[real-eyes] Re: Accessible Cell Phones
- From: Mitchell Lynn <mlynn@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: real-eyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 16:36:28 -0500
Yeah, I have the MS Office thing. We ain't getting along with that
stinking ribbon thing. To borrow from Lynyrd Skynyrd, "Gimme' back my
menus."
Last I knew, none of the Google stuff worked with speech. Was surprised
when I saw options for accessibility. I am sure if they put their minds
and resources to work on it, we would get a solution that would blow us
all away.
On 04/23/14 2:43 PM, Jim Fettgather wrote:
> Microsoft has now changed it from SkyDrive to One Drive, mainly to avoid
> another lawsuit.
> It's Office 365 online word processor actually works pretty well and can be
> found at
> https://office.live.com/start/Word.aspx?ui=en%2DUS
>
> Google Docs seems to only work well with the Chrome Browser and the
> Chromevox screen reader extension.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mitchell Lynn
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 2:25 PM
> To: real-eyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [real-eyes] Re: Accessible Cell Phones
>
> 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
>
>
> 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:
