If there was not such a variety of gestures, say only three, I would not have
so much objection to them. All that flicking up, down, to the right,to the left
- ?
Bye for now,
Carolyn
-----Original Message-----
From: optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of DavidPlumlee (Redacted sender "knobman" for DMARC)
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2016 2:52 PM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: gesturing: was a question regarding the ergonomic
design and mechanics of the optacon III
Hi, Chuck,
I think I fit into that group of blind people who use gesturing on an iPhone;
but I strongly prefer a keyboard with real buttons! Fundamentally, I classify
myself as a "knob freak" in that, from my youth, I have been "hooked" on
equipment with knobs - the more, the merrier! Of course, knobs and buttons
were what we had in those days. There is a fundamental imprecision in gestures
as a whole which really "bugs me." Both speed and amount of finger travel get
into the act to make gestures flaky by nature. I think you are on the right
track by using buttons, switches and knobs on the new Optacon.
-----Original Message-----
From: optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On ;
Behalf Of C. Pond
Sent: Thursday, 29 December, 2016 10:05 PM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] gesturing: was a question regarding the ergonomic design
and mechanics of the optacon III
True, blind folks do use the gesturing inputs. My experience when being around
them with their smart-devices chattering away is that although they do
accomplish their tasks and indeed do develop a kinaesthetic awareness of what
they must do, when observed and actually counted and noted, the blind users
make more inadvertent mistakes and mis-gestures than actual correct ones. They
have learned to deal with it, so in the end it might slow things down but it
does not hinder their accessibility. Unlike a typist or a piano player who
also uses her kinaesthetic training to use her keyboards, and during which she
has also tactile feedback, blind folks who use gestures on their smart-devices
do not have this tactile / haptic experience.
Personally (not that it matters), I prefer an external device like a braille
display and its native keyboard connected to whatever is the consumer host
computer device, rather than using gestures and touch-sensitive surfaces.
Incidentally, as it WAS, the Optacon III did have nice, clear, tactile-friendly
buttons.
Chuck whose wrist is really too painful for any gesturing!
-----Original Message-----
From: Debby Franson
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:41 PM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: a question regarding the ergonomic design and
mechanics of the optacon III
Hi Carolyn!
Yes, It's the interface that iPhones, iPads, iPods, Android tablets and Kindle
Fire tablets have. There are no physical buttons, or maybe one for the power,
but you interact with it by tapping and swiping, and other jestures. I make so
many mistakes that I find them frustrating. I'm old school. I like physical
buttons. I don't understand how people with no sight like me use such things
accurately, though I have witnessed sightless people zipping around on their
iDevices.
Debby
At 10:09 AM 12/21/2016, Carolyn Arnold wrote
What is a touch interface? Is it like an iPhone?
Bye for now,
Carolyn
-----Original Message-----
From: optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:optacon-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Debby Franson
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 12:27 AM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: a question regarding the ergonomic design and
mechanics of the optacon III
Hi Chuck!
I can't seem to get used to a touch interface. I have an iPad, Android
Galaxy, I think it's called and an iPod Touch, and I find them all
frustrating.
Debby
At 07:14 PM 12/14/2016, C. Pond wrote
Personally, if I had my druthers, I would like just a simple, small,work fine as they are.
straightforward, uncomplicated optacon without these extras.
However, although I have done no formal studies, it just seems by all
accounts that such a preferable device would not take serious flight.
So, it seems that an optacon must be a modular part of an access
device, with the default mode being the nice and straightforward optacon
mode.
I wouldn't say things are speeing up; I'm simply working with what I
have, when I can, until more favourable winds blow. I meet soon with
a certain bank to take steps in finally setting up a legal/financial
accountable entity to receive money to take the optacon/braille
display to the finish line. Production and sales is a different
matter, of which I know basically nothing.
The main technical challenge is reducing the power consumption, and
making the power pack smaller than its at least 6 D-cell batteries
minimum. There is a completely suitable alternative energy solution
which I have developed for such things as transportation, but at this
point there might be legal issues which prevent me from dropping it
very simply into the optacon and easily doing away with the portable
power problem m. Although several materials are being studied to
improve the displays' efficiency (which would not be noticed by the
user), these efforts and strategies are to reduce power consumption,
and even if they don't happen, I'm not worried about the displays;
they
far, far less resource fuss.
The basic optacon software itself is straightforward, and it could be
programmed or written to be run on anything really: a tablet, a
smartphone, a handheld computer. I'm thinking that rather than using
an off-the-shelf, small motherboard and with the braille display and
optacon as its peripherals--in addition to the board as a standard
computer--why tie the purchaser to one's version of the computer,
when one cann simply use a prefered tablet or whatever. I have not
yet tried to program the basic optacon functions in Android or use
them with a tablet or smartphone. I have bypassed any operating
system, and programmed two boards using C++ and the required
assembler. I kind of wonder about the need for these portable O/S
platforms, when well-designed software can drive the computer boar
directly and with
Of course, if there ends up being one module as the braille display,laptop but with the power and portability of a laptop.
its keyboard, another for the basic optacon, and then one fits in
their prefered portable computing device for its own accessible use,
this raises the issue of streamlined ergonomics--the form factor.
The use of a touch tablet, however, would open up some interesting
possibilities, not to mention making the device more in line with
consumer products and more easily updated.
In and of themselves, the braille display and standard notetaking
functions, and the optacon, do not require a standard computer mother
board or even a tablet or smartphone, although they are useful and
convenient. Something like the French "Essytime" (it is called
something like that), which is a braille display built directly into
a standard portable computer with a perkins keyboard, and so their
accessible computer, not needing a built-in display as a lid, and
with no qwerty keyboard, is quite portable and smaller than the
standard
The French use a standard computer motherboard, so it can be easilypackage.
updated and consumer compatible save for the braille display.
Several decades ago now, I took the design of Smith-Kettlewell's
"Note-A-Braille", refined it, added to it, and gradually migrated it
from a hardware bench device to mostly software using C++; it was a
test project for academic purposes, not an intended product, So, the
braille display module and its software / optacon combo can easily be
done without the need for a standard computer as part of the consumer
So, back to the modular approach: the software for the notetaker, the
braille display module and perkins keyboard which contains the
notetaker software (its board is like a small cracker) and advanced
optacon bells and whistles, the autonymous optacon module and its
nifty camera...and then
what: must there be an obligatory computer so it will sell because
one would have the full use of a fully accessible computer? It is
becoming too convoluted for my personal comfort. All of this stuff
so that our irreplaceable optacon will have a market? Yes, one could
use the braille/optacon combo as a peripheral for whichever computer
they have and this as it should be of course, but this again raises
the ergonomics issue.--does it?
Personally, if I had my way, why not just a simple, nicely updated
and straightforward optacon and that would be that. It appears that
reality requires a more encompassing solution.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Debby Franson
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2016 3:34 PM
To: optacon-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optacon-l] Re: a question regarding the ergonomic design
and mechanics of the optacon III
Hi Chuck!
I'm glad your progress is speeding up. That's exciting.
I agree with you about tacking on the smart display would probably
make a clunkier design, being the worst of the options.
Could a cover be made to put on to cover the "fat domino" space,
similar to the cover that is placed over the spot on the optacon II
when the battery pack is removed? That cover would protect whatever
the opening leaves exposed and keep dust out.
I agree that one versital unit would be best.
Debby
At 02:13 AM 12/12/2016, C. Pond wrote
An optacon III ergonomic mechanical question if I may in order to
make it marketable, accompanied by a pre-amble for its context:
As things stand now, the optacon III’s display has evolved
from a
meree
dumb display (a mere vibrotactile output device which feels
something like a fat domino)) to a stand-alone display into which
the nifty camera and power and whatever can be plugged. This way,
the camera and the smart-display can be mechanically connected to
form a crude one-handed optacon with room for improvement, or they
can be used each in one hand as we traditionally have done.
Although I am still really concerned about the power monster, and
I’m working with
tuflon and a few otherr
experimental strategies to reduce power consumption, I’m not
worriedd
about a vibrotactile display. We have a two-handed optacon---even
in its basic formâ€Ã¢€Âand since Mr. Noel Runyan recommended a
none-handedoption, we
now have that as well. So be it. Having said these things, it is
my “senseâ€Ã‚ or belief that a simple up-to-date small
optacon
simply willll
not sell, take wings and fly. no matter the zeal of present optacon
users. I could be wrong, given proper education of blind
people, especially children, but that is how it looks realistically
from this user’s vantage. If no new optacon users come along,
ten years
sfrom noww
will show a very different optacon-user landscape compared to today.
Therefore, from this line of reasoning, I have combined the basic
optacon III with a small, standard computer (around the size of a
Braille Sense U2 32-cell model; smaller than a Braille Lite 40)
and a built-in 32-cell braille display (which unfortunately and to
my chagrin and sincere regret and wish for the contrary is
proprietary at this time, and this goes against Every sentiment
and wish within me to have it so!). The braille display can be
built by hand for a few hundred dollars, and likely would be less
costly if produced by automation and in numbers greater than 99
per batch. At this point, the optacon III’s
sn
display fits nicely behind the spacebar and between dots 1 and 4
of the device’s perkin
n
s keyboard. So, along one long edge at the front is the 32-cell
display (built with banks of 4 braille cells per bank, smaller
than bimorph-based cells), and the optacon III’s display is
right at
the back edge,,
between dots 1 and 4, and therefore in the middle of the edge.
The device has as many useful functions as any hand-held computer
with a robust braille display and good accessibility. However, if
the optacon III’s vibrotactile display is built into the
hand-held
computer withh
its inexpensive and robust braille display, several questions come
to mind for which I do need feedback.
1. Although the smart display could be made mechanically to slide
in and out of its place, like the old PCMCIA cards, when the
display is removed and connected to its camera, a rectangle-like
void about the size of a fat domino would be left in the hand-held
computer with its braille display. So, what to do in order to
prevent this mechanical oddity or use the empty display space?
2. Is there a better way to design the mechanics of the device?
The only reason why I’m evolving toward solidifying the
optacon
sIII’s
‰„¢s
design as part of an encompassing system is that on its own, a new
optacon likely would not sell, so other things must be added.
Likely enough, most people would use the braille display and
computer more often than the optacon III’s vibrotactile
display. The only two
dreasons I can see forr
being able to detach the optacon III’s display from the
hand-held
din the first place.
computer are:
1. To connect it to its camera for one-handed use.
2. To use it as a stand-alone, small, versatile optacon.
Otherwise, and if a stand-alone optacon would indeed sell, this
stuff about a hand-held computer with a built-in braille display
would not be an issue.
If the smart display were merely tacked onto one end or the other
of the hand-held computer, that would solve nothing and would make
ergonomic design and use even worse.
I doubt a market exists for two optacon III versions: a one-handed
optacon and a two-handed optacon, and also not likely for a simple,
stand-alone optacon III. If I had my way, I would build the
detachable optacon III into an encompassing system, and find a good
use for that fat domino void, or find a way so it doesn’t
happen
.
.message to:
So, please, any thoughts and suggestions? No doubt the mechanical
solution for this is simple and straightforward.
Chuck
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe"
(without the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a
message
to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a
message
to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a
message
to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without the
quotes) in the message subject.
to view the list archives, go to:
www.freelists.org/archives/optacon-l
To unsubscribe at any time, just send a message to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "unsubscribe" (without
the
quotes) in the message subject.
Tell your friends about the list. They can subscribe by sending a
message
to:
optacon-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word "subscribe" (without the
quotes) in the message subject.
