Crack For Jaws 64 Bit Win 7


epierce@...
 

I'm new to the list, not discernibly disabled, but somewhat familiar with disability issues (labor activist). JAWS' poor quality has been a concern for several years. The last time I saw JAWS work well was on hardware from the Windows XP, MS Office 2003 era, using JAWS 7 or 8.

JAWS 10, 11 and 12 on Windows 7 (64 bit) does not work reliably with Outlook 2010, as was documented on this list several months ago. Attempts to revert to Office 2007 and 2003 showed same problems: JAWS does not seem to work well with any Win7-Outlook combination, at least 64 bit. The published response from FS tech support was inadequate.

Back to the topic of this thread: I read this whole thread, did not see a technical definition for a "Crack", so here is one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_cracking

Summary: "Cracking" usually refers to removal of software protection.

My general impression of Computer Accessibility (for disabled people) is that current "legacy" architectures of operating systems such as MS Windows, and possibly hardware (Intel), are inadequate (accessibility is "not by design").
Thus, poor quality products, and poor business models, are perhaps inevitable. Government support (including public education) in such circumstances probably creates, or reinforces, unhealthy market distortions.

In other words, FS knows that government programs are "held hostage" by accessibility requirements, and thus have to "buy something", even if it does not work well, to "get off the hook" and not be sued by disability lawyers.

Such a "system" creates unintended side effects, including a lack of care about whether or not disabled people are actually getting good products and support. Bureaucrats tend to have a "style over substance" approach, and are more interested in creating the appearance of accessibility than the reality. This is part of the politically correct mentality that prevails in the younger generation: more concern with thought policing than competency.

Again, it seems inevitable that even if the people working for accessibility companies are good, caring people (or were at some point), the organizational culture they work in, and the corresponding management climate, is warped by unhealthy market forces and unethical choices by business executives.

On capitalism in general, and ethics -- capitalism as it is currently constituted, Corporatist/State Capitalism, has become predatory in many respects (I'm anarcho-libertarian, not leftist). The largest failures of ethics in the area of economics are done in the name of capitalism, not because of poor blind people in 3rd world countries, or poor people anywhere, looking for "cracked" versions of JAWS software. State Capitalism is "socialism for rich people". It is a horribly rigged system, deeply corrupt and dysfunctional, and destructive of democracy and culture.

I've been told by people that have worked in disabled access for 30+ years that there is very little respect for FS and most of the other accessibility tech businesses by senior members of the advocacy community, rather the access tech companies (at least screen readers) are seen as little more than necessary evils.

I personally place most of the blame on Microsoft. How could a company that has made $100s of billions in profit not do the proper research into creating a "good" accessibility architecture for its products? The answer might be that since no such thing is possible because of fundamental flaws in the legacy architecture, MS simply does not want the bad "PR" and support headaches involved in supporting accessibility products. They are probably happy that someone else has taken the market niche and all its problems.

Any feedback is appreciated.

---- Original message ----

General information about the mailing list is at:

http://lists.the-jdh.com/mailman/listinfo/jfw_lists.the-jdh.com

Join main@jfw.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.