Good morning Slau,
I just wanted to say that I really appreciate all you are doing with Avid. I 
to, will be more than willing to help out ware I can pertaining to this.
Thanks so much,
Chris Harrington

On Nov 14, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Nickus de Vos <[email protected]> wrote:

> Awesome efords Slau and it certainly sounds as if the meeting whent
> very well and positive. It's great that some of the Avid guys are
> actually behind the idea of accessibility and the Ed guy beeing blind
> can also help the cause because having to use accessibility he would
> understand our position. Don't know if this is true and can't remember
> details but a while back I heard someware that in the very early OSx
> and voiceover days, a top guy at Apple had a blind sun and he
> personally through a lot of his weight behind voiceover because of his
> sun. Anyway let's hope for option A, the big boss throaghing his
> weight behind accessibility, otherwise option B raising money is
> certainly a option.
> Thanks again Slau.
> 
> Brian Casey wrote:
>> Even better than i expected Slau and I've come to expect great things from 
>> you by now!
>> 
>> Very well handled! Going to the very top might be crazy enough to work!
>> 
>> Great work
>> Brian
>> 
>> On 14/11/2012, at 8:14 PM, "Slau Halatyn" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> As some of you might recall, David Gibbons, the person who was truly to 
>>> thank for finally making the work of accessibility happen at Digidesign, 
>>> left the company a couple of years ago. He was and continues to be a great 
>>> source of support for the cause of making Pro Tools more accessible. The 
>>> reigns within Avid were handed to Bobby Lombardi. Bobby was present at the 
>>> meeting where we saw the first results of the programming work done for 
>>> VoiceOver. Bobby, in fact, was the first and only person of those who 
>>> attended that meeting to respond to my follow up email thanking those in 
>>> attendance. Unfortunately, Bobby took over at a time when Avid began to 
>>> slash their workforce. Massive layoffs commenced and Avid underwent severe 
>>> cutbacks. During this time, my limited contact with Bobby made one thing 
>>> clear: Avid was not going to do anything concerning accessibility when they 
>>> were scrambling to minimize their bleeding. It was also quite clear that 
>>> Avid's focus was on their video market. It's widely known that Avid bought 
>>> Digidesign to ensure a robust audio platform for their video business. With 
>>> Pro Tools in the service of their Avid video production environment, the 
>>> music production aspect of Pro Tools was cut back. Hence, the sale of 
>>> M-Audio (where they lost tens upon tens of millions) and the cutting of 
>>> Advanced Instrument Research  or AIR plug-ins. With resources at a minimum 
>>> and continuing to shrink, it was communicated to me that things were highly 
>>> uncertain because of their inner crises. there was never a time when Bobby 
>>> outrightly said they would not continue the work. He only indicated that 
>>> they essentially had no development capacity. He suggested that they might 
>>> be able to gain some headway through something called "hack-a-thon" where 
>>> engineers essentially spend a weekend to take on a programming project just 
>>> to throw things on the wall and see what sticks. Sometimes, it's a pet 
>>> project, a new feature, a shot in the dark. Sometimes it can be an idea put 
>>> forth by a given team. He suggested that it might be a way to address the 
>>> immediate issue of the AAX plug-in accessibility. After weeks had gone by 
>>> and there seemed to be no word, I scheduled the meeting for October.
>>> 
>>> Bobby, as nice of a guy as he is, is not the best at returning emails. He 
>>> did, however, promptly reply to me and agreed to the meeting. In fact, he 
>>> invited a couple of other people at Avid including Rich Holmes, another 
>>> attendee from our last meeting. Bobby did mention in his reply that someone 
>>> had taken a look at the AAX issue and they didn't see any easy way to fix 
>>> it. This didn't concern me at the time because I felt it was more important 
>>> to have the meeting and address the bigger picture first. By the time it 
>>> got to our meeting there were several more people present including guys 
>>> from UI design, programming, special projects and partnering. The 
>>> partnering guy is the one in charge of third-party developers. This was 
>>> probably going to be an important person at some point along the way.
>>> 
>>> When I got to the meeting, I saw Rich Holmes first. As I mentioned, Rich 
>>> was at the previous meeting. He was quite impressed with the work Xiang, 
>>> the intern, had done with VoiceOver support in Pro Tools back in 2009. At 
>>> that meeting, Rich asked a lot of questions and took a very genuine 
>>> interest in the subject. He was the one who was concerned with plug-in 
>>> accessibility when we faced the possibility of not having plug-in 
>>> accessibility in the initial 8.0.3 release. His concern was, if we didn't 
>>> have accessible plug-ins, what was the point? In other words, he felt that 
>>> it was important enough to pursue a solution somehow.  I indicated to him 
>>> that, while plug-ins were certainly critical, it would at least be usable 
>>> for recording and editing, at least for a start. As it turned out, Xiang 
>>> figured out a work-around and managed to implement it for the 8.0.4 
>>> release. Anyway, that's just a little background about Rich. back to our 
>>> previously scheduled meeting…
>>> 
>>> I was told that Bobby would probably not be joining us. It wasn't entirely 
>>> surprising to me because I had learned, quite accidentally, from an 
>>> interview with bobby on Pensado's Place that bobby was no longer in charge 
>>> of Pro Tools and that he was moving over to the Sibelius side of things. 
>>> rich Holmes was the new person in charge of Pro Tools, both hardware and 
>>> software. Frankly, I was relieved that the new person to take over was a 
>>> person with whom I've already interfaced and had some background with.
>>> 
>>> The next person to walk in was a bit of a surprise. It was Ed Gray, the 
>>> person in charge of partnering, like I said, the third-party developer 
>>> liaison. Ed's been with Digidesign/Avid for about 17 years. Several years 
>>> ago, Ed started having trouble with his vision due to glaucoma. Two years 
>>> ago he lost a significant amount of sight and he is now legally blind and 
>>> uses a white cane. Surprise, surprise, eh?
>>> 
>>> Once the others were in attendance, I went over the agenda. I did break the 
>>> ice, so to speak and not that there was any ice to begin with necessarily, 
>>> by saying I would be happy if 3 things happened: Number 1, if the San 
>>> Francisco Giants won the World Series against the Detroit Tigers. This 
>>> yielded the desired response until I also mentioned that, although I was 
>>> from New York, my ex-wife is from Detroit. This got an even better 
>>> response. This is all to say that the atmosphere was friendly and, although 
>>> the nature of the meeting was serious business, I felt it was important to 
>>> balance it with some levity. That mission accomplished, we discussed the 
>>> issues of plug-in format, the fact that the current aAX is essentially a 
>>> transitional format, the various tables that are not accessible because 
>>> they're custom UI elements, the various windows that are not yet 
>>> accessible, etc. We covered a lot of areas including the fact that the 
>>> 64-bit version of Pro Tools would be in alpha in the near future and that 
>>> it would likely be released some time next year, perhaps the middle of the 
>>> year. Rich Holmes said that this was a perfect time to consider these 
>>> issues because of the imminent new version.
>>> 
>>> The gorilla in the room was the issue of development capacity. I did make 
>>> it clear fairly early on that I recognized the issue and that it wouldn't 
>>> deter me from laying out the issues and discussing possible solutions. When 
>>> we finally got through the major points, I proposed an idea that I hoped 
>>> would prompt a certain response. It was a bit of a gamble but I thought it 
>>> was worth it. The response was, in a way,  actually better than I had 
>>> hoped. Here was my proposal:
>>> 
>>> Given that Xiang had spent roughly 4 weeks working on accessibility, I 
>>> suggested that if someone were to spend another, say two or three months 
>>> exclusively working on the same issue, we'd probably get just about 
>>> everything working. Now, this, of course, takes money. Money is something 
>>> they are not rolling in. Pick up the Wall Street Journal and you'll get a 
>>> good idea of how Avid's doing when articles about them appear in the 
>>> financial section. I do know that Avid has historically outsourced their 
>>> work to a company called Global Logic in Kiev, Ukraine. As some of you 
>>> know, I regularly travel to Kiev to engineer orchestral recording sessions 
>>> and I'm fluent in Ukrainian. First of all, Avid wouldn't outsource to 
>>> anybody outside their established corporate relationships so this covered 
>>> that angle. From a project manager standpoint, I could personally interface 
>>> with a programmer from global Logic to handle the work, Avid wouldn't have 
>>> to worry about that aspect. A programmer could work alongside the normal 
>>> development without stepping on anyone's feet.
>>> 
>>> The last part of the puzzle was the funding. I suggested that I could start 
>>> up a KickStarter  campaign to raise funds to pay Global Logic for the work. 
>>> Yes, it would place a burden on me to raise the money and, yes, it would 
>>> take some time but I'm confident that it could be done. It would mean no 
>>> burden for Avid whatsoever and we could get it done. Stay with me.
>>> 
>>> Before we could discuss any more details about that approach, Rich made it 
>>> a point to say that he felt this might not be necessary. The way he saw it, 
>>> just as there was an initiative in Pro Tools 10 for international language 
>>> support, there should be a similar initiative for VoiceOver support. He 
>>> posited that accessing Pro tools through VoiceOver is not really different 
>>> than accessing it through another language. Naturally, I was glad to hear 
>>> that coming from him. Others chimed in with similar support of his 
>>> position. In fact, they felt it should be an initiative throughout the 
>>> product line including Sibelius. The person in charge of special projects, 
>>> Phil something (his surname escapes me), actually comes from Sibelius. He's 
>>> well aware of the accessibility that JAWS users had under Windows. Again, 
>>> the support of the people in Daly City was clear and, in my opinion, 
>>> genuine.
>>> 
>>> Of course, taking this path would require essentially going to the top, to 
>>> the CEO of Avid, Gary Greenfield. Everyone at the meeting spoke highly of 
>>> Gary. They referred to him as a good guy and conscientious. This might 
>>> sound strange in light of the fact that Avid has gone through a horrible 
>>> time. rich and I agreed that we would both write letters to Mr. Greenfield. 
>>> If successful, this approach would ensure that the work of accessibility 
>>> would simply become part of the process of programming and in-house 
>>> testing. Without that, it's likely that things would just continue to break 
>>> down. Now, that's not to say that nothing could be done in the future but 
>>> there's absolutely no telling when and it seemed like a more durable choice 
>>> to get it sanctioned rather than to hope for a window of opportunity that 
>>> would likely never come.
>>> 
>>> As some of you know, I attended the 133rd Aes convention that weekend and, 
>>> consequently, was stranded in San Francisco for several more days. When I 
>>> got back, I had to catch up with a number of issues. Two days ago, on 
>>> Monday, I sent a letter to Gary Greenfield. At the risk of making this 
>>> message entirely too long, I'm posting it below:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> "Dear Mr. Greenfield,
>>> 
>>> I'm writing to you on behalf of blind Pro Tools users throughout the world 
>>> with an urgent request regarding the accessibility of the software. At the 
>>> outset, I should mention that I recently met with several people in Daly 
>>> City and we concluded that we should go to the top to ensure that the 
>>> matter is resolved in a lasting manner. There's some history to this 
>>> situation which I'll address as briefly as I can, and will gladly provide 
>>> more background if needed. Hopefully I can paint a clear picture of how 
>>> we've come to this point and the crisis we currently face.
>>> 
>>> Back in the mid '90s, there were a number of blind audio professionals who 
>>> were interested in using Pro Tools. Using a third-party program called 
>>> outSPOKEN, they attempted to navigate Pro Tools within Mac OS 9, but there 
>>> was a problem with the systems crashing. Rick Boggs, a blind producer in 
>>> Los Angeles, managed to get the folks at Digidesign and the folks from 
>>> Berkeley Systems (the makers of outSPOKEN) to put their heads together to 
>>> figure it out. They found that some code in the DAE (Digidesign Audio 
>>> Engine) software was causing the problem, so Digidesign altered it. With 
>>> that, Pro Tools became the most accessible DAW platform for blind users. It 
>>> was at that time that I and other blind engineers invested in our Pro Tools 
>>> HD systems.
>>> 
>>> When Apple released OS X, there were no third-party screen readers on the 
>>> market available for it. Blind users stuck to OS 9 for a few years and it 
>>> wasn't of great concern to those who used Pro Tools because Digidesign 
>>> didn't make its own transition to OS X support for quite a while. 
>>> Eventually, Apple decided to build a screen reader called VoiceOver right 
>>> into the operating system. At that point, Pro Tools was already available 
>>> for OS X and a few of us were eager to upgrade to the latest version (v6.4).
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, the upgraded version of Pro Tools turned out to be 
>>> inaccessible. The only things one could access were the menu bar and a 
>>> handful of dialogs that used the Apple framework. Everything else, it 
>>> seemed, was invisible to VoiceOver. A few of us tried to contact Digidesign 
>>> regarding these issues but were unable to make much headway. Eventually, we 
>>> began a petition calling for Digidesign to commit to action, gathering over 
>>> 1,200 signatures. We were about to send it to various officers in the 
>>> company when I received a call from David Gibbons (then V.P. of Marketing) 
>>> inviting me to come to Daly City to discuss the situation. Digidesign had 
>>> become aware of the petition and the issue had finally reached someone who 
>>> took interest. At our first meeting in 2006, I demonstrated the level of 
>>> accessibility I had under OS 9 with outSPOKEN and how, under OS X, the 
>>> latest version of Pro Tools was completely inaccessible. It was clear to 
>>> David that we had something that used to work but that was now broken and 
>>> needed to be fixed. Incidentally, more details about our meeting and the 
>>> actual petition can be found at:
>>> http://www.protoolspetition.org
>>> 
>>> It turned out that Avid had been planning a few transitions in the code, 
>>> which needed to happen before undertaking any work on accessibility. 
>>> Essentially, they needed to follow Apple's programming guidelines to define 
>>> the windows and controls in such a way that VoiceOver would recognize them. 
>>> In 2008, an intern was assigned to the project and spent a few weeks adding 
>>> the required bits of code. I flew out to Daly City toward the end of the 
>>> process to provide feedback. It was amazing to see how much he had 
>>> completed in that short amount of time.
>>> 
>>> Pro Tools 8.0.4, released in 2009, was the first version to include those 
>>> coding additions, which allowed it to support the VoiceOver feature in OS 
>>> X. Though still perhaps only 70% accessible, it was at least usable. 
>>> Subsequent versions continued to be mostly accessible until version 10, 
>>> where something broke. The new AAX plug-in format was significantly 
>>> different and, unfortunately, the issue of accessibility wasn't foremost in 
>>> anyone's mind as they developed it. To add to this, David Gibbons was no 
>>> longer at Avid and the issue of VoiceOver compatibility appeared to fall by 
>>> the wayside.
>>> 
>>> Since I was going to San Francisco for this year's AES show, I scheduled a 
>>> meeting with several people in Daly City. It became clear during our 
>>> meeting that the actual work isn't especially difficult. Rich Holmes 
>>> suggested that accessing Pro Tools through VoiceOver is really no different 
>>> than accessing it in another language. Given the push for international 
>>> language support in Pro Tools 10, it would seem that VoiceOver support 
>>> could fit naturally within this effort. However, we agreed that rather than 
>>> take a skunkworks approach to accessibility (as had been done before), it 
>>> would behoove us to make it official and have the support of the CEO to 
>>> ensure that it simply becomes part of the UI process and in-house testing. 
>>> I was encouraged to see genuine support for making sure that Avid's product 
>>> line is fully accessible. Rich said that he would write a letter to you and 
>>> I agreed to do the same.
>>> 
>>> Please pardon the somewhat lengthy journey I've taken to this point but 
>>> here's where I make an appeal to you as the person who can make this 
>>> happen. I know that Avid receives requests of all kinds for new features. 
>>> Please consider the fact that while most people's requests have to do with 
>>> preferences or workflows, our request for access to Pro Tools means the 
>>> difference between being able to use Pro Tools or not. Yes, we currently 
>>> have some degree of accessibility but, now that plug-ins are not 
>>> accessible, we're seeing stuff beginning to break. With the shift to 
>>> 64-bit, it's likely that other things might break if left unchecked. The 
>>> actual amount of work necessary is not great when you consider that it's 
>>> largely a matter of defining and labeling elements. We're not asking for 
>>> anything more than for Avid to follow Apple's published programming 
>>> guidelines, which will ensure that Pro Tools is accessible.
>>> 
>>> Gary, I regularly receive emails from blind students and professionals from 
>>> all over the world who, when they encounter Pro Tools, are so excited to 
>>> learn that it's fairly accessible right out of the box. They're equally 
>>> concerned when they learn that the new plug-in format is not accessible. 
>>> Who knows what the future will hold unless universal design is made a 
>>> consideration. I, too, have a personal stake in this. I make my living as 
>>> an audio engineer and recording studio owner. I'm a trained professional 
>>> who wishes to use the platform of choice alongside my sighted colleagues. I 
>>> have no esoteric requests. I'll leave that to the sighted folks ;) My 
>>> request—our request is that Avid follow Apple's programming guidelines and 
>>> maintain an accessible Pro Tools for blind users through the VoiceOver 
>>> feature built into Mac OS X.
>>> 
>>> I know that you will appreciate the weight of this request. It's probably 
>>> one of the most important letters I've ever had to write. I also have 
>>> hundreds of blind audio professionals waiting anxiously with the hope that 
>>> Avid will commit to making its products accessible. Thank you so much for 
>>> taking the time to read this and I hope you can make it happen.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Slau Halatyn"
>>> 
>>> So, the above message went out to Gary Greenfield and chris Gahagan, EVP of 
>>> Avid. I also copied Rich Holmes. The letter also made its way to Ed Gray 
>>> who sent me a message. I'm sure he wouldn't mind that I post part of it 
>>> below:
>>> 
>>> "Dear Slau,
>>> 
>>>> Your letter to Gary was passed on to me and I can’t express how much I 
>>>> appreciate it.  You expressed yourself extraordinarily well and gave a 
>>>> transparent history which is essential.   I know, having spoken to Rich 
>>>> since our meeting, that he is dedicated to delivering the results you are 
>>>> asking for.  I will  stay on top of this for you and I am your ally in 
>>>> this initiative."
>>> 
>>> So, that's where we currently stand. We're awaiting word from the top to 
>>> see if accessibility can officially become part of the process. It would, 
>>> indeed, be the best scenario for us. If we do get a commitment, great. If 
>>> not, I won't let it drop. Gary Greenfield is unaware of my initial proposal 
>>> for a fund-raising campaign. I still feel that it would be feasible and 
>>> successful if we had to undertake it. There are those who will undoubtedly 
>>> feel that we shouldn't have to raise funds for something Avid should do on 
>>> their own dime. Yes, I agree in principle. However, it is a viable option 
>>> and, if we must go there, so be it. That's where public outreach and social 
>>> networking will be required big time. For now, we need to wait and see what 
>>> the official response from Gary Greenfield will be. Whatever the response, 
>>> I will inform him that I plan to make it public. I don't mean that as a 
>>> threat. I mean, I will ask him for a formal statement either way. I trust 
>>> that his response will be hopeful and that Avid will make a formal 
>>> commitment to action. The commitment made some years ago was on the part of 
>>> several conscientious individuals at Digidesign. It's time for Avid, as a 
>>> company, to respond. That's what I'm looking for before the next move. 
>>> We'll see how it goes from here.
>>> 
>>> As I stated in a previous message, my personal commitment is to see this 
>>> through at least until we have a response. At that point, I'll make a 
>>> personal decision. If the response is positive, I'll continue to work with 
>>> Avid in the near future to ensure they have whatever they need in terms of 
>>> feedback, beta testing, etc. My involvement beyond that, by design, will be 
>>> minimal because, by nature, if the issue of accessibility is part of the 
>>> process, it won't require high maintenance.
>>> 
>>> If, however, the official response is not in our favor, I will proceed with 
>>> Plan B involving possible fund-raising through KickStarter. I will only do 
>>> this if enough people on the list support me in that approach because it 
>>> will certainly require pounding the pavement. We did that before and we can 
>>> do it again. Even this approach would require Avid's approval. They may go 
>>> along with it, they may not. We'll cross that bridge if we get to it.
>>> 
>>> Some of you might have the possibility of legal action in the back of your 
>>> mind. For the record, I'm against it at all costs. Actually, I should more 
>>> accurately say that, to me, it should be an absolute last resort. I 
>>> personally will not spearhead such an approach. It'll have to be up to 
>>> somebody else to take the reigns under such conditions. I have no 
>>> experience with such matters. Perhaps someone like Rick Boggs, who has had 
>>> firsthand experience with access-related legal action, could find the time 
>>> to step in, if necessary. Again, in my book, legal action is Plan C. 
>>> Barring subtle variations, I don't see any other major outcomes, A, B or C.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for reading this very lengthy post. I hope it answers some 
>>> questions, perhaps it might prompt some questions. I suspect that some of 
>>> the potential questions might depend on the response from Mr. Greenfield. 
>>> We'll see. Naturally, as soon as I receive any word, I'll immediately post 
>>> it here.
>>> 
>>> Slau
>>> 

Reply via email to