Technology Mail Basket

Technology Mail Basket

Tracy Carcione

From the Technology

Department Director's Mail Basket

From the Editor: As a rather recent and still

more or less unwilling Windows 95 user, I do my share (probably more than my share) of

complaining about Windows 95, JAWS for Windows (JFW), Internet Explorer, and the rest of

the graphical complications to the lives of blind computer users. Dr. Peter Scialli's

article (see the previous story) gives me hope that the advances being made in speech

access to the graphical user interface will eventually trickle down to computer users like

me. Then I read correspondence like the following exchange between Tracy Carcione, a

computer user in New York, and Curtis Chong, Director of the NFB's Technology Department

and President of the National Federation of the Blind in Computer Science, and I am

reminded that the remaining problems are very real and their impact on the lives of many

computer users is always frustrating and often frightening. What follows is a pair of

e-mail messages between Mrs. Carcione and Mr. Chong:

From: Tracy Carcione

To: Curtis Chong

Subject: Windows

Date: Wednesday, February 18, 1998

Hi Curtis:

Hope you're settling in well in Baltimore. From

the Monitor it looks like you're keeping plenty busy. Hope you're enjoying it.

I want to harass you in your capacity as

President of the computer science division and to express my frustration with Windows. As

you may recall, I tried to switch to Windows in the fall. It was a bust, and I'm still on

OS/2, thank goodness. JFW sort of worked with the mainframe and not at all with either of

the e-mail packages we tried.

Other software I've tried has had even less

success. So why do we of the CS Division keep patting Henter-Joyce on the head as though

they were doing a good job? I was hopeful about the switch from talking to Steve Jacobson

and attending CS meetings where people talked about how well things were working for them,

but it wasn't that way for me.

Possibly it would work if we hired a consultant

to come in and customize JFW, but there are no guarantees. And why should that be

necessary? When my boss buys software, she installs it on her machine, and off she goes.

She might have to call Customer Service once or get a little help from a co-worker to

learn the system, but she sure as heck doesn't have to hire a consultant to make the stuff

work or spend hours on the phone with Customer Service as I do.

Why do we as blind people put up with this

nonsense? If so-called access software doesn't work reasonably well with every application

a person has, then it's a problem for that person.

Say I have five applications I need in order to

do my job:

mainframe connection, word processing, e-mail,

online manuals, and scheduling/project management software. Say the access software works

well with one or two, sort of works with one or two more, and does not work at all with

what's left. That seriously affects my ability to do my job. Depending on which software

it works with, I may or may not be able to do my job at all. I've been thinking about

looking for another job, but, when I look in the paper, 90 percent of the jobs advertised

involve Windows in some way, and it's a good bet that even the strictly mainframe jobs

involve Windows to connect to the Network. I feel very nervous going to a job interview in

which, when the prospective boss asks me how I'll be able to connect to their system, I

have to say that it depends what kind of connection they use, and maybe I can't connect at

all.

For instance, there was an opening in another

department for which I was qualified, except that the only connection to the system was

through Netscape for security reasons, so I didn't even bother to apply.

I know you know this whole song well, but what

can we do about it? Are we harassing Netscape to make Netscape Navigator accessible? Can

we push Microsoft any harder? Can R&D invent something like Speaqualizer for Windows?

Can we push the access software guys to do a better job? Right now I totally agree with a

friend of mine who says, "If you have a lot of time to do something and you don't

care if it looks pretty, then use Windows; otherwise, stick to DOS." But there's less

and less in DOS, and Windows is still not very accessible, at least not with what I need

to run, which is what matters to me.

Thanks for listening. Let me know if there's some

action I can take.

Cordially,

Tracy

Curtis Chong

From: Curtis Chong

To: Tracy Carcione

Subject: Windows

Date: February 22, 1998=20

Hi Tracy:

I am glad that you took the time to write this

note. It raises some very interesting points, and it continues to remind me that all is

not sweetness and light in the computer world—even though I would like to think that

things have improved.

Where to begin? First, I would say that, if

anyone gets the notion that we in the computer science division in particular and in the

Federation in general endorse JAWS for Windows as the best screen-access system for

Windows 95, he or she should put that notion aside immediately. As Richard Ring and I

constantly say to anyone who asks, there is no one best program for anything. The key is

to discover the problem which is being addressed and to come up with the best possible

solution for it. Sometimes the solution involves JAWS for Windows. At other times it

involves another screen reader.

Mr. Ring and I have often said that it would be

nice (but not really practical) for blind people to have access to all of the screen

readers and Web browsers available because certain software works better in one situation

while other software works better in another. For example, while JAWS for Windows works

quite well with some e-mail clients (e.g., Eudora or Microsoft Internet Mail), it does not

work as well as Artic WinVision 97 when it comes to using Internet Explorer Version 3.02.

Just because JAWS for Windows appears to be the most popular program today for Windows

access, this does not imply that it is the best program for everyone.

Regarding mainframe connectivity, I know that

Steve Jacobson has made considerable progress in this area. While JAWS for Windows (or any

other Windows screen reader) may not provide the same high-quality access that you and I

both enjoyed with IBM's mainframe communication software, OS/2, and Screen Reader/2, the

fact is that blind people can access the mainframe, using a 3270 terminal-emulation

package, through Windows 95. The access may not be everything we want and we may have to

use a different emulation package than our sighted colleagues, but there is a time when

we, as blind employees, must make unpleasant choices. Would you want to be the last OS/2

user in your shop? If you were, then who would support you? Unpleasant as it is to

contemplate, the day will come when you will have to switch to Windows 95 (and possibly

NT), and, though I personally deplore the circumstances which make this necessary, I

recognize the necessity of being flexible in today's high-speed computer age.

Regarding a Speaqualizer for the graphical user

interface, in point of fact the Federation's Research and Development Committee is giving

this some very serious consideration. Dr. Michael Gosse and I have been looking into the

work being done by Dolphin Systems in the United Kingdom to see if the ideas they have

tried with Windows and their HAL screen-reading program really work. According to Dolphin,

they analyze the actual screen image to determine what is going on instead of intercepting

Windows calls which write text and other information to the screen. The down side to this

approach appears to be that, while HAL works well with a specific set of applications, it

tends to fall down when it comes to generalized access to software for which it has not

been configured. Suffice it to say, this will be a large project that will not result in

any immediate solutions.

You express some frustration about the fact that

we, as blind people, require the services of technical consultants to a greater degree

than our sighted counterparts. Yes, I am afraid you are correct. In order to solve our

problems in the best possible manner, we often require (but cannot get) technical

consultants to configure our systems so that we can use them with the highest degree of

efficiency.

Training is another frustration. As we all know,

much of the training that people receive for Windows-related software is oriented to the

use of the mouse. We are often advised to "point there," "click on this or

that item," and to "drag and drop objects." Little of the training

available to the general community focuses on the use of the keyboard to execute tasks.

While we do have some options in this area, we must always seek alternative ways to

accomplish the same tasks which our sighted peers take for granted.

Does all of this mean that we really can't do our

jobs? Not necessarily. It does mean that we must try to solve the problem on as many

fronts as possible. On the technology front we must try to find the best screen-reading

software we can while, at the same time, pushing the large players like Microsoft and the

Lotus Corporation to make their application software compatible with the technology we

must use to accomplish our jobs.

We must also not forget the basic skills of

blindness, which we must use to get along in the world. These basic skills often come in

handy when we need to run a piece of software that doesn't work with our access

technology. If we are lucky, most of what we need to do with the computer can be done

independently without sighted assistance. If not, unfortunately, some of us will become

casualties in the never-ending struggle to survive in this technological age.

As blind computer users we often need to figure

out ways to get the same work done with different software and approaches.

For example, the job you considered applying for,

in which Netscape was an issue, might have been a good possibility for you if your

employer had been willing to let you use Microsoft Internet Explorer instead.

When I worked at American Express, everybody else

used Microsoft Word or Lotus Smart Suite. Although I used these programs when it was

absolutely necessary, I did a lot of my original composition with good old WordPerfect 5.1

for DOS. As long as it didn't interfere with the job, nobody really cared, and I got the

work done in a highly productive manner.

As far as Netscape itself is concerned, I know

that Henter-Joyce has done some work to make it more usable in the Windows 95 environment.

I myself have had a few frustrating discussions with officials of Netscape. The problem is

finding the right contact and picking the battles that should be fought. We can't beat on

every company, and we can't expect to win every battle. Ultimately we must win the war of

access technology or we will be relegated to the backwaters of society. But we will never

eliminate the need to use alternative techniques and strategies.

At this year's NFB convention we will be

conducting a Windows 95 seminar. If you haven't had a chance to read one of the better

books written to teach the blind about Windows 95, you may find the seminar of interest.

The overall theme of the seminar is that blind people can use Windows 95--often with

tremendous ease and efficiency.

On a more optimistic note, you will be interested

to know that last week others in the disability community and I had a two-day meeting with

representatives of Microsoft. We discussed accessibility, changes to future versions of

Windows, and Windows-based applications, and Microsoft's over-all commitment to

accessibility. We heard from Bill Gates himself. Mr. Gates has expressed a stronger

commitment than ever before to ensuring that Microsoft software is accessible. I would say

that I left the meeting with more than a little frustration and just a bit of cautious

optimism.

You asked what you could do to help. Here are a

few ideas. First, if you are having problems making a screen reader work with a particular

program, write a letter to the screen reader vendor and send me a copy. If you are trying

to make a mainstream commercial package work with a screen reader and the problem appears

to be with the commercial package, write a letter to the company which develops and

markets the software expressing your frustration, and send me a copy. Share your knowledge

with other blind people. Tell them what works for you and what doesn't. Finally, keep

writing to me. I appreciate hearing from you, and, if I have any answers, I will share

them with you.

Yours sincerely,

Curtis Chong