Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 83 posts

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#71

Post by type0 »

dagmx wrote: post #38
jrm4 wrote: post #33

This is the easiest answer ever: It's not meaningfully "free/open source." It didn't even have to start out that way; sure, keep that competitive advantage for a few years. But by today, you really should be able to develop an app or whatever for the iPad with ZERO friction and ZERO permission from Apple.

Then why aren’t there solutions that fit their bill on Android or open source platforms like Linux? I think interjecting one’s own ideals into someone else’s problems is a bit uncouth. The article even goes over how prior to the iPad, AAC providers would go to their own hardware solutions. OSS is meaningless to the why. It may be a solution but if it was the reason, then OSS has similarly failed the market even more.

Superior open source mobile OS existed: Maemo/Meego. The biggest reason for it's demise is anticompetitive behaviors of Apple, MS and Google.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#72

Post by type0 »

dagmx wrote: post #62
jrm4 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Apple's been a bit too effective in dominating the industry, for reasons other than usability or technical superiority; since growing to the top they can leverage inertia and other factors. I have no idea what you think "ideals" and "being uncouth" have to do with any of this; referring to OSS as e.g. an "ideology" strikes me as a weird misunderstanding of its present role in tech. It's not theory, fam, damn…

But there have been Android tablets and Linux touchscreens. The article already states that these companies make their own hardware prior to the iPad, and the NovaTouch in the article is based around Android devices. Yet none of them meet the goal here. So clearly the open sourceness of the platforms is not what’s holding things back. The reason I mention ideals is because you came in to the discussion and effectivel…

> The cloud also runs on closed source hardware.

Most of the mobile hardware is closed source, i.e requiring closed sourced drivers so building a fully open source mobile OS is always problematic.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#73

Post by dagmx »

type0 wrote: post #71
dagmx wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why aren’t there solutions that fit their bill on Android or open source platforms like Linux? I think interjecting one’s own ideals into someone else’s problems is a bit uncouth. The article even goes over how prior to the iPad, AAC providers would go to their own hardware solutions. OSS is meaningless to the why. It may be a solution but if it was the reason, then OSS has similarly failed the market even more.

Superior open source mobile OS existed: Maemo/Meego. The biggest reason for it's demise is anticompetitive behaviors of Apple, MS and Google.

What anticompetitive behaviour killed Maemo?

I used to root heavily for Nokia but imho the only thing that killed it off was how late they were to the game in pushing it and how they’d already significantly declined as a company by then.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#74

Post by tomcam »

jph wrote: post #5

I develop iPad accessibility software for people who have dementia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, MS, etc. The iPad is a godsend. The large screen couples well with easy-grip shock-resistant spill-proof cases and attachments. My wishlist for accessibility: louder speaker (as the article mentions), and accessibility settings for a simplified patient-mode UI/UX versus a full-featured caregiver-mode. For example, zero-visib…

My iPhone 14 Pro Max speakers have surprisingly good volume, stereo separation, and audio quality

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#75

Post by CobaltFire »

msh wrote: post #47
CobaltFire wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My son is semi-nonverbal and autistic and this is a real pain point for us. We use amazon fire tablets simply because they DO have a kids (simplified) mode. Google has a version for Android on tablets, but they don't support it well. iOS has exactly nothing. iOS also sucks in that trying to load all his favorite shows for when we are out is near impossible (I have them loaded on an SD card on the fire). Ideal, no, bu…

Is it just not a question of the right app? If you install VLC or infuse you can easily side load videos.

We use VLC on the Fire, and I'm aware we can on the iPad. Control of the overall UI and the storage cost are the main issues.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#76

Post by msh »

goosedragons wrote: post #68
msh wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it just not a question of the right app? If you install VLC or infuse you can easily side load videos.

Probably more annoying to do that rigamarole with iTunes than just copying videos onto a microSD card? Plus iPad storage is expensive while a 512GB microSD card will run you $30 these days.

You dont have to do it using itunes. Both infuse and VLC can be a webserver you can copy files to and other options. See https://support.firecore.com/hc/en-us/articles/215091017-Bro...

But certainly, a SD card is cheap storage.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#77

Post by faeriechangling »

tomcam wrote: post #74
jph wrote: post #5

I develop iPad accessibility software for people who have dementia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, MS, etc. The iPad is a godsend. The large screen couples well with easy-grip shock-resistant spill-proof cases and attachments. My wishlist for accessibility: louder speaker (as the article mentions), and accessibility settings for a simplified patient-mode UI/UX versus a full-featured caregiver-mode. For example, zero-visib…

My iPhone 14 Pro Max speakers have surprisingly good volume, stereo separation, and audio quality

The audio quality is partially an outcome of Apple making the phone absurdly heavy.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#78

Post by ChrisRR »

SN76477 wrote: post #36
jph wrote: post #5

I develop iPad accessibility software for people who have dementia, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, MS, etc. The iPad is a godsend. The large screen couples well with easy-grip shock-resistant spill-proof cases and attachments. My wishlist for accessibility: louder speaker (as the article mentions), and accessibility settings for a simplified patient-mode UI/UX versus a full-featured caregiver-mode. For example, zero-visib…

Zero-visibility interfaces are a challenge even for me. Often they overlap with other "swipe" features giving unexpected results There is no manual to explain them (that I know of), one must stumble across them which often leads to frustrating results.

This has always been my argument against people who claim iOS is "easier" to use for the average user. If basic functionality is hidden behind press and hold, multifinger gestures, or swiping hidden items and you're not going to teach a user how to use them, then they may as well not exist.

If you're going to tie fundamental behaviour to unintuitive behaviour, then you have to make sure it's both easy to perform once learnt, and that you actually teach people how to use it.

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#79

Post by brookst »

smoldesu wrote: post #69
brookst wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the old "any imperfect solution is totally useless" position. I already have to educate and then console when they fall for email or SMS scams. Are you really saying that means I have to accept a new vector from scam stores that impersonate the Apple app store and just charge $100 for "Free" apps? This regulation will be good for techies AND good for fraudsters. We don't have to pretend there is no downside.

> Are you really saying that means I have to accept a new vector from scam stores that impersonate the Apple app store and just charge $100 for "Free" apps? Yes? It's rather important that they know how to distinguish the two. If they aren't honing these skills, what's stopping them from logging into a fake iCloud dialogue on someone's random website, or feeding their SSN to the "IRS" over the phone? It's not like...…

Thanks, I do this already.

I still don’t see why that means government-mandated removal of a consumer protection is an unmitigated good thing. I guess it’s an idealism I just don’t share.

I’m not opposed to the EU regulation; I am a fan of policy experimentation. But I do expect EU to see a huge increase in scams and fraud, which I guess we should celebrate?

Re: The iPad was meant to revolutionize accessibility

#80

Post by smoldesu »

brookst wrote: post #79
smoldesu wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you really saying that means I have to accept a new vector from scam stores that impersonate the Apple app store and just charge $100 for "Free" apps? Yes? It's rather important that they know how to distinguish the two. If they aren't honing these skills, what's stopping them from logging into a fake iCloud dialogue on someone's random website, or feeding their SSN to the "IRS" over the phone? It's not like...…

Thanks, I do this already. I still don’t see why that means government-mandated removal of a consumer protection is an unmitigated good thing. I guess it’s an idealism I just don’t share. I’m not opposed to the EU regulation; I am a fan of policy experimentation. But I do expect EU to see a huge increase in scams and fraud, which I guess we should celebrate?

> government-mandated removal of a consumer protection is an unmitigated good thing

DRM-locking your tires to certain manufacturers is a good thing, arguably. The manufacturer has exact measurements and can arguably make safer tires than anyone else.

...that's not an excuse to allow it, though. Yes, by allowing third-party tire manufacturers we sacrifice a bit of safety. If safety is a foremost concern of the OEM, they can work with third-party manufacturers to ensure they keep the users safe too.

> But I do expect EU to see a huge increase in scams and fraud, which I guess we should celebrate?

Again - putting a web browser and cell phone onto an iPod ushered in 2 new avenues for fraud. The number of people who were being scammed on-the-go skyrocketed after the release of the iPhone. That doesn't make it a defacto bad release though, and most people would argue both features were a net-positive. So yeah, people did celebrate that newfound freedom. You don't have to use it - you can be the sort of Luddite who only uses Apple Applications and calls the web a hive of scum and villainy if you want. But other people will use it, and probably enjoy and celebrate the feature. Lord knows Mac and Android users have.

Post reply on HN