Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
f you were a screen reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even if it was only temporary. What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt saying that, but I tell it as I see it. Chris. - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace's CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, "What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago."" Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate time. In Avid's case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months once it became a priority. Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October... We may disagree on how to get this done, but we agree it must be done... If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. In other words lets keep working. For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can't, We will respect you. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
#x27;d not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! >>>>> perfectly. >>>>> What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest >>>>> time, >>>>> >>>>> they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a >>>>> screen >>>>> >>>>> reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you >>>>> don't, >>>>> >>>>> then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, >>>>> believe >>>>> me! >>>>> >>>>> My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst >>>>> hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. >>>>> If >>>>> this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having >>>>> multiple >>>>> >>>>> A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far >>>>> am >>>>> definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all >>>>> fairness, >>>>> >>>>> who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace >>>>> really >>>>> truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as >>>>> being >>>>> >>>>> very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative >>>>> out. >>>>> >>>>> Even if it was only temporary. >>>>> >>>>> What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from >>>>> Pace >>>>> states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the >>>>> older A >>>>> >>>>> P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the >>>>> letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out >>>>> admits >>>>> >>>>> it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. >>>>> OK, >>>>> >>>>> so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up >>>>> their >>>>> mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, >>>>> they're >>>>> not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. >>>>> >>>>> I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this >>>>> message, so >>>>> >>>>> go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble >>>>> opinion. >>>>> >>>>> If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due >>>>> respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly >>>>> blunt >>>>> >>>>> saying that, but I tell it as I see it. >>>>> >>>>> Chris. >>>>> >>>>> - Original Message - >>>>> From: "TheOreoMonster" >>>>> To: >>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into >>>>> PT >>>>> regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to >>>>> the >>>>> point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and >>>>> buttons. >>>>> Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point >>>>> where >>>>> >>>>> that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple >>>>> of >>>>> years in-between when initial processes started to when access >>>>> labeling >>>>> began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the >>>>> moment. >>>>> On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, >>>>>> Feel assured you are being heard. >>>>>> Pace's CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made >>>>>> reference >>>>>> to a complaint, >>>>>> Quote, "What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility >>>>>> support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out >>>>>> and >>>>>> been done with it ages ago."" >>>>>> >>>>>> Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! >>>>>> When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid >>>>>> Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate >>>>>> time. >>>>>> In Avid's case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the >>>>>> Ap, >>>>>> most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months >>>>>> once it became a priority. >>>>>> Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until >>>>>> October... >>>>>> >>>>>> We may disagree on how to get this done, >>>>>> but we agree it must be done... >>>>>> >>>>>> If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired >>>>>> results. >>>>>> In other words lets keep working. >>>>>> For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can't, >>>>>> We will respect you. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups >>>>>> >>>>>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an >>>>>> >>>>>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups >>>>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an >>>>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups >>>>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an >>>>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
I'm gonna pretend that I didn't hear that. Chris. - Original Message - From: "Chris Smart" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 4:23 PM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy Wow, how long does it take to type all that, even if you're a fast typist? Sent from Chris's iPhone. On Jan 31, 2015, at 13:17, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: I dono... I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also agree with Mike. October? Really? OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument here. The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even if it was only temporary. What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt saying that, but I tell it as I see it. Chris. - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: To
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
Karen, I completely agree. You make some very valid points. Chris. - Original Message - From: "Karen Lewellen" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 3:54 PM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy You Know Scott, Call me an innocent. but reading this objectively, there seems no incentive for this person to give you what you want at all, not now, or in the future. what would motivate pace to consider this problem worth their time? Which is basically the answer. We do not have the resources right now, maybe later. Then later becomes gosh darn i thought we would have the resources, but oops something more worth our time came up. I am not being disrespectful. Instead I am thinking business. What motivates this person, and how can you use this to gain what you desire? he seems to indicate they are short on staff resources. Fine, simply create a part time position, or internship where this guy went to school, or get the company a tax write off for the cost to pay a part time engineer to do the work...and make sure they get major press for being innovative. Let the engineer blog about the progress hyping the next edition of Ilock manager it impacts. If it is not the cost that motivates him, what does? I read the letter got to the line where he says...I will not bother you with details. I thought, oh please do bother me, from the paying customers perspective. How about his reputation? Does he care how others he respects thinks of his company? If so, would an open letter in a major industry publication, give him reason to think again? Yes you waited a long time before, however one can generate bad social media or great social media in an environment where such can become profoundly public fast. I do not personally feel negativity is needful . Still as Carnegie wrote every human has the desire to feel important. How does this executive define it, and how can you use that definition to suddenly make this a priority. If he knows the market will wait, he will keep you waitingand waiting...and waiting. Does that make sense? Kare On Sat, 31 Jan 2015, Scott Chesworth wrote: He talks about balancing newer developments with legacy OS support so far as I can tell, not bringing back any old APIs. It's already been pointed out once, but I'll do it again. It took years, and I do mean quite a few of them, before anything got touched by Avid. During those years there were long, and I do mean long periods of inactivity and uncertainty for everyone. It's easy to forget or overlook that journey if you're new ish to using PT, but that's how we ended up with the accessibility you're now using. Seems to me like there's not much noise being made here that'll directly lead to results, unless someone knows enough about what accessibility support there is in QT4 to be able to save those Pace engineers on the skunkworks project a bunch of time. Scott On 1/31/15, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: I dono... I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also agree with Mike. October? Really? OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument here. The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the lon
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
I dono... I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also agree with Mike. October? Really? OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument here. The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even if it was only temporary. What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt saying that, but I tell it as I see it. Chris. - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace's CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, "What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago."" Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When accessibility is taken ser
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
d feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I >>> also >>> >>> agree with Mike. October? Really? >>> >>> OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily >>> be >>> implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't >>> pace >>> give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new >>> platform. >>> >>> It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like >>> it >>> was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with >>> those >>> >>> A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build >>> for >>> >>> the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted >>> and >>> want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as >>> most >>> of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could >>> use. >>> >>> I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs >>> to >>> be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. >>> You >>> might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. >>> But, >>> does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they >>> do! >>> come up with a way to get the new software working with good >>> accessibility, >>> >>> they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a >>> fallback >>> for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. >>> Now, >>> >>> you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? >>> LOL! >>> Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a >>> legitimate >>> argument here. >>> >>> The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at >>> all. >>> If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, >>> there >>> >>> is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once >>> done, >>> it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! >>> perfectly. >>> What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest >>> time, >>> >>> they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a >>> screen >>> >>> reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you >>> don't, >>> >>> then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, >>> believe >>> me! >>> >>> My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst >>> hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. >>> If >>> this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having >>> multiple >>> >>> A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far >>> am >>> definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all >>> fairness, >>> >>> who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace >>> really >>> truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as >>> being >>> >>> very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative >>> out. >>> >>> Even if it was only temporary. >>> >>> What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from >>> Pace >>> states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the >>> older A >>> >>> P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the >>> letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out >>> admits >>> >>> it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. >>> OK, >>> >>> so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their >>> mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're >>> not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. >>> >>> I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, >>> so >>> >>> go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble >>> opini
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
Really don’t want to get in a back and forth about this, I would rather we save our energy for the accessibility challenges outside of this forum. Also my schedule won’t allow it. From first hand knowledge ProTools 10, and 11, in Mountain Lion and Mavericks was unusable. When I say this was fixed in les than two months, with out going in to details just know I’m not guessing. I understand that we all have different motives for wanting to get things fixed For some of us it’s our work, for some of us it’s training, and for some it’s just a hobby, so I understand some may be abit more aggressive about timing than others. I’m not interested in a divisive discussion here because I’m a where of where our focus must be. So once again for every one no matter the process, who forced Mr. Cornce to at least respond, thanks again. On 1/31/15, Mike Lockett wrote: > On 1/31/15, TheOreoMonster wrote: >> How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT >> regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the >> point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and >> buttons. >> Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point >> where >> that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of >> years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling >> began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the >> moment. >> On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: >> >>> To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, >>> Feel assured you are being heard. >>> Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference >>> to a complaint, >>> Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility >>> support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and >>> been done with it ages ago.”” >>> >>> Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! >>> When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid >>> Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate >>> time. >>> In Avid’s case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, >>> most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months >>> once it became a priority. >>> Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October… >>> >>> We may disagree on how to get this done, >>> but we agree it must be done… >>> >>> If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired >>> results. >>> In other words lets keep working. >>> For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can’t, >>> We will respect you. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups >>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an >>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
Wow, how long does it take to type all that, even if you're a fast typist? Sent from Chris's iPhone. > On Jan 31, 2015, at 13:17, Christopher-Mark Gilland > wrote: > > I dono... > > I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also > agree with Mike. October? Really? > > OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be > implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace > give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. > It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it > was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those > A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for > the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and > want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of > us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I > understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be > eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might > not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it > not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up > with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at > least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people > like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're > probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me > out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument > here. > > The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If > you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is > an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it > works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What > about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, they > had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen > reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, > then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! > > My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking > seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is > the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's > with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! > not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to > make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! > want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very > realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even > if it was only temporary. > > What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace > states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A > P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter > that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! > Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, > are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. > It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going > to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. > > I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so > go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. > If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due > respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt > saying that, but I tell it as I see it. > > Chris. > > - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM > Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy > > > How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT > regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point > where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that > process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that > could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years > in-between when initial processes started to when access
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
ger back like it >>> was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those >>> >>> A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for >>> >>> the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and >>> want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most >>> of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. >>> >>> I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to >>> be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You >>> might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, >>> does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! >>> come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, >>> >>> they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback >>> for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, >>> >>> you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! >>> Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate >>> argument here. >>> >>> The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. >>> If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there >>> >>> is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, >>> it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. >>> What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, >>> >>> they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen >>> >>> reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, >>> >>> then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe >>> me! >>> >>> My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst >>> hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If >>> this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple >>> >>> A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am >>> definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, >>> >>> who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really >>> truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being >>> >>> very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. >>> >>> Even if it was only temporary. >>> >>> What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace >>> states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A >>> >>> P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the >>> letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits >>> >>> it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, >>> >>> so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their >>> mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're >>> not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. >>> >>> I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so >>> >>> go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. >>> >>> If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due >>> respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt >>> >>> saying that, but I tell it as I see it. >>> >>> Chris. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "TheOreoMonster" >>> To: >>> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM >>> Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy >>> >>> >>> How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT >>> regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the >>> point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. >>> Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where >>> >>> that could be done. If memory serves corre
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
ce wizard. Now, >>> >>> you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! >>> Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate >>> argument here. >>> >>> The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. >>> If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there >>> >>> is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, >>> it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. >>> What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, >>> >>> they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen >>> >>> reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, >>> >>> then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe >>> me! >>> >>> My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst >>> hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If >>> this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple >>> >>> A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am >>> definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, >>> >>> who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really >>> truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being >>> >>> very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. >>> >>> Even if it was only temporary. >>> >>> What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace >>> states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A >>> >>> P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the >>> letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits >>> >>> it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, >>> >>> so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their >>> mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're >>> not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. >>> >>> I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so >>> >>> go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. >>> >>> If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due >>> respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt >>> >>> saying that, but I tell it as I see it. >>> >>> Chris. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "TheOreoMonster" >>> To: >>> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM >>> Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy >>> >>> >>> How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT >>> regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the >>> point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. >>> Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where >>> >>> that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of >>> years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling >>> began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the >>> moment. >>>> On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: >>>> >>>> To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, >>>> Feel assured you are being heard. >>>> Pace's CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference >>>> to a complaint, >>>> Quote, "What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility >>>> support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and >>>> been done with it ages ago."" >>>> >>>> Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! >>>> When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid >>>> Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate >>>> time. >>>> In Avid's case their were a thousand movi
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even if it was only temporary. What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt saying that, but I tell it as I see it. Chris. - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace's CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, "What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago."" Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate time. In Avid's case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months once it became a priority. Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October... We may disagree on how to get this done, but we agree it must be done... If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. In other words lets keep working. For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can't, We will respect you. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
The reason the web API got killed if i understood correctly, was because it was a piracy vector. There was some loop hole in it that iLok loaders in cracked copies of PT was using. Either way i do remember it being a besuness decision. Much like them not getting to it before v2.0. Say what you want but at the end of the day company needs to make money or they won’t be around for long. In the meantime we have work arounds. Personally i make sure a company is willing to help me get the asset on my iLok before spending any money with them. +-On Jan 31, 2015, at 12:17 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > I dono... > > I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also > agree with Mike. October? Really? > > OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be > implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace > give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. > It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it > was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those > A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for > the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and > want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of > us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I > understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be > eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might > not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it > not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up > with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at > least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people > like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're > probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me > out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument > here. > > The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If > you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is > an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it > works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What > about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, they > had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen > reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, > then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! > > My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking > seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is > the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's > with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! > not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to > make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! > want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very > realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even > if it was only temporary. > > What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace > states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A > P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter > that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! > Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, > are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. > It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going > to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. > > I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so > go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. > If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due > respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt > saying that, but I tell it as I see it. > > Chris. > > - Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" > To: > Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM > Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy > > > How quickly we forget. There was
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
He talks about balancing newer developments with legacy OS support so far as I can tell, not bringing back any old APIs. It's already been pointed out once, but I'll do it again. It took years, and I do mean quite a few of them, before anything got touched by Avid. During those years there were long, and I do mean long periods of inactivity and uncertainty for everyone. It's easy to forget or overlook that journey if you're new ish to using PT, but that's how we ended up with the accessibility you're now using. Seems to me like there's not much noise being made here that'll directly lead to results, unless someone knows enough about what accessibility support there is in QT4 to be able to save those Pace engineers on the skunkworks project a bunch of time. Scott On 1/31/15, Christopher-Mark Gilland wrote: > I dono... > > I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also > > agree with Mike. October? Really? > > OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be > implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace > give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. > > It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it > was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those > > A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for > > the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and > want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most > of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. > > I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to > be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You > might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, > does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! > come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, > > they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback > for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, > > you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! > Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate > argument here. > > The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. > If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there > > is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, > it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. > What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, > > they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen > > reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, > > then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe > me! > > My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst > hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If > this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple > > A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am > definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, > > who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really > truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being > > very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. > > Even if it was only temporary. > > What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace > states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A > > P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the > letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits > > it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, > > so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their > mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're > not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. > > I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so > > go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. > > If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due > respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt >
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
I dono... I guess I have mixed feelings. I agree with you on the one hand, but I also agree with Mike. October? Really? OK, look at it this way, no, the newer technology wouldn't necessarily be implemented this way nor be totally up to date par, but! why couldn't pace give us two options, since they're so insistant on making this new platform. It seems logical to me, why not put the web interface manager back like it was a few years ago when things worked flawlessly? Put that back with those A P I's, but then, also support a newer A P I which would let them build for the current, and more updated software. This way, if you are sighted and want to use the software, more power to! ya! But, if you're blind as most of us! are, then you would have a fallback method which we still could use. I understand completely that eventually, that old web based A P I needs to be eventually rolled completely out, OK, I totally totally get that. You might not think I do, but actually, yes. I do. Trust me with this. But, does it not seem feezible to you all, that in the mingtime until they do! come up with a way to get the new software working with good accessibility, they at least! temporarily could re-enable the web interface as a fallback for people like ourselves? Look at things like the Sendspace wizard. Now, you're probably going and this has to do with the tea in China, how? LOL! Hear me out on this though, as I really am trying to present a legitimate argument here. The Sendspace wizard on the mac, by default is not very accessible at all. If you've not tried it, trust me. It's a living nightmare! However, there is an option in the menu bar which enables accessibility mode. Once done, it works... well... I'd not say perfectly, but I'd say almost! perfectly. What about Tapin Radio on the Windows side of things. For the longest time, they had an option when installing that you could check if you were a screen reader user. If you check it, bam! Tapin is now accessible. If you don't, then, good? freaking, luck! You'll be sorry you didn't check it, believe me! My point is, they were able to keep the inaccessible interface whilst hooking seperet A P I's to allow an option to give accessibility mode. If this is the case, then surely you could also do the same by having multiple A P I's with the ILok manager. Maybe it's not that easy, and I by far am definitely! not a programmer at heart, so really, honestly, in all fairness, who am I to make such assumptions? I do think though that if Pace really truely did! want to fix things, though I'm not complaining as much as being very realistic here, I truely think they could figure some alternative out. Even if it was only temporary. What I don't understand is why one minute, the guy in his letter from Pace states maybe in the mingtime, they could look at redoing some of the older A P I's to regain some accessibility. But then, he says later on in the letter that the 2.0 update will not have accessibility. He flat out admits it! Then said maybe by October, with version 3.0 they'd look into it. OK, so, are they going to give us back some A P I's, or not! Make up their mind. It's like being pregnant. Either they are! going to, or, they're not! going to. They can't go both ways, that I know of. I know I'm probably gonna get the F*** tiched outta me for this message, so go ahead. I can take the heat. I'm voicing my true not so humble opinion. If people have a problem with me doing so, then, frankly, with all due respect, tough shit. LOL! I mean, really, I'm sorry to be so harshly blunt saying that, but I tell it as I see it. Chris. ----- Original Message - From: "TheOreoMonster" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:49 AM Subject: Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago.”” Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When acc
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
Mike, I could absolutely not, regardless Slau's opinion, which I will not try changing, don't worry, agree with you any more than I do! Your attitude with this echos almost identically! what I think as well. Chris. - Original Message - From: "Mike Lockett" To: Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2015 9:41 AM Subject: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago.”” Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate time. In Avid’s case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months once it became a priority. Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October… We may disagree on how to get this done, but we agree it must be done… If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. In other words lets keep working. For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can’t, We will respect you. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
On 1/31/15, TheOreoMonster wrote: > How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT > regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the > point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. > Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where > that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of > years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling > began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the > moment. > On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: > >> To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, >> Feel assured you are being heard. >> Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference >> to a complaint, >> Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility >> support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and >> been done with it ages ago.”” >> >> Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! >> When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid >> Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate >> time. >> In Avid’s case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, >> most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months >> once it became a priority. >> Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October… >> >> We may disagree on how to get this done, >> but we agree it must be done… >> >> If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. >> In other words lets keep working. >> For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can’t, >> We will respect you. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
How quickly we forget. There was a fair amount of work that went into PT regarding modernizing and updating a lot of the code base to get to the point where all that was needed to be done was label elements and buttons. Yes that process went relatively quick once the Program got to a point where that could be done. If memory serves correct it was at least a couple of years in-between when initial processes started to when access labeling began. It appears we are in the same holding pattern with pace at the moment. On Jan 31, 2015, at 9:41 AM, Mike Lockett wrote: > To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, > Feel assured you are being heard. > Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference > to a complaint, > Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility > support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and > been done with it ages ago.”” > > Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! > When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid > Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate > time. > In Avid’s case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, > most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months > once it became a priority. > Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October… > > We may disagree on how to get this done, > but we agree it must be done… > > If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. > In other words lets keep working. > For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can’t, > We will respect you. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Letter Update from Pace Anti-piracy
To everyone that sent a letter to the B-B-B or made a call to Pace, Feel assured you are being heard. Pace’s CEO E-O Allen Cornce in an email to Slau Halatyn made reference to a complaint, Quote, “What I don't agree with is the assertion that accessibility support is simple and easy. If it was, we would have rolled it out and been done with it ages ago.”” Personally I think its HOGWASH!!! When accessibility is taken seriously and made a priority Avid Technology is a perfect example things can get fix in an appropriate time. In Avid’s case their were a thousand moving parts in the UI of the Ap, most of the accessibility issues were fixed in les than two months once it became a priority. Labeling some elements, and buttons should never take until October… We may disagree on how to get this done, but we agree it must be done… If we keep working the back channels we will achieve our desired results. In other words lets keep working. For some of you who may disagree or for other reasons just can’t, We will respect you. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro Tools Accessibility" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
