Yuma,
It isn't just the blind who would be affected by this. It's anyone with a print
disability (dyslexia, etc.). THe number of blind (legally and totally) here in
the U.S. is somewhere just north of 22 million or so. Thats just a hair under
10% of the entire U.S. population. Add in those who
Hi Eric,
This is a sound idea as it places weight on the board. Have you made some
general calculations on the number of blind/visually impaired individuals
potentially capable of buying 10 amazon shares at 260 USD current?Far as i
know, there are 45 million blind and visually impaired individu
Eric,
I like your concept and is something that I have promoted with other people.
Not necessarily in the same method.
Government laws and education only goes so far. Money speaks far louder for
public companies.
So Eric, drop me a note off line so we can compare notes.
Sean
On 09/08/2013,
Yes, but it sounds like at least one important motivation for Amazon to support
VoiceOver on its iOS app was so it would have a better chance of not needing to
make its eReaders accessible in the future. So, if the FCC rejects its request,
would it no longer be motivated to make its iOS app acce
The waiver only applies to future productions of the ereaders.
Teresa
On Aug 9, 2013, at 3:21 AM, Nicholas Parsons
wrote:
> I just hope that if Amazong doesn't get this waiver, it doesn't stop
> supporting VoiceOver on its iOS app.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribe
You can also point out that I phones and other appe devices are expensive and
not all blind persons can afford such technology so it would be in their best
interests to make their stuff more accessible.
On 9 Aug 2013, at 11:11 AM, Nicholas Parsons
wrote:
> HI,
>
> This is really interesting.
I just hope that if Amazong doesn't get this waiver, it doesn't stop supporting
VoiceOver on its iOS app.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MacVisionaries" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to macv
HI,
This is really interesting. I just have a couple of points to make.
1. I hope this doesn't mean that if Amazon is unsuccessful in getting the
exemption it will stop supporting VoiceOver on its iOS app.
2. I really respect the fact that you're making your voice heard to the FCC.
However, I
Hi Eric.
It is a gorgeous idea, with one major drawback, how many of us do you
think got that kind of money.
I definitely know that I don't.
There's got too be something else that might work.
sandi
On 8/8/13, Donna Goodin wrote:
> I agree.
> Cheers,
> Donna
> On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Mike Ar
I agree.
Cheers,
Donna
On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Mike Arrigo wrote:
> Oh, I'm not saying amazon should be off the hook. Not at all. I think they
> should be required to make their device accessible just like everyone else.
> Really though, it's a shame that it may take a requirement from the
How do you mean buy shares? Do you mean using money for something? If it's
money then I don't think too many of our community would have the funds to do
this. I live in the UK and I think I missed the original thread about this.
On 8 Aug 2013, at 22:55, eric oyen wrote:
> well, there is one
well, there is one thing we can do to force the issue: everyone who is blind
should buy up 10 shares of amazon stock and then assign it to a trusted proxy
as a single voting block. If enough shares are allocated this way, the board of
directors will have no choice but to listen. Its an idea I ha
its not wrong. In fact, if you need to modify it for your needs, do so.
You are correct that this is a lot more than just a U.S. problem, but what
happens here spreads fairly quickly to the rest of the developed world.
-eric
On Aug 8, 2013, at 6:42 AM, Red.Falcon wrote:
> Hi Eric!
> OK I hope t
Oh, I'm not saying amazon should be off the hook. Not at all. I think
they should be required to make their device accessible just like
everyone else. Really though, it's a shame that it may take a
requirement from the government to make this happen. Usually when it's
required, the company only
Right. But why does that let Amazon off the hook?
Donna
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 8, 2013, at 9:08 AM, Mike Arrigo wrote:
> There are other choices. The newest versions of android are just as
> accessible, and these are made by several manufacturers.
> Original message:
>> Hi all,
>
>> I real
I'm always torn in the discussions of regulating accessibility. On the
one side the lack of regulation means slacker companies will continue
doing what they have been while companies who care will continue doing a
good job. Once a law requiring accessibility hits a particular product
the discus
There are other choices. The newest versions of android are just as
accessible, and these are made by several manufacturers.
Original message:
Hi all,
I really have to agree with Eric, here. In response to Barry, what
Apple did with the iPhone 3Gs was to make a main-stream device
accessible
Hi Eric!
OK I hope this does not come across wrong!
Although this is taking place under USA laws maybe the point could be made that
this disision will effect people in other country's, so a bigger community!
IE like the iPhone as been mentioned before!
Just a thought!
Colin
On 8 Aug 2013, at 11:0
actually i do believe a good way of laying pressure on them, would be
keeping educating them about our needs. But then again on the other
hand till that is done we got to find other ways of getting where we
want.
For me personally it means reading a ungodly lots of medical books so
i can end up nur
The plainfield will never be level until every product can talk out of the box
this includes, Windows as well. We should not have to have a third party screen
reader such as jaws or NDVA as that is just propping up Microsoft products. How
do you think we should put pressure on big companies like
Hi all,
I really have to agree with Eric, here. In response to Barry, what Apple did
with the iPhone 3Gs was to make a main-stream device accessible to us. And
yes, that still has the potential to level the playing field . But the playing
field is hardly level if Apple is the only company do
Eric, i do agree with you up to a point at least. However one thing is
laws and rules another thing is real life.
They could obviously quite easily modify the e-readers so we could use
them, in fact it would be dead simple to do so. What is interesting is
why it is not being done. I guess in the m
and what is wrong with that? the powers that be try every way to keep us penned
up, but I do not accept that. We have the right to be able to live the same as
others (at least here in the U.S.). So, why should we accept anything less?
-eric
On Aug 7, 2013, at 2:16 PM, Barry Hadder wrote:
> I r
hi.
I do agree with others, Apple have gone a long way up the tree too
give us something we can actually use with out much problems. And it
would indeed be nice if more companies did the same thing. But lets
face it with the handicap we got, sometimes we gotta make a few more
go arounds before we a
below is a proposed comment I will make to the FCC. I would like you all to
review it and see if I need to make any changes before submitting it to the
agency.
-eric
---
In the matter of Amazon (and others) who seek exemption from both the 1934
communications act and the recently enacted Acce
below is a comment I props to send to the fcc on their comments page. let me
know if I need to make changes. Once this is done, spread it as far and wide as
possible. the more comments the FCC gets against this exemption, the better it
will be for us.
-eric
---
In the matter of Amazon (and oth
At last the mystery of why Amazon caved in on VO is solved. Is it OK for non-US
residents to comment to the FCC,
? It will naturally affect us all across the world?
Best
Adrienne
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MacVisionaries" group.
To unsubscrib
--- Original Message -
From: Barry Hadder
To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 17:16
Subject: Re: FCC seeks comment on Amazons request for waiver of accessibility
requirements
I recall a time not so long ago when i devices first became accessible,
everyone th
nt: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 17:16
Subject: Re: FCC seeks comment on Amazons request for waiver of accessibility
requirements
I recall a time not so long ago when i devices first became accessible,
everyone thinking how that was going to level the playing field. It’s funny
how quickly
I recall a time not so long ago when i devices first became accessible,
everyone thinking how that was going to level the playing field. It’s funny
how quickly perspectives change.
Now the bar has been raised even higher. The playing field will not be level
until blind people have access to e
Really? A friend ofmine and a patron, were discussing this earlier. Their
excuse is, that it will make the device weigh more. how does addedda
ccessibility in software make it heavier? I know it might effect the batery but
not by that much. You can't rely on Apple to carry you folks, that's not
I just found this interesting discussion:
http://tinyurl.com/TheDigitalReader
quote:
While there is a petition for a waiver from accessibility rules, the waiver
would only cover an exemption from a single regulation, not all accessibility
regulations. I’ll explain the regulation in question, bu
I don't think Sony and Amazon have a special vendetta against the blind,
dyslexic, and folks with print disabilities. I think it's a political move to
push the e-readers into schools and government agencies, and we get the
splash-back. Not that this makes the situation any better. In fact, it's
Can anyone provide the exact link to provide comments? I looked on the ECFS of
the FCC site, but could not find the filing in question.
On Aug 7, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Chris Blouch wrote:
> That's sort of like telling Mac users that to get an accessible experience
> with the XYZ app to just use Win
That's sort of like telling Mac users that to get an accessible
experience with the XYZ app to just use Windows. Oh, Microsoft already
does that with Office. Guess they don't have to worry since that app
isn't FCC regulated.
CB
On 8/7/13 1:21 PM, Eugenia Firth wrote:
Hi there
Yes, and we all
And, let's face it! Not all blind people can afford i devices, nor should they
have to! Having a relatively inexpensive Ereader would really help to level the
playing field!
You can have an off day, but you can't have a day off! ---The Art of Fielding
Sent from my Mac Book Pro
richr...@gmail.
Hi there
Yes, and we all know which "disability" they are talking about, and it's not
the disabled they are talking about either. They are talking about the blind,
but of course, they didn't say so. They might as well have. After all, most of
the other disabilities can read the print. When I he
That's why I thought people might want to comment.
Cheers,
Donna
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 7, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Mike Arrigo wrote:
> I can't believe the FCC would even consider that. They should say, absolutely
> not. These devices must be made accessible, end of story.
> Original message:
>
I can't believe the FCC would even consider that. They should say,
absolutely not. These devices must be made accessible, end of story.
Original message:
Hello all:
In follow-up to Karen's post last night, I am posting information
regarding FCC's request for comments on this issue. I hope tha
Hello all:
In follow-up to Karen's post last night, I am posting information regarding
FCC's request for comments on this issue. I hope that many of you will take
the time to comment.
Best,
Donna
Request for Comment on Petition for Class Waiver of Accessibility Rules for ACS
On August 1, 2013,
40 matches
Mail list logo
