Re: Window Eyes
- From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:58:01 +0300
Well, I also agree. I don't think that this is a good marketing strategy.
I think that if a well known program uses a set of hotkeys which are used by
many users, and they like them, there would be an advantage to use the same
set of hotkeys in another program, because the users will adopt it faster.
That's why most of the programs have a File menu, Edit menu, Help menu, and
sometimes Tools, Options, View, and so on.
I think the English language is big enough to allow the programmer to choose
other words, but I think that everybody knows that this would confuse the
users.
The same thing with the hotkeys used by screen readers.
Of course that if somebody started to use a screen reader by using Window
Eyes with its default interface will like it, and if that person will try
another interface, he would think that the Window Eyes is the best one.
And of course there might be also some users that like to use the num pad
arrow keys instead of the common arrow keys, because maybe they don't need
to use the numbers from the num pad very much, or for other reasons, but if
the screen reader offers a key layout compatibility, it should really work,
and it should work the most used core hotkeys, not only those who can be
probably changed by the users.
Octavian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Hofstader" <chris.hofstader@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 2:40 PM
Subject: RE: Window Eyes
The WE JAWS layout didn't "anger" me, I just found it annoying. Office
2007
claims a lot of backward compatibility for keystrokes with Office 2003 and
before. I find this really annoying too as partial compatibility is more
confusing than no intentional compatibility at all.
I also find that superfluous incompatibility for incompatibility sake is
really annoying. After we put Quick Keys into JAWS, GW came out with a
similar feature but rather than using us as a model, picked a different
set
of keystrokes which did little more than confuse people who need to use
both.
I don't know, I've never been a UI guy so I'm probably full of poop on
this
subject.
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jared Wright
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:34 PM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Window Eyes
Octavian Rasnita wrote:
"it could be made to work like Jaws..."
As a Window Eyes user of many years who is also competent if not
amazingly proficient with JFW, working like JAWS is the last thing I
want Window Eyes to do. Which is exactly the point. There can be plenty
of arguments made about the philosophies behind the different UI's that
JFW and Window Eyes employ, but the truth is that you couldn't use
Window Eyes wanting it to be JFW more than you could use JFW wanting it
to be Window Eyes. This is why I frowned on the JFW keyboard layout
option. ON the one hand, I totally value the ease of transition for JFW
users not familiar with Window Eyes. ON the other, you really can't slap
the JFW layout onto the guts of Window Eyes no matter what you do
because of their fundamental differences. So the JFW layout only ends up
angering people like Teddy because it really isn't a JFW layout in the
sense that they want it to be.
Jared
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________ NOD32 3027 (20080415) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
