Re: Itunes

Hi Gary, Steve and all,

We are deemed too insignificant for companies to be even remotely interested in forming partnerships, etc. Besides, most of the blind community is too fragmented and weak to do anything seriously effective to improve accessibility.


----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Wood" <k8hlx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: Itunes



Hi Steve! I think I would agree with that! I think it indeed takes teamwork! Maybe we need to work with companies as partners to get accessibility accomplished. That may be the only way! Maybe we can't get anywhere with companies by just demanding that they follow through on making things happen for us!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Holmes" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Itunes



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

I only make that one point about a case at a time because it may take so
much effort on each person's part.  To get some of these reforms through
might require a person getting inside the organization or at least a
piece of the development action so he or she can make influinces on the
development cycle.

I think our blindness organizations could get a lot more involved in
making policy statements and conveying such positions to product
developers and use its members to help verify compliance to such
policies.  I think the idea of sending reps to shows like the consumer
electronics show in Los Vegas is an excellent one.  Remember Darrell from
this list attending the Media Expo in Onterio, California last fall?  He
got a brief audience with Adam Curry, the Podfather:).  I only hope that
meeting results in something beyond a verbal committment.

On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 03:29:36PM -0500, Gary Wood wrote:
Hi Steve! Well Maybe these should be done on a case by case basis!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Holmes" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: Itunes



>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: RIPEMD160
>
>Well, it almost has to happen on a case by case process. One example >if
>I may toot my own horn a bit, is My church is preparing to roll out a
>big web based initiative to facilitate family history research. Like >so
>many new proposed web sites and web changes, our accessibility is >always
>up for grabs. I pleeded for and actually got access to their beta
>program. I have already suggested improvements to their proposed web
>form layouts with more to come for sure and I also already beet up on
>their visual verification scheme for user registration. At least I've
>done what I could so far; that was all in the past week and I now await
>their committments to change. At least my foot is in the door and I
>hope these efforts will benefit other blind church members and
>eventually the blind public at large who should take advantage of the
>new family search service.
>
>On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:45:13PM -0700, Darrell Shandrow wrote:
>>Hi Gary,
>>
>>It is always a balancing act. Screen readers allow us access to
>>computers.
>>These companies must certainly continue doing their part to develop >>and
>>implement technologies that make our technology lives more accessible.
>>On
>>the other hand, mainstream tech companies must also do the right thing >>by
>>meeting us the other halfway, reasonably accomodating accessibility
>>needs.
>>We must ask and insist on it if necessary, finally using the available
>>laws
>>when appropriate as the very last resort.
>>
>>By and large, at this time, the blind community simply lacks the will >>to
>>get serious about accessibility issues. The consumer organizations >>and
>>others are quite frankly paralyzed to do anything significant. So >>long
>>as
>>that's the case, we're stuck and inaccessibility is getting worse for >>us
>>on
>>practically a second by second basis!
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Gary Wood" <k8hlx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 1:26 PM
>>Subject: Re: Itunes
>>
>>
>>>Hi Darrell! I think that as blind people, we should step up to the
>>>plate,
>>>and get involved to try to solve the accessibility issues; but I >>>don't
>>>know if we should ask companies to make their products more >>>accessible
>>>to
>>>us, or we should get involved with companies to make programs >>>accessible
>>>from the ground up; but I don't know how we could do this, but it's >>>some
>>>food for thought!
>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>From: "Darrell Shandrow" <nu7i@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 9:41 AM
>>>Subject: Re: Itunes
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi Steve,
>>>>
>>>>I'm not sure there is much of a "good thing" to be lost with Apple.
>>>>Apple has most likely created VoiceOver only to protect their >>>>education
>>>>business from loss due to legislation requiring accessibility of
>>>>technology in education. As far as I can tell, the company has done
>>>>nothing further for us. I think it is time for us to do a few >>>>things.
>>>>First, let's start thinking about drafting and sending a letter to
>>>>Steve
>>>>Jobs asking for Apple to do more to make their products and services
>>>>accessible. Second, let's start participating in the forums over at
>>>>http://discussions.apple.com to publicly ask for more accessibility >>>>and
>>>>see what we can get for a response from Apple and their users.
>>>>
>>>>Everytime I think about one of the myriad and increasing >>>>accessibility
>>>>issues we face with technology, I feel very depressed. Companies by
>>>>and
>>>>large could care less whether or not we jump in the lake, but the
>>>>biggest
>>>>problem lies with the blind community, who largely refuse to take >>>>any
>>>>significant collective and individual actions to insist on equal
>>>>participation in all that technology already offers the sighted.
>>>>Almost
>>>>everyone in the companies we need to become more accessible simply
>>>>don't
>>>>know that blind technology users exist. Shame on us in the blind
>>>>community for not consistently and frequently explaining it to them!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>>From: "Steve Holmes" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 7:24 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: Itunes
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>>Hash: RIPEMD160
>>>>>
>>>>>When I read Anna Dresner's book about her iPod experiences, I got >>>>>the
>>>>>impression that Apple's tech support was quite helpful and treated >>>>>her
>>>>>fairly. Though that was nearly a year ago now. I hope some of us
>>>>>blind
>>>>>guys didn't go in there like gang busters and ruin a good thing. >>>>>But
>>>>>then again, my impressions of Apple's lack of committment to
>>>>>accessibility for such popular products like the iPod and iTunes, I
>>>>>gues
>>>>>I couldn't blaim some blind folks for ganging up on them. I
>>>>>personally
>>>>>have heard absolutely *NOTHING* from Apple concerning making iTunes >>>>>or
>>>>>the iPod any more accessible to blind people and furthermore, I >>>>>have
>>>>>heard rumors that the shuffle was being discontinued. If that last
>>>>>rumor is untrue, then I will stand corrected.
>>>>>
>>>>>?As for the set files I wrote for iTunes, it shouldn't matter what
>>>>>version of iTunes is being used. I haven't checked Brian Hartgen's
>>>>>sets
>>>>>out to see if they are any better than what I have. I only passed >>>>>my
>>>>>version to a few folks to see what was thought but mine need a lot >>>>>of
>>>>>improvement before prime time release. I just find iTunes to be so
>>>>>inconsistent with graphical displays and the like, I found it
>>>>>impossible
>>>>>to reliably purchase from the store for example. I developed my >>>>>sets
>>>>>using Window-Eyes version 5.5 so they probably wouldn't work for >>>>>any
>>>>>earlier versions of WE but the version of iTunes shouldn't matter.
>>>>>I'm
>>>>>currently using version 6.0 something and my sets still work with >>>>>such
>>>>>as iTunes is.
>>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 06:31:49AM -0700, BlindTech of >>>>>BlindTechs.Net
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>Being a blind mac user myself and a trainer for mac/osx/tiger/
>>>>>>voiceover/zoom I have to ask one very important question >>>>>>please......
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What was the context in which you asked for help. I mean, Was it >>>>>>like
>>>>>>"Hey dude, I am blind and I can't find xxxxxx on your site so can >>>>>>you
>>>>>>help me?"
>>>>>>If so, I see why, if not. hmmmm.... I got to admit though that >>>>>>apple
>>>>>>has been getting snotty with allot of blind folks and its not >>>>>>making
>>>>>>me to happy because I push for the blind to convert to the mac and
>>>>>>promote the mac all over and it annoys the hell out of me when I >>>>>>hear
>>>>>>these stories because if one of my clients get this type of >>>>>>treatment
>>>>>>it looks bad on me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>BlindTech of BlindTechs.Net
>>>>>>blindtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>website: http://blindtechs.net
>>>>>>Visit our website where we offer free email, shell accoiunts,
>>>>>>shoutcast radio service, online games and more!
>>>>>>Powered by Unix not Microsoft
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Jan 7, 2006, at 3:37 AM, Chris Gilland wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Actually, when I looked at the web site, I didn't see any type
>>>>>>>limitations, but I could be wrong. I didn't look very heavily
>>>>>>>since I couldn't even find the install shield for version 5, as
>>>>>>>that's gonna be the first thing that will have to happen, and
>>>>>>>frankly, Apple is being quite interestingly enough, very very >>>>>>>very
>>>>>>>very very rude in not wanting to help. I called and spoke with
>>>>>>>someone at the Apple Care Tech Support line, and they actually >>>>>>>had
>>>>>>>the guts to sit there and say that because I was blind, they
>>>>>>>refused to help me as a customer. None the less, I'm seriously
>>>>>>>thinking of taking a complaint to my local ACB chapter regarding
>>>>>>>this, as I'm not much for NFB, but I don't wish to get into a
>>>>>>>political discussion here, so thus, I really don't feel >>>>>>>comfortable
>>>>>>>giving any reasons why that is on list. Anyway, we'll get off >>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>subject... Yeah, I didn't see any limitations though, but I'll
>>>>>>>check later on today a bit more closely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Chris.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "BlindTech of BlindTechs.Net"
>>>>>>><blindtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 11:31 PM
>>>>>>>Subject: Re: Itunes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm assuming that the set files are coded in a way to where they
>>>>>>>won't work with a demo of win eyes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>BlindTech of BlindTechs.Net
>>>>>>>blindtech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>website: http://blindtechs.net
>>>>>>>Visit our website where we offer free email, shell accoiunts,
>>>>>>>shoutcast radio service, online games and more!
>>>>>>>Powered by Unix not Microsoft
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Jan 6, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Chris Gilland wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have an IPod mini. I?m wondering if anyone may know where to
>>>>>>>>get a coy of Itunes version 5, as apparently, the set files for
>>>>>>>>window eyes do not work with any other version. I?ve checked >>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>Apple web site, and also have looked on olderversion.com and
>>>>>>>>download.com. I?ve used google as well, with no luck. I really
>>>>>>>>would like to try these set files with my demo copy of Window
>>>>>>>>eyes. Please let me know if anyone has any ideas.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Chris.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>- -- >>>>>HolmesGrown Solutions
>>>>>The best solutions for the best price!
>>>>>http://ld.net/?holmesgrown
>>>>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>>Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
>>>>>
>>>>>iD8DBQFDv88nWSjv55S0LfERA+wyAJ9/eCgj/hW4k9UP6yXxxChReGqNrQCg578Q
>>>>>77JIvCcH1WQUoKX7JERMZ5U=
>>>>>=h56r
>>>>>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>- -- >HolmesGrown Solutions
>The best solutions for the best price!
>http://ld.net/?holmesgrown
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQFDwpC2WSjv55S0LfERA1y6AJ9ce6Zpu2Z34g6GaLi616A5PDWfsgCgqICf
>hFI6XLn+deW1sQuDUy32CPw=
>=nlrP
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>







- -- HolmesGrown Solutions
The best solutions for the best price!
http://ld.net/?holmesgrown
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)


iD8DBQFDw+gzWSjv55S0LfERA2QdAJ4vAkYt/YYLTVorOOxdch4EP/SA4QCg4vh+
Yhh9EGiziQV2HWqp3JqXqxc=
=1sSM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----








Other related posts: