The underlying mindset of super expensive accessibility software.

It used to be that when you purchased a computer with Windows installed, it was unusable. That is to say, Microsoft sells blind people an operating system that is, to them,  as good as broken. To fix this broken operating system, you have to fork out thousands for JAWS or Window Eyes. Your not paying for anything extra, just to make the operating system usable. The underlying message is clear, Microsoft does not think it is important to make their operating system accessible. They come from a mind set where blind people are supposed to weave baskets or live on handouts. The same could be said for how Google is essentially ignoring accessibility with Chrome or RIM with their Blackberry devices.

Now, an important distinction: Asking companies to make the latest 3D computer games accessible to the blind would be unrealistic. Everyone accepts that. However, asking huge companies like Microsoft, RIM or Google to make their products more accessible is not unreasonable – especially given the massive amount of money government agencies spend particularly on Microsoft and Blackberry products.

If these companies are serious about accessibility, they could make it work without breaking much of a sweat. How do we know? Well, Apple has done it.

Apple’s Mac and iOS (iPhone and iPad) operating systems come with excellent screen reading software built-in. Blind people don’t have to go buy anything extra like you have to when you buy a Microsoft or RIM product. It is accessible out of the box. They don’t sell blind people a broken product as does Microsoft and RIM. If Apple can do this, so can Microsoft and RIM. (Note that MS Windows does include some screen reading technology built in, but it is extremely poor.)

Here’s a thought…

Why doesn’t government agencies refuse to pay extra for accessibility software? Should they really be supporting a perverse model where blind people have to pay extra? Why don’t they use there massive buying power to exert positive pressure on the market?

Or, why don’t government agencies spend the many millions they spend on buying JAWS for Windows or Window Eyes on supporting the development of free alternatives like NVDA or Orca, or buying the rights to a quality text-to-speech engine and then giving it away for free to developers?

The good guys

For a long time the prohibitively high cost of JAWS and Window Eyes have left many blind users, especially in the developing world, unable to legally use computers running Windows. Fortunately, there are some good guys.

NVDA: In recent years, the free NVDA screen reader (running on Windows) has made huge strides. So much so, that some blind people are now using it as their primary screen reader. Access Wire commends the noble work done by all involved with the development of NVDA. Their work puts Microsoft, whose broken product they are making usable, to shame.

Orca: If you wish to go outside the Windows space, we can recommend trying the Ubuntu linux operating system. This includes a free screen reader named Orca. Orca is still a bit unstable, but some people will find it usable. Here too, the volunteers who work on Orca deserve recognition. However, those at the head of the Ubuntu project may have made positive noises over the years, but they have shown very little concrete support for making Ubuntu more accessible.

Android: Similarly, the Android mobile phone operating system also includes some built-in accessibility, but as with Ubuntu, accessibility doesn’t seem to be a high priority for those in charge of the project – in this case Google.

Voice Over: And finally, Apple should be commended for their great work on Voice Over – the best free screen reader available. Yes, Apple products are expensive, but if you keep in mind that the screen reader is free, Apple computers are less expensive than Windows computers plus separately purchased screen reading software.

Apple has shown that accessibility can be done. It is time for the laggards to catch up. It is time for governments to use their purchasing power to push more companies into following Apple’s lead. Alternatively, governments should invest in projects like Orca or NVDA – both of which will result in massive savings in the medium and long term.

Either way, the era of products like JAWS and Window Eyes (and Oratio for the Blackberry) being sold as super expensive extras should come to an end. We recognize that JAWS and Window Eyes have empowered many blind people over the years and that they have helped to make up for Microsoft’s failings. However, the model needs to change. Microsoft needs to stop shirking their responsibility. As they have done so many times before, they need to go out there and buy up JAWS or Window Eyes so that they can integrate it into Windows to fix their broken products.

Governments in both the developing and developed world should interrogate their spending on access technology. They should start leveraging their significant buying power to push the market into a more just and equitable space where access to technology becomes standard – rather than an expensive extra.

The steaks are very high. Millions of blind people around the world are being left behind – not because the technology is not their, but because the system by which we make and pay for accessibility software is broken.

Here are the documents you should be aware of:
- New proof of disability. To be filled in by yourself and a medical practitioner. Download it here: http://www.sars.gov.za/Tools/Documents/DocumentDownload.asp?FileID=57477
- List of things you can claim back for. Download the list here: http://www.sars.gov.za/Tools/Documents/DocumentDownload.asp?FileID=57940

Amongst others, you can claim back for the following:
“Computer devices and related equipment (including the software to operate such devices) required by a person with a disability due to a moderate to severe impairment in hand functions or visual ability (e.g. track ball)”
“Computer or other electronic equipment required in order to convert printed material or image files into text, Braille, speech or any other accessible format, including peripheral equipment such as scanners, Braille printers, speakers and headphones for the personal use by or for a person with a disability.”
“Magnification and image-enhancement devices that enable a person to read, including optacons, large-screen computer monitors, magnifiers, video magnifiers, CCTV readers, video goggles, electronic magnifiers that plug into a computer, monitor or TV and telescopic spectacles.”
“Navigation aids, including white canes, sonic or tactile echo location devices and hand-held GPS devices and related software required by a person with a disability.”
“Talking and sound-making devices that enable a person to perform daily tasks, including talking calculators, specially adapted cell phones, specially adapted watches, alarm clocks, …”

Verdict
It is clear that if you are blind you can claim in full for things like JAWS, phones with talx, Zoomtext, braille displays and visual magnifiers. In this regard these provisions are hugely empowering and progressive.
It is problematic however that you can’t check before making a purchase whether your specific claim will be successful. This might be particularly relevant with products such as the iPhone 3GS or 4 which might be perceived as borderline by officials less informed about access tech. Whereas these are the most accessible phones on the market, there is nothing about their names or how they are marketed that makes it immediately obvious that they are extremely empowering access tech. It could be that some less informed SARS officials might reject such claims.
We will follow up with SARS on the iPhone and the possibility of pre-checking whether they’ll accept specific access tech claims. Please check back later or chat to your accountant – if you have such luxuries.

The selection is disappointing. Those of us hoping to see a QWERTY phone like the E75 will have to wait – unless of course you buy the Talx software separately and install it yourself. That said, the N86 is the most high-end phone so far to become a Vodacom speaking phone, and if we are desperate for good news, we’d probably make a big deal about that.

But, against the backdrop of other developments in mobile phone accessibility, Vodacom’s latest move seems like little more than a publicity stunt to fool some less informed readers into believing that Vodacom is doing some progressive things for blind people. Yes, the discount is cool, but it is a discount for a product that is old news.

It is extremely surprising that Vodacom doesn’t make mention of the iPhone (3GS, and soon 4) as accessibility devices. As anyone who has been watching phone accessibility in recent years would know, the iPhone is miles ahead of Nokia phones in terms of empowering blind people.

If empowering blind people is what Vodacom is about with speaking phones, they would have at least mentioned the iPhone as an accessibility option. But then, all iPhone 3GSs and 4s have accessibility built in. No need for special “speaking phones”. They are already speaking phones… which, of course, gives Vodacom much less scope for marketing themselves as do-gooders.

When Vodacom started offering ‘speaking phones’ a few years ago, it was trend-setting – even though many Vodashops didn’t have a clue what a ‘speaking phone’ was. Today, loading Talx onto only two mobile phones and pretending you are doing great things to empower blind people rings hollow and seems way behind the times.

Price?
Now, if you buy an iPhone, you get Voice Over free. In fact, it is pre-installed on all iPhones and just needs to be switched on. It is built-in accessibility as it should be. In contrast, if you buy one of the supported Blackberries, you have to pay over 400 US dollars extra for the Oratio software. That is about 3,000 in South African rand. Also, Oratio is not pre-installed, so you’ll need some help installing your over-priced purchase.

Quality?
So, after spending all that extra money what do you get? Not much. While Voice Over on the iPhone supports a whole range of aps – all built-in aps plus a growing list of third-party aps, things are much less impressive on the Blackberry. Something as basic as browsing the web remains a major headache. In fact, the Blackberry plus Oratio can do little more than a Nokia phone with talx. Pathetic.

Why?
Somewhere in the last few years Apple made a decision to make there products accessible. They decided it was a priority and they implemented. As a result they have completely changed the landscape of smart phone accessibility. RIM, on the other hand, have been dragging their feet and doing absolutely nothing. How can it be that in 2010 we don’t yet have something better than Oratio for Blackberry accessibility? There can be no excuse except that RIM simply doesn’t care enough.

But why then was Oratio developed?
Oratio came from Humanware – not RIM. RIM couldn’t care less. Somewhere along the line there must have been a realization from Humanware that there are many governments and businesses out there who are fenced into Blackberry eco systems. These entities would pay to give Blackberry accessibility to blind users. The message is that if you are blind, you have to pay extra, or, if you want to employ a blind person you have to pay extra. Well done RIM, you are real market leaders.

So?
A lot of what Apple does in general is ridiculously restrictive and messed up. Still, when it comes to accessibility – to empower people with vision problems – Apple certainly has the moral high ground. They are positively heroic. RIM is behind the times and Humanware are just exploitative. Lets hope they wake up to the 21st century and learn from Apple.

Note: Blackberries plus Oratio are not yet being sold in South Africa. If you want one you’ll have to buy a Blackberry and then purchase and download the Oratio software. iPhones on the other hand are all over the place. Any 3GS or iPhone 4 already has Voice Over installed. You can buy it at a Voda Shop or iShop just like anyone else.

For breaking news, we’ve also included an rss feed from blog.blindmind.net, which seems to be quite up to date with what’s happening in the world of access.

If anyone knows of similar sites with an African or developmental focus, please let us know.

“Oratio for BlackBerry^® smartphones is a unique and innovative screen reader software that allows visually impaired users to access and operate BlackBerry smartphones using state of the art Text-To-Speech technology to convert the visual information displayed on the BlackBerry smartphone screen into a intuitive speech output. This enables its users to use BlackBerry smartphones to increase their independence and productivity in today’s competitive world.”

Only unique thing about it is that it works with Blackberries. In fact, it seems likely that Oratio will offer much less functionality than, say,  Voice Over.

“Oratio will first be released in North America in English, supporting the BlackBerry Curve 8520 smartphone from AT&T. Support for additional BlackBerry smartphone models and languages will be available in subsequent versions of Oratio.”

In other words, it will be some time before we get it in SA, which is very strange, since there should be no reason why we can’t just buy and download it like any other ap. Very restrictive.

And the worst part, Oratio will retail for 449 US dollars. That is about R3,000. Compare this to Apple which gives you Voice Over for free with the iPhone. And, also note that Android phones also have text-to-speech functionality already built in – and the first Android 2 phones should be hitting SA soon.

Bad news then. Still, I’d like to play with Oratio and it will probably beat current Nokia plus Talx  offerings. If Vodacome can subsidise Oratio in the same way they subsidise Talx, it may become a realistic option – but even then, Oratio will have to get very good reviews and will have to work with far more than just the Blackberry’s core aps. The only thing it has going for it is the keyboard. Apart from that, Humanware has given us no reason to think they can bring us anything like iPhone 3GS plus Voice Over accessibility.

The news is mixed. As a phone/music player/business device, the E66
seems to be a pretty solid phone. Its got a lot of memory, a decent
music player, GPS, great connectivity, and good battery life. It
doesn’t really take Vodacom’s offering to the next level though. Most
disappointing is that Vodacom is not yet offering a serious high-end
phone with a QWERTY keyboard – as they could have done with the E71 or
its followers, for example.

With Orator for Blackberry not yet out and no Android 2 phones on the
South African market as yet, options remain limited. As a second
choice to the iPhone, the E66 isn’t altogether a bad option for those
looking for an accessible handset.

NB: Remember, you can buy the Mobilespeak or Talx licenses yourself
and install them on any compatible phones. This does require some
shopping around, but certainly opens up a whole range of other
options.

Dear Nokia/Vodacom/MTN/Nuance/Code Factory

Please consider the below proposal both from a social responsibility perspective and a wonderful marketing opportunity. It is a proposal for combining the flood of second-hand phones in Africa with text-to speech software so that blind people in developing countries can share in the empowering accessibility of mobile phones.

Background

The development of text-to-speech software for computers and mobile phones has heralded a Gutenberg moment for blind people equal to, or greater than, the development of Braille. The empowering benefits of these advances have however been limited predominantly to rich developed countries.

The following two factors means distributing speaking phones for free in Africa can be both viable and inexpensive:

1. The incredible uptake of mobile phones in developing countries – particularly in Africa.
2. The availability of simple-to-use text-to-speech software. (Note that giving away licenses to these products in countries where there is no market will be of negligible cost, but of significant public relations value.)

How the project could work

Three things are required for such a project: 1. a source of compatible mobile phones, 2. Licenses for the text-to-speech software and 3. An organizational structure to ensure effective administration and implementation of the project.

These three factors are considered below:

1. Sourcing mobile phones

The currently available text-to-speech software packages work mainly with Nokia phones running the Symbian Series 60 operating system. (This is why this mail is also being sent to Nokia)

-         Compatible second-hand phones could be sourced from Nokia (through their existing recycling programme) or through service providers like Vodacom or MTN. When upgrading a phone, users can be given the option to donate their old phone to the blind.

-         Excess stock of older phones could be donated.

-         Organizations for the blind or service providers can run donate a phone for the blind projects or compatible second-hand phones can be bought.

1. Sourcing the text-to-speech software

Nuance’s Talks and Code Factory’s Mobile Speak software are the current market leaders in this field. These companies can donate X amount of licenses to their software, the cost of which will be negligible since the software can be downloaded and all that Nuance or Code Factory would have to provide would be serial numbers. As long as the project is restricted to countries in which these companies do not have a substantial footprint, the potential losses in sales would be negligible and more than amply made up for by the great public relations possibilities. In addition, such donations could be seen as a first step toward creating a future market.

1. Organizational structure to drive the project

-         The project would have to be driven by a large company such as Nokia, Vodacome or MTN who already has a footprint in the targeted countries. This way the project can piggyback on existing company infrastructure and have direct public relations value.

-         Organizations for the blind would have to be significant partners in the project. These could help with identifying eligible recipients of the phones, distribution, training and support in the use of speaking phones.

-         Note that the text-to-speech software is limited to certain languages. Thus, only countries where French, Portuguese, or English are widely spoken could be considered at the moment.

We hope that you will give this project serious consideration. In our view it is tragic that millions of blind people still have to do without something as simple as being able to send and receive SMSs. Empowerment does not have to be expensive!

Kind regards

The team at Accesswire



Apart from support for Windows 7 and the much-touted Research It, it seems there is very little that is new in this version. Research It is basically a rehash of the Firefox plug-in Ubiquity – which actually works quite well with Jaws. So, whereas it may be useful, there is no reason for this to be Jaws-specific, and they are certainly claiming a lot of credit for something that is pretty basic.

The worrying thing about Jaws 11, is that Freedom Scientific are continuing there close relationship to proprietary software, and particularly Microsoft Office. If there is one major disappointment with the last few versions of Jaws, it is that not more attention has been given to Open Office accessibility. After taking quite long to give us Firefox support, Freedom Scientific is now slow to catch up with other high-quality open source applications.

The distasteful thing about this, is that Jaws probably remains the best screen reader out there, and that those who want to use it are forced into using a set of predetermined programmes, some of which are very expensive. There is certainly some empowerment here, but the price they’re asking is very high.

Open source alternatives are not only necessary, they will save universities, government departments and large employees millions in the long-run. If only someone will have the insight to invest in it.