Egypt Revisited

As a lot of you know, last night I had a strong reaction to Apple and its decision to reject Serotek's Accessible Event app. The exact number of apps that do not make it to Apple's App Store is not documented but is estimated to range in the thousands. When our app fell into that category for a third consecutive time, I admit my reaction was a little hasty.

I understand Apple only wants the best apps to maintain a superior user experience. I applaud Apple for allowing that user experience to be so inclusive of the world's blind population. To that end, I submit my sincere apologies to Apple and to the blind and visually impaired community for having taken my frustrations as a developer to Twitter. If I may, I would like to provide an explanation for my reaction.

My sentiments are not unique among Apple's developer community. Hundreds of blog posts and Twitter feeds point to Apple's obscure approval system. There is no appeal process for rejected apps that meet the company's hardware and software specifications. Though sideloading has provided alternative access to OSX, Apple's sandboxing policy set to start on March 1 raises speculation about whether the company will simply eliminate what it deems inappropriate. Even apps that make the cut face an impending reality of not being able to interact with other apps. Some believe this is necessary to uphold a secure environment. Many others wonder if security is being used to minimize productivity.

Speaking from the position of a developer, I am worried about the direction Apple is taking. I am not alone in my feeling that what we are facing is really Apple's sandbox, and developers just happened to be allowed to play in it with an eye to the big bully who might one day decide he no longer wants some of the kids there. Yes, there are rotten apples that try to take advantage of the system and make things bad for everyone, but we should not dilute the very freedom that made Apple products cool to start.

On a more personal level, I have had time to reflect on the situation since my public blitz. There is no justification for my reaction, and yet I've been wondering about the origins of my feelings. Could it be that I am lashing out against the same oppressive environment imposed by the adaptive technology industry I have been opposing for the past ten years? The traditional players in the industry, after all, have grown comfortable telling blind people what they can or cannot access, and Apple has taken steps that open those old scars, not because they rejected a single app but because their system is being restructured in a way that is more limiting than it is liberating. But now it’s not just the blind community it’s the World. I have worked hard to encourage people to be more than just a company's list of features. I do not want us to wander down a path that excites us about everything that we might be able to do, only to hit a brick wall and discover that freedom is what a company decides it should be.

As you know, Serotek is no stranger to the Apple App Store. In January iBlink Radio was inducted into the AppleVis iOS App Hall of Fame. The app provides access to radio stations, podcasts, and reading services and has gained distinguished prominence among a global audience.

On behalf of Serotek, I apologize for the delay of another in a series of apps that will help blind people be productive in school and in the workplace. It is our desire to continue working in an open environment that empowers people to pursue personal and professional ambitions. We will be publishing instructions on how to sideload the Accessible Event app to work on your Mac.

Until then, stay vigilant. Innovation is about moving out of what previously restrained us.

The Disney Standard

This past Sunday my family and I accompanied some friends to Disney World. Living in Orlando, I guess it's not as big of a deal as it would be for the common tourist. I myself have always found it more or less enjoyable, something to do with the kids anyway. Last weekend I decided to satisfy my curiosity about a new audio description device that I had heard about somewhere, and while looking over the Disney website I was reminded of its existence once again. WOW! At the risk of sounding totally cliché, it's like I stepped into a whole new realm.
I have always known Disney to take a special approach to all its guests. I mean, they're in the business of making dreams come true, right? I have never encountered issues with accessing any of the attractions. My guide dog has always been welcomed. In fact, Hurley was riding around with my Son and me in one of their go karts on this trip, with no one batting an eye, but I have to confess this past weekend totally rocked my view of Disney's effort to make their park a universal experience.

The device with no real name is offered free for the duration of your visit with a refundable $25 deposit. It is a 7.2-ounce handheld computer with over the ear headphones. It provides an interactive audio and visual menu that allows you to choose the type of information you would like to receive about outdoor areas – from a description of your surroundings to information about nearby attractions, restaurants, and entertainment. It gives audio descriptions for key visual elements like action and scenery. I've never experienced the Carousel of Progress in quite that level of vivid detail before. The device features assistive listening for persons with mild to moderate hearing loss. The unit even features captions for various audio and dialog. While we were only able to visit the Magic Kingdom this time, the system is available for all four Disney parks in Orlando. One of the things I'm looking forward to in a future visit is going to the Animal Kingdom and using the handheld captioning feature to learn more about the animals my family and I are visiting. I think it will be great to offer my children information about the animals with the same ease as any tour guide. I can’t even begin to describe the feeling of joy I experienced being able to talk to my children about the amazing workmanship and attention to detail on attractions like “It’s A Small World” and others, and how I was able to connect with them and share my own experiences as a child at Disney. I can’t express how great it was to be able to use this technology to “see” the park like they did.

The technology is so sophisticated that at any point it would have been possible for me to venture out on my own and never feel at a loss as to where I was headed. Now, before you ask, no, the user does not get directions as to whether the facility is to your left, right, ahead or behind, but I attribute this to the early stages of any product development and the lack of pinpoint GPS accuracy that is absent in all mainstream orientation tools. Perhaps Google’s local map technology may help with this in the future?

As you may know, Disney does not believe in wasted real estate. Their idea of roller coasters consists of packed adventures that are just as capable of being heart-pounding as they are visually enthralling. Before, it was enough for me to bask in the delighted screams of my children and feel good that they were having fun. With my handheld device, however, I was plugged into an instant feed of information that allowed me to perceive the rides from a more highly involved angle. We're not just talking front row seat here. We're talking front and center detailed audio descriptions of costumes, props, settings and background scenery. The closest comparison to the experience I can think of is descriptive video. In 2001 I was brought to tears while experiencing “How The Grinch Stole Christmas” on DVD with my family without anyone having to tell me what was going on. As unforgetable as that day was, the problem is that video description is still quite two-dimensional. There is something completely different about a multisensory experience being aided by a voice telling you exactly what you are passing. You’ll hear details about the attraction that will in all likelihood escape the notice of even those who can see. There's just too much competing for visual attention that the average guest will not be able to take it all in.

Like Serotek’s System Access to Go in 2008, Disney’s handheld device received the American Foundation for the Blind's prestigious Access Award in 2011. I now know firsthand that the recognition was well-deserved. As AFB's President and CEO Carl R. Augusto noted, "“Too often, swift advances in technology bring the rewards of convenience and entertainment to an eager world while inadvertently leaving those who are visually impaired behind.” I can testify that as far as I can tell, Disney has made people with disabilities a fully integrated part of their customer base.

Visiting the Disney World Resort prompted me to think about a couple things:

First, it occurs to me that as blind consumers, we spend so much time fighting for equal access that we too often forget to really praise the innovations of those companies that are doing it right. Apple may have needed the threat of litigation to make accessibility a higher priority, but unlike most companies, Apple rose to the challenge in such a way as to make accessibility one more selling point of their core functionality and blind people just one more highlight of their TV commercials. Olympus is another company that continues to make something as simple as voice guidance a key feature of their products to make them enjoyable for a wider segment of their customer base. So I wonder, why is it that our social networks buzz when there are critiques and gripes about the lack of accessibility in this or that product or service, but no one says a thing about achievements that are better than anything we could have hoped for? I mean, I expect to be treated as an equal by product and service providers but, as we all know, that isn’t true for the most part. So, when a company does do something right for us, shouldn’t we really let them and others in our community know?

Don’t get me wrong. I would never suggest we lay down our arms and stop asking for equal access. In fact, I am a big promoter of using Yelp, Twitter, Facebook and other mainstream channels to express our opinions of restaurants that do not have Braille menus, retailers that do not produce eReaders that speak out of the box and facilities that think adding a wheelchair ramp is enough to make a place accessible. Just this morning one of my reviews on Yelp was blasted via email throughout Orlando. People will now be able to read the opinions of a fellow foody who just happens to be blind. Perhaps other restaurant owners will see my reviews that not only talk about the quality of food and customer service but also cover things like, did they freak out about my guide dog or did they have Braille menus. What I am saying is that whether we are praising a product or damning it, we need to break out of our blindness bubble of list-serves, forums, and chatroom communities and take our comments to the general public where their impacts are more likely to be felt by the parties responsible. We need to write product reviews. We need to send e-mails, and far be it from me to suggest we do something so outdated as picking up the phone to talk to a company about our experience with their product or service. And don’t tell me that you’re just one person and your voice doesn’t matter. That’s simply not true. When you combine individual voices they become a crowd.

Every voice counts, and if we are going to gripe loudly then we need to selibrate just as loudly when a company gets it right. Our feedback should not be limited to those aspects of life that have a direct bearing on our blindness either. We need to participate as consumers to be taken seriously as consumers. If you think about it, Apple and Disney must have spent millions of dollars on research and development and implementation to make their experience more than just accessible. Universal design is creating an experience that is simultaneously enjoyable to all, as opposed to creating a hierarchy of access to the same encounter. The least we could do is say "thank you" with our wallets, our reviews, and continued encouragement to make it better. I have a feeling that such encouragement would prompt more companies to use the secret sauce of their success to create some accommodations that are out of this world.

Second, taking a little of my own advice, I call upon all companies to rise to Disney's standard. My dollars as a blind consumer are every bit as important as the dollars of my sighted neighbor. It is not enough to add a layer of accessibility to your products and services because a law directs you to. I am using my hard-earned money to pay for the same privileges as my sighted peers, and those privileges include my walking into your restaurants and ordering from Braille menus just like all your other customers. Asking your wait staff to read the menus to me is not being hospitable. It is being patronizing. We deserve better. Just as Apple now depicts blind people actively using their mobile technology, Disney ought to consider showing blind people enjoying the same facilities as anyone else, because the same marketing strategies that feed the bottom line can go a long way toward changing public misconceptions.

The landscape for blind people has not changed all that much in the ten years I've been involved with Serotek. What has changed is my attitude and my approach to these types of consumer challenges. I've decided I can either choose to look forlornly at the world I wish I could enjoy and get angry, or I can shatter the dividing line and be an active participant in that world. I hope for the sake of our collective progress that you will join me. So, when are you going to right a review? When are you going to call that company that has gone the extra mile and thank them or express your frustration with the lack of accessibility in a product or service? In short, are you going to have a little faith? Even though every time you ask for accessibility you may not get it, you have to continue to believe that there will be companies, like those I have covered in this post, who will heed your cry for equal access and amaze us all with the outcome.

System Access: The Alternative Commitment

As you know, Serotek is not a conventional assistive technology provider. In fact, we take pride in our willingness to think outside the box and leverage products that make a distinct mark on the customers we serve, but, the price of pulling away from the pack means succumbing to all manner of speculation perpetuated by competitors and by customers who rely on bias reviews to direct their own decisions. We have never shied away from defending our approach to development, and so following in that tradition, today we address a question that comes to our attention from time to time: Is System Access a full screen reader?

Well, to begin on common ground, let's first start by defining what a screen reader is. In the way of an impartial source, we can use the American Foundation of the Blind, which sets forth the following:

"Screen readers are software programs that allow blind or visually impaired users to read the text that is displayed on the computer screen with a speech synthesizer. A screen reader is the interface between the computer’s operating system, its applications, and the user. The user sends commands by pressing different combinations of keys on the computer keyboard to instruct the speech synthesizer what to say and to speak automatically when changes occur on the computer screen."[1]

Well, if we're going by these fundamental guidelines, then System Access is most certainly a full screen reader. Customers can install our product and interact with a growing number of popular applications that facilitate e-mail, word processing, web browsing and other key activities that are essential to daily tasks inside and outside of the office or classroom.

In its early days, it would have been fair to ask if our product could feasibly rise to the challenge of a traditional screen reader. Then again, we never promised more functionality than the product delivered. We understood that in its infancy, the product formerly known as Freedom Box that later included System Access 1.0 was a rudimentary solution with limited use of the off screen model to interact with applications, but even in 2002, many years after the birth of competing products, Freedom Box was hailed by the Teachers.Net Gazette as a product that "opened a new door for the blind and visually impaired, offering a new found freedom and a new kind of life."[2] That was high praise for a product that was so basic compared to the innovation we see today and when compared to the screen readers that had already been enjoying a prominent spotlight in the market.

There are at least three factors that feed people's hesitation to see System Access for what it is:

First, customers respond to marketing tactics that feed on human instinct. When you are sick, and when given a choice between the less expensive and the more expensive treatments, your instinct is to want the more expensive treatment because the higher cost must surely mean that the results are better. The same is true of technology. Accessibility concerns aside, you could buy the new Kindle Fire, or you could put down more money and buy the more expensive iPad because the majority says the latter outperforms the former. So it comes as no surprise that if competing screen readers cost $895 and $1,095, the experience must surely be sweeter. We often hear that not all is peace in paradise, but it's not our place to comment on other companies' ability to live up to expectations.

Second, there is a persistent view that a product cannot be considered a full screen reader if it does not allow for scripting. Such a view presumes that the absence of this feature was an oversight rather than an implementation by design. For the moment, Serotek does not buy into the practice of opening its product to scripting languages, and even if this were to change in the future, it would not be a dominant focus of our development.

To understand this aspect of our approach, it's important to recognize our distinction between user interface and user experience. User interface provides users with a core platform and enough tools to make that platform work for the specific needs of the end user. The manufacturer admits it does not know what the user might want to do with the product, so it provides scripting language support to help advanced users manipulate the platform to fit their needs. Such an approach is by no means a bad one, but it relies on users to devote many hours to learning the scripting language. It also sometimes requires many dollars to gain training if a consumer wants assistance with using the language to interact with and configure access to complex applications.

On the other hand, user experience boils down to nothing more complicated than creating a product that, to borrow Apple's philosophy, just works. Serotek has never claimed to outpace competing products on all fronts. We continue to cultivate a product that works very well for the most popular applications like ITunes, various e-mail clients, Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer and Google Chrome and a growing range of social networking tools like Facebook and Twitter. The scope of what System Access can deliver might be painted as limited, but limitations are only as concrete as the real world use of the consumer in question. System Access need not be configurable through scripting if the product is already delivering a solid experience for what it is advertised to accomplish.

Finally, Serotek has a specific customer in mind as it develops new products and services. We are thinking of the consumer who cannot afford to pay for competing products or for the software maintenance agreements to keep those products updated. Starting with monthly payment plans as little as $9.95 per month, System Access is priced well below other options on the market, and we are the only company with enough faith in the evolution of our product and it’s ability to continue to attract new customers to have eliminated software maintenance agreements. Our option is economical enough for people who are recent adopters of screen reading technology who need a straightforward introduction to assistive technology before plunging into murkier waters. It is an economical solution for people who believe in having easy to use yet powerful options instantly at hand.

We are also thinking of the consumer who enjoys the bells and whistles of competing products but require a consistent companion on hand when the competing product crashes or is unable to be installed due to lack of access to admin rights on the target machine. Nothing is more frustrating than encountering silence and having no way to get around it than to reboot the entire system to get things talking again. We would never suggest that System Access is without faults, but as far as offering an approach that delivers immediate and intuitive access, we stand by our commitment to make it work as easily and as consistently as possible. We are also the only company that has developed portable solutions that work under a minute on any PC you plug your thumb drive into with our product or access them via our Internet sites on any compatible version of Windows without the need for admin rights.

So, while we may not be the best choice for the software developer who requires specific tweaks to make her environment inhabitable, we are a perfect tool for the vast majority of users who want to take accessibility on the go and work anywhere, anytime, something best exhibited in the free service available on SAToGo.com. After all, why limit yourself to timed demonstrations when you could take our product for a more uninhibited test drive?

At Serotek, System Access provides a fundamental platform upon which our other services have been launched. We rolled out System Access during the days before we had options like NonVisual Desktop Access (NVDA), and in fact, System Access might have never been born if NVDA had been an option back then. As things stood, the only choices were too expensive for a vast majority of blind consumers, and our commitment to making products as affordable as possible is as vigorous today as it was when we released our first beta.

So, is System Access a full screen reader? We believe in presenting you the evidence and letting you decide for yourself. Ultimately, the proof is in the performance and if the product works for your spasific applications. Right?
?
[1] Screen Readers. American Foundation of the Blind: Last accessed December 6, 2011
http://www.afb.org/prodbrowsecatresults.asp?catid=49
[2] The Freedom Box, Technology for the Blind and Visually Impaired. Melanson, Dave. Teachers.Net Gazette. Last accessed: December 6, 2011
http://teachers.net/gazette/OCT02/melanson.html

Another Accessibility Slap In The Face

While this is a personal post and I don’t make it a habit to get on my personal soapbox on this blog, I think that the issues covered in the email are relevant to Serotek’s mission of providing and advocating for

“Accessibility Anywhere.”

Below is a letter submitted to the IPad Today show on the Twit Netcast Network. It frustrates me that even so called “geeks” don’t understand how important accessibility is in both software and on the web. What do you think of this letter? Please post your comments so perhaps someone will read them and really know that accessibility isn’t just a law but that it really does allow us as a market to enjoy the same level of access to products and services that our sighted peers enjoy and take for granted.

From:

Mike Calvo

To:

ipadtoday@twit.tv

Subject:

Program 51 Advocates for Universal Design … for Once

Hello Leo and Sarah,

I’ve been a long-time listener of The Twit Network and iPad today, and have
always been impressed with the insightful commentary you both consistently
provide on the show. I was very excited to hear your thoughts on HTML 5 on the
show which aired on June 23. As the CEO of an assistive technology company providing accessible cloud
services to the blind, I’m a staunch advocate of HTML 5. It allows for
consistent cross-platform design, and has the added benefit of being far more
accessible than other design technologies such as Flash.

I was all set to hear a well-thought-out
and candid discussion of the benefits of HTML 5, so imagine my shock and
surprise when you began discussing the iPad experience for the new Harry
Potter site. You first
lamented the fact that the site displayed on the iPad was a text-only site, which lacked all the appealing features
of the main site. Then, Sarah took things one step further and asked the
developers to: "consider the community with good vision for once!"
Really? Seriously?

Sarah, have you ever been prevented from
conducting legitimate business because of an inability to use a particular
site? Have you ever had to contact a site designer to explain that you wanted
to purchase a business’s products and services but were prevented from doing so
because of a flaw in web design? Have you ever overheard a friend or family
member discussing a particular site, only to realize you couldn’t enjoy that
site yourself, again, because of a flaw in web design? This is the struggle
that the blind community faces on a daily basis. When your entire audience of
web developers, business professionals, and blind and sighted consumers hear
you minimize this struggle with a few snide and ill-considered words, it is
incredibly damaging. With this single statement, you’ve implied that
accessibility may be a headache which some designers have to address, but only
when it doesn’t detract from the experience of the mainstream audience or in
your words "those of us with good vision." What you fail to
understand is that the members of an audience who need accessibility don’t
actually want separate but equal. We want the same bells and whistles that
everyone else enjoys. Don’t get me wrong; I appreciate the consideration when a
site designer at least acknowledges the need for accessibility by providing a
text-only site. With that said, my primary goal is to educate developers that
accessibility doesn’t have to be an afterthought, and can be incorporated quite
easily without adversely impacting anyone else. In fact, when a developer
chooses to use something like HTML 5 over something like Flash, everyone
benefits, including the sighted iPad users like yourself who want a more
compelling experience.

As well-respected tech enthusiasts,
imagine how much you could do to further the education on web accessibility
just by including information like this when you discuss platforms like HTML 5.
Conversely, consider just how damaging it can be when you make statements which
encourage actions which further your own interests while minimizing those of
another population. Would you rather advocate for the continuation of a
separate but equal philosophy, or would you rather advocate for universal design,
"for once?"

--

Mike Calvo CEO

Serotek Corporation

Ph: (612) 246-4818

Fax (612) 643-3483

United Kingdom +44 2080-990685

accessibility anywhere

www.serotek.com

1128 Harmon Place

Suite 310

Minneapolis, MN 55403

Lack of Sight Doesn’t Mean Lack of Vision Text Version

On November 12th of this year we posted an audio version of a keynote speech I gave at the Mid-Atlantic ACB Conference on our Serotalk blog and podcast. While many folks heard it and gave some great feedback, it was still about an hour long and who wants to hear me talk for that long? For those of you that would rather read the speech without my trips down memory lane, I have posted it here.

I hope that it will inspire you as much as meeting and interacting with many of you readers, customers, and friends has inspired me.

Mike

Lack of Sight Doesn’t Mean Lack of Vision
By Mike Calvo

I’m going to tell you some of the highlights and lowlights of my life story, tonight. Not all of them – just a few to give you a sense of how it’s possible for a blind kid, a trouble-maker, pretty much written off by his teachers, can be standing here as CEO of a company that is changing the adaptive technology paradigm. It’s a story that didn’t start well and which isn’t over yet, I hope. But it’s a story of how blindness has very little to do with vision. And while this is my story, it’s also a story that any blind person can live if they can dream.
School was not a great experience for me. Every day teachers and guidance counselors would tell me to set my sights low – to find some mind-numbing work I could be trained to do, because what else was there for me? After all “I was born with a strike against me and I would have to work twice as hard as a normal person.” I didn’t begin with a great deal of sight, and I gradually lost what little I did have. By the time I was 18 years of age, I had lost the last traces of my eyesight. I was blind and tired of beating my head against an establishment that didn’t have my best interest at hart. This resulted in me dropping out of high school and taking to the Miami streets and club seen.

I mean, I was handicapped. My goal should be to not be too big a burden on my family and society. Right? A wife? Kids? Success? No way! Maybe you’ve heard this too: “No big, impossible dreams please.”
With inspiration like that, many kids would just give up. But I was the ornery type and I got angry. I’d show them all. And I got mean. I did whatever I needed to do to prove to myself and to the world that I was a person you had to pay attention to. I was going to dream big and fulfill those dreams and I didn’t much care who got hurt or what laws might get broken in the process. I wouldn’t want anyone to emulate that early part of my life. Unfortunately, some of those early big dreams were pretty selfish and caused me to hurt many of those closest to me. Fortunately, somewhere along in there Jesus came into my life!
What? Relax. I’m not going to preach at you. I’m just telling you how it was for me. I’m a firm believer that when you’re ready to accept the Lord in your life, he’ll be there. You don’t need me selling him to you.
What God did was teach me to forgive both those that hurt me and myself, to redirect the energy I was putting into anger, bitterness, and rejection into doing something productive. He helped me cage my impatience. He helped me see that it wasn’t “me against them.” It was me, finding a way to love “them” and get “them” to work with me to accomplish something together. It was me accepting that whether or not I liked society and its ignorance, I was getting an education from every challenge I experienced and every person I met and if I paid attention, I would discover how together we could do more than any of us could do separately. In other words, thanks to this divine intervention, I could see the world in a different light. Since then, life has been a great deal more exciting! But, I digress.

When I was twenty one, I became a dad. “No more streets or clubs for Mikey.” I had to be responsible. I began working in a bank, and as part of my job I needed to learn to use the computer. Due to the encouragement of Greg Luther of the Florida Division of Blind Services I quickly realized I was a pretty good teacher. So I took on the job of teaching how to use the computer to other blind people at the bank, and later, for that vary same agency. I ultimately ended up opening my own training business. At the same time I was indulging my love of music by doing audio production. And in the process an idea was niggling in the back of my mind. At that time we were just getting sophisticated with tools to help blind people be productive at work and school. There was very little to help “these people” enjoy the fullness of life. Sure there were books on tape – a truly wonderful innovation; and there were news reading services by telephone. But TV, movies, the emerging Internet were all pretty much beyond reach.
There was this huge barrier called accessibility. And those people who were working at reducing the barriers were focused on what might make a blind person productive or educated and didn’t pay much attention to the things the blind person might enjoy after work or school.
But man! I wanted my piece of that Internet pie! So, I joined forces with my best friend from high school and we created a product called Radio Webcaster. I even wrote my own website for the first time. It had moderate success in the mainstream community. Surprisingly, at least to me, blind people bought the product as well. It was an eye-opening experience, no pun intended, to realize that blind people everywhere were just like me. They had money to spend and they liked to be entertained just as much as the next person. They just didn’t have a product that they could buy for themselves without having to mortgage everything they had.

While Radio Webcaster was a great idea for its time, I knew I wanted to do something more. My vision was firmly placed on the Internet and tools to make it more accessible. With full access to the Internet blind folks could enjoy pretty much everything sighted folks could enjoy.
Greg had told me that “behind the computer I am an equal.” There is a cartoon, I think from the New Yorker, that shows a dog sitting at a computer and he’s saying to another dog, “The cool thing is that on the Internet no one knows that you’re a dog.”
And the cool thing is that with the right tools, over the Internet, no one would know you were blind. You are judged by the people you interact with by what you know, what you can do, by who you really are – not by whether or not you are sighted. So the challenge was to create those tools. Because in my mind I could see that accessibility meant equality. This was a place where the barriers had to come down and could, with a little creative thought, tumble quickly.
What were those barriers?
First was the computer itself. Most folks weren’t necessarily skilled computer users. In fact, one survey shows a scant five percent of blind folks use computers. The greatest possible liberating and enabling tool and not even five percent of the blind population had access because of cost and training.

The whys were:
· Cost. Accessibility tools were prohibitively expensive and without government aid there was little chance for most blind people to have them.
· Complexity. Accessibility tools added a whole layer of complexity to computer use – which was, in the early days, pretty complex in itself. A typical blind person needed more than thirty hours of class room time to become moderately competent in using these tools. Proficiency was many, many more hours of training away.
· Availability. Because of the expense, the only path to computer use for a blind person was through vocational rehab training. That’s a pretty narrow channel and only reaches a small number of people and mostly people of employable age.
Let me share a bit of frustration. Henter-Joyce and others who did the pioneer work to bring computer access to the blind were wonderful. They opened a world that had been completely closed to us. But many of the people that followed them and took control of the companies making accessibility tools had a different philosophy. They wanted to milk the status quo for every dollar they could make. They stopped innovating and focused on locking up the vocational rehab channel, doing everything they could to push small, upstart innovators out of business. That would have been okay if they were actually serving the majority of the blind population. But, as I mentioned earlier, they were reaching a tiny percentage. And as for the other blind people they didn’t reach? Well they just didn’t care.
We came into this business thinking differently. Because we were effectively locked out of the traditional blind services channels, we focused on taking our product direct to blind folks. Our goal was to overcome the myth that blind people were not a market – because that myth is very destructive. It keeps venture money out of the blind consumer market and stifles innovation.
We believe that in fact blind folks do have money and do buy stuff but they are a highly fragmented market and getting to them is not easy. We set out to prove that with products that were fun, highly functional, intuitive and easy to use, and inexpensive that leveraged the power of the latest off the shelf hardware and software, we could get ordinary blind folks of all ages to be part of the digital age even if they had to spend their own money.
I will tell you that we are succeeding, although at a much slower pace than I would like. Over the last 9 years Serotek has changed the direction of access to computers and the Internet for the blind by lowering the cost of a screen reader from over $1000 to as little as $9.95 per month. Thanks to one of the most dedicated group of people I have ever met!
This was my vision from the beginning. Here I was, a blind Cuban kid from Miami, lugging a thirty-pound computer, wandering from place to place looking for someone who would believe. The first guy who believed was a lawyer, Av Gordon. He steered me to a consulting company, Matrix Associates and its leader Michael Fox. Matrix had just finished a strategic self-examination and determined under no circumstances would they invest time and effort in another start-up. But as a favor to Av, they listened.
The product was dismal. It had more bugs than a New York hotel room. But those Matrix guys could hear the truth behind the faltering message. And they dumped their new “no start up” policy and have worked with Serotek ever since, Michael Fox taking on the role of COO and mentoring me in the art of management. Sometimes it took a lot of mentoring – and a two-by-four. But I learned.
Our vision, and we articulated it in our very first business plan, was to treat blind people as a market; provide them with the tools and services they need; and migrate them and the industry towards universal design. From the very beginning we believed accessibility was a right, not a privilege. We’ve stayed true to that mission ever since.
From the start we went against the industry trends. We adapted our software to run with the very latest OS releases. We created products that could be used right out of the box with very little training and we delivered functionality that fully served blind people’s lifestyle and did a very good job with their common business needs.
We focused on mobile – smart-drive based software that could be plugged in anywhere and then Internet-based software available anywhere, anytime from the cloud – for free. We charged a simple, low price and gave away updates. We created unique ways for peer to peer communication using the Internet. We were roundly hated by the industry leaders.
And we developed a bit of a cult following which served us in good stead when we got served a cease and desist-order for using a name vaguely related to the industry leader’s name. It was the best thing that ever happened to us. Here was the industry giant beating up on this tiny company whose only crime was that it created better, cheaper products. The community was up in arms and name recognition was no longer a problem. We were essentially liberated from using the old name (a legacy that really no longer fit us) and everyone knew who we were. I’d love to claim that I planned that, but I suspect it was, yet again, truly a case of divine intervention.

Since then we have released new and exciting products in to the marketplace at an accelerated rate: social networking tools – why shouldn’t blind people have FaceBook and Twitter and Linked In and all of that? Music; I phone applications, tools for making meetings and events accessible both locally and over the Internet. We have cheered others in the industry as they moved into our space and we have roared our approval for mainstream players like Apple, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft for making their tools universally accessible. We are for anything that promotes universal accessibility.
Blind as I am, I saw this coming more than a decade ago and now my vision is coming to pass. Serotek is still not a huge company, but it is growing. And we remain the only company in the industry with a blind CEO – the only company that looks to a blind person for its vision. Not only that, sighted people are the minority at Serotek. Not because I don’t like sighted people, it’s just that we have been able to find so much great talent in our own community. Our lead programmer Matt Campbell is visually impaired and is one of the most amazing software engineers I have ever met!
So far the vision has been 20/20. Today I am blessed with a beautiful wife that is here with me tonight and five, yes five, wonderful children!
The lesson of this story is that the biggest barrier to success is not lack of eyesight but lack of insight – knowing and believing in yourself. If you believe in yourself and open your heart to a little divine guidance when you need it, anything is possible. After all if our creator gave us the ability to dream HE would be awfully cruel if HE didn’t give us a way to achieve that dream. So, what’s your dream?

Thank you.

The Serotek Ultimatum

Serotek declares war on the traditional adaptive technology industry and their blind ghetto products. With this announcement we are sending out a call to arms to every blind person and every advocate for the blind to rise up and throw off the tyranny that has shaped our lives for the past two decades. It is a tyranny of good intentions – or at least what began as good intentions. But as the proverb says, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” And for the past two decades the technologies originally conceived to give us freedom have been our shackles. They have kept us tied down to underperforming, obscenely expensive approaches that only a small percentage of blind people can afford or master. They have shackled us to government largess and the charity of strangers to pay for what few among us could afford on our own. And we have been sheep, lead down the path, bleating from time to time, but without the vision or the resources to stand up and demand our due.
That time is past.
We stand today on the very edge of universal accessibility. Mainstream products like the iPod, iPhone, and newly announced iPad are fully accessible out of the box. And they bring with them a wealth of highly desirable accessibility applications. The cost to blind people is exactly the same as the cost to sighted people. It’s the same equipment, the same software, the same functionality, and fully accessible.
What Apple has done, others are doing as well. The adaptive technology vendor who creates hardware and software that is intended only for blind folks, and then only if they are subsidized by the government, is a dinosaur. The asteroid has hit the earth, the dust cloud is ubiquitous, the dinosaur’s days are numbered.
But dinosaurs are huge, and their extinction does not happen overnight.. Even as they die, they spawn others like them (take the Intel Reader for example). Thank you, no. Any blind person can have full accessibility to any type of information without the high-cost, blind-ghetto gear. They can get it in the same products their sighted friends are buying. But let’s face it; if we keep buying that crap and keep besieging our visual resource center to buy that crap for us, the dinosaurs of the industry are going to keep making it. Their profit margins are very good indeed. And many have invested exactly none of that profit in creating the next generation of access technology, choosing instead to perpetuate the status quo. For instance, refreshable braille technology, arguably the most expensive blindness-specific(and to many very necessary) product has not changed significantly in 30 years. Yet, the cost remains out of reach for most blind people. Where's the innovation there? Why have companies not invested in cheaper, faster, smaller, and more efficient ways to make refreshable braille? Surely the piezoelectric braille cell is not the only way? And what about PC-based OCR software? It's still around a thousand dollars per license, yet core functionality hasn't changed much; sure, we get all sorts of features not at all related to reading, along with incremental accuracy improvements, but why are these prices not dropping either, especially when you consider that comparable off-the-shelf solutions like Abby Finereader can be had for as low as $79? ? And let's not forget the screen reader itself, the core technology that all of us need to access our computers in the first place. Do we see improvements, or just an attempt to mimic innovation with the addition of features which have nothing to do with the actual reading of the screen, while maintaining the same ridiculous price point.

This maintaining of the status quo will, inevitably, face an enormous crash, worse than the transition from DOS to Windows based accessibility. You can expect a technology crash that will put users of the most expensive accessibility gear out of business.
Why? I won’t bore you with all the technical details, but the basic story is that some of these products have been kept current with patches and fixes and partial rewrites and other tricks we IT types use when we haven’t got the budget to do it right, but we need to make the product work with the latest operating system. That process of patching and fixing creates an enormous legacy barrier that makes it impossible to rewrite without abandoning all who came before. But you can only keep a kluge working for so long before it will crumble under its own weight. That, my friends, is exactly where some of the leading adaptive technology vendors find themselves today.
There are exceptions. Serotek is an exception because we have completely recreated our product base every three years. GW Micro is an exception because they built their product in a highly modular fashion and can update modules without destroying the whole. KNFB is an exception because they take advantage of off-the-shelf technologies, which translate ultimately into price drops and increased functionality.

But even we who have done it right are on a path to obsolescence. The fundamental need for accessibility software is rapidly beginning to vanish. The universal accessibility principles we see Apple, Microsoft, Olympus, and others putting in place are going to eliminate the need for these specialty products in a matter of just a very few years.
Stop and think. Why do you need accessibility tools? To read text? E-book devices are eliminating that need. None of them are perfect yet, but we are really only in the first generation. By Gen2 they will all be fully accessible. To find your way? GPS on your iPhone or your Android based phone will do that for you. To take notes? Easy on any laptop, netbook, or iPad. Heck, you can record it live and play it back at your convenience. Just what isn’t accessible? You can play your music, catch a described video, scan a spreadsheet, take in a PowerPoint presentation – all using conventional, off-the-shelf systems and/or software that is free of charge.
There are still some legacy situations where you need to create an accessibility path. Some corporations still have internal applications that do not lend themselves to modern devices. There will certainly be situations where a specialized product will better solve an accessibility problem than a mainstream one, especially in the short term. We don't advocate throwing the baby out with the bathwater, but we do advocate that we begin to hasten the inevitable change by using accessible mainstream solutions wherever possible. Even now, the leading edge companies are reinventing their internal systems with accessibility as a design criteria, so the situations that require specialized products will certainly become fewer as time goes on.
If our current Assistive technology guard's reign is coming to an end, why the war? Why not just let it die its own, natural, inevitable death? Because nothing dies more slowly than an obsolete technology. Punch cards hung on for twenty or thirty years after they were completely obsolete. The same is true for magnetic tape. Old stuff represents a comparatively large investment, and people hate to throw away something they paid a lot of money for even if it’s currently worthless. But that legacy stuff obscures the capabilities of the present. It gets used in situations where other solutions are cheaper and more practical. The legacy stuff clogs the vocational rehab channel, eating up the lion’s share of the resources but serving a tiny portion of the need. It gets grandfathered into contracts. It gets specified when there is no earthly reason why the application requires it. The legacy stuff slows down the dawning of a fully accessible world.
It hurts you and it hurts me.
To be sure, I make my living creating and selling products that make our world accessible. But first and foremost, I am a blind person. I am one of you. And every day I face the same accessibility challenges you face. I have dedicated my life and my company to making the world more accessible for all of us, but I can’t do it alone. This is a challenge that every blind person needs to take up. We need to shout from the rooftops: “Enough!”
We need to commit ourselves in each and every situation to finding and using the most accessible off the shelf tool and/or the least-cost, highest function accessibility tool available. With our dollars and our commitment to making known that our needs and the needs of sighted people are 99% the same, we can reshape this marketplace. We can drive the dinosaurs into the tar pits and nurture those cute fuzzy little varmints that are ancestors to the next generation. We can be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
And all it takes is getting the best possible solution for your specific need. Once you have found the solution to fill that need, let the company know you appreciate their work towards better accessibility. Let your friends (sighted and blind) know about these accessibility features; they probably don't know that such features exist.
Make your needs known to the vocational rehab people you are working with, and don’t allow them to make recommendations for a specific technology for no other reason than that it’s been in the contract for years. Make sure your schools and your workplace understand the need to push technology in to the accessible space. Show them the low-cost alternatives. In this economy some, the intelligent ones, will get it and the tide will begin to turn.
And then in short order the tsunami of good sense will wash away the old, and give us the space to build a more accessible world for all of us. Let the demand ring out loud and clear and the market will follow.
If this message rings true to you, don’t just shake your fist in agreement and leave it at that. let your voice be heard! Arm yourself with the vision of a future where there are no social, conceptual, or economic barriers to accessibility, and let your words and your actions demonstrate that you will not rest until that vision is realized. Take out your wallet and let your consumer power shine! You do mater as a market people! You have kept this company alive with your money for 8 years this month! I believe that if we all get together and do our part, we will finally say “NO more!” same old same old! Join the revolution! Together we can change the world!

What I think About the Intel Reader

Yesterday marked the release of a product which, according to Intel, would revolutionize the way the blind and others with reading disabilities accessed printed materials. During those few fleeting moments between hearing of the announcement and reading the actual press release, I had high hopes that a mainstream company would demonstrate its dedication to accessibility and innovation at an affordable price. And with backing from companies and organizations such as Humanware, Lighthouse International and the Council for Exceptional Children, I felt certain that the device I was going to read about would be very impressive indeed.

The Intel Reader, a device about the size of a paperback and weighing approximately 1 pound, is equipped with a camera and text-to-speech allowing print documents such as newspapers, menus, and signs to be converted in to a readable form by the blind and others with print disabilities. With the addition of a capturing station, sold separately, the device can be used to scan and convert more lengthy materials such as textbooks and novels. It can also read existing etexts in Daisy format as well as play standard MP3 and Wav files. This feature set reads quite a bit like other mainstream and custom-built solutions on the market. In fact, the only jaw-dropping aspect of this product is its price. The device itself can be had for a mere $1499, and you’ll pay an extra $399 for the privilege of using the capturing station.

After the initial shock, I and many others in the blind community began looking more closely at the information available about the device, just to ensure that we hadn’t overlooked anything truly awe-inspiring. After all, for its price, there had to be something which set the device apart from existing solutions such as the KNFB Reader for performing OCR on documents on the go, the forthcoming free e-reader from Kurzweil to read existing Daisy documents, off-the-shelf solutions like a PC, scanner, and ABBYY FineReader for more involved projects like scanning textbooks, or even the $259 Amazon Kindle, which isn’t currently accessible but could be made so with a little effort and encouragement from the community.

As we learned more about the Intel Reader, there was plenty to make this device unique. First, while most portable scanning solutions like the KNFB reader for mobile phones or a scanner/Netbook combo are equipped with wi-fi access, the Intel Reader can’t make that claim. In this article from VentureBeat it is stated that wi-fi is absent from the product because web-connected devices aren’t allowed in some classrooms. Far be it from us to suggest including wi-fi and leaving it up to school IT professionals to handle whether or not to grant wi-fi access, as they must do for all other wi-fi-equipped mainstream devices.

In addition to having no wi-fi capabilities, the device is also unable to handle HTML content natively. Rather, a user must first convert the HtML document to plain text before it can be read. This doesn’t bode well for a device whose major goal is purportedly to take the hassle out of reading for the blind and print-disabled.

Given that this device appears to boast no significant features setting it apart in a positive way from existing solutions, we must ask why the device was created in the first place. Ben Foss, the Intel representative spear-heading the project, has a lot to say on this. Foss states in a press conference: “A metaphor for this are the ramps that make buildings wheelchair accessible. This reader is like a ramp.” Unfortunately, this particular metaphor is far from apt. While wheelchair ramps are an example of smart universal design principles in action because they’re just as useful to a walking mother with a stroller as they are to a person in a wheelchair, the Intel reader has been manufactured and marketed exclusively for the blind and print-disabled without a thought for universal design. Foss goes on to acknowledge that the price is not cheap, but guess what, folks? It’s ok. You see, the device contains several custom components. Never mind that the essential components are a 5-megapixel camera, flash memory, and Intel’s own low-cost Atom processor which can all be had for under $250 as parts. Are you questioning the price yet? No, don’t do that. Intel can explain. Braille reading devices can cost upwards of $10000, so $1500 is really easy to swallow in comparison to that, isn’t it? Never mind that comparing Braille displays and text-to-speech readers makes little sense.

In essence, Intel is unapologetically asking us to accept this device’s hefty price tag for no other reason than that it was designed specifically for the blind. Are we going to accept being blatantly charged a premium because of our blindness, especially by a company who claims to have a philanthropic bent? Remember Intel’s Classmate PC, whose aim was to provide a low-cost and rugged netbook to students, especially those in developing countries? How can we take initiatives like that seriously when with this device Intel clearly shows it isn’t interested in providing low-cost solutions to the blind students in its own back yard?

Still, Intel didn’t create this device in a vacuum. “Intel has done its homework on the device,”, says Dorrie Rush, who serves as the marketing director for Lighthouse International. This signifies that Intel received input from blind and print-disabled individuals as it designed the product. So why is it that no one from these groups questioned Intel’s decision to reinvent the wheel, and in a completely lackluster way at that. Why did no one from these groups encourage Intel to combine existing components to create an innovative and affordable product that could be beneficial to all?

No matter how stunning a product Intel created, it still needed the backing of influential groups within the blind community in order to be taken seriously. For Humanware, who is among the companies distributing the product, partnering with one of the most lucrative and well-known mainstream companies was a huge accomplishment. Did Humanware leverage this relationship to educate Intel so that at least one mainstream company would design its products with accessibility in mind from the ground up? No! It did not! Humanware thanked Intel for producing yet another overpriced, sub par blind ghetto product, and jumped on the chance to convince millions of blind and print-disabled people that they need look no further than this bulky and expensive device to further their independence. When a mainstream company like Intel employs such tactics it is shameful. But from Humanware, a company who should by all rights have the interests of blind consumers at heart, these actions are nothing less than despicable.

Because of Intel’s status and high visibility, its new product rated mentions in mainstream publications as well as those which are more blindness-oriented. In this somewhat flippant article from Engadget, the authors posit that a device like the Intel reader could be created for under $500, and I suspect they’re right. But the interesting reading isn’t so much the article itself, but the comments. One post says in part: “Sure, you could build something that did something similar for less money, but would you then be able to give it to a nearly blind person to use all day, everyday? Completely implausible for $500.” This same poster goes on to say: “besides, the target audience for this device is disabled -- it should be paid for by 3rd parties because it meets the requirements to be classed as an aide for the disabled.”

And there you have it -- everything that we despise about this product’s existence all wrapped up in a smug, condescending little package and tied with a bow. Essentially, this poster believes that nothing which wasn’t created specifically for the blind could possibly work well in a day-to-day situation. Not only that, but there are apparently an abundance of tax dollars to go around for purchasing overpriced devices. And luckily, the blind person need not ever make a decision as a consumer since there’s a benevolent 3rd-party agency to take care of such things, rendering the process of making choices for oneself unnecessary.

So, are we, as a community, going to let this stand? Are we going to throw our support behind Intel, who spent countless hours and research funds to offer us a third-rate product which is priced out of our reach? Are we going to put our hard-earned money in the pockets of Humanware, who squandered their one chance to truly shape the direction of accessibility in mainstream technology in favor of making a quick profit? Do we want to continue accepting the pronouncement that blind ghetto products are not only necessary, but worthy of our everlasting gratitude? Or are we going to tear down those ghetto walls and demand our rightful place as the smart and savvy consumers that we are!

And before you say that you’re only one consumer, that your voice will never be heard, I will tell you that you’re wrong. You can make a choice to be educated about what you buy before you make a decision. And once you embrace the power to choose, you’ll want to share that power., and you won’t want to stop with just one person. You’ll tell every blind person you know to stop and think before choosing a product which has no claim to fame other than being designed for the blind. You’ll tell the blindness agencies and school systems who already struggle with tight budgets to stop and investigate before accepting the party line and purchasing something which does half as much at twice the price. And to those companies who are banking on your willingness to accept anything less than the best just because it’s been given the stamp of accessibility, the sound of your wallet slamming shut an the realization that you are actually “a consumer” with a functional brain and an opinion will convey your point quite eloquently indeed!

Isn't It Ironic?

IBM gained a bit of press with its recently announced Social Accessibility Project which promises to broker a service that makes Web sites accessible to users of Jaws and Internet Explorer. Almost immediately thereafter, WebVisum was touted for its tools that make sites accessible via Firefox. Both of these efforts are stragglers, wandering onto the field some four years after Serotek announced C-Saw, which enlisted the blind and low vision community to help itself by making not-so-accessible sites more accessible with graphics tags, form fields, links, etc. Serotek has a library of over 4,000 heavily trafficked sites that have been made fully accessible via C-Saw.
When we created C-Saw we approached every AT vendor and offered it to them, free of charge with the goal of making the Internet more accessible for everyone. We got no takers. So the work that has been done is the result of volunteers using Serotek’s System Access and/or the System Access Mobile Network. And these volunteers have done very good work indeed.
It is disheartening to introduce a capability that benefits the community, offer it to everyone, and get the cold shoulder only to see a behemoth like IBM waddle in and make a half-hearted gesture along the same lines and get considerable favorable press. All so they can market tools for accessibility to website designers. It’s disheartening, but not unexpected. This sort of thing happens all the time in the technology industry. Everyone pays attention when the eight-hundred pound gorilla scratches.
More disheartening is the fact that the IBM effort is unlikely to make important things happen for the community. It could, like Sprint’s voice dial capability, be discontinued tomorrow and no consideration given to those who have come to depend on it. Those who contribute to the database will be professionals, doing their part, but not invested in the outcome. C-SAW volunteers are from the blind and low-vision community. They represent the blind community doing for itself – an independent attitude we kind of like here at Serotek.
We’d like to suggest that the three efforts be merged and that the AIR Foundation become the repository for the accessibility database. We imagine there are good things to be learned from IBM and Visum and Serotek can offer up its current data base of accessible sites and our cadre of experienced volunteers. By taking the site accessibility database out of the hands of any company, we protect against the corporate retooling that can (as it did with Sprint) wipe out a non-profit service without a thought as to the consequences.
Let’s make Web site accessibility a community right! Please post your comments and try your best not to be anonymous.