Yes, I hate copy protection and proprietary software, things probably could've gotten a lot further quicker if the primary screen readers in use these days were open source. I wonder what the interface will be like for the new gnome screen reader? Speakup is said to work a lot like Asap did, the way speakup works is pretty good for a command-line system, you can navigate most menus and the like, and have good feedback for using irc and telnet, only cygwin and vocal-eyes come close, but the demo of ve times out, then you basically hear something or forever lose it because you can't scroll back after 20 minutes of use. I was thinking that the new package for gnome would work similar to jaws in user interface, not the bad stuff with the authorization and instability of windows. At 07:06 PM 1/5/03 -0500, you wrote: >On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 05:05:30PM -0600, Brent Harding wrote: >> I would switch to exclusively linux if a screen reader for x was available >> and usable. I heard one is in the works for gnome, is that true? Where can >> I get a beta to try it? > >You can't. It's pre-alpha. Thus...not quite ready for >prime-time. Still, you can get it from CVS on the GNOME CVS server, >whose information I currently do not have. > > Then I'd have the equivalent of jfw for linux, > >No you wouldn't. ... Right now, it doesn't (I understand) work to do >useful things yet. Once it does work and is useful for things like >OpenOffice, Mozilla, etc., you still won't have the equivalent of JFW >for several reasons: > >1. It is free software. Free. You know, as in beer, as well as in >liberty. That means you have the freedoms to use it, benefit from it, >distribute it, modify it, and distribute modified copies of it. (See >www.gnu.org) > >2. It will actually, oh, I dunno, be stable. > >> which we all wished existed, it'd be called JFL instead of JFW, and > >It most certainly would *NOT* be called JFL! JAWS is: > >1. Proprietary software. >2. Copy protected. >3. Expensive. >4. Made by a company whose business practices are, at best, slimy. > >No indeed. It will not be called JFL. It will not be JFanything. It is >not JAWS. It will not be JAWS. It will never, ever, ever be JAWS. It >is fundamentally different. Certainly in philosophy. (BTW, it's called >gnopernicus.) > >> probably work a lot better than win-98. > >Egads man, that's a given! > >BTW, GNU/Linux is very usable, even without X. True, having an X >screen reader will be great...we can use the same word processors as >our colleagues and exchange documents easier. We can do word >processing without having to learn a markup language. We can use these >crappified Javascripted Web pages that don't work with the cat or the >chain. But even without all that, GNU/Linux is very, very usable >indeed with the tools currently available. I have one machine that is >Debian GNU/Linux only. My wife's machine spends the majority of its >time in a Debian GNU/Linux environment (she uses GNOME 2.0 with >enlarged fonts and things). She uses Windows for the few pages that >don't play in Mozilla properly, or to play her Windows games, or >what-not. But we are primarily a free software household here and are >no less efficient for it. >-- >Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV/3 | "And if the ground yawned, >Phone: (814) 455-7333 | I'd step to the side and say, >Email: davros@ycardz.com | "Hey ground! I'm nobody's lunch!" >http://www.ycardz.com/ | --Eddie From Ohio > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Blinux-list@redhat.com >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > >