This comes up when you do a search for Mosen and iPhone on Google. Written before the iPhone with VO came to market I might add.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan Mosen" <jmo...@xxxxxxxxx> To: <blindpho...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 11:15 PM Subject: iPhone, a Reality Check > There's been some pretty lively discussion on Twitter since the > announcement > of the new iPhone, which some are calling accessible. As 140 characters > can > be quite limiting, I thought I would make some extended comment through > this > list. > > There seems to be a great deal of excitement over the fact that Apple have > put a screen reader into the iPhone. For no extra cost, someone can go to > AT&T in the US, or your iPhone carrier in other countries, pick up an > iPhone, and get speech without installing any additional software. It can > be > made to talk by enabling the feature from the PC, so no sighted assistance > is required. At face value, the principle is an enticing one, although the > concept is not entirely new. Phones such as some of the LG range have > offered an out of box experience that has varied in its degree of > accessibility for some time. There is also the question of how easily we > as > blind people can influence product enhancements. But hats off to Apple for > getting this done for sure. > > Just because we're blind, doesn't mean we're immune to the latest trend > and > marketing hype. Sighted iPhone devotees love the look of the iPhone, and > its > touch screen. So there are blind people who want an iPhone because it's > trendy. There's nothing inherently wrong with this either. If we want to > be > part of the latest big thing, it is wrong for consumers that happen to be > blind to be locked out. It is worth baring in mind though that Nokia still > well outsells all of its competitors put together in the global market. > > We all use our phones for different purposes, and perhaps it is true that > because screen readers have only run on smartphones, some of us are using > smartphones when we otherwise wouldn't be. A smartphone is all about > productivity. Getting information in and out of the device with ease is > critical. > > There are comments in the Apple documentation, found at > http://www.apple.com/accessibility/iphone/vision.html that intrigue me > with > respect to reviewing what is on the screen. They say in part: > > What makes VoiceOver on iPhone truly remarkable is that you control it > using > simple gestures that let you physically interact with items on screen. > It's > easy to learn and fun to use. Instead of memorizing hundreds of keyboard > commands, or endlessly pressing tiny arrow keys to find what you're > looking > for, with VoiceOver, you simply touch the screen to hear a description of > the item under your finger, then gesture with a double-tap, drag, or flick > to control the phone. > > VoiceOver delivers an experience unlike any screen reader you've ever used > before. Traditional screen readers describe individual elements on the > screen, but struggle to communicate where each element is located or > provide > information about adjoining objects. This contextual information is very > important but typically filtered out by other screen readers. For example, > "off-screen" models used by traditional screen readers to represent > applications and web pages intentionally strip away contextual information > and describe web pages as a list or menu of items. But with VoiceOver on > iPhone 3G S, you'll experience something entirely new. > > > > So say the people at Apple. It seems they are indulging in some serious > hyperbole here. As a Talks and Mobile Speak user who uses a lot of the > screen readers' functionality, it is simply not the case that there are > hundreds of commands to remember. Further, are arrow keys and a keyboard > or > number pad really so bad? It would appear to me to be an optimal interface > for a blind person to use. > > > > But the really interesting philosophical point for me relates to their > comment about knowing where information appears on the screen. Apple says > this is important. But this begs the question, who says that where > information appears on the screen of a phone is important? Not many, if > any, > blind people. We're not talking about formatting complex documents here. > We > want to get at our information, whether that be reading a message or > checking our battery status, efficiently. I've used accessible phones for > six years now. Never once has it even occurred to me to wonder where the > power and battery status appears on the screen of my phone. Why should it? > Irrespective of where it appears, I want a foolproof, 100% guaranteed way > of > hearing that information without fuss. The description on the Apple site > simply seeks to turn what is a negative for us, the lack of arrow keys and > a > real keyboard, into a positive. In my view, it's a false positive. We do > not > need to know where something appears on the screen. That said, with > practice, it probably will be straightforward enough to aim at the right > part of the screen to get the information you want, although I'd say not > as > reliable as getting there from a keyboard. > > > For input, anyone who has a current smartphone running one of the other > operating systems will be taking a step back in terms of ease of use and > productivity. > > If you want to dial numbers and play music from your library, the iPhone > will allow you to do this by speaking to the device. We won't know how > well > this works in noisy environments, but speech recognition is quite good > these > days, so one would expect satisfactory results in most conditions. > > The area where the iPhone is especially weak is inputting data, such as > texts, e-mail and contacts. The contacts of course could be entered on a > desktop device and synchronised, but when on the move, you want to be able > to send texts and e-mails speedily. > > When you are running Voiceover on the iPhone, a different user interface > is > active for the touch screen from that which is in play for sighted users. > Here's what Apple's own documentation says about entering data. > > When you're typing text, such as an email message or a note, VoiceOver > echoes each character on the keyboard as you touch it, and again to > confirm > when you enter it. You can also have VoiceOver speak each completed word > instead of and in addition to individual characters as you type them. A > flick up or down while typing moves the insertion point cursor left and > right within the text so you can edit a word just as easily and precisely > as > typing a new word. > > To help you type more quickly and accurately, iPhone features word > prediction and suggests the correct spelling when you type a word > incorrectly. With Speak Auto-text enabled, you'll hear a sound effect and > the suggested word spoken automatically. You can just keep typing to > ignore > it, or press the space key to have iPhone type it for you. > > So say Apple. So this sounds fairly similar to the functionality offered > on > Pocket PC touch screen phones by Mobile Speak Pocket, although it is > considerably more advanced in terms of the various gestures one can make > on > the screen to control a range of functions. My concern is the speed at > which > data entry will be possible. You first have to locate the character you > want, on a completely flat surface touch screen, with Voiceover voicing > each > character as you search for the one you want. Once located, you must > confirm > the entry of that character. Now with practice, one may get fairly > accurate > about guessing where your finger needs to be on the screen in order to get > the character you want. However I think one can be more precise, and more > importantly, efficient if one uses a qwerty keyboard or number pad. A > really > proficient T9 text user is something to be hold in terms of speed. > > Efficiency is critical for people who need to process information quickly > to > be as productive on the job as their sighted peers. > > It is possible that the word prediction algorithm may substantially speed > up > data entry. However it would seem unlike that even then, data entry would > be > as fast as an accomplished T9 user. > > Then there is the question of third party applications, which may be thin > on > the ground for the iPhone, at least initially. Apple says: > > VoiceOver works with all of the built-in applications that come with > iPhone > 3G S, such as Phone, iPod, iTunes, Mail, Safari, and Maps. So, you can > place > and receive calls, surf the web, text and email your friends, check your > stocks and the weather, and much, much more. Apple is also working with > iPhone software developers so they can make their applications VoiceOver > compatible. > > This is, at least in the short term, a lot more limiting than other > options > such as Symbian or Windows Mobile. > > In the end, it depends on what you're after. Some people believe that > having > a "mainstream" device accessible out of the box is so important, that they > will sacrifice productivity. And of course, there's no need to buy any > additional software. I personally believe that we are a market deserving > of > our needs to be met in the best way that meets our needs. There are still > better phones out there. The new Nokia range, such as the N86, has an 8 MP > camera, great data speeds, built-in voice over IP, and the potential to > run > the KNFB Reader. If you are willing to put up with access that is more > fiddly for a lower price, then maybe the iPhone is an attractive > proposition. For me, my phone is not a gimmick, nor is it an experiment. I > need a phone that will let me manage my data on the move, and get the > messages out, without hunt and peck. > > To those who say that the touch screen is the way of the future, this is > clearly not the case. Many, many manufacturers, even those that dabble in > some touch screen models, are still producing great new phones with > keyboards or number pads that have far better specs than the iPhone. > Further, I watched with interest the hopes being expressed by some > bloggers > and tech commentators that maybe Apple would come out today with an iPhone > complete with slide-out qwerty keyboard. So even sighted people in some > quarters are starting to find the touch screen wearing a bit thin. > > In summary, Apple should be congratulated for taking a device that clearly > breached Section 255 of the US Telecommunications Act, and having a go and > making it compliant. NFB and ACB have been asking for this, and I've no > doubt this is a sincere, and commendable effort on Apple's part to > deliver. > Whether it can compete with well established offerings in terms of > productive, efficient access, I am not convinced. I still ask, what have > we > gained in terms of efficient access to the exchange of information. Had > Apple come out with the same offering today, but with the addition of a > version of the iPhone with a qwerty keyboard, I think they would have been > right on the money. > > Hopefully we can avoid the knee-jerk reactions of the fanboys out there, > and > have some serious, thoughtful discussion about the appropriateness of this > kind of a user interface in meeting Section255 compliance. > > Jonathan To subscribe or to leave the list, or to set other subscription options, go to www.freelists.org/list/real-eyes Follow-Ups: [real-eyes] Re: Fw: iPhone, a Reality Check From: Robert Beach Other related posts: » [real-eyes] Fw: iPhone, a Reality Check - Jim Fettgather » [real-eyes] Re: Fw: iPhone, a Reality Check - Robert Beach All trademarks and copyrights within the FreeLists archives are owned by their respective owners. Everything else ©2000-2009 Avenir Technologies, LLC. FreeLists is a service of Avenir Technologies, LLC. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionaries@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
