, it's dumb, vibrating glass. My God, it's like idiots have taken over the world. What good is feeling a button if you don't know what the button does? What good is vibrating feedback on some arbitrary part of a screen that happens only once you invoke its function? Jesus Christ.

    8. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What Good Is Vibration? Tell That To Mr Morse. Dumbass. These Earlier Comments Have Been Written By A Sighted Bigot.

    9. Re:Touchscreens Still Blow For Sightless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cos when it does something, you can recognize it the next time before you decide to push it. the feedback doesn't just have to be after the action it can be before. we use this all the time in our lab and its true - you can train monkeys to do it. in our case the monkeys get 1 or 2 pulses before actions leading to good or bad consequences and weve shown they can even learn to tell between 2 and 4 pulses what kind of reward they will receive after.

  9. Re:penis? by martinw89 · · Score: 3, Funny

    that's what i'm talking 'bout...

    Unfortunately, blind people won't hear you.

  10. Braille? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how do they turn stuff on the screen into Braille? I thought Braille was based on feeling and you can't feel anything useful from the monitor alone.

  11. Re:penis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or, I suppose I should have said:

    "Unfortunately, blind people will hear you."

  12. Re:penis? by stonedcat · · Score: 0

    huh?

    --
    You can't take the sky from me.
  13. What about the dogs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah but it scares the hell out of the seeing eye dogs.

  14. It's Good News by madsheep · · Score: 1

    It's always good news and encouraging to see progress like this. While it's certainly not a requirement for most parties to have software/websites that are compliant for people with disabilities, it's good to see when things are designed so they can readily use them. In the government public websites and software services are required to be Section 508 compliant -- meaning they work for those with disabilities. This has to do with colors, alt-tags, text placement, etc. One could make an argument that perhaps that same requirements should be levied on companies providing public services, however, I am not making such an argument. However, it would seem it might make business sense in many cases when you have a popular service to make it friendly to those with disabilities (i.e. the blind).

    ---

    On a side note.. not to be insensitive... but I find it absolutely hilarious that as I am writing this response, the Slashdot Google Ads are:

    "Next Day Blinds - Official Site of Next Day Blinds. Blinds, Shades, & Shutters" - coincidence? I think not. :)

  15. FAIL: Timothy knows nothing about usabilty by gnugnugnu · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First lesson of usability, learn how to spell it.
    Usability.
    Usable.

    Sure useable is in the dictionary but so is dumbass.

  16. It's not politically correct... by syousef · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...to call users who don't understand or care about Apple DRM blind. Think of how insulting it is to the blind.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:It's not politically correct... by furball · · Score: 1

      Can we call them stupid? Or is that insulting to the er ...stupid?

  17. Welcome to the 80's Apple by wiredlogic · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Windows has always had superior accessibility because it was designed to support full keyboard navigation from its inception. It's impossible to create an application using standard controls that doesn't support the keyboard. Why Apple didn't make their OS work right in this regard with the move to OSX escapes me to this day.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    1. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by Graff · · Score: 4, Informative

      Windows has always had superior accessibility because it was designed to support full keyboard navigation from its inception. It's impossible to create an application using standard controls that doesn't support the keyboard. Why Apple didn't make their OS work right in this regard with the move to OSX escapes me to this day.

      You mean like this:

      Full Keyboard Navigation
      In Mac OS X, you can use the keyboard to navigate through a document. The Tab key lets you navigate to lists, text boxes, and other controls, and the space bar and Return key let you interact with them.

      Keyboard Shortcuts
      Using keyboard shortcuts (or key combinations), you can quickly perform a wide range of tasks. In addition to the large number of predefined keyboard shortcuts included with Mac OS X, the Mac lets you customize existing shortcuts, create your own, or remove shortcuts you don't use. Shortcuts can be systemwide or made to work only in specific applications. Use the Keyboard Shortcuts tab in the Keyboard & Mouse pane of System Preferences to add or modify shortcuts.

      Slow Keys
      If you have motor-skills disabilities, you can use Slow Keys to avoid typing errors and unintended multiple keystrokes.

      Adjustable Key Repeat and Delay
      If you want to change the Key Repeat or Delay Until Repeat rate to suit your needs, you can do so using the Keyboard & Mouse settings in System Preferences. Used in conjunction with Slow Keys, these settings let you adapt the keyboard to match your abilities and use it more effectively.

      Sticky Keys
      Using Sticky Keys, you can enter key combinations (called "chords") -- such as Command-Q (for Quit) or Shift-Option-8 (to enter the symbol) -- by pressing them in sequence instead of simultaneously.

      When Sticky Keys is active, Mac OS X visually displays each key in the sequence in the upper-right corner of the screen, accompanied by a sound effect, so you can verify the sequence and correct it (if needed) before it's entered. When you press the last key in the sequence, Mac OS X enters the keys as a chord and the visual representation disappears.

      Mouse Keys
      If you have difficulty controlling the mouse, you can use Mouse Keys to control the mouse pointer using the keys on a numeric keypad. With Mouse Keys, you can navigate menus, the Dock, windows, toolbars, palettes, and other controls by pressing keys.

      --
      Sapere aude!
    2. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by chaboud · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but that's not entirely on the mark. It's possible to create a Windows application that isn't fully accessible by keyboard by screwing up tabstop ordering, failing to add accelerators, etc. That said, it's much easier to get it right. You have to go out of your way (and a surprising number of people do) to screw things up.

    3. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by chaboud · · Score: 2, Informative

      And, well, sorry, but the Windows universe has long been better for blind and near-blind users than the OS X universe. Though Apple has made some serious strides in the past few years, they're still behind.

      Simple things, like not tab-stopping commit/cancel buttons, make the process significantly harder for usability programmers and users alike.

      Applause should be given for making strides on this front, but Apple is still playing catch-up.

    4. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by bidule · · Score: 1

      Simple things, like not tab-stopping commit/cancel buttons, make the process significantly harder for usability programmers and users alike.

      What's wrong with Enter / Cancel and cmd-D?

      And yes, I am a mouse hater that is too lazy to fix the missing shortcuts.

      --
      ID: the nose did not occur naturally, how would we wear glasses otherwise? (apologies to Voltaire)
    5. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite -- it's trivially possible to make applications where the tab key skips over controls. Combined with no keyboard shortcut, and you have a control that's only accessible via the mouse. It's sloppy design on the application developer's part, for sure, but the fact that it's possible (and even worse, possible by mistake) is somewhat a shame.

    6. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to be able to activate my Mac's menu from the keyboard. There used to be an extension for this under OS9 (can't remember what) but I don't think there's anything for OS X like this.

    7. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by SPY_jmr1 · · Score: 1

      Ctrl-F2.

      If you hit Ctrl-F1, and wonder why it won't work anymore, Ctrl-F1 is a toggle to enable/disable the Ctrl-F2 functionality.

    8. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Windows has better third party support since the companies coding those complex apps and drivers choose Windows over Apple. The Windows accessibility which is built in is a 'fallback' thing. Look to its help if you don't believe me. Blind people use way more advanced apps but... apps doesn't exist on OS X.

      When they port to OS X using XCode or when they finally wake up and start porting does Apple refuse to support them? I bet they would even support them for free.

      What will Apple do? Bribe them and make them code? Is there a more consistent and documented single user interface rather than OS X?

    9. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by Yer+Mum · · Score: 2, Informative

      The option is there but by default on Mac OS X tab only jumps to the next text field. If you want to make it jump through all controls you need to enable it in system preferences. I've forgot exactly where it is though...

    10. Re:Welcome to the 80's Apple by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Turn on full keyboard navigation.

  18. You guess wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Windows it was already fully accessible. I guess OSX doesn't have the same sort of accessibility features, but now at least in iTunes it does.

    You guess wrong.

  19. What about deaf users? by barfy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I think if they could bring Itunes for the Deaf, that would be rad! (Waving my hands in mime excitement)

    1. Re:What about deaf users? by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      After reading that joke for the 7th times, it falls on deaf ears.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  20. Attorney General by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't mean to sound like I'm against making software more accessible to disabled users, but what are the details of the Attorney General's involvement in this. Were there any threats made against Apple concerning iTunes accessibility? I thought private companies weren't required to make their software accessible, which is a policy that I fully agree with.

    Too much bullying by Attorneys General these days (see NY AG's actions w.r.t. UseNet).

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    1. Re:Attorney General by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      I thought private companies weren't required to make their software accessible, which is a policy that I fully agree with.

      And why would you "fully agree" with that? Why should Apple or Microsoft not be required to do in their software what companies have to do in the physical world?

    2. Re:Attorney General by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      I would argue that software is not a fundamental right and part of existence. Getting the lawyers involved threatens to open a frightening floodgate of frivolous lawsuits.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    3. Re:Attorney General by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      Prove to me that people are entitled to a particular software package and I'll agree that accessibility features should be mandatory. Failing that, show me that the software's creation was publicly funded and I'll agree that accessibility features should be mandatory. Otherwise, I don't think it's the government's place to mandate development of accessibility features. But perhaps I'm wrong, so please tell me: "Why should Apple or Microsoft be required to [make their software accessible]?"

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    4. Re:Attorney General by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      People aren't entitled to stay in a particular hotel room or shop in a particular store either. The law still requires hotel and shop owners to provide handicapped access.

    5. Re:Attorney General by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      I would argue that software is not a fundamental right and part of existence.

      Is eating in a particular restaurant a "fundamental right of existence"? Shopping for clothes? Going to the zoo? Using the public water fountain?

      Getting the lawyers involved threatens to open a frightening floodgate of frivolous lawsuits.

      Lawsuits are only "frivolous" if people are suing over things that the law isn't intended to cover. But if the law says that accessibility must be provided, then suing to make sure companies comply isn't "frivolous".

      What I consider "frivolous" is your blatant disregard for the needs and suffering of your fellow human beings.

    6. Re:Attorney General by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      Why should they provide accessibility features? For the same reason restaurants, hotels, airports, schools, hospitals, and lots of other places have to: as a society, we decided it's the right thing to do and therefore to impose this cost on our economy.

      And can we impose that on corporations? Of course, we can. Corporations only exist and only can operate because the public supports them and the public created the legal framework for them. If Apple or Microsoft dislike some regulation so much, they can always dissolve; nobody's private property is taken by regulating how corporations operate or imposing costs on them.

    7. Re:Attorney General by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      we decided it's the right thing to do

      That's not a reason.

      If Apple or Microsoft dislike some regulation so much, they can always dissolve.

      If users dislike the fact that software X lacks accessibility features, they can buy a competing package or else do without.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    8. Re:Attorney General by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      That's not a reason.

      That's an excellent reason in a democracy, even if emotionally defective people don't understand it.

      If users dislike the fact that software X lacks accessibility features, they can buy a competing package or else do without.

      Since they are nearly a duopoly, I actually can't.

      Even if could, I don't want to. I'd much rather use the democratic process to force Apple and Microsoft to do what I consider the right and moral thing to do.

    9. Re:Attorney General by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      That's an excellent reason in a democracy, even if emotionally defective people don't understand it.

      No. To say that "it's the right thing to do" does not in any way help us determine why or whether it's "the right thing to do". Calling me "emotionally defective" likewise does nothing at all to support your particular assertion.

      Since they are nearly a duopoly, I actually can't.

      You can do without the software just as much as Apple and Microsoft "can always dissolve".

      I'd much rather use the democratic process to force Apple and Microsoft to do what I consider the right and moral thing to do.

      What you consider the "right and moral thing to do" isn't necessarily "right" or "moral". Also, you refer to the "democratic process" as if such a process is inherently good, but the fact is there's nothing about "majority rule" that makes it inherently ethical.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    10. Re:Attorney General by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On numerous occasions Apple had been asked to make iTunes accessible to the blind organizations. In particular the National Federation of the Blind. Apple refused.

      Eventually College professors began putting lectures on mp3. With the iPods popularity, iTunes became a "standard" part of the educational process. Suddenly equal access became an issue.

    11. Re:Attorney General by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      You know, I suggest you read up a bit on moral reasoning; there are writings going back millennia.

      As for Apple and Microsoft, there is no legal, ethical, or constitutional reason not to impose these costs on those companies, and if the people decide to do it because they feel it's the right thing to do, they can and will. I'm sorry you don't like it.

    12. Re:Attorney General by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 1

      "You know, I suggest you read up a bit on moral reasoning; there are writings going back millennia."

      You have quite a talent for saying nothing at all while making it seem like you have a point.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
  21. Re:penis? by Vectronic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Shh... speak softly and he wont be able to see you...

  22. tagging fun by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 0

    applehatesblindpeople

    --
    -
  23. Would be way more impressive... by sleeponthemic · · Score: 1, Redundant

    If this update made it accessible to the deaf.

    *ducks*

    --
    I record my sleeptalking
  24. that's pretty depressing by jipn4 · · Score: 1

    I had been under the impression that Apple had at least as much accessibility support as other platforms. If it takes this long for one of their main audio apps to become accessible to blind users, Apple is doing poorly on accessibility.

  25. verbiage, not solution by jipn4 · · Score: 1

    Have you tried actually using OS X from the keyboard alone? I have, and it doesn't work.

    All that verbiage from Apple is just trying to cover up that fact. In particular, the section "Full keyboard navigation" is misleading.

    1. Re:verbiage, not solution by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      From the keyboard _alone_? You're right, it doesn't *fully* work, and I write up bugs whenever I find things that don't work. (You should too. Go to https://bugreport.apple.com/ and write up a bug.)

      But I use keyboard navigation for much of my daily use of the system. I keyboard navigate the menubar and the Dock all the time, for example. Some things (e.g. dragging of files around) obviously are easier with the mouse (trackball in my case).. but I use the keyboard for much of my interaction with the GUI.

  26. so they've helped the blind by ZipprHead · · Score: 2, Funny

    But what about the def users?!

  27. When is iTunes coming out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That supports deaf users?

  28. Weasel words. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Full Keyboard Navigation
    In Mac OS X, you can use the keyboard to navigate through a document.     [emph mine]

    Notice that while the page you link to gives the impression that the OS is keyboard navigable, the above statement refers to navigating through a document, not all Operating System features.

    Apple have managed to suck a few disabled into buying their systems with this sales pitch. Have a read of this guy's experiences (he interacts with his PC via a mouthstick):

    Very annoying. In short i'm refering to the lack of underlined letters in menu items and such, a-la XP. Also most tabbed Preference dialogs have no keyboard access to the tabs themselves, plus theres many more issues that just make OSX an annoying experience for me... looks very pretty though.

    I've used XP since forever, and i used Gnome desktop on FC5 for a while too and both were lightyears ahead of OSX as far as keyboard navigation goes.

    Short lesson here for you: Unless you've directly experienced something, do not believe Apple's marketing literature to the contrary.

    Oh - and Kudos to the gnome team.

    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    1. Re:Weasel words. by Graff · · Score: 1

      Notice that while the page you link to gives the impression that the OS is keyboard navigable, the above statement refers to navigating through a document, not all Operating System features.

      You can navigate through all operating system features, not just documents. All I have to do is hit control-F2, for example, to control the main menu with the keyboard. This sort of thing exists for all UI elements, all you have to do is read the appropriate documentation and it spells it out very nicely and in a fairly logical manner.

      Oh and if you have a menu open in this fashion you can just start typing the name of the menu item and it will select it. If there are two menu items with similar names just type another letter or two, it will select the first menu item it finds with those characters. It actually works pretty well.

      --
      Sapere aude!
    2. Re:Weasel words. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Full Keyboard Navigation In Mac OS X, you can use the keyboard to navigate through a document. [emph mine]

      Notice that while the page you link to gives the impression that the OS is keyboard navigable, the above statement refers to navigating through a document, not all Operating System features.

      So you are saying that when I hit the Tab key in a document, it "lets [me] navigate to lists, text boxes, and other controls" - is that your final answer?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    3. Re:Weasel words. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      So you are saying that when I hit the Tab key in a document, it "lets [me] navigate to lists, text boxes, and other controls" - is that your final answer?

      I didn't say anything about what you can do, I said that OS X has inferior keyboard navigation compared to other OSes.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    4. Re:Weasel words. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Suuuuure. Just the Weasel words from the pee-nut gallery we expected.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    5. Re:Weasel words. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      More blathering from the incomprehensible lunatic fringe of Apple fanboism.

      Do you even know what weasel words means?

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    6. Re:Weasel words. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the quote in my post that said:

      Also most tabbed Preference dialogs have no keyboard access to the tabs themselves,

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    7. Re:Weasel words. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do. Do you, or do you just use them a lot to cover up your fanatism and utter lack of clue?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    8. Re:Weasel words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I do.

      Wow! I'm convinced! A rabid Apple fanboi, sans clues, without a shred of common sense states "Actually, I do"

      I bet you're a hit with the ladies.

      Now, I presume is the point you're trying to make is that Apple has superior keyboard navigation to other operating systems. Do you have anything, anything at all to backup this point of view - or are you simply flailing about because someone has pointed out that your favourite OS is inferior for some disabled use cases?

    9. Re:Weasel words. by Graff · · Score: 1

      Also most tabbed Preference dialogs have no keyboard access to the tabs themselves

      You mean like control-F7 which does just this? I've just tried it on a bunch of standard windows with tabs, such as many of the preference dialogs in System Preferences and it works just fine for me.

      You can keep on trying to come up with exceptions and I'm sure you'll eventually find SOMETHING but the point is that there is pretty damn good Universal Access in Mac OS X. I'm sure there are some non-standard applications out there which are broken and don't properly support people with disabilities but it's not for lack of Apple providing the tools to developers. The fact is most Apple developers are very good at creating applications which adhere to Apple's UI and programming guidelines which means most applications will work just fine with Apple's assistive technologies.

      Lets face it, you have an axe to grind against Apple and you'll continue to nitpick to try to show them up. Your name here on Slashdot says it all, I would say that you're acting just as childish as the "whiny mac fanboys" that you mock. Apple is not perfect and there's quite a few things that I'm not happy with but they DO get a lot of stuff right. Support for people disabilities is one of them.

      --
      Sapere aude!
    10. Re:Weasel words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So have you experienced OS X with a mouthstick first hand? No, you're relying on second hand info too- in a web forum, no less. To access Tools Extensions in Firefox OS X:

      Ctrl F2 T Space E Space

      Not quite as quick as

      Alt T Alt E

      But not as hard as is made out by the complainer in the forum. Also, while I have no first hand experience, I believe Space is one of the easier keys to input with a mouthstick, which probably makes it a draw.

      BTW, OS X is completely keyboard navigable, although contextual menus (being contextual based on position of the mouse pointer) require the use of mouse keys. So there is no weasel word needed there.

    11. Re:Weasel words. by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 1

      So have you experienced OS X with a mouthstick first hand?

      No, but I have experienced using OS X/Gnome/KDE/windows while trying to use the mouse as little as possible (I have a bad should & constant movement between keyboard & mouse irritates it).

      Of those four operating environments, OS X is by far the worst. Lack of visual clues (the underlined letter that is the shortcut), no doubt makes the system look prettier, but also makes things less intuitive.

      A win for style over substance - but hey, that's what the mac is all about.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    12. Re:Weasel words. by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Gee, whenever WMF loses, he starts posting as AC.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    13. Re:Weasel words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP Do you have anything, anything at all to backup this point of view

      LT Gee, whenever WMF loses, he starts posting as AC.

      IOW No.

  29. Independent verification? by blitzcat · · Score: 1

    This is a PR fluff piece, with no feedback from anyone blind. And everywhere I looked for derivative articles was more of the same. I want to know if it really works for a blind person, or is it just frustration in a tiny box.

    1. Re:Independent verification? by fastfinge · · Score: 1

      Have you checked:
      http://www.lioncourt.com/

      As a blind user, I can say it does everything I need.

      --
      tired of online ads?
  30. Two years+ late... Rockbox does this too by Ptur · · Score: 1

    So this is news? Rockbox has been offering spoken menus and player content for many years.
    Also on ipods (a little less than two years).

    I wouldn't be surprised if they would patent it anyway....

  31. What about the deaf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there no more love in the world?

  32. foobar2000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    foobar2000 has had this feature since somewhere in the 0.8.x series. It was one of the first accessible audio players in existence. I'm glad to see that iTunes is copying more features from it, such as accessibility, SoundCheck (from ReplayGain), gapless mp3 playback, an so on.

    By the way, join http://www.last.fm/group/Friends+of+foobar2000!

  33. but... by gimpimp · · Score: 1

    does it make the ipod/iphone usable for linux users?

    --
    i wish i was but oh well
    1. Re:but... by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1

      Usable??? Hell, with my "ZZ Top" beard, kaftan and sandals, they won't even let me in the Apple shop!

      --
      Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  34. Re:penis? by nimbius · · Score: 1

    im sure a prescription from Dr. Sbaitso will clear that up.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  35. Credit where it is due by beetle496 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft does do a good job with accessibility, especially Office, but there is no good to be had in overstating their effort.

    You'll find a number of accessibility programs

    As TaxMan explained in his reply to your post, those are more like utilities than robust features that can be relied upon every day.

    And honestly, are you seriously trying to tell me that buying a Mac is ever cheaper than a roughly equivalent Windows PC? Macs are great computers, don't get me wrong. But they're also *premium* devices, and cost more than PCs.

    You are trolling. It has been demonstrated repeatedly on /. (and everywhere else on the 'net) that Macs are more than price competative in the mainstream.

    For a home or school user (or really anyone who does not have to run Windows) who happens to be blind, going Mac can save the person a thousand bucks!

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    1. Re:Credit where it is due by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does do a good job with accessibility, especially Office, but there is no good to be had in overstating their effort.

      I wasn't trying to overstate it. I was just trying to clarify what the Windows OS offered.

      As TaxMan explained in his reply to your post, those are more like utilities than robust features that can be relied upon every day.

      Ok, I'll take your word on that. I only have experience in programming for those features, not actually using them. I'll accept others' expertise on that.

      You are trolling.

      Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're trolling. It's great way to kill a discussion though.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    2. Re:Credit where it is due by Taxman415a · · Score: 1

      Microsoft does do a good job with accessibility, especially Office, but there is no good to be had in overstating their effort.

      They may do that on Windows, and others have confirmed they do, but Microsoft Office is completely inaccessible on the Mac with VoiceOver. Luckily you can open Word docs in Textedit which is accessible or I presume you could open the files with Openoffice. I haven't tested that. And in the spirit of not overstating, since Voiceover isn't as full featured as the expensive Windows only software that is available (and nothing like it is available for Mac that I am aware of) most fully blind people do use JAWS or WindowEyes because they have to. At that point, because of the things a screen reader allows you to do, $1000 isn't a big deal. It's more like getting a computer costs that much more than it would have and then you can scan and read books, mail, magazines, etc.

      On the Linux front, more good news is the the Gnome accessibility efforts get a boost from the fact that the accessibility API is very useful for automated testing, so Gnome's accessibility is pretty good and getting better. I don't know anything about KDE's efforts. Hopefully they are similar. The real problem for the accessibility stack on Linux now is the lack of a good OCR solution. gocr is fairly low quality, tesseract is supposedly higher quality and google is working on improving it and integrating it into OCRopus, but it's still nowhere near what you can get on Windows unfortunately. OCRopus looks promising though.

  36. However, it still takes full advantage of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...peoples' blind stupidity to use iTunes in the first place.

  37. Re:penis? by fifedrum · · Score: 1

    \ where smy mode pointswhen I NEED them\

  38. Re:You insensitive Claud! by Fluk3 · · Score: 0

    what?

    --
    I've been upgraded to "bad"!
  39. Re:You insensitive Claud! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, slow down there cowboy. Read it again. Whoosh is right, but above your head not mine....lol

  40. You are a true professional by beetle496 · · Score: 1

    I only have experience in programming for those features

    The fact that you include this factor in your developement process has got to put you in the top 1% of all programmers. Kudos and thanks!

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  41. Carbon versus Cocoa and accessibility by beetle496 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft Office is completely inaccessible on the Mac with VoiceOver.

    This is true. Other developers heavily vested in Carbon, not the least of which is Adobe, also have huge problems with VoiceOver compatibility.

    most fully blind people do use JAWS or WindowEyes because they have to ... $1000 isn't a big deal.

    Mostly true. If a blind person needs to use MS Office or other Windows-only applications, there is no choice, and a grand is not expensive if that is all it takes to get a job. But just as most people use MS Office Windows because they think they have to, most fully blind people use JAWS or WindowEyes without consideration of the alternatives.

    then you can scan and read books, mail, magazines, etc

    OCR software that is fully functional for a blind individual costs another $1000! Unfortunately, this is another absent product category under OS X and Gnome.

    Hopefully they [Gnome vs. KDE] are similar.

    I do not quite grok the reasons for the differences, I think they are architectural, but there are at least three decent screen readers for Gnome, but none for KDE.

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
    1. Re:Carbon versus Cocoa and accessibility by Taxman415a · · Score: 1

      OCR software that is fully functional for a blind individual costs another $1000! Unfortunately, this is another absent product category under OS X and Gnome.

      Actually OmniPage is $150 and is fully accessible (well at least version 15 was) and many people say it is more accurate than Kurzweil for OCR. The other consumer OCR apps are supposed to be decent accuracy, but I don't know about their accessibility. Readiris has a Mac version and supposedly it works with Voiceover, but I don't know. Photoshop has OCR, but nothing like the dedicated OCR apps, and as you mentioned, not especially accessible.

      Hopefully they [Gnome vs. KDE] are similar.

      I do not quite grok the reasons for the differences, I think they are architectural, but there are at least three decent screen readers for Gnome, but none for KDE.

      Yeah actually I looked into this and it seems KDE is way behind in accessibility. I had never checked since I use Gnome. Oh well, no reason to duplicate all that effort I suppose. It seems Sun has poured a lot of effort and cash apparently into making Gnome accessible. Some people give them grief, but that is an effort they aren't going to get a lot of accolades for but it is hard work and valuable nonetheless. Of course it takes a community as well.

  42. Yes, iTunes and iPods are accessible to the Deaf! by beetle496 · · Score: 1

    I realize you are just trying to be funny, but iPod, iTunes, and Apple TV all support captioning, and have for some time. Jobs even metioned it during his last keynote. Here is a page about it: http://www.apple.com/accessibility/itunes/hearing.html

    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!