Here it is...Ubuntu Phone

Mon Jan 7 22:25:30 UTC 2013

I agree with this sentiment. I'd only nit pick a few points. Canonical
isn't making money at all yet, let alone with Ubuntu Phone. That being
said, accessibility needs to be built in from the get though, and it
can't wait until Canonical is profitable or making money off of Ubuntu
Phone.

I don't think Canonical is investing much in QT accessibility, but I
know there are members of the Ubuntu community working on QT
accessibility. It isn't perfect yet, but we have accessibility to some
QT apps in Ubuntu 12.04, and Unity 2D, which is accessible, was written
in QT.

I'm not sure why you're stepping back from this thread, but hopefully,
you'll continue to advocate for greater accessibility.

On 07/01/13 15:15, Nolan Darilek wrote:
> And yes, I agree, things are getting better. I never said they weren't,
> nor have I said that they were bad. My primary point is that we're
> seeing *lots* of companies backing QT for mobile accessibility,
> Canonical being the latest of those, and we aren't seeing any commitment
> by those companies to accessibility. I'm saying that, for me,
> Windows-based AT is starting to look more and more appealing because I
> do have increased access. And, for the record, I am testing out the more
> recent access tech than is available in Ubuntu packages, thanks for
> asking. But if companies are going to start making money off of Linux,
> and are going to urge consumers to jump ship from their
> Android/Windows/IOS devices, the time to advocate for accessibility
> *isn't* after said products have taken off. It's now. "Good enough for
> me" isn't always good enough for everyone. There are plenty for whom a
> Linux text console is good enough. It'd really suck if those people
> blasted those of you who used GNOME/X because Lynx wasn't acceptable for
> you. So when some of us come along and say "sure, things are great and
> are getting better, but these other solutions are starting to look a lot
> more compelling to us," that has nothing to do with *your* needs or
> *your* choice to run what *you* want.
> 
> And with that I'm stepping back from this thread, and will not read
> public or private responses. Either the community steps up and starts
> speaking out strongly for Canonical to up its accessibility game, or it
> doesn't.
> 
> 
> On 01/07/2013 03:04 PM, kendell clark wrote:
>> I will say this though. Orca is *much* better than it was even a year
>> ago. I started using linux when it was at v 3.2.0 and it has improved
>> a lot, especially in the area of web browsing. Is it perfect? no but
>> what access tech is, especially computers where a simple coding error
>> can render an app inaccessible. If I must be honest, I think and
>> probably always will taht without a money insentive, or a threat of
>> legal action, most devs including companies put little or no thought
>> towards accessibility. Yes we have the orca devs, and we have vinux,
>> but they can't do everything and without cooperation from the major
>> desktops gnome, xfce, etc they can't solve the problem on their own.
>> Bug reports seem to sit unsolved for months, even years, while sighted
>> problems get fixed fairly quickly. If there was a catastrophic bug
>> that caused the screens on all desktops and laptops to go off, and
>> wouldn't come back on, there would be a massive outcry. If the
>> response from the dev community was meh, we'll fix it sooner or later,
>> people would flock to windows, or mac, or whatever offered the fix.
>> That's how accessiblity is imo. YOu can flame me if you like but
>> that's my opinion. I love linux and I love orca and firefox but I'm
>> trying to be realistic and I just don't  think that many people care
>> about a11y. There are people, but not nearly enough, imo. I can't
>> code, and documentation on accessiility  is sparse or non existent,
>> making it difficult for anyone not familiar with gnome to dive in.
>> On 01/07/2013 02:51 PM, kendell clark wrote:
>>> ouch. Pms, maybe?
>>> On 01/07/2013 02:49 PM, Nolan Darilek wrote:
>>>> First, please confirm which versions of Firefox and Orca I am using.
>>>> Since you know so much about my environment, I look forward to your
>>>> abilities in this regard.
>>>>
>>>> Second, please justify why the fact that a given choice works for
>>>> you is a good reason why that choice must be for everyone. I at no
>>>> point said that you must use Windows or criticized your choices, so
>>>> perhaps it would be wise not to criticize mine, or to criticize me
>>>> when I claim that Windows suits my needs better.
>>>>
>>>> If you're happy with what you have now, fine. Be happy with it. But
>>>> do step aside when others aren't and try to make things better.
>>>> We're not trying to put *you* down or call *you* out, after all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 01/07/2013 02:14 PM, Kyle wrote:
>>>>> I do lots of things with my computer using Linux. Granted, my
>>>>> primary distro is Arch Linux rather than Ubuntu, so I get all the
>>>>> latest stuff as soon as it's released, but I don't use Windows,
>>>>> except the very rare times when I need to print something, because
>>>>> I have yet to purchase a good printer, at which times I use a
>>>>> left-over XP install on a 10-year-old box. I browse many websites
>>>>> on my Linux box using Orca and Firefox, and I use no other browser,
>>>>> not even Chrome+ChromeVox. I have nothing against trying different
>>>>> things, but I tend to stick with what works, and Firefox+Orca works
>>>>> quite well here. I have yet to find a website that is impossible to
>>>>> navigate, with the exception of Flash content, which is more miss
>>>>> than hit on any browser in any OS. Yes, the times I still have to
>>>>> use Windows for printing, I find NVDA to be quite usable, but if
>>>>> making Firefox+Orca more usable for others means converting to a
>>>>> clunky virtual buffer system that doesn't handle dynamic content
>>>>> well, and cludgy work-arounds like lists of links, then I'll hold
>>>>> off on the downgr ... I mean upgrade, thank you very much.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, Firefox and the way Orca works with it could be improved, and
>>>>> this is happening. But saying that you'd rather use Windows for web
>>>>> browsing because you haven't even tried the latest versions of
>>>>> either Orca or Firefox is utterly ridiculous. So before spouting
>>>>> and spitting about how accessibility needs to improve, first start
>>>>> by trying the latest versions of things, so that you can file more
>>>>> informed bug reports based on the newest, dare I say shiniest,
>>>>> technology.
>>>>> ~Kyle
>>>>> http://kyle.tk/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Christopher (CJ)
chaltain at Gmail