RE: Window Eyes
- From: "Macarty, Jay {PBSG}" <Jay.Macarty@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:52:14 -0500
Very valid points. I was a beta tester for Jaws when they went from the
16 bit to 32 bit version. Interesting times. :)
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris
Hofstader
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 5:43 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Window Eyes
There are some very delicate parts of JAWS and I would assume WE and HAL
as
well that rely on 32 bit instructions in the OS. It will be pretty hard
to
get that part right in a world where everything is twice as large.
System
Access and NVDA, which rely almost entirely on API to gather information
from the screen will be less badly effected.
Getting JAWS or WE to run somewhat well on a 64 bit system will probably
not
be terribly hard or time consuming. Getting them to run reliably on the
other hand will take months of tweaks and bug reports from some very
daring
users who are willing to install a 64 bit OS and then run it with a
likely
unstable screen reader. The combination of the difficulty of the task
matched with a small test sample makes me quite happy that I'm not
managing
that release of JAWS.
Enjoy,
cdh
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of inthaneelf
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 1:32 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Window Eyes
ok, well I hope they do, the last person I talked to said that they herd
that there were no plans to support it, but that... was almost a year
ago,
so I will be glad to be out of date on this, and when I start working on
my
new desktop, I'll plan for that, yea!
thanks,
inthane
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Harmon" <rickharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 4:44 PM
Subject: Re: Window Eyes
> I've heard rumors a couple of months ago that FS will support 64 bit
in
> Jaws
> 10.0
>
> Rick
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "inthaneelf" <inthaneelf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 7:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Window Eyes
>
>
> just a note on one point Laura, smile
>
> as far as I have been told by folks, neither jaws or WE have announced
to
> anyone that I have talked to that they plan on supporting 64 bit OS's,
> why?
> I have no bloody clue, it seems ridiculous to me, but that's the way I
> have
> herd it, and it was intonated that Hal was going the same route,
*shrug*
>
> take care,
> inthane
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tribble" <lauraeaves@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Window Eyes
>
>
>> Wow--what a thread --
>> I own both jaws and an older version of WE, and I tend to side a
little
>> with
>> Teddy, while understanding the argument that window eyes enthusiasts
are
>> taking. First, a blind person needs to learn so many sets of hot
keys,
>> windows/application/screen reader and whatever else -- that it is
>> extremely
>> annoying to be told to change to a new configuration just to do basic
>> operations with a screen reader. And second, someone mentioned
something
>> about using a mouse cursor and text cursor independently in window
>> eyes --
>> but how is this different from what jaws does? In fact, jaws has 3
(or
>> more?) cursors that can be used in scripting to jump around to
wherever
>> the
>> user wants, or route to wherever, so could someone more familiar with
>> both
>> jaws and window eyes explain what the differences are in cursor
handling?
>> I'm not a proficient window eyes user and would like to know. Or
maybe I
>> should go vista and download nvda or SAToGo...
>> And speaking of vista, jaws currently doesn't work on the 64 bit
>> version --
>> does window eyes?
>> --le
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Chris Hofstader" <chris.hofstader@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:40 AM
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> __________
> 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
>
>
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________ NOD32 3030 (20080416) 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:
