It's listed at the bootom of the testamony. However, since I've deleted Janina's post, I don't have it anymore. I'd be really interested to hear what he has to say for himself. If anyone sends the eloquently made comments, please forward his replies to us. On the other hand, knowing how quick FS is to respond to e-mail, why am I expecting a reply to come? Greg On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 06:44:45PM -0400, Alex Snow wrote: > 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 at ec.rr.com> > 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
