Re: Apple's initial response
Chris, Please, just trust me on this. Avid does not have anything to do with the issue. We need to focus these particular issues toward Apple. Thanks, Slau. On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Chris Norman wrote: > Well, the reason I mention Avid is simple. If Apple start looking at the > flood of reports about the same bug, all pertaining to Pro Tools, they'll do > what they've done already, and try and palm it off on Avid. If they continue > to get the bug returned to them, and the look into it, I'm sure they have > actual programmers who really understand the stuff this tool is telling me, > and what it's saying, is that Pro Tools isn't exactly squeaky clean. A few > accessibility descriptions here and there, and so it gives them more reason > to try and pass the book to Avid. > > I have already emailed Apple about it, and as I previously said, got the same > response as Chris, and you Slau, and presumably everyone else who's emailed > them, but I don't think we should hold Apple soully responsible for this > problem, just because your friend, who is remaining nameless, told you it's a > bug on Apple's end. I have no clue about the stuff I'm seeing, but it still > can't hurt, if this information is packageable, to send it to Avid, and point > out that although most likely, the edit values are an Apple bug, Pro Tools > does have some accessibility flaws, which Apple will likely want sorting > before it'll even consider the possibility that it's largest piece of > software has a bug. > > Cheers, > > Take care, > Chris Norman > > > > > On 13 Nov 2012, at 22:06, Slau Halatyn wrote: > >> Please, forget about Avid. As I said several times, this has nothing to do >> with them. Focus on Apple. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Slau >> >> On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Chris Norman wrote: >> >>> OK, I found it, and I can happily examine the control. It seems to be >>> telling me it's a button, but then text area is mentioned too. Is there any >>> way to bundle up all the information I found, and send it off to Apple, and >>> / or Avid for analysis? >>> >>> Funnily enough, when I ran a full accessibility analysis of Pro Tools, the >>> only things that kicked off errors were the pan knobs having a press >>> action, and about 140 errors from what looked like Apple's own inputs menu. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Just downloading xCode on my Lion in >>> >>> Take care, >>> Chris Norman >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >>> Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for it. Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman wrote: > I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > >> Hey Scott, >> >> I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the >> accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see >> what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether >> the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Yuma >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Light has no value without darkness" >> Mob: +642102277190 >> Skype: Shainobi1 >> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >> >> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but >> you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended >> recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, >> honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission >> error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath >> to avoid all illicit data retention. >> >> On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth >> wrote: >> >>> Hey Yuma, >>> >>> The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit >>> window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range >>> you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric >>> text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks >>> etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell whic
Re: Question about monitoring vocals
Two suggestions. A) have someone sighted next to you while on the phone with m-audio support, or b) call m-audio and see if they will remote into your system and set it up for you. Also they don't need to be a computer wiz to follow the steps laid out in the manual. On Nov 13, 2012, at 9:57 PM, "Christopher-Mark Gilland" wrote: > The issue is I don't know how to enable direct monitoring on the C400. I > think you gotta do it through the M-Audio control panel, which isn't > accessible in the least, and I lamentably don't have anyone sighted who knows > anything at all about what they're doing that could help me go in there and > turn that on. Anyway, again, I'm probably "rambling" so I'll shut up. > > Thank you kindly, > > Christopher-Mark Gilland. > Founder of CLG Productions > > Blog: > http://www.clgproductions.org > > Podcast: > http://clgproductions.podhoster.com > > E-mail: > ch...@clgproductions.com > > IMessage/Facetime: > theblindmusic...@att.net > > Windows Live Messenger: > ch...@blindperspectives.net > > Twitter: > @gilland_chris > > Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland > > Skype: > twinklesfriend2007 > > Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: > 704-697-2069 > > Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): > 980-272-8570 > > > - Original Message - > From: TheOreoMonster > To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 9:47 PM > Subject: Re: Question about monitoring vocals > > actually since we are recording in digital and at 24 bits there is no reason > to record as loud as you can with out clipping anymore. That was what you had > to do in the analog days to make sure the audio was up over the noise floor > of tape or you would hear the tape hiss during what you were recording. > You record at lower levels you have more room to bring tracks up in the mix > before they clip and more flexibility withcompression and other dynamics > effects. > > As for the original question. stop trying to monitor what is in the DAW and > listen to the direct monitoring from the interface. you should have enough > level there without having to crank everything up. Unless you have a reverb > or something else on the track that you want to monitor yourself through > while recording, there is really no benefit to using the input monitor in > your DAW over the direct monitor of the interface. But if you insist on > monitoring through the DAW, then try putting a gain plug in in one of the > insert slots. > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 9:09 PM, Chris Norman > wrote: > >> OK, no offense, but I got bored of reading half way through the message, but >> here it is: >> >> I'm not a pro, but I always thought you got the original signal as loud as >> possible without clipping. Personally, I head for as close to 0db on that >> gain indicator as possible, usually stopping level testing at about -3db, to >> account for the fact that people usually sing louder with the backing in >> their ears. No clue how you get anything done at -10db, but maybe I'm >> completely wrong. >> >> If that's still not loud enough, turn the fader right up, no one cares of >> that fuzzes, then, if you still don't have enough, once you've got your >> initial level set, compress away, use the fatten or brick wall presets, and >> you should be fine. >> >> Anyways, sorry if I missed your point, but all the extra jabber you put in >> your messages means about 50 paragraphs of "whatever whatever, this is >> completely by the point", and I'm bored out of my mind, but I think >> paragraph 3 said it all. >> >> HTH, >> >> Take care, >> >> Chris Norman. >> >> >> >> >> >> On 14 Nov 2012, at 02:01, "Christopher-Mark Gilland" >> wrote: >> >>> OK, this may seem like quite an elementary question, and a lot of you >>> probably are gonna look at me and think I'm nuts for asking, but here's my >>> situation. >>> >>> I have a pare of head phones which I've been using for a while now. I'm >>> not gonna sit here and lie to you guies. They're IFrogs. They're not >>> studio-grade by any theory of the spectrom. I do have a pare that is >>> studio grade, that probably in the days costed roughly 3 or 400 bucks, but >>> those things literally speaking are about 20 years old, and have gone >>> through so much wear and tare that the headband is becoming loose, and the >>> left ear piece is drooping down off my ear, no matter how many times I >>> readjust it's hinge. Anyway, that's totally aside the point... >>> >>> Basically, here's the deal. The IFrogs I have are sort of noise >>> cancelling, but not really. You'd think this would be a good thing in some >>> cases, but it actually's not helping matters. The thing is, even with them >>> on, my voice, whether singing, or talking is not hardly canceled/muffled at >>> all. Because of this, I've honestly just learned to get used to the problem >>> I'm facing, and play devils
Re: Question about monitoring vocals
The issue is I don't know how to enable direct monitoring on the C400. I think you gotta do it through the M-Audio control panel, which isn't accessible in the least, and I lamentably don't have anyone sighted who knows anything at all about what they're doing that could help me go in there and turn that on. Anyway, again, I'm probably "rambling" so I'll shut up. Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: TheOreoMonster To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 9:47 PM Subject: Re: Question about monitoring vocals actually since we are recording in digital and at 24 bits there is no reason to record as loud as you can with out clipping anymore. That was what you had to do in the analog days to make sure the audio was up over the noise floor of tape or you would hear the tape hiss during what you were recording. You record at lower levels you have more room to bring tracks up in the mix before they clip and more flexibility with compression and other dynamics effects. As for the original question. stop trying to monitor what is in the DAW and listen to the direct monitoring from the interface. you should have enough level there without having to crank everything up. Unless you have a reverb or something else on the track that you want to monitor yourself through while recording, there is really no benefit to using the input monitor in your DAW over the direct monitor of the interface. But if you insist on monitoring through the DAW, then try putting a gain plug in in one of the insert slots. On Nov 13, 2012, at 9:09 PM, Chris Norman wrote: OK, no offense, but I got bored of reading half way through the message, but here it is: I'm not a pro, but I always thought you got the original signal as loud as possible without clipping. Personally, I head for as close to 0db on that gain indicator as possible, usually stopping level testing at about -3db, to account for the fact that people usually sing louder with the backing in their ears. No clue how you get anything done at -10db, but maybe I'm completely wrong. If that's still not loud enough, turn the fader right up, no one cares of that fuzzes, then, if you still don't have enough, once you've got your initial level set, compress away, use the fatten or brick wall presets, and you should be fine. Anyways, sorry if I missed your point, but all the extra jabber you put in your messages means about 50 paragraphs of "whatever whatever, this is completely by the point", and I'm bored out of my mind, but I think paragraph 3 said it all. HTH, Take care, Chris Norman. On 14 Nov 2012, at 02:01, "Christopher-Mark Gilland" wrote: OK, this may seem like quite an elementary question, and a lot of you probably are gonna look at me and think I'm nuts for asking, but here's my situation. I have a pare of head phones which I've been using for a while now. I'm not gonna sit here and lie to you guies. They're IFrogs. They're not studio-grade by any theory of the spectrom. I do have a pare that is studio grade, that probably in the days costed roughly 3 or 400 bucks, but those things literally speaking are about 20 years old, and have gone through so much wear and tare that the headband is becoming loose, and the left ear piece is drooping down off my ear, no matter how many times I readjust it's hinge. Anyway, that's totally aside the point... Basically, here's the deal. The IFrogs I have are sort of noise cancelling, but not really. You'd think this would be a good thing in some cases, but it actually's not helping matters. The thing is, even with them on, my voice, whether singing, or talking is not hardly canceled/muffled at all. Because of this, I've honestly just learned to get used to the problem I'm facing, and play devils advocate, and just say whatever, I'll deal with it. Basically, the thing is, I always process my vocals *after!* I have them recorded. Never during. I find that if I try to do it in realtime, for one, I can't always until the vocal track is totally laid down determine what things need to be tweeked. The problem however is, when I was tought initially by Kevin, as well as others about recording vocals, I was told you always always always! want to record at a low level, then use gain compensation like a limiter, or say, a compressor etc. to bring the level up to
Re: Question about monitoring vocals
Well, frankly, yes, I did! take offense. How else was I supposed to explain my issue, if I didn't explain how I was doing things? I'm not going to get anywhere if I don't specifically explain what I'm doing so you all can see my mistake, but in fear of being oh, whoops? gasp! to lengthy, with all do respect, I'll cut the bullshit and say no more on the topic. Sorry for asking for any help, sir. Nice to know I can ask questions on list. Oh, and BTW, thanks for your help, right? Jesus H Christ!
Re: Question about monitoring vocals
actually since we are recording in digital and at 24 bits there is no reason to record as loud as you can with out clipping anymore. That was what you had to do in the analog days to make sure the audio was up over the noise floor of tape or you would hear the tape hiss during what you were recording. You record at lower levels you have more room to bring tracks up in the mix before they clip and more flexibility with compression and other dynamics effects. As for the original question. stop trying to monitor what is in the DAW and listen to the direct monitoring from the interface. you should have enough level there without having to crank everything up. Unless you have a reverb or something else on the track that you want to monitor yourself through while recording, there is really no benefit to using the input monitor in your DAW over the direct monitor of the interface. But if you insist on monitoring through the DAW, then try putting a gain plug in in one of the insert slots. On Nov 13, 2012, at 9:09 PM, Chris Norman wrote: > OK, no offense, but I got bored of reading half way through the message, but > here it is: > > I'm not a pro, but I always thought you got the original signal as loud as > possible without clipping. Personally, I head for as close to 0db on that > gain indicator as possible, usually stopping level testing at about -3db, to > account for the fact that people usually sing louder with the backing in > their ears. No clue how you get anything done at -10db, but maybe I'm > completely wrong. > > If that's still not loud enough, turn the fader right up, no one cares of > that fuzzes, then, if you still don't have enough, once you've got your > initial level set, compress away, use the fatten or brick wall presets, and > you should be fine. > > Anyways, sorry if I missed your point, but all the extra jabber you put in > your messages means about 50 paragraphs of "whatever whatever, this is > completely by the point", and I'm bored out of my mind, but I think paragraph > 3 said it all. > > HTH, > > Take care, > > Chris Norman. > > > > > > On 14 Nov 2012, at 02:01, "Christopher-Mark Gilland" > wrote: > >> OK, this may seem like quite an elementary question, and a lot of you >> probably are gonna look at me and think I'm nuts for asking, but here's my >> situation. >> >> I have a pare of head phones which I've been using for a while now. I'm not >> gonna sit here and lie to you guies. They're IFrogs. They're not >> studio-grade by any theory of the spectrom. I do have a pare that is studio >> grade, that probably in the days costed roughly 3 or 400 bucks, but those >> things literally speaking are about 20 years old, and have gone through so >> much wear and tare that the headband is becoming loose, and the left ear >> piece is drooping down off my ear, no matter how many times I readjust it's >> hinge. Anyway, that's totally aside the point... >> >> Basically, here's the deal. The IFrogs I have are sort of noise cancelling, >> but not really. You'd think this would be a good thing in some cases, but >> it actually's not helping matters. The thing is, even with them on, my >> voice, whether singing, or talking is not hardly canceled/muffled at all. >> Because of this, I've honestly just learned to get used to the problem I'm >> facing, and play devils advocate, and just say whatever, I'll deal with it. >> >> Basically, the thing is, I always process my vocals *after!* I have them >> recorded. Never during. I find that if I try to do it in realtime, for >> one, I can't always until the vocal track is totally laid down determine >> what things need to be tweeked. The problem however is, when I was tought >> initially by Kevin, as well as others about recording vocals, I was told you >> always always always! want to record at a low level, then use gain >> compensation like a limiter, or say, a compressor etc. to bring the level up >> to adiquit range. With this said, my technique personally, is I always try >> keeping my vocals on the input level somewhere in the neighborhood of -12 to >> -10 at the most, DB. I'm talking about the level that I see just >> immediately one vo+right arrow to the right of the volume up down slider on >> each track. I try not to let it peek above -10 at the absolutely most, and >> really, that's for me even a bit overkill. Normally, I shoot for around -12 >> if I can get within several decimal ranges from there, like 12-3, or 12.5, >> somewhere around there. Obviously, this is before I apply any dynamics, or >> e queueing or the like. The issue is, once I hit shift+R to arm my track >> for recording, obviously, at that level of -12DB, I'm hardly gonna hear >> anything through my monitors. I know I could turn up the headphone monitor >> dial on my interface, but even doing that, I'm having to run it darned near >> wide open to hear anything. Yeah, I can run th
Re: Question about monitoring vocals
OK, no offense, but I got bored of reading half way through the message, but here it is: I'm not a pro, but I always thought you got the original signal as loud as possible without clipping. Personally, I head for as close to 0db on that gain indicator as possible, usually stopping level testing at about -3db, to account for the fact that people usually sing louder with the backing in their ears. No clue how you get anything done at -10db, but maybe I'm completely wrong. If that's still not loud enough, turn the fader right up, no one cares of that fuzzes, then, if you still don't have enough, once you've got your initial level set, compress away, use the fatten or brick wall presets, and you should be fine. Anyways, sorry if I missed your point, but all the extra jabber you put in your messages means about 50 paragraphs of "whatever whatever, this is completely by the point", and I'm bored out of my mind, but I think paragraph 3 said it all. HTH, Take care, Chris Norman. On 14 Nov 2012, at 02:01, "Christopher-Mark Gilland" wrote: > OK, this may seem like quite an elementary question, and a lot of you > probably are gonna look at me and think I'm nuts for asking, but here's my > situation. > > I have a pare of head phones which I've been using for a while now. I'm not > gonna sit here and lie to you guies. They're IFrogs. They're not > studio-grade by any theory of the spectrom. I do have a pare that is studio > grade, that probably in the days costed roughly 3 or 400 bucks, but those > things literally speaking are about 20 years old, and have gone through so > much wear and tare that the headband is becoming loose, and the left ear > piece is drooping down off my ear, no matter how many times I readjust it's > hinge. Anyway, that's totally aside the point... > > Basically, here's the deal. The IFrogs I have are sort of noise cancelling, > but not really. You'd think this would be a good thing in some cases, but it > actually's not helping matters. The thing is, even with them on, my voice, > whether singing, or talking is not hardly canceled/muffled at all. Because of > this, I've honestly just learned to get used to the problem I'm facing, and > play devils advocate, and just say whatever, I'll deal with it. > > Basically, the thing is, I always process my vocals *after!* I have them > recorded. Never during. I find that if I try to do it in realtime, for one, > I can't always until the vocal track is totally laid down determine what > things need to be tweeked. The problem however is, when I was tought > initially by Kevin, as well as others about recording vocals, I was told you > always always always! want to record at a low level, then use gain > compensation like a limiter, or say, a compressor etc. to bring the level up > to adiquit range. With this said, my technique personally, is I always try > keeping my vocals on the input level somewhere in the neighborhood of -12 to > -10 at the most, DB. I'm talking about the level that I see just immediately > one vo+right arrow to the right of the volume up down slider on each track. > I try not to let it peek above -10 at the absolutely most, and really, that's > for me even a bit overkill. Normally, I shoot for around -12 if I can get > within several decimal ranges from there, like 12-3, or 12.5, somewhere > around there. Obviously, this is before I apply any dynamics, or e queueing > or the like. The issue is, once I hit shift+R to arm my track for recording, > obviously, at that level of -12DB, I'm hardly gonna hear anything through my > monitors. I know I could turn up the headphone monitor dial on my interface, > but even doing that, I'm having to run it darned near wide open to hear > anything. Yeah, I can run the output volume slider on the track in PT up to > a higher level, but even with it as high as it'll go at +12DB, it's barely > audible until I run vocal compression. Basically I use the > compresser/limiter dyns3 plugin, and I change none of the parameters, but I > use the vocal leveler preset, which is under the librarian menu inside the > vocals sub menu. Even doing that though, I'm having to run my level almost > to +12DB on the slider on the track strip within PT. Not that that is a > problem, as I can run the music way down, to meet that of the vocal, then > just pop a master fader and bring everything back up in the final mix, but > the problem is with my monitorring through the headphones. Being that > without processing anything, I hardly can hear my vocals at all, and if I > make it loud enough that I can, then I clip like the holy virgin Mary! Parden > the pun for you religious folks... LOL! I just don't exactly know how would > be best to work around this. > > I'm using a Blue Bluebird microphone without the shockmount, as my stand > won't support it, plus the windscreen that came with the mike. Then I'm > using phantom power t
Question about monitoring vocals
OK, this may seem like quite an elementary question, and a lot of you probably are gonna look at me and think I'm nuts for asking, but here's my situation. I have a pare of head phones which I've been using for a while now. I'm not gonna sit here and lie to you guies. They're IFrogs. They're not studio-grade by any theory of the spectrom. I do have a pare that is studio grade, that probably in the days costed roughly 3 or 400 bucks, but those things literally speaking are about 20 years old, and have gone through so much wear and tare that the headband is becoming loose, and the left ear piece is drooping down off my ear, no matter how many times I readjust it's hinge. Anyway, that's totally aside the point... Basically, here's the deal. The IFrogs I have are sort of noise cancelling, but not really. You'd think this would be a good thing in some cases, but it actually's not helping matters. The thing is, even with them on, my voice, whether singing, or talking is not hardly canceled/muffled at all. Because of this, I've honestly just learned to get used to the problem I'm facing, and play devils advocate, and just say whatever, I'll deal with it. Basically, the thing is, I always process my vocals *after!* I have them recorded. Never during. I find that if I try to do it in realtime, for one, I can't always until the vocal track is totally laid down determine what things need to be tweeked. The problem however is, when I was tought initially by Kevin, as well as others about recording vocals, I was told you always always always! want to record at a low level, then use gain compensation like a limiter, or say, a compressor etc. to bring the level up to adiquit range. With this said, my technique personally, is I always try keeping my vocals on the input level somewhere in the neighborhood of -12 to -10 at the most, DB. I'm talking about the level that I see just immediately one vo+right arrow to the right of the volume up down slider on each track. I try not to let it peek above -10 at the absolutely most, and really, that's for me even a bit overkill. Normally, I shoot for around -12 if I can get within several decimal ranges from there, like 12-3, or 12.5, somewhere around there. Obviously, this is before I apply any dynamics, or e queueing or the like. The issue is, once I hit shift+R to arm my track for recording, obviously, at that level of -12DB, I'm hardly gonna hear anything through my monitors. I know I could turn up the headphone monitor dial on my interface, but even doing that, I'm having to run it darned near wide open to hear anything. Yeah, I can run the output volume slider on the track in PT up to a higher level, but even with it as high as it'll go at +12DB, it's barely audible until I run vocal compression. Basically I use the compresser/limiter dyns3 plugin, and I change none of the parameters, but I use the vocal leveler preset, which is under the librarian menu inside the vocals sub menu. Even doing that though, I'm having to run my level almost to +12DB on the slider on the track strip within PT. Not that that is a problem, as I can run the music way down, to meet that of the vocal, then just pop a master fader and bring everything back up in the final mix, but the problem is with my monitorring through the headphones. Being that without processing anything, I hardly can hear my vocals at all, and if I make it loud enough that I can, then I clip like the holy virgin Mary! Parden the pun for you religious folks... LOL! I just don't exactly know how would be best to work around this. I'm using a Blue Bluebird microphone without the shockmount, as my stand won't support it, plus the windscreen that came with the mike. Then I'm using phantom power through the mono xlr input on my interface, which is an M-Audio Fast Track C400. ProTools 10.0 standard, on Snow Leopard 10.6.8, interfacing via USB, with the correct M-Audio drivers installed, and a white stocked 13 inch macbook mid 2010. Any help is greatly appreciated. I just need to know how we can get my mike on the monitor, without clipping ramped up to a level where it can be audible, as I don't wanna just go by well, it's armed, I know it's recording, I can hear myself through the ear muffs. No... I wanna literally hear exactly what's going into the DAW. Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570
Re: Apple's initial response
Well, he did after all say Apple, or Avid. I think his intention was to also send to Apple, of course. Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: Slau Halatyn To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 5:06 PM Subject: Re: Apple's initial response Please, forget about Avid. As I said several times, this has nothing to do with them. Focus on Apple. Thanks, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Chris Norman wrote: OK, I found it, and I can happily examine the control. It seems to be telling me it's a button, but then text area is mentioned too. Is there any way to bundle up all the information I found, and send it off to Apple, and / or Avid for analysis? Funnily enough, when I ran a full accessibility analysis of Pro Tools, the only things that kicked off errors were the pan knobs having a press action, and about 140 errors from what looked like Apple's own inputs menu. Cheers, Just downloading xCode on my Lion in Take care, Chris Norman On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for it. Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman wrote: I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: Hey Scott, I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: Hey Yuma, The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our part. I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. Scott On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
Do these problems only exist with the standard version of pro tools and the os and voice over? Does this also happen with the hd version of pro tools? What would happen if the hd version of pro tools was used and if mountain lion was used with voice over. maybe if the hd version of pro tools doesn't have this problem and it seems that more people are using the version that is not hd then this should be fixed all across the board if you don't mind me saying so. I don't want to spend more money on a product that doesn't properly work with voice over? - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 2:26 PM Subject: Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion Chris, Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link earlier but here it is again: http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all get canned responses but keep going at it. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: Hello. I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days threatenning a lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple unwillingly complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then clamed they were committed. I'm not so convinced. If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank you kindly, Thank you kindly. Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion Hello, Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility Your original message: Hello. Though I understand
Re: Apple's initial response
Well, the reason I mention Avid is simple. If Apple start looking at the flood of reports about the same bug, all pertaining to Pro Tools, they'll do what they've done already, and try and palm it off on Avid. If they continue to get the bug returned to them, and the look into it, I'm sure they have actual programmers who really understand the stuff this tool is telling me, and what it's saying, is that Pro Tools isn't exactly squeaky clean. A few accessibility descriptions here and there, and so it gives them more reason to try and pass the book to Avid. I have already emailed Apple about it, and as I previously said, got the same response as Chris, and you Slau, and presumably everyone else who's emailed them, but I don't think we should hold Apple soully responsible for this problem, just because your friend, who is remaining nameless, told you it's a bug on Apple's end. I have no clue about the stuff I'm seeing, but it still can't hurt, if this information is packageable, to send it to Avid, and point out that although most likely, the edit values are an Apple bug, Pro Tools does have some accessibility flaws, which Apple will likely want sorting before it'll even consider the possibility that it's largest piece of software has a bug. Cheers, Take care, Chris Norman On 13 Nov 2012, at 22:06, Slau Halatyn wrote: > Please, forget about Avid. As I said several times, this has nothing to do > with them. Focus on Apple. > > Thanks, > > Slau > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Chris Norman wrote: > >> OK, I found it, and I can happily examine the control. It seems to be >> telling me it's a button, but then text area is mentioned too. Is there any >> way to bundle up all the information I found, and send it off to Apple, and >> / or Avid for analysis? >> >> Funnily enough, when I ran a full accessibility analysis of Pro Tools, the >> only things that kicked off errors were the pan knobs having a press action, >> and about 140 errors from what looked like Apple's own inputs menu. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Just downloading xCode on my Lion in >> >> Take care, >> Chris Norman >> >> >> >> >> On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >> >>> Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for >>> it. >>> >>> Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Light has no value without darkness" >>> Mob: +642102277190 >>> Skype: Shainobi1 >>> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >>> >>> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but >>> you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended >>> recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey >>> pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, >>> please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid >>> all illicit data retention. >>> >>> On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman >>> wrote: >>> I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > Hey Scott, > > I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the > accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see > what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether > the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. > > > Cheers > > Yuma > > > > > > > > "Light has no value without darkness" > Mob: +642102277190 > Skype: Shainobi1 > twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 > > This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but > you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended > recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, > honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission > error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath > to avoid all illicit data retention. > > On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth > wrote: > >> Hey Yuma, >> >> The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit >> window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range >> you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric >> text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks >> etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you >> currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These >> things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked >> the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed >> anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in >> any other app, so can't imagine what's causing th
Re: Apple's initial response
Please, forget about Avid. As I said several times, this has nothing to do with them. Focus on Apple. Thanks, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 5:03 PM, Chris Norman wrote: > OK, I found it, and I can happily examine the control. It seems to be telling > me it's a button, but then text area is mentioned too. Is there any way to > bundle up all the information I found, and send it off to Apple, and / or > Avid for analysis? > > Funnily enough, when I ran a full accessibility analysis of Pro Tools, the > only things that kicked off errors were the pan knobs having a press action, > and about 140 errors from what looked like Apple's own inputs menu. > > Cheers, > > Just downloading xCode on my Lion in > > Take care, > Chris Norman > > > > > On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > >> Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for it. >> >> Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Light has no value without darkness" >> Mob: +642102277190 >> Skype: Shainobi1 >> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >> >> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you >> don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. >> However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open >> relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please >> advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all >> illicit data retention. >> >> On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman wrote: >> >>> I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >>> Hey Scott, I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > Hey Yuma, > > The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit > window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range > you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric > text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks > etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you > currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These > things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked > the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed > anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in > any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. > > Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, > hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. > Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from > all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be > different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our > part. > > I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. > > Scott > > On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >> Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to >> the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within >> one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line >> with >> the engineers. >> >> Let me know >> >> Cheers >> >> Yuma >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Light has no value without darkness" >> Mob: +642102277190 >> Skype: Shainobi1 >> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >> >> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but >> you >> don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended >> recipient. >> However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open >> relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please >> advise the sender and throw your laptop in
Re: Apple's initial response
OK, I found it, and I can happily examine the control. It seems to be telling me it's a button, but then text area is mentioned too. Is there any way to bundle up all the information I found, and send it off to Apple, and / or Avid for analysis? Funnily enough, when I ran a full accessibility analysis of Pro Tools, the only things that kicked off errors were the pan knobs having a press action, and about 140 errors from what looked like Apple's own inputs menu. Cheers, Just downloading xCode on my Lion in Take care, Chris Norman On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:54, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for it. > > Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. > > > > > > > "Light has no value without darkness" > Mob: +642102277190 > Skype: Shainobi1 > twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 > > This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you > don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. > However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open > relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise > the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data > retention. > > On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman wrote: > >> I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >> >>> Hey Scott, >>> >>> I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the >>> accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see >>> what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the >>> axaccessibility api has been properly coded. >>> >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Yuma >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Light has no value without darkness" >>> Mob: +642102277190 >>> Skype: Shainobi1 >>> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >>> >>> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but >>> you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended >>> recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey >>> pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, >>> please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid >>> all illicit data retention. >>> >>> On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: >>> Hey Yuma, The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our part. I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. Scott On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to > the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within > one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with > the engineers. > > Let me know > > Cheers > > Yuma > > > > > > > "Light has no value without darkness" > Mob: +642102277190 > Skype: Shainobi1 > twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 > > This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but > you > don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended > recipient. > However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open > relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please > advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all > illicit data retention. > > On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: > >> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >> properly implement the necessary components into their applications tha
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
You gottit. I won't get them into it, at your advice. I promise! Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:58 PM Subject: Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion No. The NFB was never involved. Keep coming back with the facts. That's all for now. Thanks, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: I guess that's all right now we really can! do. I don't mean to be rude, Slau, but do you really think they're gonna listen? Do you think we should maybe get the n f b involved again? I hate saying that, but... I won't do any thing drastic like that without your say first, I not only promise, but I completely vow! on that. I am a sollumn man of my word. I, shall not! I didn't say will not, I said shall! not, do anything like that without your soul permission first. I just almost wonder if you was to have another conference meeting with Avid, but maybe bring along someone from the NFB, if maybe that would help convince Apple, "Oh, sh**!" maybe we should look more into this than we have been!" Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:26 PM Subject: Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion Chris, Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link earlier but here it is again: http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all get canned responses but keep going at it. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: Hello. I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days threatenning a lawsuit, no
Re: Apple's initial response
I completely agree with Slau, and frankly, it might hurt our case by doing so. Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Apple's initial response Don't mention that someone from Apple said to contact the accessibility team. That's irrelevant. It's here say as far as anybody is concerned because they weren't part of that specific discussion. The point is all of the stuff I mentioned before. best, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Nick Gawronski wrote: Hi, I would even call up Apple support and explain the issue even go as far as to demo the issue on the phone with them so they can hear it. I think that is the best option and again reply to that responce as I did and explain that someone from Apple even said to contact the accessibility team. Nick Gawronski On Tue, November 13, 2012 2:35 pm, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: Slau, that is verbadum word? for word! the response I got. I mean, they may as well written that from a script! That's identical! what they said to me. What the hell more do we say to them! This is m effing ridiculous! Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:36 PM Subject: Apple's initial response Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau
Re: Apple's initial response
Whoa! You know? notta! half bad? idea! Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: Yuma Antoine Decaux To: Pro Tools Accessibility Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:40 PM Subject: Re: Apple's initial response Hey Scott, I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: Hey Yuma, The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our part. I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. Scott On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with the engineers. Let me know Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau <>
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
No. The NFB was never involved. Keep coming back with the facts. That's all for now. Thanks, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > I guess that's all right now we really can! do. I don't mean to be rude, > Slau, but do you really think they're gonna listen? Do you think we should > maybe get the n f b involved again? I hate saying that, but... I won't do > any thing drastic like that without your say first, I not only promise, but I > completely vow! on that. I am a sollumn man of my word. I, shall not! I > didn't say will not, I said shall! not, do anything like that without your > soul permission first. > > I just almost wonder if you was to have another conference meeting with Avid, > but maybe bring along someone from the NFB, if maybe that would help convince > Apple, "Oh, sh**!" maybe we should look more into this than we have been!" > > Thank you kindly, > > Christopher-Mark Gilland. > Founder of CLG Productions > > Blog: > http://www.clgproductions.org > > Podcast: > http://clgproductions.podhoster.com > > E-mail: > ch...@clgproductions.com > > IMessage/Facetime: > theblindmusic...@att.net > > Windows Live Messenger: > ch...@blindperspectives.net > > Twitter: > @gilland_chris > > Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland > > Skype: > twinklesfriend2007 > > Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: > 704-697-2069 > > Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): > 980-272-8570 > > > - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:26 PM > Subject: Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain > Lion > > > Chris, > > Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying > it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up > that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link > earlier but here it is again: > http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads > This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the > necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all > get canned responses but keep going at it. > > Slau > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. >> not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is >> their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to >> shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of >> always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The >> developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just >> real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated >> that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and >> tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like >> us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the >> developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever >> their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of >> writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, >> they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's >> talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an >> underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make >> complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, >> than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. >> >> Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being >> extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be >> realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with >> accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 >> roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, >> which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was >> Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do >> you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? >> That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days >> threatenning a lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple >> unwillingly complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then >> clamed they were committed. I'm not so convinced. >> >> If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me >> off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. >> >> Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank >> you kindly, >> >> Thank you kindly. >> Christopher-Mark Gilland. >> Founder of CLG Productions >> >> Blog: >> http://www.clgpr
Re: Apple's initial response
I agree with you whole heartedly, but I highly doubt Avid's gonna do that. then again though, who am I to say? Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Chris Norman" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:28 PM Subject: Re: Apple's initial response Just out of interest, are Avid willing to disclose what kind of control they use? If we knew that, then we could pinpoint the problem with Apple in a more targeted fashion possibly. Hath, Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:05, Slau Halatyn wrote: No, this is a canned response. Avid is not pointing the finger at all. In fact, as I said, it was a person from Apple who said it appeared to be a bug in VoiceOver. Avid is currently unaware of this particular issue. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Ronald van Rhijn wrote: Slau, and now? Apple and Avid are pointing fingers at each other. I haven't send a message to accessibility yet, cause I don't know how to describe the problem exactly. Is it enough to say the counters etc aren't spoken correctly under Mountain Lion while with the same version of pro Tools under Snow Leopard or Lion the items are spoken right? thanks, Ronald Op 13 nov. 2012, om 18:36 heeft Slau Halatyn het volgende geschreven: Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau
Re: Apple's initial response
Man these people changed the whole structure again, so i have to look for it. Sometimes this company frustrates the hell out of me. "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 9:44 AM, Chris Norman wrote: > I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > >> Hey Scott, >> >> I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the >> accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see >> what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the >> axaccessibility api has been properly coded. >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Yuma >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Light has no value without darkness" >> Mob: +642102277190 >> Skype: Shainobi1 >> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >> >> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you >> don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. >> However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open >> relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please >> advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all >> illicit data retention. >> >> On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: >> >>> Hey Yuma, >>> >>> The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit >>> window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range >>> you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric >>> text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks >>> etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you >>> currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These >>> things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked >>> the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed >>> anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in >>> any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. >>> >>> Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, >>> hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. >>> Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from >>> all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be >>> different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our >>> part. >>> >>> I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. >>> >>> Scott >>> >>> On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with the engineers. Let me know Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: > Apple's initial response to me was as follows: > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not > work. > > Apple Accessibility > > I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested > contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that > Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does > not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and > Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canne
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
I guess that's all right now we really can! do. I don't mean to be rude, Slau, but do you really think they're gonna listen? Do you think we should maybe get the n f b involved again? I hate saying that, but... I won't do any thing drastic like that without your say first, I not only promise, but I completely vow! on that. I am a sollumn man of my word. I, shall not! I didn't say will not, I said shall! not, do anything like that without your soul permission first. I just almost wonder if you was to have another conference meeting with Avid, but maybe bring along someone from the NFB, if maybe that would help convince Apple, "Oh, sh**!" maybe we should look more into this than we have been!" Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 3:26 PM Subject: Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion Chris, Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link earlier but here it is again: http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all get canned responses but keep going at it. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: Hello. I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days threatenning a lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple unwillingly complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then clamed they were committed. I'm not so convinced. If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank you kindly, Thank you kindly. Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original M
Re: Apple's initial response
we don't have that information. Had that been required, I believe it would have been communicated in that manner. The bottom line is that a program made accessible should stay accessible through operating systems. When it's accessible in two operating systems and not the third and nothing is different otherwise, there's a problem within the OS not the program. If something different needs to be done specifically for Mountain Lion, Apple needs to make that clear and, by the way, I don't think that's the case anyway. Had it been, I think that would have been an issue with other applications outside of Pro Tools. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Chris Norman wrote: > Just out of interest, are Avid willing to disclose what kind of control they > use? If we knew that, then we could pinpoint the problem with Apple in a more > targeted fashion possibly. > > Hath, > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:05, Slau Halatyn wrote: > >> No, this is a canned response. Avid is not pointing the finger at all. In >> fact, as I said, it was a person from Apple who said it appeared to be a bug >> in VoiceOver. Avid is currently unaware of this particular issue. >> >> Slau >> >> On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Ronald van Rhijn wrote: >> >>> Slau, >>> and now? Apple and Avid are pointing fingers at each other. >>> I haven't send a message to accessibility yet, cause I don't know how to >>> describe the problem exactly. >>> Is it enough to say the counters etc aren't spoken correctly under Mountain >>> Lion while with the same version of pro Tools under Snow Leopard or Lion >>> the items are spoken right? >>> thanks, >>> Ronald >>> >>> Op 13 nov. 2012, om 18:36 heeft Slau Halatyn het >>> volgende geschreven: >>> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau >>
Re: Apple's initial response
Don't mention that someone from Apple said to contact the accessibility team. That's irrelevant. It's here say as far as anybody is concerned because they weren't part of that specific discussion. The point is all of the stuff I mentioned before. best, Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Nick Gawronski wrote: > Hi, I would even call up Apple support and explain the issue even go as > far as to demo the issue on the phone with them so they can hear it. I > think that is the best option and again reply to that responce as I did > and explain that someone from Apple even said to contact the accessibility > team. Nick Gawronski > On Tue, November 13, 2012 2:35 pm, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: >> Slau, that is verbadum word? for word! the response I got. I mean, they >> may >> as well written that from a script! That's identical! what they said to >> me. >> What the hell more do we say to them! This is m effing ridiculous! >> >> Thank you kindly, >> >> Christopher-Mark Gilland. >> Founder of CLG Productions >> >> Blog: >> http://www.clgproductions.org >> >> Podcast: >> http://clgproductions.podhoster.com >> >> E-mail: >> ch...@clgproductions.com >> >> IMessage/Facetime: >> theblindmusic...@att.net >> >> Windows Live Messenger: >> ch...@blindperspectives.net >> >> Twitter: >> @gilland_chris >> >> Facebook: >> http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland >> >> Skype: >> twinklesfriend2007 >> >> Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: >> 704-697-2069 >> >> Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): >> 980-272-8570 >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Slau Halatyn" >> To: >> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:36 PM >> Subject: Apple's initial response >> >> >> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >> work. >> >> Apple Accessibility >> >> I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested >> contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that >> Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does >> not >> exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain >> Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back >> with >> further support of the argument. >> >> Slau >> >> > >
Re: Apple's initial response
I have Xcode on my laptop. How would I do that? Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:40, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > Hey Scott, > > I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the > accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see what > part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the > axaccessibility api has been properly coded. > > > Cheers > > Yuma > > > > > > > > "Light has no value without darkness" > Mob: +642102277190 > Skype: Shainobi1 > twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 > > This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you > don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. > However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open > relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise > the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data > retention. > > On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > >> Hey Yuma, >> >> The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit >> window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range >> you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric >> text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks >> etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you >> currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These >> things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked >> the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed >> anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in >> any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. >> >> Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, >> hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. >> Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from >> all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be >> different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our >> part. >> >> I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. >> >> Scott >> >> On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >>> Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to >>> the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within >>> one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with >>> the engineers. >>> >>> Let me know >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Yuma >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Light has no value without darkness" >>> Mob: +642102277190 >>> Skype: Shainobi1 >>> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >>> >>> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you >>> don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. >>> However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open >>> relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please >>> advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all >>> illicit data retention. >>> >>> On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: >>> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau >>> >>> >
Re: Apple's initial response
Yadsas Nektario. Ti kanaté? xi. Den ine calá. LOL! No, they don't, apparently. Write me off list if you have any more questions, or want further detail on what by that I mean. Irini tu Théu me sas. Xrístos, AKA: Chris.
Re: Apple's initial response
Hey Scott, I think you guys should try to pinpoint the issue ui elements with the accessibility inspector that's bundled with x-code. At least you can see what part of the interface has problems, and it even tells you whether the axaccessibility api has been properly coded. Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 8:41 AM, Scott Chesworth wrote: > Hey Yuma, > > The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit > window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range > you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric > text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks > etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you > currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These > things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked > the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed > anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in > any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. > > Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, > hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. > Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from > all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be > different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our > part. > > I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. > > Scott > > On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: >> Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to >> the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within >> one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with >> the engineers. >> >> Let me know >> >> Cheers >> >> Yuma >> >> >> >> >> >> >> "Light has no value without darkness" >> Mob: +642102277190 >> Skype: Shainobi1 >> twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 >> >> This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you >> don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. >> However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open >> relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please >> advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all >> illicit data retention. >> >> On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: >> >>> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >>> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >>> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >>> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >>> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >>> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >>> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >>> work. >>> >>> Apple Accessibility >>> >>> I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested >>> contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that >>> Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does >>> not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and >>> Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to >>> come back with further support of the argument. >>> >>> Slau >>> >> >> <>
Re: Apple's initial response
Hi, I would even call up Apple support and explain the issue even go as far as to demo the issue on the phone with them so they can hear it. I think that is the best option and again reply to that responce as I did and explain that someone from Apple even said to contact the accessibility team. Nick Gawronski On Tue, November 13, 2012 2:35 pm, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > Slau, that is verbadum word? for word! the response I got. I mean, they > may > as well written that from a script! That's identical! what they said to > me. > What the hell more do we say to them! This is m effing ridiculous! > > Thank you kindly, > > Christopher-Mark Gilland. > Founder of CLG Productions > > Blog: > http://www.clgproductions.org > > Podcast: > http://clgproductions.podhoster.com > > E-mail: > ch...@clgproductions.com > > IMessage/Facetime: > theblindmusic...@att.net > > Windows Live Messenger: > ch...@blindperspectives.net > > Twitter: > @gilland_chris > > Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland > > Skype: > twinklesfriend2007 > > Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: > 704-697-2069 > > Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): > 980-272-8570 > > > - Original Message - > From: "Slau Halatyn" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:36 PM > Subject: Apple's initial response > > > Apple's initial response to me was as follows: > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not > work. > > Apple Accessibility > > I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested > contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that > Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does > not > exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain > Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back > with > further support of the argument. > > Slau > >
Re: Apple's initial response
Slau, that is verbadum word? for word! the response I got. I mean, they may as well written that from a script! That's identical! what they said to me. What the hell more do we say to them! This is m effing ridiculous! Thank you kindly, Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: "Slau Halatyn" To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:36 PM Subject: Apple's initial response Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
I got the exact response as tother Chris. As you've said, it's a mass produced reply. Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:26, Slau Halatyn wrote: > Chris, > > Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying > it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up > that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link > earlier but here it is again: > http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads > This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the > necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all > get canned responses but keep going at it. > > Slau > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. >> not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is >> their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to >> shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of >> always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The >> developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just >> real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated >> that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and >> tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like >> us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the >> developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever >> their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of >> writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, >> they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's >> talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an >> underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make >> complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, >> than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. >> >> Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being >> extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be >> realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with >> accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 >> roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, >> which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was >> Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do >> you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? >> That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days >> threatenning a lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple >> unwillingly complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then >> clamed they were committed. I'm not so convinced. >> >> If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me >> off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. >> >> Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank >> you kindly, >> >> Thank you kindly. >> Christopher-Mark Gilland. >> Founder of CLG Productions >> >> Blog: >> http://www.clgproductions.org >> >> Podcast: >> http://clgproductions.podhoster.com >> >> E-mail: >> ch...@clgproductions.com >> >> IMessage/Facetime: >> theblindmusic...@att.net >> >> Windows Live Messenger: >> ch...@blindperspectives.net >> >> Twitter: >> @gilland_chris >> >> Facebook: >> http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland >> >> Skype: >> twinklesfriend2007 >> >> Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: >> 704-697-2069 >> >> Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): >> 980-272-8570 >> >> >> - Original Message - From: >> To: >> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:19 PM >> Subject: Re: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion >> >> >> Hello, >> >> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >> work. >> >> Apple Accessibility >> >> Your original message: >> >> Hello. >> >> Though I understand that this issue may come across as being something you >> all do not directly support, I genuinely hope and urge you guys here at >> Apple, to at least look into the situation as best you can. I am a >> professional musician who has been relying very heavily now for at least 4
Re: Apple's initial response
Just out of interest, are Avid willing to disclose what kind of control they use? If we knew that, then we could pinpoint the problem with Apple in a more targeted fashion possibly. Hath, Sent from my iPhone On 13 Nov 2012, at 20:05, Slau Halatyn wrote: > No, this is a canned response. Avid is not pointing the finger at all. In > fact, as I said, it was a person from Apple who said it appeared to be a bug > in VoiceOver. Avid is currently unaware of this particular issue. > > Slau > > On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Ronald van Rhijn wrote: > >> Slau, >> and now? Apple and Avid are pointing fingers at each other. >> I haven't send a message to accessibility yet, cause I don't know how to >> describe the problem exactly. >> Is it enough to say the counters etc aren't spoken correctly under Mountain >> Lion while with the same version of pro Tools under Snow Leopard or Lion the >> items are spoken right? >> thanks, >> Ronald >> >> Op 13 nov. 2012, om 18:36 heeft Slau Halatyn het >> volgende geschreven: >> >>> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >>> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >>> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >>> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >>> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >>> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >>> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >>> work. >>> >>> Apple Accessibility >>> >>> I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested >>> contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that >>> Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does >>> not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and >>> Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come >>> back with further support of the argument. >>> >>> Slau >
Re: For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
Chris, Again, Avid is not aware of the issue, it's someone at Apple itself saying it's a VoiceOver issue. That, however, is irrelevant. Don't even bring up that point. Just keep coming back with the facts. I've supplied the link earlier but here it is again: http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads This proves that Pro Tools 10.3.2 supports Mountain Lion and they've done the necessary work. Don't relent. Just keep coming back with it. Yes, we'll all get canned responses but keep going at it. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 3:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > Hello. > > I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. > not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is > their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to > shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of > always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The > developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just > real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated > that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and > tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like > us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the > developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever their > flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of writing > this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, they're > wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's talked to > Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an underlying > issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make complete > sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, than someone > who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. > > Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being > extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be > realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with > accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 > roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, > which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was > Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do you > think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? That's > right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days threatenning a > lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple unwillingly > complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then clamed they were > committed. I'm not so convinced. > > If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me > off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. > > Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank > you kindly, > > Thank you kindly. > Christopher-Mark Gilland. > Founder of CLG Productions > > Blog: > http://www.clgproductions.org > > Podcast: > http://clgproductions.podhoster.com > > E-mail: > ch...@clgproductions.com > > IMessage/Facetime: > theblindmusic...@att.net > > Windows Live Messenger: > ch...@blindperspectives.net > > Twitter: > @gilland_chris > > Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland > > Skype: > twinklesfriend2007 > > Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: > 704-697-2069 > > Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): > 980-272-8570 > > > - Original Message - From: > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:19 PM > Subject: Re: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion > > > Hello, > > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. > > Apple Accessibility > > Your original message: > > Hello. > > Though I understand that this issue may come across as being something you > all do not directly support, I genuinely hope and urge you guys here at > Apple, to at least look into the situation as best you can. I am a > professional musician who has been relying very heavily now for at least 4 > years on the use of ProTools from Avid in my home recording environment. > Recently, I've expanded and now have a full fledged recording studio which I > bring clients to every day of the week, Monday through Friday. Regarding > accessibility, here is the situation. After much research
For Slau and others: Fw: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion
Hello. I e-mailed Apple Accessibility regarding the issue with the counters, etc. not properly reading, as Slau had suggested that all of us do. Below is their response. In my humble opinion, though I don't want to be the one to shoot the black horse, this is so damn typical of them. I'm so sick of always hearing the same templated script: "Oh, it's not our falt. The developer needs to work harder." It's never Apple's falt. Maybe I'm just real hot as there is another onpgoing accessibility issue totally unrelated that they absolutely refuse to cooperate on, but I'm really getting sick and tired, I tell you, of them apparently never ever listenning when people like us who need accessibility implemented always put the raw meat back on the developer. They like thinking they're perfect, and that nothing's ever their flaw until proven otherwise. So, that leads me to my question of writing this mail: how do we then prove it to them, that in this case, they're wrong? I'd trust Slau with this more than I would anyone. If he's talked to Avid, and Avid directly says this isn't a P T issue, but more an underlying issue of OSX, which based on what I'm hearing elseware, does make complete sense, by the way, then I'm gonna be more promed to believe him, than someone who's never probably used ProTools a single day of their life. Sorry for the outburst of frustration. Maybe now I! am the one being extremely unfair, but come on! This is ridiculous, I mean let's just be realistic here. This is not the first time Apple has refused to help with accessibility until we pushed. And who do you think it was back in 2005 roughly with OSX 10.4 Tiger, that convinced them to put a screen reader, which wound up being Voiceover into the OS directly? Oh sure, there was Outspoken before then, and believe me, it worked wonderfully! but, who do you think put the fire under their feet to get on the train, if you will? That's right! the N? F? B. If it wasn't for them back in the days threatenning a lawsuit, now granted, it never came down to that, as Apple unwillingly complied, but that's just it, they did it unwillingly, then clamed they were committed. I'm not so convinced. If you wanna know more my reasonnings, this isn't the list for it. Write me off list, if you want, and I'll furtyher elaberate. Anyway, scroll down below my signature, and you'll find their response.Thank you kindly, Thank you kindly. Christopher-Mark Gilland. Founder of CLG Productions Blog: http://www.clgproductions.org Podcast: http://clgproductions.podhoster.com E-mail: ch...@clgproductions.com IMessage/Facetime: theblindmusic...@att.net Windows Live Messenger: ch...@blindperspectives.net Twitter: @gilland_chris Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/christopher.gilland Skype: twinklesfriend2007 Send me a fax from any standard fax machine: 704-697-2069 Google Voice: (Please use sparingly): 980-272-8570 - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:19 PM Subject: Re: Problem with accessibility in Mountain Lion Hello, Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility Your original message: Hello. Though I understand that this issue may come across as being something you all do not directly support, I genuinely hope and urge you guys here at Apple, to at least look into the situation as best you can. I am a professional musician who has been relying very heavily now for at least 4 years on the use of ProTools from Avid in my home recording environment. Recently, I've expanded and now have a full fledged recording studio which I bring clients to every day of the week, Monday through Friday. Regarding accessibility, here is the situation. After much research, and after much working with Avid directly, all of us... myself and Avid Engineering both have come to the following conclusion. Under Snow Leopard and Leopard, Pro Tools' counter displays read fine but under Mountain Lion, they're simply identified by labels like, "Main Counter, numeric text," "Edit Start Time, numeric text," etc. Under Snow Leopard and Leopard, edit modes and tool selections are spoken properly by VoiceOver but, under Mountain Lion, there's no way to tell what edit mode is selected or which tool is selected. We know that a programmer at Avid followed Apple's own guidelines and we know that the exact same version of Pro Tools behaves fine under snow Leopard and Leopard but not so under Mountain Lion. I'd appreciate very greatly and urge you all very strongly to look into thi
Re: Apple's initial response
folks, Be prepared for a canned response from Apple. They will probably try to send you an outdated link to a page on Avid's web site that shows Pro Tools as not being compatible with Mountain Lion. Shoot back the following link: http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/en_US/Download/Pro-Tools-10-3-2-Downloads which shows that Pro Tools 10.3.2 does, in fact, support Mountain Lion. Also, reiterate the fact that stuff works in snow Leopard and Lion but not in Mountain Lion and there should be no reason for that. Slau
Re: Apple's initial response
No, this is a canned response. Avid is not pointing the finger at all. In fact, as I said, it was a person from Apple who said it appeared to be a bug in VoiceOver. Avid is currently unaware of this particular issue. Slau On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:33 PM, Ronald van Rhijn wrote: > Slau, > and now? Apple and Avid are pointing fingers at each other. > I haven't send a message to accessibility yet, cause I don't know how to > describe the problem exactly. > Is it enough to say the counters etc aren't spoken correctly under Mountain > Lion while with the same version of pro Tools under Snow Leopard or Lion the > items are spoken right? > thanks, > Ronald > > Op 13 nov. 2012, om 18:36 heeft Slau Halatyn het > volgende geschreven: > >> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >> work. >> >> Apple Accessibility >> >> I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested >> contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that >> Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not >> exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain >> Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with >> further support of the argument. >> >> Slau >> >
Re: Apple's initial response
Hey Yuma, The issue we're trying to draw their attention to is that in the edit window of Pro Tools, counter values (that speak start time, the range you have selected etc) have suddenly started just saying "numeric text" instead of speaking dynamic information like "beat 3, 480 ticks etc". It's also not possible anymore to tell which edit tool you currently have selected with VO, or which edit mode you're in. These things all worked a treat in Snow Leopard and Lion, but have kicked the bucket in ML for some reason even though Avid haven't changed anything at their end. So far, I haven't seen the same behaviour in any other app, so can't imagine what's causing the issue. Nektarios, no, they definitely don't. However, I've lost many many, hours of my life and a big chunk of sanity arguing that point. Currently I have nothing to show for it (other than a sore head from all that repetition and cyber wall banging). Things should be different, but they're not. That's not down to a lack of effort on our part. I'll reply to the email anyway, keep calm and carry on as the saying goes. Scott On 11/13/12, Yuma Antoine Decaux wrote: > Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to > the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within > one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with > the engineers. > > Let me know > > Cheers > > Yuma > > > > > > > "Light has no value without darkness" > Mob: +642102277190 > Skype: Shainobi1 > twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 > > This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you > don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. > However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open > relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please > advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all > illicit data retention. > > On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: > >> Apple's initial response to me was as follows: >> Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to >> properly implement the necessary components into their applications that >> allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an >> update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with >> VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID >> directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not >> work. >> >> Apple Accessibility >> >> I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested >> contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that >> Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does >> not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and >> Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to >> come back with further support of the argument. >> >> Slau >> > >
Re: Apple's initial response
Slau, and now? Apple and Avid are pointing fingers at each other. I haven't send a message to accessibility yet, cause I don't know how to describe the problem exactly. Is it enough to say the counters etc aren't spoken correctly under Mountain Lion while with the same version of pro Tools under Snow Leopard or Lion the items are spoken right? thanks, Ronald Op 13 nov. 2012, om 18:36 heeft Slau Halatyn het volgende geschreven: > Apple's initial response to me was as follows: > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not > work. > > Apple Accessibility > > I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested > contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that > Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not > exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain > Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with > further support of the argument. > > Slau >
Re: Apple's initial response
Hi, could you tell me what the issue with voice over is? I have access to the apple bug reporting system. If i can emulate something similar within one of the standard apps as well, i may be able to have a direct line with the engineers. Let me know Cheers Yuma "Light has no value without darkness" Mob: +642102277190 Skype: Shainobi1 twitter: http://www.twitter.com/triple7 This message is protected by article 4-210 of a certain book of laws but you don't have to worry about privacy issues if you are the intended recipient. However, if any freakish circumstance such as ip sniffing, honey pot open relay servers or an honest mistake caused a transmission error, please advise the sender and throw your laptop into a bubble bath to avoid all illicit data retention. On 14/11/2012, at 6:36 AM, Slau Halatyn wrote: > Apple's initial response to me was as follows: > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not > work. > > Apple Accessibility > > I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested > contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that > Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not > exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain > Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with > further support of the argument. > > Slau > <>
Re: Apple's initial response
Hello. With that response in context, I am wondering, does Apple follow their own guide lines to make Logic pro accessible with Voice over? Nektarios. On Nov 13, 2012, at 7:36 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: > Apple's initial response to me was as follows: > Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to > properly implement the necessary components into their applications that > allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an > update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with > VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID > directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not > work. > > Apple Accessibility > > I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested > contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that > Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not > exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain > Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with > further support of the argument. > > Slau >
Apple's initial response
Apple's initial response to me was as follows: Thank you for your email. Apple relies on each application developer to properly implement the necessary components into their applications that allow VoiceOver to work correctly. Unfortunately AVID has not provided an update for ProTools that would allow their software to work correctly with VoiceOver in OS X 10.8 Mountain Lion. We recommend that you contact AVID directly to provide them feedback on the features you are finding do not work. Apple Accessibility I responded and copied a couple of people at Apple who initially suggested contacting the accessibility team. I essentially reiterated the fact that Avid did, indeed, do the necessary work and that, since the problem does not exist in Snow Leopard and Lion, it's a problem with VoiceOver and Mountain Lion. I encourage anyone who gets the same canned response to come back with further support of the argument. Slau
Re: Question about Bouncing
Yep, and it's my biggest gripe about PT. Every other daw in the world not only has offline bouncing, but offline rendering of soft synth tracks. Their philosophy was sound about 15 years ago, which was the concept of rendering audio in realtime through their own hardware. Now, it's a moot point. Half the time, I'm rendering tracks using the internal macbook card, cause I'm on the run. I totally feel your pain. Kevin
Re: we need to email Apple about something
Hi Slau, Of course I will send a message to Apple Accessibility, in my best English ugh, but have not so good experiences with them, and I am not the only one. They tend to reply with some standard written messages, saying they are thankful for the feedback but cannot comment on it. Some very huge bugs in Dutch OSX are present for 18 months now since the release of Lion. They now also messed up IOS6 for us as well. many people have written Accessibility, but all get the same answer: thanks for feedback, we are aware of the issue and cannot comment on anything. Very frustrating. Anyways, I am drifting off subject. I wil send them a message about Pro Tools. and slau, many thanks for your efforts man. best, Ronald Op 12 nov. 2012, om 18:49 heeft Slau Halatyn het volgende geschreven: > Folks, > > I've spoken with a few people regarding this issue and it appears that we > need to email accessibil...@apple.com to ensure its resolution. > > The issue of counters in Pro Tools 10 not reading correctly under Mountain > Lion appears to be a VoiceOver issue rather than an issue with Pro Tools > itself. Not only are counters not being read but edit modes and tool > selections are not being indicated. > > I encourage everybody to email accessibil...@apple.com identifying the issue, > explaining it and urging Apple to resolve it. Just so everybody's straight > with the details, here's the situation: > > Under Snow Leopard and Leopard, Pro Tools' counter displays read fine but > under Mountain Lion, they're simply identified by labels like, "Main Counter, > numeric text," "Edit Start Time, numeric text," etc. Under Snow Leopard and > Leopard, edit modes and tool selections are spoken properly by VoiceOver but, > under Mountain Lion, there's no way to tell what edit mode is selected or > which tool is selected. > > We know that a programmer at Avid followed Apple's own guidelines and we know > that the exact same version of Pro Tools behaves fine under snow Leopard and > Leopard but not so under Mountain Lion. > > Please feel free to elucidate these facts in your own words and email > accessibil...@apple.com and urge them to look into it. > > Thanks, > > Slau >
