My memory may be failing me, but I seem to recall, at a time--perhaps 2004--something like RockBox was software to make the Ipod Classic accessible with speech, that I heard Apple was developing what became known as VoiceOver primarily as a way for sighted folks to navigate their iPod's while otherwise visually preoccupied, such as while driving, for example. The potential for use by blind and visually-impaired folks was a secondary or coincidental consideration or discovery, and not a primary driving force.
This view may be cynical and inaccurate. I recall it arising during conversation with others, and not based on any particular source I was aware of. -----Original Message----- From: viphone@googlegroups.com [mailto:viphone@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Chittenden Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 9:41 PM To: viphone@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Apple's commitment to accessibility [was "Re: a warning to voice over users concerning IOS 6"] Hello, Please forgive my cynicism in my final statement of those poor blind people. I am preparing my proposal for my doctoral research. My proposed topic is how are blind people able to adapt to touch screen devices, so I am currently reading all the academic and professional research I can find on the topic. I do not know why Apple shifted its core values to include accessibility within its business model. If we look at the numbers, especially with iOS, it would appear to be a bad decision considering that there was no expectation for it, and Apple would not lose any governmental or education contracts over it. Consider that Microsoft has not lost any government contracts even though they removed accessibility from Windows Phone Seven and still have not put it back in. We do know that Apple is committed to the end-user experience. The visual actions of the display have many affects which make it extremely pleasing for sighted people. Microsoft and Google are constantly trying to copy many of these affects with mixed results (according to sighted friends). Sighted people I know who are not at all computer savvy talk excitedly about their iPhones, MacBooks, and even Airport Xtreme routers because they are so intuitive and even fun to use. I only hear geek friends talk about Windows or Android that way. I suspect, therefore, that Apple perceives universal accessibility in a similar vein, that it should be innovative, and should encompass the sighted experience as much as possible. And, they obviously do not pay attention to what the experts in the field say. David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA Email: dchitten...@gmail.com Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 Sent from my iPhone On 18/09/2012, at 13:51, Joanne Chua <shuang.an...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi David, > > If that is the case of what you said, we "poor blind people", why > Apple should care on putting voiceover in their touch screen products? > Not only that, Apple also advertise that their products are friendly > to people with access needs. > > Just a thought > > Regards > Joanne > > On 18/09/2012, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> wrote: >> You are correct for the Mac. For iOS devices, however, this is not the case. >> Most of the professional proofs and studies clearly demonstrated that blind >> peepul, as a whole, did not have the necessary spatial awareness, and >> attempting to memorise, without good tactile clues, would be almost >> impossible for most blind people. Therefore, an accessible pure touch-screen >> device was not expected or required. After all aside from some basic >> functionality, it couldn't be done anyway. Those poor blind people. >> >> David Chittenden, MSc, MRCAA >> Email: dchitten...@gmail.com >> Mobile: +64 21 2288 288 >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 18/09/2012, at 9:34, Christopher Chaltain <chalt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I agree with David here, but I also wonder how much of Apple's sales are >>> effected by their commitment to accessibility. For example, how many >>> government sales or small business sales or educational sales wouldn't >>> have even been possible if they weren't able to demonstrate that they >>> had an accessible solution and meet the various regulations and laws, at >>> least here in the US? I think this would explode the 100K figure by >>> quite a bit, although I'm not sure it's possible to capture such a >>> number. I also don't mean to take away from Apple's commitment to >>> accessibility. I think their commitment goes beyond just bottom line >>> dollars and cents, although they are a business, and I don't think >>> they're doing it entirely out of the kindness of their corporate hearts. >>> >>> On 17/09/12 16:05, Scott Howell wrote: >>>> David, >>>> >>>> True, but my point is that although a small portion of the overall sales, >>>> APple still considers this segment worth the investment. I would love to >>>> know what the real numbers are across all Apple products including the >>>> Macs. >>>> >>>> On Sep 17, 2012, at 4:19 PM, David Chittenden <dchitten...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Do not consider 100,000 iPhones to blind folk to be much of a market in >>>>> this case. This number represents 0.3% of 1 quarter year of Apple's >>>>> iPhone sales, but includes all models of iPhones for the past 3 years. >>>>> In other words, if Apple were to stop supporting VO, they wouldn't even >>>>> notice the tiny bump to their profits. Apple is not supporting concepts >>>>> of universal access for their bottom line. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Christopher (CJ) >>> chaltain at Gmail >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" >>> Google Group. >>> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >>> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google >> Group. >> To search the VIPhone public archive, visit >> http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. >> To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. >> >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google > Group. > To search the VIPhone public archive, visit > http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. > To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google Group. To search the VIPhone public archive, visit http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "VIPhone" Google Group. To search the VIPhone public archive, visit http://www.mail-archive.com/viphone@googlegroups.com/. To post to this group, send email to viphone@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to viphone+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/viphone?hl=en.
