Re: [orca-list] Trying Quantal Quetsal Alpha 3

[Alex Midence <alex midence gmail com>]

Only trouble with all that diversity everyone in Linuxland loves so
dearly is that it makes accessibility problematic.  The overwhelming
majority of Linux graphical environments are not accessible.  Here's a
list for you to sink your teeth into:

IceWm
Fluxbox
XFCE (sorry but noone seems to be able to get it to work)
FvWM
Sawfish
Sugar
CDE (common in Unix proper environments)
Enlightenment
Openbox
Razor QT
Étoilé
Unity 3d (let's not forget that one)

Here's a list of usably accessible desktop environments just so you can compare:

Gnome
Unity 2d (technically a subsystem of Gnome but, what the heck?)
LXDE (only in Knopix Adrienne)

Now, here's a list of partially or allegedly accessible environments
just to drive the point home even more:

KDE (you can use it as long as you don't need to enter text anywhere)
XFCE (rumor has it it's usable but has gaps and setting it up to work
seems to be an unsolved mystery for most of us)

These are some pretty grim discrepancies here especially when you
consider this list of fully accessible commercial one choice
environments which get so maligned in the free software world:

Windows:  More screen readers than you can shake a stick at and very
productively accessible for most tasks.

Mac:  Built in screen reader which gives comparable accessibility on
all devices that run Apple OS variants such as iPhone, iPad, iPod
iTouch ETC.  You can litterally walk up to any of them and turn this
thing on and use it.  Even right at the store.

So, there are times, and I know this is an unpopular sentiment around
these parts, there are times, I say, when I wish there wasn't quite so
much choice of interface available in Linux.  This would centralize
things a bit and make it a more realistically attainable goal for you
to be able to walk up to any Linux computer and get to work on it
because its interface, whatever it may be, will be accessible to you.

Regards,
Alex M


On 8/1/12, Jason White <jason jasonjgw net> wrote:
> Thomas Ward <thomasward1978 gmail com> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I know. However, I was merely pointing out that the apps menu is
> > still there in Gnome-shell its just not as easy to get to as it was in
> > earlier versions of Gnome. Although, I agree with you its often easier
> > just to type the name of an application into the Dash and have it
> > locate the launcher in question. This seems to be a fairly common
> > design feature of modern graphical user interfaces as typing the name
> > of an app in the start screen on Windows 8 will do the same thing.
>
> Based on what I have read, the influences on Gnome 3 come from a review of
> the
> user interface literature and from developments in mobile devices,
> especially
> touch-screen interfaces. The same influences appear to be shaping the
> design
> of other desktop environments and operating systems, but by no means all of
> them.
> > Its definitely not unusual at all. However, there lies the true power
> > of open source software. With Linux a person can technically pick the
> > user interface he or she likes, use the applications they like, and
> > can have absolute control over the OS where with Mac OS and Windows
> > what you see is what you get.
>
> Yes, exactly. Also, each of those alternatives will survive and thrive for
> as
> long as there are people with sufficient interest and resources to maintain
> and improve the software.
>
> This is very different from a situation in which a single vendor's business
> and technical decisions determine what is and is not available in future
> releases.
>
> I think diversity of interfaces is desirable and inevitable in the free and
> open-source software world. I would argue that one can't have freedom
> without
> creating the conditions for diversity to arise, given inevitable
> divergences
> of needs and preferences, and human creativity. The idea that there will
> ever
> be only one user interface, desktop environment, etc., is as unrealistic as
> it
> is unwelcome.
>
> Accessibility needs to be designed to work well amid this diversity. I
> think
> the widespread acceptance of AT-SPI 2 and its D-Bus APIs (Gnome, KDE, XFCE,
> Unity etc.) helps in that process. This really is unprecedented. Meanwhile,
> the underlying textual environment inherited from the UNIX tradition
> continues
> to develop, and there are good access tools for working with it. Then there
> are environments such as Emacs and Chromium that have their own access
> tools
> (e.g., Emacspeak and Chromevox, respectively). With these tools it's
> possible
> to provide interfaces that would be much harder to achieve with a screen
> reader, because you have access to the internals of the application and
> you're
> creating a special-purpose tool rather than a generalized assistive
> technology.
>
> Thus again there are different solutions on offer and that's ultimately
> good
> as well as inevitable.
>
> _______________________________________________
> orca-list mailing list
> orca-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/orca-list
> Visit http://live.gnome.org/Orca for more information on Orca.
> The manual is at
> http://library.gnome.org/users/gnome-access-guide/nightly/ats-2.html
> The FAQ is at http://live.gnome.org/Orca/FrequentlyAskedQuestions
> Log bugs and feature requests at http://bugzilla.gnome.org
> Find out how to help at http://live.gnome.org/Orca/HowCanIHelp