[nfbcs] NVDA product question

Larry Wayland lhwayland at sbcglobal.net
Tue Nov 4 03:54:27 UTC 2014 

Nicole: Why would there have to be restrictions?  All that could be worked
out in the contracts. As far as I know there no restrictions for the deaf
people and the decoder chip.


-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Torcolini
via nfbcs
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 9:20 PM
To: 'George'; 'NFB in Computer Science Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] NVDA product question

Not all of JAWS and NVDA working differently has to do with money. I don't
know how the different models for collecting data about the screen work, but
I do know that JAWS and NVDA do it differently, which usually means that
each one is going to work well in some situations and not work well in
others. Also, keep in mind that Freedom Scientific and Microsoft work
together at least a little, which is why JAWS usually works with the latest
version of Windows as soon as or not long after it is released. But this
does not mean that, given time, NVDA might come to work better than JAWS on
a particular version of Windows.
I think that putting JAWS on Windows would make it cheaper, but, on the
other hand, I am glad that Freedom Scientific is not working with Microsoft.
Usually, when you have some sort of major collaboration like that, there is
some kind of restriction on working with other companies or on other
products.

Nicole

-----Original Message-----
From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of George via nfbcs
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 6:52 PM
To: NFB in Computer Science Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] NVDA product question

Of course, usually you do get what you pay for: when noone else paid in
stead of you, but this is not the case of NVDA.
If you are the only one who pays for a product and you don't pay so much,
the product doesn't cost so much. However, when you get some product for
free, because many people pay for it, you might get a very high quality
product if the cost for its development is high. This is the case with NVDA;
even if you don't need to pay when you download it, the cost paid by its
supporters and developers is very high.
That's why i feel that saying that you get what you pay for in the case of
NVDA means to forget its high cost and it might also be an attitude of
ingratitude to its supporters.

I'm using NVDA and I'm amazed at its quality. So I think that the idea of
paying for some screen reader just to be more efficient is totally biased. 
If you need some particular screen reader to be able to do something you
can't do with other screen reader, it's because there are some screen
readers that are better in some circumstances than others, but it's not
because you pay (particularly in the case of NVDA where many people and
organizations around the world pay for us).
The thing is not how much you pay when many people bear the cost.
And in other cases, you get less than what you pay for when you pay more
than the real cost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Jolls via nfbcs" <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
To: <nfbcs at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2014 2:34 AM
Subject: Re: [nfbcs] NVDA product question


>I won't argue the fact that often times, you do get what you pay for.  
>Case

>in point, I just recently purchased a guitar.  It was not an 
>inexpensive instrument ... and I have played less expensive guitars ... 
>and the workmanship on this guitar amazes me.  It's not even the most 
>expensive one

>... not a cheap one either ... but still the point is made that you get 
>what you pay for.  In the case of the guitar, I'd spend the money again.
>The guitar is just simply that good.
>
> With that said, here was the reason for my inquiry about NVDA.  Jaws, 
> although it is a good product, is (for the version I have) about $1000 
> if I was to go buy a copy with no previous version.  That's a pretty 
> stiff price tag and I'm sure there are people who could benefit from a 
> screen reader who may not qualify for it through a state agency who 
> can't afford it.  While I am a developer and I understand that it 
> takes hundreds of hours to code and test a product such as this, 
> charging that much money simply prices some people who could benefit from
it right out of the park.

> I definitely do understand that when you put as much time as they do 
> at Freedom (or other vendors) into the product, you have to get your 
> money back to stay in business ... but at what price?  Here in 
> Nebraska where I live  ... for example ... they charge 10% in taxes 
> when you buy a car.  On

> a $30,000 car, you have to come up with an additional $3000 within 30 
> days

> when you purchase (don't worry, I'm not driving).  It seems to me that 
> they'd sell more new cars if they'd lower the tax burden.  When prices 
> are

> high, not as many can buy.  When prices are lower, it opens up the 
> product

> to more people.  Simple economics there.
>
> I do know people ... in  my wife's family ... that could have 
> benefitted from purchasing these products ... but they absolutely 
> couldn't do it because of the price.  OK, free is totally on the other 
> end of the spectrum, and I can understand paying something ... or as I
said above,
> you get what you pay for.     So I'm sure there could be some sort of 
> happy medium.
>
> Now I do understand that our market is a bit different since our 
> population is much smaller and the vendors have to spread their cost 
> over a smaller group.  That could keep the price high.  But what if 
> the accessibility vendors contracted with Microsoft or Google or 
> others and had Jaws or ZoomText or Magic or whatever built into the 
> O/S?  Then the cost could be distributed over the "whole world" ... 
> and those that didn't

> need to use the product wouldn't have to turn it on.  The vendors 
> would get paid a bit differently but perhaps that would help 
> distribute the software to the masses and it wouldn't cost as much to 
> the end user.  And,

> when a student got to a university, for example, the product would 
> already

> be there (as a side benefit).
>
> I'm digressing on that last point, but I'm just saying ... while I get 
> the

> whole thing of value for money, and I do understand that quality does 
> come

> at a price, couldn't there be some other way to do it that doesn't 
> shut people out who could really use the technology?
>
>
>
>> From: gwunder at earthlink.net
>> To: mrspock56 at hotmail.com; nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: RE: [nfbcs] NVDA product question
>> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:14:05 -0500
>>
>> Hello, Mike. I am delighted that you read the article about NVDA in 
>> the Braille Monitor, and I want to give you a heads up about 
>> something that will appear in the November issue.
>>
>> We have run two articles talking about free or essentially free 
>> software for blind people, but I wanted the Braille Monitor also to 
>> make the case for why we have for-profit commercial screen readers 
>> and what role they play in our education and employment. I think I 
>> found that article, and I hope that it provokes discussion. The 
>> essence of the article is that free might not be everything it is 
>> cracked up to be if we are interested in efficiency, and

>> I
>> think anyone who is employed knows that efficiency is a key issue.
>>
>> Thank you for being a reader of the Braille Monitor. Please feel free 
>> to write me with ways in which I can make the publication more 
>> responsive to the things that you want and need. My email address for 
>> Monitor-related issues is gwunder at nfb.org
>>
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nfbcs [mailto:nfbcs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Jolls 
>> via nfbcs
>> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2014 2:00 PM
>> To: nfbcs at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: [nfbcs] NVDA product question
>>
>> So I was reading the NFB Monitor this morning and came across an 
>> article about NVDA.  I didn't know much about it up to this point, 
>> but as I read the article by the person who created the free screen 
>> reader, it really intrigued me.  Up until this point I've sworn by 
>> JAWS ... but it is pricey and in a few years I'll be wanting to 
>> retire ... and NOT have to pay the price for upgrades all the time.  
>> Having a free screen reader would be a good thing.... providing it's 
>> a good product.  It sounds like it, but I wanted to get some 
>> opinions.  I know some of you out there have spoken about it so I'm 
>> hoping we have some users on this list.  Can anybody comment on the 
>> product?  How does it stack up next to Jaws and does it support 
>> Freedom Scientific's Braille displays?  In addition, I might be 
>> interested in contacting the developer and get on board in helping 
>> out people once I don't have the responsibilities of working for a 
>> living.
>>
>> Comments welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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%40earthlink.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/osocalmo%40yahoo.co
> .jp
> 


_______________________________________________
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/lhwayland%40sbcglobal.net

More information about the NFBCS mailing list