[nabs-l] Independence with a Price Tag

David Andrews dandrews at visi.com
Wed Feb 3 10:58:59 UTC 2010


On the face of it what you say is true -- unfortunately, below the 
surface things are more complex.

Yes, Serotek is bringing down prices for individuals -- however, 
possibly at a cost.  I work for a state rehab agency -- we place 
people in competitive employment -- or at least try to (smile.)  The 
technology people are using at work is becoming increasingly 
sophisticated and complex.  We often need the upper end facilities 
for scripting provided by JAWS or Window-Eyes to make a job site 
accessible.  Serotek and NVDA just don't cut it.  They aren't trying 
to, but they also take the easy sales away from JAWS and Window-Eyes, 
leaving them with less of the market, and not providing them with the 
revenue they need to support the more complex applications.

It really is becoming more difficult providing blind people with 
access to entry-level jobs -- we do have a problem here.  And -- as 
much as they help in some areas, System Access and NVDA are also 
hurting us in some ways too.

Dave

At 12:29 AM 2/3/2010, you wrote:
>Joe,
>
>You're not the only person taking a look at what some call the 
>"blindness tax." Products that cost a lot of money, are geared 
>specifically to the blind, and either don't compete equally with 
>mainstream products and/or hardly do so have now been dubbed "blind 
>ghetto products" simply because they do charge such an outrageous 
>price even though they do exactly or nearly exactly what mainstream 
>products do.
>
>One company that's currently looking into these issues is SEROTEK. 
>SEROTEK's business model is all about reducing the blindness tax and 
>making necessary technology affordable to everyday blind consumers. 
>SEROTEK openly supports companies who build products with universal 
>design in mind since they would cost the same for a blind person to 
>use them as a sighted person. Their products are priced according to 
>what blind people can realistically be expected to pay, and SEROTEK 
>supports mainstream products that have the duel function of helping 
>the blind whether they were designed to or not. Keep your web 
>browser pointed to http://www.serotalk.com for podcasts and other 
>media related to both A.T. and mainstream technology with similar 
>characteristics that I've mentioned here.
>
>One way to put a dent into the pockets of those who would charge a 
>blindness tax is not to buy their products or ask the government to 
>buy them for us. For example, instead of choosing Jaws for Windows, 
>a screen reader built by a company notorious for charging a 
>blindness tax, try screen readers such as System Access, NVDA, or 
>VoiceOver with the Mac. These readers are either free or low cost 
>and work just as well as the conventional readers do for most every 
>consumer. Similarly, buying mainstream products such as OmniPage 
>instead of OpenBook is another example. Buying from blindness 
>specific companies who make a genuine effort to lower their prices 
>such as SEROTEK, TalkNav, and KNFB Reading Technologies is another 
>way to make a statement with your wallet.
>
>Just keep talking to people about your ideas. You will find quite a 
>few people who support the mainstreaming of blindness technologies 
>especially if it means lowering prices while meeting the same 
>standards for quality as always. There will be some products whose 
>prices won't change unless new materials are sought to make them 
>and/or new methods of making them are discovered. One example would 
>be the Braille display. In this case, it's worth shelling out the 
>money because displays have a variety of uses. In that case, you 
>want companies to support the use of displays without the extra 
>hassle of finding unusual drivers. HandyTech is one company who 
>supports plug and play drivers. I bought a Brailliant, but I'm 
>thinking twice already.
>
>Respectfully,
>Jedi
>Original message:
>>Dear list,
>
>>I'm continuously appalled at the price tags associated with adaptive
>>technology.  While you're in college you might receive assistance from your
>>rehab agency to purchase equipment.  You may get some assistance after you
>>find a job, but inevitably there comes a point when the expense comes
>>directly from your own pocket.  I wonder how many people have had to settle
>>for outdated technology because they simply cannot afford it.  But, that's
>>the thing.  I'm only assuming there are tons of people who cannot afford
>>this technology.  I'd like to lead a campaign to call public attention to
>>this monopoly, and, I'd like to hear your thoughts on whether or not you
>>think me crazy.  If my assumption is wrong, I'll keep my views to myself.
>>If there is a high number of people unable to tap into emerging software
>>simply because they cannot pay for it, I'd like to hear from you.  I
>>understand the technology itself costs a lot of money to develop.  Yet, it
>>seems more of the price boost is owed to extravagant government contracts
>>that allow the few players to charge something like $6,200 for a device
>>that, despite its best advertisements, does not perform completely on par
>>with its mainstream counterparts.
>
>>At this time I have only a vague idea for a strategy.  Yet it's something
>>I'm willing to build up if the need can be clearly identified.
>
>>Looking forward to your input,
>
>>Joe Orozco
>
>>"A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the
>>crowd."--Max Lucado





More information about the NABS-L mailing list