Thought I forgot eh? Well I haven’t, however, this is going to seem very anticlimactic some five months down the road from my original posts. And, thankfully, I sum these two bits up in a paragraph or two. This post has a few edits. I’ve left some anachronisms in place from my draft and added only a sentence here or there.
Apple made a jump into the mobile space for the Blind in a big way last year. There is no denying that the ability to go out to WalMart and buy something off the shelve, and after some doing, come home and make it talk is a fantastic thing. I have a great fear though that some are just trading in one perceived monopoly for one actual monopoly. Um, but I’ll save that discussion for another time. For now, Apple was a big story in 2009.
The biggest story though, and you can confirm my vote with Jamie or J.J. or Rick, was Google and their inclusion of Talkback into Android 1.6 and higher. Why Google? Why not Apple? At the time I stated my reasons as this: 50 handsets running Android for free with most contracts by holiday 2010 can’t be ignored. I stand by that still. While LG offers some built in options, the ability to add talking GPS and Speech Recognition gives the G Men a bit of an edge. Of course, the problem is that the “Eyes Free” project has a long ways to go. Google, unlike Apple, is software based. The ability for Google to throw money, engineers and time at an issue also can’t be ignored. . . Of course, they have to do that part first ..
Google’s bigger issue falls on fragmentation and the rapid ever changing face on what is a Google phone. This is where Apple has the advantage in being predominantly a hardware maker. Google faces an uphill battle with phone manufacturers in the same way that Microsoft does with Windows. And like Windows, Google could be supporting just as many configurations with a new Android phone coming out each week in your box of breakfast cereal. What a cool toy surprise!
the thing about Microsoft is that they can’t go get a cup of coffee without consulting two teams of lawyers first. The thing about Apple and Google is that they haven’t been tested beyond the court of public opinion yet. At some point the EU and others will descend on both companies and they to will have to defend themselves from the same legal battles as Microsoft. It is just what happens to big companies.
I still think that Google has the potential to rush out of the gate at some point. Either by design or by Advocacy prompting them in nasty ways. it will have to happen. I just wish it would happen faster because we are running out of options in the mobile space. And being locked into a phone platform, a company and a carrier is not a good thing going forward.
Control can be a double edged sword that can cut both sides of the argument clean in half. Reliance can also take the place of control in this scenario as well. I’m reminded of those great but ominous DEVO lyrics on the matter.
“Freedom of choice is what you got.. Freedom from choice is what you want.”
Here the whole track from the link below ..
Posts
2 comments:
Hi ranger. As always, you've written a thought provoking blog post. What caught my attention was the part about an actual monopoly as opposed to a perceived monopoly.
First, I want to acknowledge your point. Apple's voiceover is in deed the only game in town for the IPhone, IPad, and IPod. If you don't like it, you'd best be looking for a different device. However, I think there is a critical reason why most users, myself included, don't mind the VO monopoly, but do hold a grudge against other screen readers we perceive as monopolistic. . Put simply and bluntly, voiceover works, and works well. It is my experience that the competition does not. As an example, I had talks 4, and updated to talks 5 on my nokia phone. I still cannot use it with the internet, because I keep getting an error that says scrypt alert, undefined value. When doing a read all, it crashes the internet, and I must manually retype the address again to go back to the page. Sometimes talks does this, and sometimes it doesn't.
But it's not just talks, it's mobile speak as well. Neither screen reader supports nokia maps for effective GPS use. Want a compass app? Forget it. Compass pro, though highly recommended by nokia users doesn't work with either product even when phones can support the program. Want a shoutcast and internet radio playing app? Muahahahaha foolish mortal! LCG jukebox, again a major selling app on cymbian doesn't speak a single iota with mobile speak or talks. Yet, these products market to us like they have so much more functionality than the previous version because they implemented a half baked touch interface, or added more keystrokes to the internet.
Now, you could make the argument that I am being too hard on the screen reader developers. After all, they are just a few people, and it's immensely challenging to keep up with an entire platform that moves on without consulting you. I agree with this, but to me, it feels like they're not even trying. Where, on either screen reader web site, do you find a list of evolving support for third party applications? Code factory has a list, but it has long since stagnated.
Where, on either screen reader's web site, do you find tips and how tos of making difficult apps more compatible by changing settings? I don't see any.
I know this has turned into ranting, which is not the aim of the blog post. But, in my mind, this is the most obvious reason why I glare angrily at other screen reader companies, and readily accept voiceover, flaws and all. I know that mobile speak and talks have creative people behind them, but to me, the creativity just doesn't show through when compared to all the functionality of apple's device.
Is it a mistake? I don't know. But until something dramatic happens, I don't see my attitude changing any time soon.
Hi ranger. As always, you've written a thought provoking blog post. What caught my attention was the part about an actual monopoly as opposed to a perceived monopoly.
First, I want to acknowledge your point. Apple's voiceover is in deed the only game in town for the IPhone, IPad, and IPod. If you don't like it, you'd best be looking for a different device. However, I think there is a critical reason why most users, myself included, don't mind the VO monopoly, but do hold a grudge against other screen readers we perceive as monopolistic. . Put simply and bluntly, voiceover works, and works well. It is my experience that the competition does not. As an example, I had talks 4, and updated to talks 5 on my nokia phone. I still cannot use it with the internet, because I keep getting an error that says scrypt alert, undefined value. When doing a read all, it crashes the internet, and I must manually retype the address again to go back to the page. Sometimes talks does this, and sometimes it doesn't.
But it's not just talks, it's mobile speak as well. Neither screen reader supports nokia maps for effective GPS use. Want a compass app? Forget it. Compass pro, though highly recommended by nokia users doesn't work with either product even when phones can support the program. Want a shoutcast and internet radio playing app? Muahahahaha foolish mortal! LCG jukebox, again a major selling app on cymbian doesn't speak a single iota with mobile speak or talks. Yet, these products market to us like they have so much more functionality than the previous version because they implemented a half baked touch interface, or added more keystrokes to the internet.
Now, you could make the argument that I am being too hard on the screen reader developers. After all, they are just a few people, and it's immensely challenging to keep up with an entire platform that moves on without consulting you. I agree with this, but to me, it feels like they're not even trying. Where, on either screen reader web site, do you find a list of evolving support for third party applications? Code factory has a list, but it has long since stagnated.
Where, on either screen reader's web site, do you find tips and how tos of making difficult apps more compatible by changing settings? I don't see any.
I know this has turned into ranting, which is not the aim of the blog post. But, in my mind, this is the most obvious reason why I glare angrily at other screen reader companies, and readily accept voiceover, flaws and all. I know that mobile speak and talks have creative people behind them, but to me, the creativity just doesn't show through when compared to all the functionality of apple's device.
Is it a mistake? I don't know. But until something dramatic happens, I don't see my attitude changing any time soon.
Post a Comment