[ddots-l] Re: Are we speculating or do we know what is really happening?
- From: "Darren" <darren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 21:25:45 +0100
This is why I love spectrasonics products.
Not only are they top draw products, they are able to be made accessible to a
fair degree with HSC.
I believe Window Eyes also has an HSC equivalent.
In all honesty, I've not heard anything from Native Instruments that I haven't
been able to find elsewhere from other companies.
Just because everyone's using it, doesn't mean it's good. It just means there
are a lot of sheep.
Cheers
Darren
-----Original Message-----
From: ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ddots-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Bryan Smart
Sent: 08 July 2011 21:14
To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [ddots-l] Re: Are we speculating or do we know what is really
happening?
Every situation is different.
With Native Instruments, it's difficulty. It's a huge amount of work, that
won't earn them any sales, and they really don't even know how to do it if they
wanted.
What makes something accessible? Does it need full keyboard navigation and
scripts to automatically make sure that everything is spoken? Is it fair to
write scripts for only one screen reader? Who decides which screen reader will
be used to evaluate the accessibility?
Is a program accessible if enough info can be reasoned out with the screen
review cursor to make most of the important features accessible?
Most programmers in the world don't even know what a screen reader is,
nevermind how it works, either technically or from a user's perspective. How
much time will it take for a given group of programmers to learn how the screen
reader gets info off of the screen so that they can at least get to a point
where they can dream up a plan of how the might be able to accommodate it after
lots of work? Who will help them with technical issues related to
accessibility? Will they have to pay a screen reader manufacturer or Microsoft
for consulting assistance, and where will that money come from? How will the
programmers learn how to operate the screen reader enough to be able to
experiment with using it to examine what their program looks like to the screen
reader?
One thing that Apple got right was the design of the way that assistive tech,
like a screen reader, interacts with programs. If a Mac program isn't
accessible, then there are clear directions to follow for a programmer to fix
it. The changes involve adding extra bits to their program that essentially
explain to VoiceOver how to read a particular control to the user. The
programmer doesn't need to know how screen readers work at all. They just
follow the directions to expose the appropriate info. They don't even need to
change how their program appears visually.
On Windows, when blind people ask for accessibility, they usually don't know
much more than the programmers as to what is technically involved in making
something accessible. I hear people frequently ask for standard Windows
controls, but that is like asking web sites to show everything in black and
white with no color, no background, no icons, and no substantial formatting.
Appearance/theming/skinning is part of a program's image/brand, and, for
complex software, is chosen to make it easier to visually understand how to
work it. If you ask a company that makes a product like that to use only
standard Windows controls, in their minds, you might as well have asked them to
write a DOS version. They aren't going to destroy the look-and-feel that
sighted people recognize in screen shots from the web and YouTube. No way.
Some small software shops might tweak their programs to use standard controls,
or at least write text on the screen in a way that a screen reader can
recognize with its screen review cursor, but, in many cases, these are 1 or 2
man projects that didn't use a lot of custom design in the first place, not to
help blind people, but because they couldn't afford the time to make something
that looks as slick as the professional program that they're competing against.
They also probably just run on a single platform, like a VST version for
Windows.
Native Instruments directly draws everything. They don't use any operating
system features for their user interface if they can at all help it. They have
designed a system that their plug ins can use to display the same interface,
regardless if it is running on Windows or Mac. They don't have time to make a
version that is just for one OS and its user interface qwerks. They sell lots
of synths directly, and they must create DXI, VST 2/3, RTAS, and Re-wire
versions for Windows, as well as VST, AU, RTAS, and others for Mac. In some
cases, each of the above has to have a 32 and 64 bit version. Further, many
companies sell products built on their sampler platforms like Kontakt, and
those people need to be able to create a single version, and have it run in all
of those formats, and on Windows and Mac. That's why they make their own
generic user interface that has nothing to do with Windows or Mac OS.
That might seem like they could fix it in one place and be fine, but it isn't
that simple. If they change the code that renders the UI, then they have to go
through a long process of testing it on multiple formats and OSes to be sure
that one of their products doesn't react strangely now. All might seem fine,
until they get reports that the 64-bit RTAS version ofone of the plugs is not
displaying correctly, but only on Mac. All of their partner developers that
build on Kontakt will also have to re-test. Most of them use Kontakt and the
like so that they don't have to be expert programmers with multiple formats and
operating systems, but a radical redesign of the user interface rendering code
means that they must re-test everything everywhere, to be sure no surprises pop
up.
It is a technically complex process, will require lots of money to study and
then fix, and lots of people involved don't care to create work and expense for
themselves, or alienate customers, by fixing what they don't consider is
broken. To make it happen, you must be able to supply some clear idea of what
must be technically accomplished, and where the people and money will come from
to fix it. Even then, the project managers won't want to take on new projects
that will put them behind schedule, the developers won't want the added work
and bugs, the sales people won't want to upset the partner developers, the
partner developers will resent the required money and time that is being asked
of them, and upper management will want to know why we're spending all of this
money on something that is distracting us from finishing the version that we
need to put out on schedule if we're going to meet earnings estimates this year.
If it was a quick and simple fix, no one would mind. For them to do anything,
though, is a major technical project. I'd like to use their stuff, but I
realize why it isn't going to happen. I feel like people just get too worked up
over Native Instruments.
There are choices. If you are really doing this for a living, then you're
earning good money, and you can pay what it costs to put together the sort of
solution that will allow you to compose with these sorts of sounds. That's what
sighted composers do, so it isn't like you're having to pay that much more to
be able to still accomplish this sort of goal if you're blind. If it's just a
hobby for you, and you aren't rich enough to drop $30,000+ on a hobby, then,
what can I say, the only alternative is to make the best of the alternatives,
while everyone else waits for Native Instruments to care. Maybe you can compose
with a library that you can use, and sub-contract to someone else with the pro
libraries to arrange/mix it for you.
Bryan
On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:59 AM, <ivanlopez@xxxxxxxxxxx> <ivanlopez@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> I am hearing folks say at least three different things regarding
> making software blind user friendly: If some companies do not make
> blind user software on the basis of difficulty, that is one thing, if
> they don’t do it on the basis of misinformation, that is another, and
> if they don’t do it because it is something they can do but they just
> don’t want to do it, that is another.
>
> For reason one, acceptance of the temporary dilemma is viable, for the
> second, as someone pointed out, if we blind folks know it will be an
> easy fix, lets educate the companies, if the 3rd is the reality, we
> might want to consider a civil rights rout.
>
> However, it looks like there is lots of speculation with the reality
> we are facing: are companies really not making their software user
> friendly because it is difficult? Are the companies not making their
> software accessible because they need more information because they
> lack expertise? Or are they not doing it on the basis of arbitrary or
> capricious action? Who really knows? I don’t
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: [ddots-l] Re: Native instruments?
>> From: Chris Smart <csmart8@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thu, July 07, 2011 7:09 am
>> To: ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> At 08:08 AM 7/7/2011, you wrote:
>>> I think that a lot of companies think that making a piece of
>>> software accessible will require a complete reworking of the gui.
>>> There are much easier and more reliable ways of making programs
>>> accessible these days.
>>
>> Gord, I write companies regularly about this, but I don't have enough
>> facts to make a strong case that will make sense to the programming
>> folks.
>>
>> Can you elaborate on some of these methods?
>>
>> thanks
>> Chris
>>
>> PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
>> To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
>> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
>> If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
>> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> and in the Subject line type
>> unsubscribe
>> For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
>> immediately following link:
>> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq or send a message, to
>> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and in the Subject line type faq
>
> PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
> To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe
> If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> and in the Subject line type
> unsubscribe
> For other list commands such as vacation mode, click on the
> immediately following link:
> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject q or send a message, to
> ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx and in the Subject line type faq
>
<
PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
unsubscribe
For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject�q or
send a message, to
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
faq
Other related posts: