[blindlaw] Accessibility of eDiscovery Platforms ...

[Gerard Sadlier]

All,

I largely agree with all that has been said about JAWS and I think its
days are numbered unless it really gets its act together. I at least
am seriously considering moving to NVDA permanently/fully and given
that NVDA is free, once lost, customers of JAWS will not be back.

Discovery platforms are reasonably specialized and I can understand
that may be a nitch market but the point made about accounting
software for example is telling! (I happen not to need access to such
myself on a regular basis at the moment but that isn't really the
point.)

I take it though that Freedom Scientific are aware how significant the
access problems are with discovery platforms?

Many thanks

Ger

On 7/7/16, Rod Alcidonis, Esquire via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Elizabeth:
>
> Government institutions represent the main cause of the problem. As long as
> they keep purchasing JAWS without any demands from Freedom Scientific, each
> update to the software will continue to be full of gimmicks ant not much to
> be helpful in a job environment. If Freedom Scientific was a company truly
> committed to accessibility and not just its bottom line, by now it would
> fully support at least one major accounting software, legal practice
> management software, and Etc.. This will happen only when the folks who
> subsidize its existence begin to mount sufficient pressure to change the
> status quo. Because the company fail so miserably in that department, I find
> it to be a joke to continue to refer to JAWS as "Job Access With Speech" and
> not as something else.
>
> Currently, sound engineers have to work on their own accessibility package
> to operate their studios. Lawyers have to develop custom scripts to get
> basic access to case management software; accountants are in the same boat.
> call center technologies have been left behind. Educators barely have access
> to modern applications. But some how, Freedom Scientific remains the only
> king in the industry.
>
>
>
> Rod Alcidonis, Esq.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Elizabeth Rene via BlindLaw
> Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2016 11:44 AM
> To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> Cc: Elizabeth Rene
> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Accessibility of eDiscovery Platforms ...
>
> Hi all,
> Having read the last few posts with keen interest, I'm beginning to wonder
> whether it isn't time for the blind legal community and for other like
> groups  to insist to Freedom Scientific that it produce versions of JAWS
> that are compatible with the leading professional software programs.
> Haven"t the days of one-size-fits-all passed? Isn't it time for blind
> lawyers to stop saying to employers, to opposing counsel, and to the court,
> "I'm sorry, but JAWS won't do that?"
> With the prices charged for JAWS, and with Apple/VoiceOver's stiff
> competition, should we continue to spend hours and hours crafting
> work-arounds when we should be practicing law?
> I'm growing impatient with hostagehood to the technology that was developed
> to serve us.
> We are the consumers.
>
> Elizabeth M René
> Attorney at Law
> WSBA #10710
> KCBA #21824
> rene0373 at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> BlindLaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/attorney%40alcidonislaw.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BlindLaw mailing list
> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> BlindLaw:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com
>