Re: state of Gnome usability was Re: Mozilla accesssibility site restructured

Someone much smarter than I, on Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 10:34:00AM -0500, spake thus.
*cut here*
> > Thanks for the update, and for your work on the site.  It is definitely a 
> > lot cleaner.  Two comments though.  On the "access today" page:
> > 
> >
> > 
> > You say:
> > 
> >  "Right now, GUI's on Linux are mostly not accessible. Microsoft Windows is
> >   still far more accesible. Gnome, KDE, StarOffice, KOffice, Mozilla and all
> >   other GUI software packages in Linux are unuseable by large numbers of
> >   disabled users. There has been some progress with the support of Gnome's
> >   ATK APIs in many of these packages, and the development of GOK (Gnome
> >   Onscreen Keyboard) and Gnopernicus (screenreader and magnifier). However,
> >   these solutions are not yet truly usable for real disabled end users."
> > 
> > This is not an accurate characterization of GNOME and should be changed.  
> > The *core* GNOME desktop (GNOME 2.6 and the about-to-be-released GNOME 2.8) 
> > work quite well with both Gnopernicus and GOK, as well as with themeing 
> > (high-contrast, large print) and keyboard navigation.  Especially with the 
> > accessible login work wrapping up in GNOME 2.8, users with a wide range of 
> > disabilities can be successful on the GNOME desktop.  While we're still 
> > dealing with the occasional crash in GOK and the a-bit-more-than-occasional 
> > crash in Gnopernicus, blind users in particular tell me the crashing rate 
> > is similar to what they experience in JAWS on Windows.
> Ok, that's it!  If Gnome is so usable, why are you using Windows for your oss?
> I don't know the current state of Jfw, but JFW was more stable in 1996
> than Gnopernicus.  I'm not a programmer, just a user who wants access to
> Mozilla.  I've been trying to help since early last year.  What I get from
> you guys is "use the latest CVS".  When I do, and report problems I get
> a response suggesting I'm a dum user for expecting CVS to work.
> If Gnome is so usable by blind people then I challenge you to turn off 
> your monitor and use Gnome for work for a week.  You are using Mozilla for
> mail so you should have no problem using the Unix version.  My sighted girl
> friend has no problems using open office while the people she works with use
> different versions of MS office.  That means you have no excuse for needing MS
> office.  I'll cut you some slack and not ask you to use a Linux distro,
> just use a Unix operating system.
> > 
I'm in agreement with kenny's statements above. I am a jaws uwer for the 
times I need/want to use windows and I've seen less crashes with my 
current version of jaws under the current encarnation of windows than I 
have with gnopernicus.
I can't even use mozilla for my mail or for browsing the internet. so I 
suggest you make accurate claims about the software rather than try to 
beat it up to what it's not. and currently what it's not right now is 
ready for human consumption.
> > The key issues for a GNOME desktop user are:
> > 
> >  1. No shipping Linux/UNIX distribution supports all of this yet (so it
> >     is diffcult for most users to get this stuff working)
> Linux distros have standards for quality.  A program that crashes every few 
> minutes isn't very good quality.
> > 
> >  2. Mozilla in particular has a good distance to go before it is accessible
> >     on GNOME/Linux/UNIX; StarOffice a smaller distance
> > 
> Ok, so you admit Mozilla isn't accessible with Gnopernicus.  Why do you post
> messages after conferences that suggest it is usable?
I've seen people that aren't associated with sun microsystems or 
as such suggest that they've had not a major problem working within 
gnome and I say good luck to them.
the point here is Gnopernicus nore the Gnome accessability api is ready 
for public consumption by any stretch of the imagination.
I'm not a programer nore do I cleam to understand the first thing about 
the code that goes into these various projects.
However, I submit that there's issues with stability that need sorting 
out well before anyone goes farting about with trying to get gnopernicus 
to read anything from the application's object model for all intents and 
I suggest the developers quit with the marketing hipe and when they have 
a useable solution then start sprooking about it. Until then, don't make 
claims you can't back up.
I've seen a majority of posts on this list saying they've had problems 
with one thing and another and the support from those in the know I have 
to say has been noticeably lacking.
guys we're all here for a common purpose and that's to get the Gnome 
environment accessable to users with a disability. if we talk up what's 
not there and rest on our laurels, we'll all go the way of microsoft and 
freedom science fiction and I might add gwmicro. All of whom have one 
thing in common. they all think their product has something to offer 
that it's competitor doesn't. 
Just on that argument, take windoweyes. you can hardly access ms office 
with it, yet you have support for terminal services and citrix client 
support. Jaws on the other hand you have reasonable access to ms office 
and fuck all on the windows terminal services and citrix side.

both have reasonable access to the desktop both require some kind of 
configuration to work with various applications, and both die in the 
arse more times than I'd like. And, that's usually when I'm right in the 
middle of some kind of critical operation e.g. updating something or 
configuring something else.
if we're not careful here this is where we'll end up.
just my 2 bob's worth

People will buy anything that's one to a customer.
Shaun Oliver

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]