Re: Itunes

  • From: "Gary Wood" <k8hlx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:12:35 -0500

Hi Chris! Those are my sentiments, exactly! That's what teamwork is all about! To me, we should work with those who are willing to work with us! It looks like Panasonic is willing to make their products accessible to us, but I was wondering if we should ask Sony to make theirs, as well! But you have a great point about working with, and buying products from, those who are willing to make theirs accessible. I think that those who are willing should be rewarded by us for their efforts in our behalf!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Skarstad" <toonhead5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:54 AM
Subject: Re: Itunes


This is going to be my last word on this subject, because I think I've made myself clear as to how I feel. I kind of take issue with Darrel's comments below, only because as I said before, it, is, all, in, how, you, go, about, it.
We have to go to these companies and say you know, we would use your products, but we can't. It's all about the bottom line y'all, and the bottom line is about loss of revenue.
The thing is we have to proove to them that it would be a significant loss, and that's where the problems come in. We are clearly a minority, that much I agree with. But we should still be granted access to these products. Having a defeatest attitude, or one that is too forceful or militant, helps, no, one.
Also as I said, instead of beating our heads against the walls trying to work with companies who have no interest in making their products accessible, let's find companies who offer similar products and software programs, but who *are* interested in access for everybody. Itunes ain't the end all be all in music software, folks. To me itunes is a piece of crap, I was never really all that impressed with it, even with the scripts.
I sent a note to Red Chair software thanking them for making their program Anapod Explorer accessible to me. I'm sure they were thankful for the kind words, and it may have opened their eyes, bad pun i know but it's true, about their user base. Unlike Apple, some companies are interested in making their stuff accessible, so I say, let's work with them instead. After all, why beat your head against the wall working with someone who doesn't want to work, when you can find someone who does and get the same job done and there's less of a headache? why take the long way around.

At 07:57 PM 1/10/2006, you wrote:
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

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

>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
>>These companies must certainly continue doing their part to
develop >>and
>>implement technologies that make our technology lives more >>accessible.
>>the other hand, mainstream tech companies must also do the right
thing >>by
>>meeting us the other halfway, reasonably accomodating accessibility
>>We must ask and insist on it if necessary, finally using the >>available
>>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
>>that's the case, we're stuck and inaccessibility is getting worse
for >>us
>>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
>>>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
>>>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"
>>>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
>>>>Jobs asking for Apple to do more to make their products and >>>>services
>>>>accessible. Second, let's start participating in the forums over >>>>at
>>>> 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
>>>>large could care less whether or not we jump in the lake, but the
>>>>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.
>>>>everyone in the companies we need to become more accessible simply
>>>>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"
>>>>To: <blindcasting@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 7:24 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: Itunes
>>>>>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
>>>>>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
>>>>>I couldn't blaim some blind folks for ganging up on them. I
>>>>>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
>>>>>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
>>>>>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.
>>>>>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
>>>>>>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
>>>>>>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.
>>>>>>>----- Original Message ----- From: "BlindTech of >>>>>>>BlindTechs.Net"
>>>>>>>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
>>>>>>>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 and
>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>- -- >>>>>HolmesGrown Solutions
>>>>>The best solutions for the best price!
>>>>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>>Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
>>>>>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>- -- >HolmesGrown Solutions
>The best solutions for the best price!
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

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


Other related posts: