[real-eyes] Re: Accessible Cell Phones
- From: Mitchell Lynn <mlynn@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: real-eyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 14:25:03 -0500
Agree on Google being a problem with screen readers. I was hoping Google
Docs might work since they had an option for those using screen readers.
Not much luck there at all, and Google Drive, while usable, is still a
pain in the butt. I was going to give MS Sky Drive (or whatever they are
calling it these days) a run, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
On 04/23/14 12:46 PM, Fettgather, Jim wrote:
> Google is just about the worst offender at not following its own
> accessibility guidelines, whether it be on their smart phones and tablets, or
> on their web sites.
>
> I have found that when setting up a Gmail account, on certain fields such as
> gender, or country of origin, if using jaws, you must disable the virtual
> cursor with Insert Z to make them work properly.
> With Window-Eyes, it's necessary to go out of browse mode, not sure about
> NVDA. At any rate, it is completely counter intuitive and makes the set up
> process laborious and unnecessarily difficult.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: real-eyes-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:real-eyes-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Mitchell Lynn
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 12:36 PM
> To: real-eyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [real-eyes] Re: Accessible Cell Phones
>
> Yes. That is one of the examples I was thinking of. One or two more Matt
> Honan incidents, and I think we will see things really start to move.
> But what about these Ubikeys I keep seeing on the net. There are also
> other dongle devices used for one-time passwords, and I doubt any of
> those are accessible at all. Most are based on the current time, and
> they expire within 30 seconds or so.
>
> I tried a couple of times to set up a Google account. Can't do it, but
> it isn't the Captia that gives me issues, it's trying to figure out the
> field names and the combo boxes. Even in browse mode, those fields are
> triggering with error messages, and they cut off the descriptions of the
> element I am trying to discover.
>
> On 04/23/14 10:59 AM, Fettgather, Jim wrote:
>> Yet another situation where the two-factor authentication is prevalent is in
>> the creation of a Google account.
>> You can choose to try to solve the CAPCHA, or, provide a number to which a
>> text message can be sent, it works beautifully every time.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: real-eyes-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:real-eyes-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> On Behalf Of Mitchell Lynn
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 10:09 AM
>> To: real-eyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [real-eyes] Re: Accessible Cell Phones
>>
>> I don't expect to get a lot of texts. What I want it for is potential
>> 2-factor authentication. There are other ways to do this, but this is
>> the only one that looks like it might be accessible to us. I think the
>> time is approaching when most sites will be using 2-factor
>> authentication. It might not be required for every-day logins from a
>> known node, but if you need to reset a password or try to logon from a
>> device you haven't used before, they (the site that is) will want to
>> verify that you are who you say you are. The time is coming when being
>> able to supply "something you know" as verification won't be enough;
>> they will also want to verify with "something you possess." A couple of
>> weeks back, I wanted to try out XPN. I couldn't even get signed up
>> without a mobile number.
>> I didn't get the chance to investigate this further (as this was when I
>> ran into that nasty mess with the new system) but strongly suspect that
>> their need for a mobile number was for 2-factor authentication.
>>
>>
>> On 04/23/14 9:32 AM, kitty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> mitchell, hopefully someone will have more info re accessible ones. But,
>>> the killer is that you typically end up paying more for being able to text.
>>> For instance, I have a very basic verizon plan. Cost around $30.00. I am
>>> told by their sales staff that if I wanted any plan that included texting,
>>> the minimal cost would be $30 plus whatever typical voice costs would be.
>>> So, all that to say that seems to me that texting can be rather expensive.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Mitchell Lynn
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 9:58 AM
>>> To: Real-Eyes
>>> Subject: [real-eyes] Accessible Cell Phones
>>>
>>> Okay,
>>> Maybe someone here can suggest where I might learn about accessible cell
>>> phones also cheapest plans etc. I've Googled this, and the hits are
>>> overwhelming. I am an utter neophyte on this subject. Never so much as
>>> dialed one of these, and my total talk time on one wouldn't fill the
>>> commercial break in your favorite TV series. When you get right down to
>>> it, I am less inclined to hold a cell phone than I would be to pick up a
>>> snake.
>>>
>>> I have only one requirement: it must be able to voice text messages. If
>>> it can be arranged that voice communications could be disabled, all the
>>> better <grin>.
>>>
>>> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
>>> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>>>
>>>
>>> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
>>> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
>> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>>
>>
>> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
>> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>>
>>
>>
> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>
>
> To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go
> to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
>
>
>
To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go to
www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes
Other related posts:
