I recently learned that officials of the Missouri Division of Purchasing
had been contacted by a Microsoft representative with the message that
someone in the NFB of Missouri thought this product accessible for the
blind. Following is my letter of response.
Gary Wunder
WUNDER@MAIL.COIN.MISSOURI.EDU
home (314) 874-1774 Work (314) 882-2561
September 12, 1995
Ms. Pam Meyer
Microsoft Corporation
2405 Grand
Suite 1280
Kansas City, MO 64108
Dear Ms. Meyer:
In a letter dated August 9 you wrote to Ms. Karen Boeger of the
Missouri Division of Purchasing stating that someone from the
"National Federation for the Blind of Missouri" working on the
issue of accessibility found Windows 95 in compliance with
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. This is an incredible
statement given that there are currently no commercially
available screen readers for this operating system. The
rationale given to justify such a statement was that within weeks
there would be several offerings of screen reading packages for
Windows 95 and that a handful would follow soon after.
Since I am the President of the National Federation of the Blind
of Missouri and am the only NFB of Missouri member active in the
issue of the graphical user interface, I assume I was the person
being quoted. At no time have I said, nor do I now believe, that
Windows 95 is truly useable by the blind and Section 508
compliant. Such a representation to officials of the Missouri
Division of Purchasing is absolutely false and especially is it
inappropriate given that I have been a major player in asking the
Division to look at withholding approval of purchases of this
product until it is truly possible for blind persons to perform
efficiently those tasks now performed using DOS.
I attended the Accessibility Summit held in early July and was
favorably impressed by the enthusiasm and intellect of the staff
I met and by the hospitality extended to conference participants.
My inclination has been to give Microsoft high marks for their
effort in hosting the Summit, but the Summit does not change the
immediate and significant difficulties facing blind users. If my
understanding of presentations at the Summit are correct, it is
the opinion of management and developers at Microsoft that there
are no short-term solutions for the problems faced by blind users
today. Not only must the proper hooks be placed in the operating
system to provide quality information to screen readers, but many
programs which accomplish their functions by going around the
operating system must also be converted. Microsoft has its share
of such programs, and we were told that even if the changes we
need were developed and tested today, it would take up to nine
months to get them out the door and on the market. Given that
some of these changes are a year or more in the future, it is
hard to argue for the accessibility of this product.
Since this is my reading of our short-term prospects, it is
inconceivable that I would currently encourage the purchase of
Windows 95. While we cannot spend too much time living in the
past, our experience as blind users is that Microsoft ignored our
pleas for help in the late 80's and early 90's, and that only the
strong intervention of governmental entities charged with buying
accessible equipment has turned the tide. Why, by any reasonable
standard, would we encourage any of them to purchase a product
which, by all published evaluations, does not allow for efficient
use of word processors, spreadsheets, accounting packages or
telecommunications programs, all functions we have grown
accustomed to efficiently using under DOS?
Certainly the problem we are trying to solve is complicated and
will not be remedied in a few short weeks. Solutions will
require a lot of design and coding, and the effort will only be
expended if first there is a real commitment to seeing that blind
people can efficiently use state-of-the-art software. The point
was made again and again at the Summit that Microsoft is a
company driven by the market, and the number of persons affected
by the inaccessibility of GUI software is relatively small. Our
market force is not found in our numbers but in the commitment of
government to buy only those products which are accessible.
Until we have dependable, versatile and affordable screen
readers, we must continue to insist that Windows 95 and the
software available to make it useful is inaccessible.
While it must be clear that I am upset by remarks I believe to
have been attributed to me, I in no way want to detract from the
effort Microsoft is now putting into the issue of accessibility.
The Accessibility Summit was very worthwhile, and the ongoing
work of the Accessibility Team is very much appreciated.
I hope soon that Windows 95 and other software which makes it
functionally useful to the public will be available for efficient
use by the blind. When that time comes I will be delighted to
encourage Missouri and other states to purchase it in quantity.
Cordially,
______________________
Gary Wunder, President
National Federation of the Blind of Missouri
cc: Karen Boeger, Office of Administration, Division of
Purchasing
Cindy Bryant, Missouri Assistive Technology Project
Dr. Fred Schroeder, Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services
Administration
Sally Howard, Director, Rehabilitation Services for the
Blind
Marc Maurer, President, National Federation of the Blind
Luanne Lalonde, Accessibility Product Manager, Microsoft
Corporation
Chuck Opperman, Senior Program Manager, Microsoft
Corporation
Curtis Chong, National Federation of the Blind in Computer
Science
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST