[nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards, and legal requirements.

Wed Mar 5 17:24:21 UTC 2014

Are they any businesses out there whose sole job is to test accessibility.
Something where a company could provide their software and user stories and
those savvy in accessibility run it through it's paces and report back.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Jim Barbour <jbar at barcore.com> wrote:

> Tracy, this is an excellent usability mission statement for anyone,
> but particularly for eyes free usability.
>
> The challenge is that web developers have a very hard time determining if
> their sites meet this usability mission statement for eyes free users.
>
> IMHO, it is not usually feasible to expect web developers to invest the
> time navigating web pages using a screen reader.  It's uncomfortable for
> them, is time consuming for them, and doesn't provide a lot of return on
> investment for them.
>
> Larger companies, like Google, are in a better position to set up user
> testing, and to have a small staff of screen reader savvy folks who can
> train others and do a very limited amount of testing.
>
> Doug, I'd be very curious to know how you guys recommend structuring a
> product's development and quality control life cycle to effectively take
> accessibility into account.
>
> Take Care,
>
> Jim
>
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 09:41:11AM -0500, Tracy Carcione wrote:
> > Yes.  That's so simple, I guess I was taking it for granted and looking
> for
> > something more complex.
> > If I'm running a program, or visiting a website, I want to spend as
> little
> > effort as possible on figuring out how to make it work.  I just want it
> to
> > do whatever I'm using it to do. I really hate jumping through hoops to
> make
> > something work.
> > Tracy
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicole Torcolini"
> > <ntorcolini at wavecable.com>
> > To: "'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 9:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,and
> > legal requirements.
> >
> >
> > >Sure. Whether or not a person has a disability, it should not a take a
> ton
> > >of brain power to figure out what controls on a page do. Sometimes, how
> a
> > >page is supposed to work is not even obvious to a sighted person.
> Usually,
> > >pages like this have accessibility problems that would be fixed or at
> > >least
> > >slightly better if the whole "what is this thing suppose to do" thing
> was
> > >fixed. Also, regardless of disability, there is the whole expected
> > >behavior
> > >part. If you are writing in an autocomplete combobox textfield, what
> > >should
> > >happen when you press certain keys?
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Tracy
> Carcione
> > >Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 6:48 AM
> > >To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> > >Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,
> and
> > >legal requirements.
> > >
> > >Nicole, could you expand on this statement?  It sounds like an
> interesting
> > >perspective, but I'm not really sure what you mean.
> > >Tracy
> > >
> > >>A large part of accessibility is user experience. It certainly is not
> > >>all of it, but a large number of the problems with which I deal
> > >>probably would not exist if the user experience part was better.
> > >>
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Jim Barbour
> > >>Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 9:33 AM
> > >>To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> > >>Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility, standards,
> > >>and legal requirements.
> > >>
> > >>Hey Suzanne,
> > >>
> > >>A more germane course is probably a course on usability, sometimes
> > >>called human computer interaction.
> > >>
> > >>In there, you'll see the challenges of designing and building apps
> > >>that are usable by a large cross section of the population.  This
> > >>includes people who speak different languages, have differing
> > >>educational backgrounds, different physical impairments, etc.
> > >>
> > >>Since it turns out to be really hard to bring all these people
> > >>together to test your apps, app designers/developers have to come up
> > >>with really good best practices for how to design and built programs.
> > >>Often these practices do not include accessibility, but it is likely
> > >>the right place for a discussion of it.
> > >>
> > >>This whole model though only works well for mature software
> > >>development teams, and not for folks who are working on brand new
> ideas.
> > >>
> > >>Good luck on your degree, Suzanne.  I like seeing more blind people
> > >>get into this industry.
> > >>
> > >>Jim
> > >>
> > >>On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:28:52AM -0700, Suzanne Germano wrote:
> > >>>In my computer science degree, we are required to take a course in
> > >>>computing ethics. There is one chapter that touches on accessibility
> > >>>but it isn't much. I believe from day one of computer science classes
> > >>>the student should be taught how to make the program accessible. I am
> > >>>legally blind and have taken several programming courses yet I do not
> > >>>know how to ensure a piece of software I develop is accessible. I
> > >>>know how important it is yet I dont' know how to do it, so how can we
> > >>>expect people who don't even think about it to know how to do without
> > >>>being taught. It should be mandatory as part of all computer science
> > >>programs.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Mike Freeman <k7uij at panix.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> How can education teach what can't even be defined?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Mike Freeman
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nancy
> > >>>> Coffman
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 5:40 AM
> > >>>> To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Innovation, Usability, Accessibility,
> > >>>> standards, and legal requirements.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The education system needs to teach about accessibility. It is not
> > >>>> fair to those who need it for accessibility to be learned as
> > >>>on-the-job
> > >>training.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Nancy Coffman
> > >>>> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>>>
> > >>>> > On Mar 3, 2014, at 12:30 AM, Jim Barbour <jbar at barcore.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > Like I said, learn to disagree in public.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > We're not talking about contracts here.  If the government has
> > >>>> > contracted
> > >>>> to write an app then accessibility ought to be a requirement -- >
> > >>>even if the department receiving the program doesn't have any blind
> > >>>> people working there. I'm sure we can agree that this is a good
> > >>>> idea and that it's not hapening right now.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > What I'm talking about are startups, or other situations where a
> > >>>> > new app
> > >>>> is getting  off the ground.  In the very beginnings of this apps
> > >>>> lifecycle (a few product designers or just developers trying to
> > >>>> build something brand new), it's not yet the right time to think
> > >>>> hard about accessibility or security.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > Jim
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 08:40:48PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >> Well, you're just making no sense. In your world, a bank
> > >>>> >> president goes
> > >>>> to the programmers. He says, "How's that on-line banking app going?"
> > >>>> The programmers say, "Really good. We have the ability for our
> > >>>> customers to pay bills, transfer money from one account to another,
> > >>check their balances.
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> only thing we can't do yet is keep hackers from getting in and
> > >>>> stealing all their money. Other than that we are ready to go."
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >> You know that if you want to sell a computer system to the
> > >>>> >> Department of
> > >>>> Defense, you have to meet certain security standards, right? why do
> > >>>> you think that is?  Imagine a defense contractor trying to sell the
> > >>>> Pentagon a new missile system. The contractor is like, "this
> > >>>> missile is so fast can get anywhere in the world in two minutes and
> > >>>> so accurate that deliver its payload to withing 2 feet of its
> target."
> > >>>> The Pentagon says, "Yeah, but the control system is insecure. They
> > >>>> enemy will just take control and fire it back at us." The
> > >>>> contractor replies, "Yeah, but look how fast and accurate it is."
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 7:34 PM, Jim Barbour wrote:
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> and John I think you're looking at it wrong, so you and I may
> > >>>> >>> just have
> > >>>> to learn to disgree in public <grin>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> I would, in fact, argue that paying too much attention to
> > >>>> >>> security
> > >>>> concerns early in a product's design cycle can stifle innovation.
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> If a product can't be released as a 1.0 product unless it's
> > >>>> >>> deamed
> > >>>> "secure" by a security audit, that's going to be too high a bar for
> > >>>> a lot of folks. The same question gets asked about security a lot
> > >>>> that I'm asing about accessibility.  That is, when is the product
> > >>>> deemed "worthy of going through a security audit"
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> Your kernel patch comment is interesting, but off topic.  I'll
> > >>>> >>> start a new thread asking more about that.
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> Jim
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 07:06:46PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
> > >>>> >>>> I think you're looking at it wrong. Would you argue that
> > >>>> >>>> security
> > >>>> concerns are stifling innovation with respect to on-line banking?
> > >>>> Of course not. It's simply something that has to be there or the
> > >>>> technology simply isn't ready to go. Accessibility is no different
> > >>>> than other features like stability and security. Would Google have
> > >>>> released gmail before they had security issues pretty well in hand?
> > >>:Okay, here's your new email account.
> > >>>> We don't really know how to keep people from stealing your password
> > >>>> and reading your mail but we're working on that."
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>> Just as companies tend to pay lip service to security issues
> > >>>> >>>> until
> > >>>> they
> > >>>> get bitten by them, they don't pay attention to accessibility until
> > >>>> they have to. The only issue is how to change tthat.
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>> I've been struggling to get a patch into the linux kernel that
> > >>>> >>>> makes
> > >>>> hardware speech synthesizers work at boot time. Some of the kernel
> > >>>> developers don't get what the big deal is. But would they release a
> > >>>> version of the operating system that didn't have video at boot time?
> > >>>> Imagine an operating system where the users had to wait until the
> > >>>> computer started up and then type a command to get the monitor to
> > >>>work.
> > >>That would be insane.
> > >>>> Nobody would say they had to put it out that way because it would
> > >>>> take too long to fix. It just wouldn't be considered to be done
> > >>>> until that problem was addressed.
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> On Mar 2, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Jim Barbour wrote:
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> <note> I'm starting a new thread about this topic because
> > >>>> >>>>> frankly I
> > >>>> don't know if what I'm about to say applies to new versions of MS
> > >>office.
> > >>>>  I
> > >>>> truly don't know if MS is innovating their user interfaces or if
> > >>>> they're just being lazy, and would like for *that* conversation to
> > >>>> take place on the other thread.
> > >>>> >>>>> </note>
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> I was having a similar discussion about innovation with Tim
> > >>>> >>>>> Elder
> > >>>> this
> > >>>> weekend.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> It is my rather strong opinion that allowing innovation does,
> > >>>> >>>>> pretty
> > >>>> much by definition, require that we allow new ideas to grow and
> > >>>> flourish before accessibility can be brought into the picture.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> I would say that this applies to most areas of broad
> > >>>> >>>>> usability
> > >>>> requirements such as Internationalization, localization, varying
> > >>>> color palettes, ergonomic menu placement, etc., etc.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> My favorite example of innovation that would have been
> > >>>> >>>>> stopped cold
> > >>>> by
> > >>>> accessibility standards is the whole AJAX/web 2.0 model that Google
> > >>>> introduced with their gmail product in 2004.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> Google could not have released gmail in 2004 if they had been
> > >>>> required
> > >>>> to make it accessible.  They couldn't have, even if they'd wanted
> > >>>> to. The technology needed to make AJAX accessible, what we now call
> > >>>> the ARIA roles, hadn't been invented yet.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> What basically had to happen was a rather long set of
> > >>>> >>>>> conversations
> > >>>> amongst web browser developers, screen reader developers, and web
> > >>>> app developers to figure out how to communicate the necessary
> > >>>> information through the necessary channels so that screen readers
> > >>>> could get the right information at the right time.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> Within the general web usability community, AJAX/web 2.0 is
> > >>>> >>>>> pretty
> > >>>> much the big step for web apps becoming truly user friendly web
> > >>>> apps, rather than clunky, text based, app like web pages.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> Therefore, it's pretty easy to argue that AJAX/web 2.0 was a
> > >>>> >>>>> very
> > >>>> necessary usability step for the general user community,  that the
> > >>>> blind were (sometimes still are) hurt by this usability
> > >>>> improvement, and that screen reading technology has to catch up.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> This is pretty much the same dynamic that we've seen over and
> > >>>> >>>>> over
> > >>>> again.  When DOS become windows 3.0, UNIX started using X-windows
> > >>>> and session managers, phones switched from keypads to touch
> > >>>> screens, and probably a few examples I missed.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> So, where is the point at which a webapp stops being
> > >>>> >>>>> experimental and
> > >>>> starts being an entity that is expected to provide reasonable
> > >>>> accomodations for disabled users?
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> Is it when you have to acknowledge license agreement or terms
> > >>>> >>>>> of
> > >>>> service page?  Is it when you are expected to give them a credit
> > >>>> card number?  Is it when the site is made available to the general
> > >>>> public, as apposed to a limited beta? I can argue for and against
> > >>>> each of those suggestions.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> I do know that the Department of Justice is wrestling with
> > >>>> >>>>> this
> > >>>> question, along with other questions about how does a web site
> > >>>> provider know for sure that they've made their website accessible.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> I'm pretty sure that however the rules come down, they're
> > >>>> >>>>> going to
> > >>>> seriously hamper webapp providers and in turn give us relief from
> > >>>> much of the inaccessible web content we as blind people have to
> > >>>> deal with on a very regular basis.  I hope we keep both sides of
> > >>>> this in mind when the DOJ developes, releases, and begins enforcing
> > >>>> these
> > >>regulations.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> In other words, I'm hoping we can figure out a way to go
> > >>>> >>>>> after
> > >>>> Google,
> > >>>> facebook, United airlines, and the US government to get their web
> > >>>> sites more accessible; without also harassing tech startups,
> > >>>> non-profits, and my high cusin who just put up a really cool
> > >>>> visualization tool for how he and his friends listen to music.
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> Take Care All,
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>> JIm
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:26:25PM -0600, Gary Wunder wrote:
> > >>>> >>>>>> Dear Mike:
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Perhaps one of the things we need to address is whether or
> > >>>> >>>>>> not
> > >>>> making
> > >>>> things
> > >>>> >>>>>> screen reader compatible truly does limit innovation. Is
> > >>>> >>>>>> screen
> > >>>> reader
> > >>>> >>>>>> technology so far behind state-of-the-art technology that
> > >>>> >>>>>> this is
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> case,
> > >>>> >>>>>> or are we talking about the failure to add a few lines of
> > >>>> >>>>>> code in
> > >>>> this new
> > >>>> >>>>>> technology that makes it play well with the assistive
> > >>>> >>>>>> technology we
> > >>>> need? I
> > >>>> >>>>>> lack the expertise to answer this question, but it seems to
> > >>>> >>>>>> me to be
> > >>>> all
> > >>>> >>>>>> important. We go to Congress each year with the message that
> > >>>> accessibility
> > >>>> >>>>>> is easy and doable. I have never heard the software
> > >>>> >>>>>> companies argue
> > >>>> to the
> > >>>> >>>>>> contrary. What I do often hear from software developers is
> > >>>> >>>>>> that it
> > >>>> is
> > >>>> too
> > >>>> >>>>>> costly to go back and modify their legacy code but that new
> > >>>> development will
> > >>>> >>>>>> certainly incorporate accessibility. Only recently have I
> > >>>> >>>>>> heard the
> > >>>> idea
> > >>>> >>>>>> that demanding accessibility threatens innovation. Can
> > >>>> >>>>>> someone with
> > >>>> some
> > >>>> >>>>>> expertise in state-of-the-art coding and state-of-the-art
> > >>>> >>>>>> screen
> > >>>> reader
> > >>>> >>>>>> technology set me straight. It seems to me that this
> > >>>> >>>>>> argument, if
> > >>>> true,
> > >>>> >>>>>> changes where we need to place our emphasis. If it is false,
> > >>>> >>>>>> it
> > >>>> needs
> > >>>> to be
> > >>>> >>>>>> revealed as such. If it is true, then we need to place more
> > >>>> >>>>>> emphasis
> > >>>> on
> > >>>> >>>>>> bringing the screen readers into the second decade of the
> > >>>> twenty-first
> > >>>> >>>>>> century.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> >>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
> > >>>> >>>>>> Mike
> > >>>> Freeman
> > >>>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 11:00 AM
> > >>>> >>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> > >>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
> > >>>> >>>>>> Progress
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Gary:
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I confess that I am beginning to think we're running up
> > >>>> >>>>>> against
> > >>>> something we
> > >>>> >>>>>> ought to be familiar with, being Federationists, but that we
> > >>>> >>>>>> don't
> > >>>> want to
> > >>>> >>>>>> face. That "something" is that we, the blind, are a minority.
> > >>>> >>>>>> This
> > >>>> is
> > >>>> >>>>>> something we're going to come up against more and more as
> > >>>> >>>>>> the
> > >>>> general
> > >>>> >>>>>> universe seeks bling more than information.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I confess that I'm beginning to suspect that unless and/or
> > >>>> >>>>>> until we
> > >>>> come up
> > >>>> >>>>>> with *absolutely* iron-clad legislation that, in effect,
> > >>>> >>>>>> limits what software vendors are allowed to do to those
> > >>>> >>>>>> things wherein we can
> > >>>> guarantee
> > >>>> >>>>>> accessibility -- in effect, limiting innovation  -- > >>>>>>
> > >>>something which
> > >>>> I
> > >>>> >>>>>> obviously know won't happen -- we're going to be behind the
> > >>>> >>>>>> eight
> > >>>> ball even
> > >>>> >>>>>> with vendors who claim to put accessibility first.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I think more and more we will find ourselves forced to old,
> > >>>> tried-and-true
> > >>>> >>>>>> but much-forgotten and much-maligned strategies -- such as
> > >>>> >>>>>> -- gasp
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> use of
> > >>>> >>>>>> readers.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I believe Deborah Kent-Stein and I talked about this a while
> > >>>> >>>>>> back
> > >>>> and
> > >>>> *she*
> > >>>> >>>>>> thinks we'll eventually have to come round to a
> > >>>> >>>>>> TapTapSee-like app
> > >>>> that
> > >>>> >>>>>> allows us to point a camera at indecipherable screens and
> > >>>> >>>>>> have
> > >>>> someone tell
> > >>>> >>>>>> us what's going on. I don't think even that would work as
> > >>>> corporations would
> > >>>> >>>>>> frown on their networks being used for such things and might
> > >>>> >>>>>> balk at
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> >>>>>> possibilities of theft of corporate secrets or intellectual
> > >>>> property.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Mike Freeman
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> >>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
> > >>>> >>>>>> Gary
> > >>>> Wunder
> > >>>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 7:09 AM
> > >>>> >>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> > >>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
> > >>>> >>>>>> Progress
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I still respectfully suggest that we put Microsoft on the
> > >>>> >>>>>> agenda and
> > >>>> try to
> > >>>> >>>>>> find out why accessibility always seems to be at the bottom
> > >>>> >>>>>> of their priority list. Did screen reader developers have a
> > >>>> >>>>>> look at this
> > >>>> before it
> > >>>> >>>>>> came on the market? Why is it that we were still wrestling
> > >>>> >>>>>> with
> > >>>> problems in
> > >>>> >>>>>> Outlook 2007 when Outlook 2010 hit the market? Is there any
> > >>>> >>>>>> kind of consistency between the statement "computing for all"
> > >>>> >>>>>> and the kind
> > >>>> of
> > >>>> >>>>>> release strategy we see from Microsoft?
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Gary
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> >>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
> > >>>> Elizabeth
> > >>>> >>>>>> Campbell
> > >>>> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:08 AM
> > >>>> >>>>>> To: 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
> > >>>> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In
> > >>>> >>>>>> Progress
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Hello Curtis,
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I am using Office 13 at home on my laptop running Windows 8.
> > >>>> >>>>>> I must
> > >>>> confess
> > >>>> >>>>>> that I did not have  the installation headaches as I
> > >>>> >>>>>> purchased my
> > >>>> system and
> > >>>> >>>>>> software from Bestbuy. The store in my area has a very
> > >>>> >>>>>> helpful geek
> > >>>> squad,
> > >>>> >>>>>> and I explained that I wanted to put the computer through
> > >>>> >>>>>> its paces
> > >>>> using
> > >>>> >>>>>> JAWS and so forth before I purchased it.
> > >>>> >>>>>> The Best Buy folks took care of all of the installations for
> > >>>> >>>>>> me as I purchased a year of tech support for my devices.
> > >>>> >>>>>> I primarily use office 13 for Outlook and Word. I am a fan
> > >>>> >>>>>> of
> > >>>> outlook, so I
> > >>>> >>>>>> was very disappointed to see that it often crashes,
> > >>>> >>>>>> sometimes while
> > >>>> I'm
> > >>>> >>>>>> reading or writing a message then mysteriously restarts. IN
> > >>>> >>>>>> Word, I
> > >>>> haven't
> > >>>> >>>>>> used the return address features since I'm creating
> > >>>> >>>>>> documents for
> > >>>> use
> > >>>> at
> > >>>> >>>>>> home or at work, and I send 99 percent of my correspondences
> > >>>> >>>>>> via
> > >>>> email.
> > >>>> >>>>>> However, I've had a lot of frustration accessing documents
> > >>>> >>>>>> that are protected.
> > >>>> >>>>>> JAWS will start reading the file and then stop. I believe
> > >>>> >>>>>> what
> > >>>> happens is
> > >>>> >>>>>> that Word shuts down and then restarts because I get a
> > >>>> >>>>>> prompt about recovering files which I can never find.
> > >>>> >>>>>> Interestingly enough, I ran in to this problem last week
> > >>>> >>>>>> when
> > >>>> accessing some
> > >>>> >>>>>> documents for a Newsline seminar.
> > >>>> >>>>>> I believe there is a way to unprotect files, but I haven't
> > >>>> >>>>>> found it
> > >>>> yet.
> > >>>> >>>>>> Curtis, I agree that Office 13 is very much a work in
> > >>>> >>>>>> progress, and
> > >>>> I
> > >>>> hope
> > >>>> >>>>>> Microsoft does come out with a service pack that will repair
> > >>>> >>>>>> these
> > >>>> bugs
> > >>>> >>>>>> which make it almost impossible to use Office reliably.
> > >>>> >>>>>> At work, I an using Windows 7 and Office 2007,and I haven't
> > >>>> >>>>>> had the
> > >>>> same
> > >>>> >>>>>> frustrations.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Best regards.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Liz Campbell
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> >>>>>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
> > >>>> >>>>>> Curtis
> > >>>> Chong
> > >>>> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:06 AM
> > >>>> >>>>>> To: nfbcs at nfbnet.org
> > >>>> >>>>>> Subject: [nfbcs] Office 2013: Very Much A Work In Progress
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Greetings and felicitations:
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Early this month, I took the rather bold step of upgrading
> > >>>> >>>>>> from
> > >>>> Microsoft
> > >>>> >>>>>> Office 2010 to Microsoft Office 2013. I am running the
> > >>>> >>>>>> 64-bit
> > >>>> version
> > >>>> of
> > >>>> >>>>>> Windows 7 Professional.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I am interested in hearing from anyone out there who has
> > >>>> >>>>>> taken a
> > >>>> similar
> > >>>> >>>>>> journey. Permit me to provide a brief summary of my
> > >>>> >>>>>> experiences so
> > >>>> far.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> To begin with, the upgrade was not at all a trouble-free
> > >>experience.
> > >>>> The
> > >>>> >>>>>> first thing that Office 2013 wanted me to do was to link to
> > >>>> >>>>>> either
> > >>>> an
> > >>>> >>>>>> existing or new Microsoft account. There appears no way to
> > >>>> >>>>>> avoid
> > >>>> this
> > >>>> step.
> > >>>> >>>>>> Since I had a Microsoft account (which I had never used for
> > >>>> >>>>>> years
> > >>>> and
> > >>>> years)
> > >>>> >>>>>> I had to spend considerable time trying to get my password
> > >>>back.
> > >>>> This
> > >>>> was
> > >>>> >>>>>> only the first problem.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Then, Office wanted to set up Sky Drive on my computer,
> > >>>> >>>>>> which I
> > >>>> allowed at
> > >>>> >>>>>> first and have since removed.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> After the install was finished (hours of work), I tried
> > >>>> >>>>>> starting
> > >>>> Word. Right
> > >>>> >>>>>> away, I received a message (which was not spoken by JAWS for
> > >>>> Windows)
> > >>>> >>>>>> indicating that the program had stopped working. There
> > >>>> >>>>>> seemed to be
> > >>>> no way
> > >>>> >>>>>> around this problem. In the end, I had to contact Microsoft
> > >>>> >>>>>> Support
> > >>>> over the
> > >>>> >>>>>> telephone so that someone could remote into my computer and
> > >>>> >>>>>> run some
> > >>>> kind of
> > >>>> >>>>>> a repair.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> While I am now using Microsoft Office 2013 to do real work,
> > >>>> >>>>>> I must
> > >>>> point out
> > >>>> >>>>>> that using this software is not without its problems. For
> > >>>> >>>>>> one thing,
> > >>>> there
> > >>>> >>>>>> are many situations during which JAWS goes silent and during
> > >>>> >>>>>> which
> > >>>> one
> > >>>> >>>>>> simply has to wait for something to happen. For another,
> > >>>> >>>>>> there are
> > >>>> frequent
> > >>>> >>>>>> instances when either Word or Outlook will crash and then
> > >>>> recover--all in
> > >>>> >>>>>> complete silence (from a nonvisual access standpoint).
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> I don't know about the rest of you, but one strategy which I
> > >>>> >>>>>> often
> > >>>> use is to
> > >>>> >>>>>> open a master document from Windows Explorer, bringing it
> > >>>> >>>>>> into Word,
> > >>>> then
> > >>>> >>>>>> save the document under a different name so that I can work
> > >>>> >>>>>> on
> > >>it.
> > >>>> On
> > >>>> my
> > >>>> >>>>>> system right now, there is no way to do this anymore. As
> > >>>> >>>>>> soon as I
> > >>>> hit F12
> > >>>> >>>>>> to invoke the "Save As..." dialog, Word will immediately
> crash.
> > >>>> >>>>>> Interestingly, this does not happen on the Office 2013
> > >>>> >>>>>> system I am
> > >>>> using at
> > >>>> >>>>>> work. Go figure.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> There are two other problems worth mentioning. First, in
> > >>>> >>>>>> Word, the
> > >>>> return
> > >>>> >>>>>> and delivery address edit boxes in the Envelopes dialog are
> > >>>> >>>>>> not
> > >>>> accessible
> > >>>> >>>>>> with any screen access program. You simply cannot read the
> > >>>> >>>>>> text that
> > >>>> may (or
> > >>>> >>>>>> may not) be in these boxes. Secondly, in Outlook 2013, the
> > >>>> >>>>>> Signature dialog's edit box is just as inaccessible to a
> > >>>> >>>>>> nonvisual user as the Envelopes edit boxes in Word.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> These days, for new users, it is just about impossible to
> > >>>> >>>>>> acquire
> > >>>> Office
> > >>>> >>>>>> 2010. This is most unfortunate inasmuch as I consider Office
> > >>>> >>>>>> 2013 to
> > >>>> be very
> > >>>> >>>>>> much a work in progress. I very much am looking forward to a
> > >>>> >>>>>> service
> > >>>> pack on
> > >>>> >>>>>> this from Microsoft.
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Cordially,
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> Curtis Chong
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> >>>>>> 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/batescampbell%40
> > >>>> c
> > >>>> harter.n
> > >>>> >>>>>> et
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> >>>>>> 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/gwunder%40earthl
> > >>>> i
> > >>>> nk.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/k7uij%40panix.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/gwunder%40earthl
> > >>>> i
> > >>>> nk.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/jbar%40barcore.c
> > >>>> o
> > >>>> 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/jheim%40math.wis
> > >>>> c
> > >>>> .edu
> > >>>> >>>>>
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> >>>> 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/jbar%40barc
> > >>>> >>>> o
> > >>>> >>>> re.com
> > >>>> >>>>
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> >>> 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/jheim%40math.wis
> > >>>> c
> > >>>> .edu
> > >>>> >>>
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> >> 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/jbar%40barcor
> > >>>> >> e
> > >>>> >> .com
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> > _______________________________________________
> > >>>> > 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/nancy.l.coffman%
> > >>>> 4
> > >>>> 0gmail.c
> > >>>> om
> > >>>>
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> 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.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/sgermano%40asu.e
> > >>>> d
> > >>>> u
> > >>>>
> > >>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>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/jbar%40barcore.com
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>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%40waveca
> > >>ble.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/carcione%40access.n
> > >>et
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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/carcione%40access.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/jbar%40barcore.com
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/sgermano%40asu.edu
>