Well, actually, I don't think it's all that hard to make your app friendly to blind users. You need to make sure that your UI has text titles on all buttons. Then you make sure all text in your UI can be scaled up to larger sizes without getting garbled. Then you need to make sure your app works with VoiceOver. All of that shouldn't take one developer more than a few hours, depending on how many scenes the app has and how complex the UI is. And that work should make it possible for blind and low-vision users can use your app.
I saw a group of blind and low-vision users with iPhones last year. It was fascinating. They were able to launch apps, select items from the UI, change system settings, and do nearly everything that a sighted user could do with an iPhone and non-visually-intensive apps. But yes, it took far longer than just looking and tapping, and it was a little noisy. (But that was OK since it was at a bustling Peet's Coffee and Tea shop.)
I wonder if any developers have attempted to make any "audio games" that are aimed specifically at blind users? I think it could be a very interesting challenge.
I wonder if any developers have attempted to make any "audio games" that are aimed specifically at blind users? I think it could be a very interesting challenge.
It could be made by a blind developer, as they would obviously have more know how in making an effective and good game for that market.
I can see "audio" only games being good, if done right.
Remember text games like Zork? Somebody could make an audio only adventure game, where the player simply speaks their commands.
Even with this back tracking I still think these guys are way off base here. They are still demanding that all apps be blind accessible, while hat might be a lofty goal in an ideal world it has nothing to do with the world we live in. For one many small time developers do not have the resources to support the blind and frankly many apps simply aren't making the big bucks to even stay on App Store. Not to mention is the free apps that are given to the world by people with no desire to make money and usually as spare time efforts.
In a nut shell the demand that all apps be blind accessible is nonsense. This is exspecually the case with games whci frankly aren't usable without sight.
I really don't wish to be unkind and frankly would never want to be blind but I really see this as an unreasonable expectation on the part of this association. I engage in many tasks and hobbies that I cant even imagine doing safely blind. Personal health problems right now prevent me from doing some things that would put either me of the public in danger. Everybody has or eventually ages into limitation as to what they can do, it is something you can resist but really can't beat.
A few months ago I read an article about a blind woodworker who made a living professionally. That is an amazing accomplishment considering that I do a bit as a hobby. From my stand point it would be extremely dangerous but yet he is successful. Successful by the way with machinery never designed to support the blind. Obviously where there is a will there is a way!
In any event let's say that the Association here started to demand that all wood working equipment be suitable for use by the blind. Is that a reasonable requirement? What is it explodes the price of the equipment in such a way that it makes the tools inaccessible to more people, via increased expense than it realistically makes usable to the blind. Also what do we do about the small time supplier of tools that simply doesn't have the resources to meet the demands being place upon them. In the end not everything can be realistically tailored to support the blind here and the same goes for software.
That shouldn't mean that everybody gets a free ride either. I just don't see where universal support is possible. It should be there when possible but we shouldn't be putting excess restrictions on small time developers, especially if the software isn't of use to the blind in the first place. Not to mention all the free software that is put on App Store by people with no intention of making a profit or even finishing the product.
You sir are a genius... Or a wizard. Agree 100% with this extremely important negative aspect of regulation. It would be truly "blind" not to see the realities of the universe.
It could be made by a blind developer, as they would obviously have more know how in making an effective and good game for that market.
I can see "audio" only games being good, if done right.
Remember text games like Zork? Somebody could make an audio only adventure game, where the player simply speaks their commands.
Awesome... Even d&d used to be pen and paper and the imagination and it captured gamers the world over. I dont see why that wouldnt be fun for a blind individual. I would be interested if I were blind.
On the other hand I am not sure if there is a large enough audience to put bread on the developers table ...
Awesome... Even d&d used to be pen and paper and the imagination and it captured gamers the world over. I dont see why that wouldnt be fun for a blind individual. I would be interested if I were blind.
On the other hand I am not sure if there is a large enough audience to put bread on the developers table ...
There's about 285 million visually impaired people in the world.
But, if the game were done really well and professionally, it could appeal to all people, not just the blind.
It is said that sound is 50% of a movie, and for this game, sound would have to be 100%, and this game would have to have an awesome and professional soundscape.
Blind people are much better than non-blind people at localizing various sounds. This wouldn't just be a simple game with audio narration. A blind person would also be able to hear the environment that they're in, and they could just say "Turn left and walk towards the dog".
The "if you are successful you must be evil" sickness that has infected media outlets has gone too far. For the life of me I can’t figure out what they hope to accomplish…
“Everyone on Earth should receive an equal share of the work done by everyone else”
Oh, I see. But in your opinion, publicly shaming Apple, as has been the case (even though Apple does more for the environment, and for the blind and the deaf than any others in the same field), is fine.
If anybody is to be shamed, of course it is (what you call) "the laggards". I personally call them "the selfish"; "the careless"; maybe "the discriminatory".
Your pathetic little "1950s motherly shame platitude" says a lot more about you than it does about me.
Now go in the corner and think long and hard about what you've learned!
Why all the negative comments and yes Apple may not be as good as androids as their slaves said but then it is doing all it can to level the playing field by making iOS better and inclusive.
And it is good that someone set the facts right and that Reuters is a disgrace to their trade so is Bloomberg, WSJ, NYT, etc.
"Apple has done more for accessibility than any other company to date, and we have duly recognized this by presenting the company with at least two awards (including our annual Dr. Jacob Bolotin Award) and publicly praising it whenever the opportunity arises."
So here's what I want to know.
If Apple has been so great, then who is it who has not been so great? Why is the NFB not calling these companies on the carpet; starting with the worst offender? (that has to be somebody).
It's just like Greenpeace. Take the company who is doing the most and the best, and then see if you can find which little thing they are not doing, and then publicly flog them for it.
You know what, Riccobono; just shut up about Apple altogether! Apple actually doesn't need your defense. Just go after (publicly) those companies who are actually not rising to the standards that Apple has set. That way you will actually be doing something for your constituents.
you didn't really read their response, did you? they weren't flogging apple at all. because iOS is the best and dominate app ecosystem for the blind, they were talking about an area of improvement -- app devs who don't actually employ the accessibility sdks.
And the trolls are running wild with the original article. Once the words are out there there’s no explaining after the fact. The stupid, dumbass, ignorant, uneducated American public believe anything they see on the Internet.
Quote: Why would a blind person choose Android in the first place? Because their phone salesperson was ignorant or needed to make their boat payment this month and sold them an Android phone? Maybe?
“And here’s your new... (cough)Phone.”
“Hey, tha... say, this seems a little big.”
“It’s the new model.”
“I don’t remember reading about a 6.1” iPhone.”
Originally Posted by lkrupp
The stupid, dumbs, ignorant, uneducated American public...
Some people might call that racist. Intelligent people would call it stupid.
For one many small time developers do not have the resources to support the blind and frankly many apps simply aren't making the big bucks to even stay on App Store. Not to mention is the free apps that are given to the world by people with no desire to make money and usually as spare time efforts.
I'm a one man show and have three apps and since making my last released one much better integrated with VoiceOver, I've gone back and updated my first free app and am currently updating my last one. Every app I do from know will be as VO compatible as I can make it.
For a standard app, labels and hints can be set when designing the interface and it's a fairly straightforward process, but for some apps, especially games, it can take much more work, but it is still possible depending on the game. Obviously a VO compatible first person shooter or racing game would probable not make sense but there are many types of games where VO can be integrated very effectively.
Apple has created an amazing set of tools for us developers, the things is that some developers don't know about VO and some clearly don't care. I think that a bit more nudging in the right direction from Apple would be good idea.
Comments
Well, actually, I don't think it's all that hard to make your app friendly to blind users. You need to make sure that your UI has text titles on all buttons. Then you make sure all text in your UI can be scaled up to larger sizes without getting garbled. Then you need to make sure your app works with VoiceOver. All of that shouldn't take one developer more than a few hours, depending on how many scenes the app has and how complex the UI is. And that work should make it possible for blind and low-vision users can use your app.
I saw a group of blind and low-vision users with iPhones last year. It was fascinating. They were able to launch apps, select items from the UI, change system settings, and do nearly everything that a sighted user could do with an iPhone and non-visually-intensive apps. But yes, it took far longer than just looking and tapping, and it was a little noisy. (But that was OK since it was at a bustling Peet's Coffee and Tea shop.)
I wonder if any developers have attempted to make any "audio games" that are aimed specifically at blind users? I think it could be a very interesting challenge.
I wonder if any developers have attempted to make any "audio games" that are aimed specifically at blind users? I think it could be a very interesting challenge.
It could be made by a blind developer, as they would obviously have more know how in making an effective and good game for that market.
I can see "audio" only games being good, if done right.
Remember text games like Zork? Somebody could make an audio only adventure game, where the player simply speaks their commands.
Remember text games like Zork? Somebody could make an audio only adventure game, where the player simply speaks their commands.
Good idea.
Guys, cybersex has been around a while.
"I take off my robe and wizard hat..."
You sir are a genius... Or a wizard. Agree 100% with this extremely important negative aspect of regulation. It would be truly "blind" not to see the realities of the universe.
Awesome... Even d&d used to be pen and paper and the imagination and it captured gamers the world over. I dont see why that wouldnt be fun for a blind individual. I would be interested if I were blind.
On the other hand I am not sure if there is a large enough audience to put bread on the developers table ...
This would be a revolutionary gift like mechanical brail devices... But the whole screen could be a brail device.
Awesome... Even d&d used to be pen and paper and the imagination and it captured gamers the world over. I dont see why that wouldnt be fun for a blind individual. I would be interested if I were blind.
On the other hand I am not sure if there is a large enough audience to put bread on the developers table ...
There's about 285 million visually impaired people in the world.
But, if the game were done really well and professionally, it could appeal to all people, not just the blind.
It is said that sound is 50% of a movie, and for this game, sound would have to be 100%, and this game would have to have an awesome and professional soundscape.
Blind people are much better than non-blind people at localizing various sounds. This wouldn't just be a simple game with audio narration. A blind person would also be able to hear the environment that they're in, and they could just say "Turn left and walk towards the dog".
“Everyone on Earth should receive an equal share of the work done by everyone else”
Oh, I see. But in your opinion, publicly shaming Apple, as has been the case (even though Apple does more for the environment, and for the blind and the deaf than any others in the same field), is fine.
If anybody is to be shamed, of course it is (what you call) "the laggards". I personally call them "the selfish"; "the careless"; maybe "the discriminatory".
Your pathetic little "1950s motherly shame platitude" says a lot more about you than it does about me.
Now go in the corner and think long and hard about what you've learned!
Deleted. Not worthy of a response.
And it is good that someone set the facts right and that Reuters is a disgrace to their trade so is Bloomberg, WSJ, NYT, etc.
Because their phone salesperson was ignorant or needed to make their boat payment this month and sold them an Android phone? Maybe?
Huh?
you didn't really read their response, did you? they weren't flogging apple at all. because iOS is the best and dominate app ecosystem for the blind, they were talking about an area of improvement -- app devs who don't actually employ the accessibility sdks.
And the trolls are running wild with the original article. Once the words are out there there’s no explaining after the fact. The stupid, dumbass, ignorant, uneducated American public believe anything they see on the Internet.
“And here’s your new... (cough)Phone.”
“Hey, tha... say, this seems a little big.”
“It’s the new model.”
“I don’t remember reading about a 6.1” iPhone.”
Some people might call that racist. Intelligent people would call it stupid.
I'm a one man show and have three apps and since making my last released one much better integrated with VoiceOver, I've gone back and updated my first free app and am currently updating my last one. Every app I do from know will be as VO compatible as I can make it.
For a standard app, labels and hints can be set when designing the interface and it's a fairly straightforward process, but for some apps, especially games, it can take much more work, but it is still possible depending on the game. Obviously a VO compatible first person shooter or racing game would probable not make sense but there are many types of games where VO can be integrated very effectively.
Apple has created an amazing set of tools for us developers, the things is that some developers don't know about VO and some clearly don't care. I think that a bit more nudging in the right direction from Apple would be good idea.
It makes you wonder what Reuters motives really are?
Great post. Interesting information thank you.
http://techhowdy.com