Fully autonomous cars will be a reality when and only when my wife, who is blind, can legally have such a car drive her to any location at any time and in any weather she might wish.
At that time I shall be happy to buy such a car but not until.
On the MacOS, iOS and tvOS, all from Apple, there is an accessibility service called Switch Control. Similar software exists for other operating systems. Switch Control along with the built in dictation service provides a means for those with very limited mobility to operate a computer or similar device.
When connected to a bluetooth switch such as those made by Ablenet (www.ablenetinc.com) the whole interface can be control from a single button which can be bushed by the disabled person. Other switches work by means of puffing into a tube or tracking head movements. People with very limited movement are able to employ this to use computers and there are a number of videos of such use on YouTube. Dictation, now built into Windows and MacOS, iOS, tvOS and Android could be used to provide easy text entry. Combining these and the voice control functions of modern operating system should provide her with the tools needed to again access her computer.
Here is an idea I'm sure college and universities will hate. Se the cost of the degree based on the pay of persons employed in that field. IN this system the cost of an engineering degree would be much higher than say the cost of a library science degree because the engineer is going to be payed a great deal more than the librarian. So the engineer will be much more likely to be in a position to pay off a large student loan.
One must assume that when Apple instituted it Canary that their lawyers thought the process through to some degree. Is Apple and other companies that have implemented such steps subjecting their management to legal peril?
MacOS X has a full scale screen reader for the blind. Not only can you run the OS without a mouse you can run it without a screen if you need to. Using a bluetooth keyboard and headset I have even run a Mac that was indoors from my patio.
The blind and some print disabled use computers all the time without a mouse. On MacOS X and the iOS there is a built in screen reader called VoiceOver (started with a command-F5 on a standard keyboard function-command-F5 on portables. With VoiceOver running you can work the OS with no mouse, or for that matter even a screen attached. It also support a wide range of braille displays.
There is similar products for Windows but they are not built into the OS and some, JAWS and WindowEyes for example, can cost more than the computer they run on.
On on the whole this is a rather silly question which if the authors had asked the question "How do the blind use a computer?" would have been answered.
Gregory Kearney Manager - Accessible Media Association for the Blind of Western Australia 61 Kitchener Avenue, PO Box 101 Victoria Park 6979, WA Australia
We would be happy to have USB drives as a donation. We use them to send out digital talking books to the blind and print disabled. Please feel free to contact me.
Gregory Kearney Manager - Accessible Media Association for the Blind of Western Australia 61 Kitchener Avenue, PO Box 101 Victoria Park 6979, WA Australia
Still another issue to consider is that this deals with text-to-speech and not human read books such as the NLS provides.
The VicetorReader Stream will do text-to-speech on any text file without activation and without the buyer having to prove a disability. Given that the Streams intended market is book and document reading and given that HumanWare will sell it to anyone who wants one, and given that it will do text to speech with out activation how is the VictorReader Stream any different from the Kindle?
So is a Macintosh computer, which has a built in screen reader which anyone can activate a "specialized device" that are "available only by prescription to people with a qualifying disability"? No of course not. Yet it has text to speech able to read books or anything else for that matter.
The makers of talking book players are happy to sell the devices to anyone who wants one, disabled or not. See www.humanware.com or want one of those 1/4 speed four track tape player? you can buy a new one here: http://secure.nfb.org/ecommerce/asp/default.asp
The issue i much bigger than just the blind. Both the MacOS and many versions of Linux have screen readers for the blind as part of the OS and there are similar products for sale or download for Windows.
These screen readers can be activated and used by anyone, not just the blind. So is this technology illegal? Should the users of such be required to prove they are disabled before it can be activated on their computers?
While the voices on the Kindle 2 were not that great there are very high quality voices which are more useable the MacOS Alex voice for one. To see where this all might go you can visit an experimental talking book library in Western Australia www.cucat.org/library/ which permits the public to download DAISY digital talking books (www.daisy.org) recorded in higher quality voices.
John Key of infringement and have his internat (202.160.117.122) disconnected. See how long it takes to have some method of dealing with false accusations then.
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
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.
No screen reader access will mean a fast lawsuit from the NFB or the ACB. And Microsoft will not be able to argue that they have brick and mortar stores like target did. Not that it did Target any good. So go ahead and use silverlight, flash, or what have you. I'm sure the NFB and the ACB will welcome your contributions by way of settlements.
Cost is not really the point here. Do or do not businesses have the right to sell to who ever they want to or not. In your original post you mentioned nothing at all about cost but asserted the right of a business to do as they please. So which is it?
There are several problems with the idea of turning off California IP ranges. First is how would you know which ranges of IP were from California and which ones were not? IPs in the U.S. are assigned to companies not geographic ranges. One of my employer's has a set of IP ranges assigned. They are located in Iowa the IPs are registered to the company in Iowa but they have many offices in California as well as many other states. Your still on the hook for those users in California even if the IP look as if they are in Iowa.
Second if you don't turn of ALL the IP address coming California, an impossible task given the facts I cite above, and someone from California gets through your still on the hook. Now some have suggested denying access to anyone with a screen reader. That will not work because as far as I know, and I've done a good deal of work in the area of accessibility, none of the screen readers announce themselves to the server so yo have no idea who is using a screen reader and who is not. To further complicate things every Mac with system 10.4 or better has a screen reader built into its OS. So you would need to filter out every Mac coming to your site in order to "catch" those users which might be using it with VoiceOver turned on.
The final issue is one of simple economics. California is jut too big of a market for most companies to walk away from. The auto industry discovered this years ago when California imposed stricter emissions regulations. The auto maker talked a good line for a while about not selling car in California but quickly realized that California was just too big of a market to simply walk away from. California had them over a barrel and they knew it.
"But the Windows world isn't like that. It's a cold, unforgiving place where nothing is sacred, users turn like rabid wolves on any company that makes even the smallest error, and no prisoners are taken."
This must explain why people keep using Windows, right?
While the interface is not as polished as Photoshop I have found Photoline to be a good choice. http://www.pl32.com/ it supports CMYK.
Mac and Windows versions are offered at 59 Euros
It will break screen readers for the blind...
on
AMD's New DRM
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
and in doing so make any computer inaccessible and not purchasable by government. Between this and the fact that none of the windows screen readers work with Vista it seems as it everyone is working over time to have the blind and print disabled move from Windows to Mac, Linux or Sun.
At some point will we need legislation that requires that computing equipment be accessible the way we now require such of telephone equipment?
if you want press credentials go and make yourself up a press card in Photoshop and take it down to Kinkos and have it laminated! Everyone act like there is some sort of legal process to become a "member of the press" there isn't. Anyone can create a press credential and be part of the "club".
Perhaps the bloggers should just create a new "news service" they could call it the Internet News Agency and start issuing credentials it's no different from what Reuters or AP has done. The press in the United States is the only organization which gets to create and issue it's own identity credentials.
So if you want to be a part of the "press" nothing is stopping you.
Slashdot Mirror
Fully autonomous cars will be a reality when and only when my wife, who is blind, can legally have such a car drive her to any location at any time and in any weather she might wish. At that time I shall be happy to buy such a car but not until.
On the MacOS, iOS and tvOS, all from Apple, there is an accessibility service called Switch Control. Similar software exists for other operating systems. Switch Control along with the built in dictation service provides a means for those with very limited mobility to operate a computer or similar device.
When connected to a bluetooth switch such as those made by Ablenet (www.ablenetinc.com) the whole interface can be control from a single button which can be bushed by the disabled person. Other switches work by means of puffing into a tube or tracking head movements. People with very limited movement are able to employ this to use computers and there are a number of videos of such use on YouTube. Dictation, now built into Windows and MacOS, iOS, tvOS and Android could be used to provide easy text entry. Combining these and the voice control functions of modern operating system should provide her with the tools needed to again access her computer.
Here is an idea I'm sure college and universities will hate. Se the cost of the degree based on the pay of persons employed in that field. IN this system the cost of an engineering degree would be much higher than say the cost of a library science degree because the engineer is going to be payed a great deal more than the librarian. So the engineer will be much more likely to be in a position to pay off a large student loan.
One must assume that when Apple instituted it Canary that their lawyers thought the process through to some degree. Is Apple and other companies that have implemented such steps subjecting their management to legal peril?
MacOS X has a full scale screen reader for the blind. Not only can you run the OS without a mouse you can run it without a screen if you need to. Using a bluetooth keyboard and headset I have even run a Mac that was indoors from my patio.
The blind and some print disabled use computers all the time without a mouse. On MacOS X and the iOS there is a built in screen reader called VoiceOver (started with a command-F5 on a standard keyboard function-command-F5 on portables. With VoiceOver running you can work the OS with no mouse, or for that matter even a screen attached. It also support a wide range of braille displays.
There is similar products for Windows but they are not built into the OS and some, JAWS and WindowEyes for example, can cost more than the computer they run on.
On on the whole this is a rather silly question which if the authors had asked the question "How do the blind use a computer?" would have been answered.
Gregory Kearney
Manager - Accessible Media
Association for the Blind of Western Australia
61 Kitchener Avenue, PO Box 101
Victoria Park 6979, WA Australia
Telephone: +61 (08) 9311 8246
Telephone: +1 (307) 224 4022 (North America)
Fax: +61 (08) 9361 8696
Toll free: 1800 658 388 (Australia only)
Email: gkearney@gmail.com
We would be happy to have USB drives as a donation. We use them to send out digital talking books to the blind and print disabled. Please feel free to contact me.
Gregory Kearney
Manager - Accessible Media
Association for the Blind of Western Australia
61 Kitchener Avenue, PO Box 101
Victoria Park 6979, WA Australia
Telephone: +61 (08) 9311 8202
Telephone: +1 (307) 224 4022 (North America)
Fax: +61 (08) 9361 8696
Toll free: 1800 658 388 (Australia only)
Email: gkearney@gmail.com
Still another issue to consider is that this deals with text-to-speech and not human read books such as the NLS provides.
The VicetorReader Stream will do text-to-speech on any text file without activation and without the buyer having to prove a disability. Given that the Streams intended market is book and document reading and given that HumanWare will sell it to anyone who wants one, and given that it will do text to speech with out activation how is the VictorReader Stream any different from the Kindle?
And just wait until these activated devices turn up on ebay as the old four track tape players do all the time.
So is a Macintosh computer, which has a built in screen reader which anyone can activate a "specialized device" that are "available only by prescription to people with a qualifying disability"? No of course not. Yet it has text to speech able to read books or anything else for that matter.
The makers of talking book players are happy to sell the devices to anyone who wants one, disabled or not. See www.humanware.com or want one of those 1/4 speed four track tape player? you can buy a new one here: http://secure.nfb.org/ecommerce/asp/default.asp
The issue i much bigger than just the blind. Both the MacOS and many versions of Linux have screen readers for the blind as part of the OS and there are similar products for sale or download for Windows.
These screen readers can be activated and used by anyone, not just the blind. So is this technology illegal? Should the users of such be required to prove they are disabled before it can be activated on their computers?
While the voices on the Kindle 2 were not that great there are very high quality voices which are more useable the MacOS Alex voice for one. To see where this all might go you can visit an experimental talking book library in Western Australia www.cucat.org/library/ which permits the public to download DAISY digital talking books (www.daisy.org) recorded in higher quality voices.
John Key of infringement and have his internat (202.160.117.122) disconnected. See how long it takes to have some method of dealing with false accusations then.
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
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.
Let's see the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. Shouldn't we call it the Commonwealth Cyber Crime Working Group?
No screen reader access will mean a fast lawsuit from the NFB or the ACB. And Microsoft will not be able to argue that they have brick and mortar stores like target did. Not that it did Target any good. So go ahead and use silverlight, flash, or what have you. I'm sure the NFB and the ACB will welcome your contributions by way of settlements.
Cost is not really the point here. Do or do not businesses have the right to sell to who ever they want to or not. In your original post you mentioned nothing at all about cost but asserted the right of a business to do as they please. So which is it?
So you would favor permitting stores to erect "Whites ONly" signs then?
There are several problems with the idea of turning off California IP ranges. First is how would you know which ranges of IP were from California and which ones were not? IPs in the U.S. are assigned to companies not geographic ranges. One of my employer's has a set of IP ranges assigned. They are located in Iowa the IPs are registered to the company in Iowa but they have many offices in California as well as many other states. Your still on the hook for those users in California even if the IP look as if they are in Iowa.
Second if you don't turn of ALL the IP address coming California, an impossible task given the facts I cite above, and someone from California gets through your still on the hook. Now some have suggested denying access to anyone with a screen reader. That will not work because as far as I know, and I've done a good deal of work in the area of accessibility, none of the screen readers announce themselves to the server so yo have no idea who is using a screen reader and who is not. To further complicate things every Mac with system 10.4 or better has a screen reader built into its OS. So you would need to filter out every Mac coming to your site in order to "catch" those users which might be using it with VoiceOver turned on.
The final issue is one of simple economics. California is jut too big of a market for most companies to walk away from. The auto industry discovered this years ago when California imposed stricter emissions regulations. The auto maker talked a good line for a while about not selling car in California but quickly realized that California was just too big of a market to simply walk away from. California had them over a barrel and they knew it.
"But the Windows world isn't like that. It's a cold, unforgiving place where nothing is sacred, users turn like rabid wolves on any company that makes even the smallest error, and no prisoners are taken."
This must explain why people keep using Windows, right?
While the interface is not as polished as Photoshop I have found Photoline to be a good choice. http://www.pl32.com/ it supports CMYK.
Mac and Windows versions are offered at 59 Euros
and in doing so make any computer inaccessible and not purchasable by government. Between this and the fact that none of the windows screen readers work with Vista it seems as it everyone is working over time to have the blind and print disabled move from Windows to Mac, Linux or Sun.
At some point will we need legislation that requires that computing equipment be accessible the way we now require such of telephone equipment?
It's the price they pay for being a monopoly.
That assumes that anyone pays any attention to the Microsoft license or even reads it for that matter. I can just picture this at home:
"Hi honey I'm going to load Vista on the Mac with Parallels"
"STOP! you can't do that the license for Vista says so. We would never want to do anything that would go against a Microsoft license!"
Oh right like that would ever happen. Further with Boot Camp your not running in emulation anyway.
if you want press credentials go and make yourself up a press card in Photoshop and take it down to Kinkos and have it laminated! Everyone act like there is some sort of legal process to become a "member of the press" there isn't. Anyone can create a press credential and be part of the "club".
Perhaps the bloggers should just create a new "news service" they could call it the Internet News Agency and start issuing credentials it's no different from what Reuters or AP has done. The press in the United States is the only organization which gets to create and issue it's own identity credentials.
So if you want to be a part of the "press" nothing is stopping you.