Jolt Country

http://thedesertskies.com/archive/2007/ ... tions.aspx

For those unfamiliar: Freedom Scientific=makers of JAWS/Magic and owners of Open Book (all top-rate or second-rate products in a market with very few competitors.) Main Menu=*the* blindness technology podcast hosted by ACB, second largest consumer blindness advocation group in America.
Microsoft Windows (R) Vista (TM)=GET THE FUCK OFF MY INTERNET.

So instead of take up the invitation to talk about how screenreader access will be effected in the newest Microsoft opperating system in the same place as everyone else that everyone else is listening to, FS is going to release their own podcast on their own website saying exactly what they want to say with absolutely no chance of any outside intervention by anyone as horrid as a MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.

Y'know what, FS? Meet me at camera 3.

It wasn't enough to charge $900 for a single piece of software that has in recent years balooned to the point that it's now even worse than Symantec antivirus. It wasn't enough to then charge $200 extra just for the "feature" of being able to use the same exact freaking installer file on Microsoft Windows (R) XP Professional (TM) as well as Microsoft Windows (R) XP Home (TM). It wasn't enough to then charge $200 extra to use what's still the same exact freaking installer file to use the feature of remote access, and then only after one installs the exact same freaking installer file again on every client machine. (Oh, but they have to protect their precious site licenses, don't they? IN fairness, they probably aren't able to think up a solution and so we're just going to have to live with that one. I digress.) It wasn't enough to then--inexplicably--charge $120 for every two major upgrades (as opposed to something sane like $60 per major upgrade) and then throw us free updates that are completely indistinguishable from major upgrades... apparently just to confuse the holy hell out of me. My real issue is that they then charge 200 dollars for that "professional" version I was talking about earlier. It wasn't enough to then toss in features that absolutely no one needs or cares about such as the ability to assign custom sounds to indicate the beginning nad end of form fields on webpages! While leaving out firefox support until October of 2005. ("But GW Micro did the same thign with Windoweyes!" --noitall blindtech participant I know, and I dont' care. Next.) It wasn't enough to use a FLOPPY DISKETTE SENT IN THE MAIL to authorize this aforementioned $1195 piece of software until 2004. It wasn't enough to undercut the single real competitor in the blindness PDA market by offering a trade-in program for that specific notetaker model and brand. You just had to twist the screws juust that tiny little bit, didn't you? God. I long for the old days of corporate backstabbing at the dawn of the 21st century; comparing the PacMate to a BrailleNote at an FS-sponsored event with a PacMate user who barely did anything but glance at the Braillenote specs before making his presentation and then unashamedly calling it an unbiased comparison. At least back then they bothered with the pretense of murmering "and we really do care what you think" before they started screaming "FUCK YOU, USERS! WE DON'T NEED YOUR GOOD WILL WHEN WE HAVE YOUR MONEY AND YOUR EYES!" at the top of their lungs.

Wow, they know they have you by the balls. Please tell me that ABVI or a similar organization picks up the tab for all the software expenses.



THE
OUCH!
AARDVARK

Yes. THat's exactly right--which is why FS can stay in business. THeir clients aren't end users; their clients are government agencies, educational institutions, basically any place that has deep enough pockets to buy their product a LOT. I don't really have a problem with that except that it kind of unfairly shuts out what little competition their is because what are they going to do, give their competitor free press just to be nice and fair? Of course I'd like it if these places would do research and discover which package they prefer the most and then sell that one--or even better, let the person who gets to use it in the end decide for himself--but we can't let that happen now can we? But the myth that Freedom Scientific is the only way forward really annoys the hell out of me--I've seen agency after agency trumpet how accessibility-savvy they are with their JAWS license and when I mention window-eyes they have no idea what I'm talking about. Which is why they can get away with the stuff they get away with; the end user, is usually not hte one picking up the tab so as long as they don't come right out and say "Whatevah, I do what I want!" they, well, do what they want. Which is why, of course, they won't be seen on any talk show; the risk of anyone daring to sully their miticulous public image somewhere where so many people are listening is apparently too high.