Re: Re : Re: Blind vs. mainstream distros

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Tony Baechler here.

On 4/28/2017 6:20 AM, Linux for blind general discussion wrote:
Now that I think about it, I have no idea what the mixture of "blind
from birth/a young age" and "blinded as an adult" is on this list, and
I would imagine these groups would have very different perspectives. I
myself was blinded in the right eye before I could form memories, but
my left eye was good enough for anything short of driving until I was
25, and best I can tell, the biggest loss from lacking binocular
vision is not being able to bring magic eye pictures into focus and
having to watch 3D movies in 2-D.

I was born blind. I still remember my first exposure to computers. My very first machine was some kind of Atari which didn't talk but had a few games with sound. My first real computer was an Apple II+. I remember the thrill and amazement of booting the machine for the first time and actually having speech. I could actually do things on the computer. I could write letters, do homework assignments, etc. I spent many hours playing on first the II+ and later the IIe.


using. If anything, I would expect someone who has been using Windows
since the 9x days and suddenly found themselves blinded would be even
more reluctant to give Linux a fair chance than the sighted Windows
user, probably feeling that learning to use Windows with a screen
reader and without a monitor is a big enough challenge.

That's why I push so hard for Ubuntu MATE. It's as much like XP or 9X as you're going to get. It has the equivalent of a Start Menu, Windows Explorer, desktop, etc. There is still a learning curve, but not much. The main thing I had to learn is which keys do what. Then again, I used 9X and XP for years. For a brand new Linux user coming from even Windows 7, I think MATE is a good starting point. For a brand new computer user, I don't think it matters as it's all new anyway. One nice thing about young minds is they're very adaptable and don't mind learning different interfaces. I remember going from the Apple II to DOS. It was hard to learn, but I knew enough from ProDOS to adapt. Learning Vocal-Eyes was harder than anything. Going from DOS to Windows 3.1 was frustrating. I couldn't figure out what I was doing and Window-Eyes 1.0 was crap. It ran incredibly slowly and locked up a lot, to the point that I had better luck without speech. Moving to 9X was relatively easy, especially since it still had a command prompt. Moving to XP was the most painless of all as it worked almost the same way as 9X at an interface level. I've used Win7 before, but not anything newer. I first found it a pain, but after turning off indexing and going back to the classic view, it wasn't too bad. I have no idea how I'll deal with Win10, but I have a few years before I have to worry about it. Hopefully I'll be fully on Linux by then and it won't matter, but there are still those programs which only work in Windows.


Though, a thought occurred to me regarding helping new blind linux
users learn the ropes, and it's something non-devs could contribute
to. How feasible would it be to produce a CD-length audio tutorial
that could be shipped along side install media for either a blind
customized distro or the talking version of a mainline distro?

I've thought of this a lot. This is something I really want to do. There is a very great, desperate need for this. The problems I ran into are:

1. Money. People want to be paid. Even if you get volunteers, you have production costs, like CD manufacture, shipping, packaging, Braille labels, etc. Without the funding, I don't see it going very far. I was going to pay out of my own money, but I obviously have to make back my investment. There isn't much insentive for people to buy such a thing, first because of the open source nature of Linux but also because there is the chicken and egg problem. Do they try Linux first and buy the tutorial or do they take a chance on buying the tutorial and see if they want to try Linux? You have to at least give away part of it, or as you say, put it on YouTube.

2. To do it right, you need professionals who know what they're doing and good audio equipment. Someone at home with a cheap microphone doesn't sound good. Frankly, it sounds like exactly what it is, someone sitting at home with a cheap microphone. I've heard lots of those before. It takes lots of time and energy to produce it, edidt out mistakes, normalize the volume, do noise reduction and post production. We're talking about either a recording studio or someone with professional audio software. I have Sound Forge and I could do it, but see point #1 above.

3. There are political issues, rights issues and royalties. I was going to work with Kyle, but he would only do it if it was public domain. Obviously, I can't do that or I would lose my shirt. I could revert the rights to him after two years, but I have to sell enough to make back my investment. If I commission someone to do it and they want the rights, obviously I don't want them and I both selling it. I'm putting out a fairly large amount of money. Therefore, the conclusion I came to is either I have to do it myself, I have to wait until I'm wealthy and can afford to give it away or give up. For now, I've given up, but I think it's essential in the long term. I haven't even addressed who would produce the lessons, if it would be scripted, how many hours, what distros, if it would be shipped with new computers, etc.

_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Speakup]     [Fedora]     [Linux Kernel]     [Yosemite News]     [Big List of Linux Books]