[nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development

[Mike Freeman]

It's quite possible. However, on the Washington Council of the Blind list
yesterday, Carl Jarvis (an IL program contractor) said that plenty of older
folks got frustrated even with things like the way most clocks say the word
"It's" before the time, as in "it's ten-thirty-two".

Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Torcolini
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 8:19 PM
To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development

Hmm, actually, the problem that I have found with some elderly people trying
to use talking products is that the products are not loud enough. Some of
the elderly people who I know actually like some of the talking products
that they have. 

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Freeman
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 10:47 AM
To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Ethics of screen reader friendly development

Tracy: 
I don't think marketing would make a whit of difference. As you say, the
learning curve is too steep and most people are singularly lacking in
patience. Whether we like it or not, people don't like conversing with
machines with the possible exception of GPS devices.. And the elderly in
general don't want to learn something new; they just want their sight back
if they have lost vision. Even talking watches are often too complicated for
them. 

Mike Freeman


On May 21, 2013, at 10:03, "Tracy Carcione" <carcione at access.net> wrote:

> But do they have to know it's "disabled stuff"?  What if it was 
> advertised like "See these nifty things you can do without needing to 
> look at the screen"?
> My sister can see OK, and she didn't know Voiceover was on her iphone. 
> Now she'd like to use it, although maybe not enough to go through the 
> learning curve.
> Tracy
> 
>> Jim,
>> 
>> You pick an interesting example.  While I would agree that people are 
>> not using VoiceOver in their cars, the van I carpool in has a system 
>> where the phone connects to the stereo system and in-coming calls are 
>> announced including who is calling along with other status messages.  
>> However, this is part of the car's system and not the phone.  It does 
>> not read text messages, but our driver wishes it did.  I think some 
>> of the trouble is marketing, but I also tend to think that is speech 
>> is promoted to the public that it is likely some of the extra 
>> capabilities we need will get lost.  Even if there is a need, sighted 
>> people don't want to use that there disabled stuff.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, 21 May 2013 06:46:41 -0700, Jim Barbour wrote:
>> 
>>> I must say I've always been very skeptical of the argument that if 
>>> devices talked sighted people would use them when driving,
>> etc. The iPhone seems to be a pretty good indication  that this 
>> doesn't happen.  sighted people could use voice over when driving if 
>> they wanted to, but rarely do.
>> 
>>> Jim
>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On May 21, 2013, at 6:05 AM, "Tracy Carcione" <carcione at access.net>

_______________________________________________
nfbcs mailing list
nfbcs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/ntorcolini%40wavecable.co
m


_______________________________________________
nfbcs mailing list
nfbcs at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbcs_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nfbcs:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbcs_nfbnet.org/k7uij%40panix.com