<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Acces barriers: Communication Breakdown?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.headstar.com/eablive/?feed=rss2&#038;p=303" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.headstar.com/eablive/?p=303</link>
	<description>Access to technology for all</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2018 16:32:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry Weichbrodt</title>
		<link>http://www.headstar.com/eablive/?p=303&#038;cpage=1#comment-5410</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jerry Weichbrodt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.headstar.com/eablive/?p=303#comment-5410</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can absolutely believe the results of this report.  I believe &quot;gut feeling&quot; carries a lot of weight and does a disservice to many people since that &quot;gut feeling&quot; is usually that of twenty-something-year-olds with very good vision, excellent dexterity, and a much higher than average level of technical ability.  It is a crime that human factors (or ergonomics, depending on where in the world you live) is considered &quot;secondary.&quot; Why can&#039;t designers get a clue that they are designing for real PEOPLE who tend to want to use products out of the box without a ten-day course in software use or a thorough read of a manual in six-point type?

Here in the U.S. we are just today seeing our analog television stations go off the air, and, even though this close-down has been several years in preparation, there is not one digital TV converter box that a blind person like me can set up independently.  Everything is handled through on-screen menus, and of course accessible documentation is nonexistent.  I&#039;m sure the argument was that the set-up would only need to be done once, and those blind people don&#039;t watch television anyway.  Well, there may be a smaller market of blind television viewers after this debacle if it proves to be just too much of a bother to operate the equipment in the digital era.

There are companies that put effort into designing accessible products, but my experience is that these efforts are rare and generally only apply to one or two models in a company&#039;s line-up.  Then those models are poorly and very spottily marketed so that the potential consumers who would really benefit either never hear about the products or discover that they&#039;re hard to get.  The accessible products don&#039;t sell like hotcakes, so the products are discontinued.  The whole exercise is doomed from the start and helps to reinforce the view that it&#039;s not worth the trouble.

In short, I&#039;m afraid the same issues will continue to doom movement toward truly accessible products without some external pressures to force development, proper marketing, and production of equipment that everybody can use regardless of ability.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can absolutely believe the results of this report.  I believe &#8220;gut feeling&#8221; carries a lot of weight and does a disservice to many people since that &#8220;gut feeling&#8221; is usually that of twenty-something-year-olds with very good vision, excellent dexterity, and a much higher than average level of technical ability.  It is a crime that human factors (or ergonomics, depending on where in the world you live) is considered &#8220;secondary.&#8221; Why can&#8217;t designers get a clue that they are designing for real PEOPLE who tend to want to use products out of the box without a ten-day course in software use or a thorough read of a manual in six-point type?</p>
<p>Here in the U.S. we are just today seeing our analog television stations go off the air, and, even though this close-down has been several years in preparation, there is not one digital TV converter box that a blind person like me can set up independently.  Everything is handled through on-screen menus, and of course accessible documentation is nonexistent.  I&#8217;m sure the argument was that the set-up would only need to be done once, and those blind people don&#8217;t watch television anyway.  Well, there may be a smaller market of blind television viewers after this debacle if it proves to be just too much of a bother to operate the equipment in the digital era.</p>
<p>There are companies that put effort into designing accessible products, but my experience is that these efforts are rare and generally only apply to one or two models in a company&#8217;s line-up.  Then those models are poorly and very spottily marketed so that the potential consumers who would really benefit either never hear about the products or discover that they&#8217;re hard to get.  The accessible products don&#8217;t sell like hotcakes, so the products are discontinued.  The whole exercise is doomed from the start and helps to reinforce the view that it&#8217;s not worth the trouble.</p>
<p>In short, I&#8217;m afraid the same issues will continue to doom movement toward truly accessible products without some external pressures to force development, proper marketing, and production of equipment that everybody can use regardless of ability.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
