I'd forward them if I new his email address. Do you know it? If you do, I won't hesitate to forward it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cecil H. Whitley" <cwhitley@xxxxxxxxx> To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 6:31 PM Subject: Re: I swear to tell the truth, > 1. There is no IBM, there was no sr/dos or sr/2 and the web browsers under > os/2 are not accessable even though they work perfectly fine for a blind > user with sr/2. In addition, IBM did not have a group of employees that > worked dilligently to make and keep os/2 accessable. > 2. Commercially available means "free" since there is no charge for > internet explorer. Therefore, the only accessable free browser is internet > explorer. > 3. MSAA has always been available and if it were not for that blind people > could not be using windows. In addition, M.S. has always insured that their > os was accessable before release. Jaws 3.1 diskettes did not include a msaa > disk because it was already present in all M.S. os's including NT 3.51 and > windows 2.0. > 4. A multi-billion dollar corporation is genorously providing employment > to 40 individuals in order to make sure it's product is accessable to all > persons with disabilities, evaluated as a percentage of available resources > this exceeds every other company including Sun. > 5. If windows changes freedom scientific has to earn the money they charge > for jaws by doing work. Windows should remain as it is today with no > furthur changes in order to increase FS's bottom line. Furthurmore no > furthur middleware should be developed for the same reason. As a matter of > fact, all applications anyone could be possibly need are already available > so no more should be allowed on the market. > 6. Because it is developed by volunteers who do not charge for it, screen > readers for linux can't be considered to make it accessable or to provide > access to the internet..... oh yeah, and the install for XP talks sorta like > a linux install using speakup. Presumely this feature is being put in all > previous windows versions retroactively? Oh yeah, since when did kernel > patches not be considered part of the operating system? > > Anyone who wishes to forward these small comments of mine to the individual > whom testified without considering the full implications of what he was > saying is welcome to. > > Regards, > > Cecil H. Whitley > Registered Jaws user and very ashamed of that fact today. > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup >
