Date   

Re: PowerPoint and alt text

Poppa Bear <heavens4real@...>
 

Hello Marriann,

1.       Go to the picture/object holder.

2.        Press application/context menu

3.        Go to Format picture.

4.        Shift tab into the tab box containing 4 items and arrow to size and property

5.        Tab to the Alt Text check box and check it, then tab to the title and description edit boxes.

6.       Don’t forget to close the pain when done.

 

From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Marianne Denning
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 5:38 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: PowerPoint and alt text

 

Please ignore my question about Excel. I guess I didn't put in my brain before asking the question. How do I put alt text with a picture in PowerPoint 2013 and 2016?


--

Marianne Denning, TVI, MA

Teacher of students who are blind or visually impaired

(513) 607-6053


Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Lisle, Ted (CHFS DMS)
 

I agree. I remember the problems with Office and JAWS 11 and 12 running under XP, but relief came with 13, and the problems have not recurred. Also, I notice 16 can read protected documents again; that was a problem for a while. I know that, in an office environment, there are often good reasons for nailing down a document so it can't be altered.

Ted

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of ptusing
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 10:42 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi,
Regarding your points and those stated by Ed, I wonder what would happen
if some one made a list of top 10 bugs and posted it?

Please add---and I say the list should be formulated mostly off list, the
known 1.5 year problem of
JAWS 17 not working with MAGIC and adobe document cloud for some.

I do give Freedom Scientific credit for not caving on that
Adobe-related issue as the problem is an outstanding issue.
Waiting for Adobe to do something

MY point is that there are people out there smarter than I who could list
something like a consolidated list of issues from which people could
speak to V F O about and share with
Large groups like agencies that purchase lots of JAWS versions.

In case some one is wondering, I actually believe in the people there in
Florida and
Think they will eventually get it done.
The problem is the waiting.

Thanks to all.

.



-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Lisle, Ted
(CHFS DMS)
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 8:26 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Sounds Like 16 was too good for FS's own good. It combined solid
performance with really useful new features (the expanded OCR capability
particularly), and was a great match for new versions of Office. Smart tabs
sound helpful, but I'm still with 16, and may stay a while longer.

ted

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Marquette,
Ed
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 2:57 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Tim:

Thank you for your full and frank discussion of something that has concerned
me for years.
In fact, a few years back, I started an on-line petition. The idea was to
send a message to Freedom Scientific that, until Freedom Scientific fixed
fundamental problems with its basic code (instead of loading the software
with new features) we, JAWS users, should stop buying "upgrades" -- a kind
of feature moratorium.
I hear echoes of my own posts -- posts that got me kicked off at least one
list.
Many of us experienced the problems with JAWS 13 that you are experiencing
with JAWS 17.
Well, my on-line petition didn't get very far, and Freedom Scientific has
continued to pile on the new features.
The problems with JAWS 17 may not simply be a further symptom of the feature
disease, though it likely contributes. JAWS 17 is fundamentally different,
as FS will admit. I try to use JAWS 17, but I find myself switching back to
JAWS 16 quite frequently. There are an array of situations, particularly in
Office 2013, where JAWS 16 is just better, reading prompts that JAWS 17
misses, reading the correct prompts instead of extraneous information, and
just working instead of going out to lunch. JAWS 17 also has an inherent
problem of corrupting some of its own files. Periodically, it starts
reading extraneous numbers. For instance, in JAWS 17, I am now typing (in
words and figures) the number thirteen 13. When I read back the number, I
hear thirteen sixty-five. The number is in superscript, but that is not
always necessary to confuse JAWS 17. JAWS 16 NEVER has this problem.
Of course the whole file layout is different. As I sadly discovered, the
Keyboard Manager in JAWS 17 is brain-damaged.
At the same time I bemoan the new features, it is some of these features
that keep me using JAWS. Even as badly as JAWS handles track changes, when
I last checked NVDA didn't handle track changes at all.
ALAS! Perhaps I'll try NVDA again.
I was hoping JAWS 18 would fix the problems in JAWS 17. It looks like
that was a vain hope.


-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Ford
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:20 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who
want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to
consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the
sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the
time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not
heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now
it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the
sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and
although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point
that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book,
and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had
any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it
affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that
started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram.
It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and
anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues
towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the
problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with
the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only
up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go
back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was
focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us
continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly
more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it
has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing
the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS
basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us.
JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when
the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of
how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new
features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has,
JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to
accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves
to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we
valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to
make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable
performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This E-mail message is confidential, is intended only for the named
recipients above and may contain information that is privileged, attorney
work product or otherwise protected by applicable law. If you have received
this message in error, please notify the sender at 402-346-6000 and delete
this E-mail message.
Thank you.


Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

ptusing <ptusing@...>
 

Hi,
Regarding your points and those stated by Ed, I wonder what would happen
if some one made a list of top 10 bugs and posted it?

Please add---and I say the list should be formulated mostly off list, the
known 1.5 year problem of
JAWS 17 not working with MAGIC and adobe document cloud for some.

I do give Freedom Scientific credit for not caving on that
Adobe-related issue as the problem is an outstanding issue.
Waiting for Adobe to do something

MY point is that there are people out there smarter than I who could list
something like a consolidated list of issues from which people could
speak to V F O about and share with
Large groups like agencies that purchase lots of JAWS versions.

In case some one is wondering, I actually believe in the people there in
Florida and
Think they will eventually get it done.
The problem is the waiting.

Thanks to all.

.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Lisle, Ted
(CHFS DMS)
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 8:26 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Sounds Like 16 was too good for FS's own good. It combined solid
performance with really useful new features (the expanded OCR capability
particularly), and was a great match for new versions of Office. Smart tabs
sound helpful, but I'm still with 16, and may stay a while longer.

ted

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Marquette,
Ed
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 2:57 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Tim:

Thank you for your full and frank discussion of something that has concerned
me for years.
In fact, a few years back, I started an on-line petition. The idea was to
send a message to Freedom Scientific that, until Freedom Scientific fixed
fundamental problems with its basic code (instead of loading the software
with new features) we, JAWS users, should stop buying "upgrades" -- a kind
of feature moratorium.
I hear echoes of my own posts -- posts that got me kicked off at least one
list.
Many of us experienced the problems with JAWS 13 that you are experiencing
with JAWS 17.
Well, my on-line petition didn't get very far, and Freedom Scientific has
continued to pile on the new features.
The problems with JAWS 17 may not simply be a further symptom of the feature
disease, though it likely contributes. JAWS 17 is fundamentally different,
as FS will admit. I try to use JAWS 17, but I find myself switching back to
JAWS 16 quite frequently. There are an array of situations, particularly in
Office 2013, where JAWS 16 is just better, reading prompts that JAWS 17
misses, reading the correct prompts instead of extraneous information, and
just working instead of going out to lunch. JAWS 17 also has an inherent
problem of corrupting some of its own files. Periodically, it starts
reading extraneous numbers. For instance, in JAWS 17, I am now typing (in
words and figures) the number thirteen 13. When I read back the number, I
hear thirteen sixty-five. The number is in superscript, but that is not
always necessary to confuse JAWS 17. JAWS 16 NEVER has this problem.
Of course the whole file layout is different. As I sadly discovered, the
Keyboard Manager in JAWS 17 is brain-damaged.
At the same time I bemoan the new features, it is some of these features
that keep me using JAWS. Even as badly as JAWS handles track changes, when
I last checked NVDA didn't handle track changes at all.
ALAS! Perhaps I'll try NVDA again.
I was hoping JAWS 18 would fix the problems in JAWS 17. It looks like
that was a vain hope.


-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Ford
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:20 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who
want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to
consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the
sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the
time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not
heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now
it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the
sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and
although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point
that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book,
and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had
any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it
affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that
started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram.
It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and
anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues
towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the
problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with
the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only
up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go
back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was
focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us
continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly
more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it
has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing
the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS
basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us.
JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when
the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of
how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new
features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has,
JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to
accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves
to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we
valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to
make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable
performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This E-mail message is confidential, is intended only for the named
recipients above and may contain information that is privileged, attorney
work product or otherwise protected by applicable law. If you have received
this message in error, please notify the sender at 402-346-6000 and delete
this E-mail message.
Thank you.


Comment pane in MS-Word 2016 and JAWS 18

Jason White
 

I'm running the latest Jaws 18.0.2118 and Microsoft Word 2016 with the
November update applied, under Windows 10.

If I insert a comment (Alt+R, C), the braille display continues to show the
main text of the document, even after I type text into the comment pane. If I
then use arrow keys to navigate, neither speech nor braille presents the text
of the comment.

Is anyone else on the list seeing this?


PowerPoint and alt text

Marianne Denning
 

Please ignore my question about Excel. I guess I didn't put in my brain before asking the question. How do I put alt text with a picture in PowerPoint 2013 and 2016?

--
Marianne Denning, TVI, MA
Teacher of students who are blind or visually impaired
(513) 607-6053


page reads wierdly

Juan Hernandez
 

Hi all,

 

http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/63-arrays-and-loops/

 

if you go to this page, and when you go to the first code sample you’ll see the line numbers then the code  when you use ins+x, smart mode on, it reads the code but with a clickable after each space.  If ins+x, smarte mode off, it merges things like intarray, where it should be int array.

 

Any ieas?  Thanks.

 

Juan Hernandez

Juanhernandez98@...

619-750-9431

 


Excel and alt text

Marianne Denning
 

How do you put alt text into Excel in Office 2013 or 2016? I thought it was using the application key and tabbing to alt text but when I do that I can't enter the text.

--
Marianne Denning, TVI, MA
Teacher of students who are blind or visually impaired
(513) 607-6053


Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Lisle, Ted (CHFS DMS)
 

Sounds Like 16 was too good for FS's own good. It combined solid performance with really useful new features (the expanded OCR capability particularly), and was a great match for new versions of Office. Smart tabs sound helpful, but I'm still with 16, and may stay a while longer.

ted

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Marquette, Ed
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 2:57 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Tim:

Thank you for your full and frank discussion of something that has concerned me for years.
In fact, a few years back, I started an on-line petition. The idea was to send a message to Freedom Scientific that, until Freedom Scientific fixed fundamental problems with its basic code (instead of loading the software with new features) we, JAWS users, should stop buying "upgrades" -- a kind of feature moratorium.
I hear echoes of my own posts -- posts that got me kicked off at least one list.
Many of us experienced the problems with JAWS 13 that you are experiencing with JAWS 17.
Well, my on-line petition didn't get very far, and Freedom Scientific has continued to pile on the new features.
The problems with JAWS 17 may not simply be a further symptom of the feature disease, though it likely contributes. JAWS 17 is fundamentally different, as FS will admit. I try to use JAWS 17, but I find myself switching back to JAWS 16 quite frequently. There are an array of situations, particularly in Office 2013, where JAWS 16 is just better, reading prompts that JAWS 17 misses, reading the correct prompts instead of extraneous information, and just working instead of going out to lunch. JAWS 17 also has an inherent problem of corrupting some of its own files. Periodically, it starts reading extraneous numbers. For instance, in JAWS 17, I am now typing (in words and figures) the number thirteen 13. When I read back the number, I hear thirteen sixty-five. The number is in superscript, but that is not always necessary to confuse JAWS 17. JAWS 16 NEVER has this problem.
Of course the whole file layout is different. As I sadly discovered, the Keyboard Manager in JAWS 17 is brain-damaged.
At the same time I bemoan the new features, it is some of these features that keep me using JAWS. Even as badly as JAWS handles track changes, when I last checked NVDA didn't handle track changes at all.
ALAS! Perhaps I'll try NVDA again.
I was hoping JAWS 18 would fix the problems in JAWS 17. It looks like that was a vain hope.


-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Ford
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:20 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book, and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram.
It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only
up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us.
JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has, JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This E-mail message is confidential, is intended only for the named recipients above and may contain information
that is privileged, attorney work product or otherwise protected by applicable law. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender at 402-346-6000 and delete this E-mail message.
Thank you.


Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

BeastlyTheos <theodorecooke@...>
 

So if we stop using their product, that sends a message that we're not
satisfied, but it doesn't let them know why we're not satisfied. How
do we specifically send the message that we're not satisfied because
of their development roadmap?

On 12/9/16, Marquette, Ed <ed.marquette@kutakrock.com> wrote:
Tim:

Thank you for your full and frank discussion of something that has concerned
me for years.
In fact, a few years back, I started an on-line petition. The idea was to
send a message to Freedom Scientific that, until Freedom Scientific fixed
fundamental problems with its basic code (instead of loading the software
with new features) we, JAWS users, should stop buying "upgrades" -- a kind
of feature moratorium.
I hear echoes of my own posts -- posts that got me kicked off at least one
list.
Many of us experienced the problems with JAWS 13 that you are experiencing
with JAWS 17.
Well, my on-line petition didn't get very far, and Freedom Scientific has
continued to pile on the new features.
The problems with JAWS 17 may not simply be a further symptom of the feature
disease, though it likely contributes. JAWS 17 is fundamentally different,
as FS will admit. I try to use JAWS 17, but I find myself switching back to
JAWS 16 quite frequently. There are an array of situations, particularly in
Office 2013, where JAWS 16 is just better, reading prompts that JAWS 17
misses, reading the correct prompts instead of extraneous information, and
just working instead of going out to lunch. JAWS 17 also has an inherent
problem of corrupting some of its own files. Periodically, it starts
reading extraneous numbers. For instance, in JAWS 17, I am now typing (in
words and figures) the number thirteen 13. When I read back the number, I
hear thirteen sixty-five. The number is in superscript, but that is not
always necessary to confuse JAWS 17. JAWS 16 NEVER has this problem.
Of course the whole file layout is different. As I sadly discovered, the
Keyboard Manager in JAWS 17 is brain-damaged.
At the same time I bemoan the new features, it is some of these features
that keep me using JAWS. Even as badly as JAWS handles track changes, when
I last checked NVDA didn't handle track changes at all.
ALAS! Perhaps I'll try NVDA again.
I was hoping JAWS 18 would fix the problems in JAWS 17. It looks like
that was a vain hope.


-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Ford
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:20 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who
want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to
consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the
sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the
time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not
heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now
it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the
sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and
although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point
that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book,
and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had
any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it
affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that
started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram.

It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and
anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues
towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the
problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with
the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only
up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go
back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was
focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us
continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly
more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it
has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing
the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS
basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us.
JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when
the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of
how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new
features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has,
JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to
accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves
to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we
valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to
make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable
performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This E-mail message is confidential, is intended only for the named
recipients above and may contain information
that is privileged, attorney work product or otherwise protected by
applicable law. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender at 402-346-6000 and delete this
E-mail message.
Thank you.




Re: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Marquette, Ed <ed.marquette@...>
 

Tim:

Thank you for your full and frank discussion of something that has concerned me for years.
In fact, a few years back, I started an on-line petition. The idea was to send a message to Freedom Scientific that, until Freedom Scientific fixed fundamental problems with its basic code (instead of loading the software with new features) we, JAWS users, should stop buying "upgrades" -- a kind of feature moratorium.
I hear echoes of my own posts -- posts that got me kicked off at least one list.
Many of us experienced the problems with JAWS 13 that you are experiencing with JAWS 17.
Well, my on-line petition didn't get very far, and Freedom Scientific has continued to pile on the new features.
The problems with JAWS 17 may not simply be a further symptom of the feature disease, though it likely contributes. JAWS 17 is fundamentally different, as FS will admit. I try to use JAWS 17, but I find myself switching back to JAWS 16 quite frequently. There are an array of situations, particularly in Office 2013, where JAWS 16 is just better, reading prompts that JAWS 17 misses, reading the correct prompts instead of extraneous information, and just working instead of going out to lunch. JAWS 17 also has an inherent problem of corrupting some of its own files. Periodically, it starts reading extraneous numbers. For instance, in JAWS 17, I am now typing (in words and figures) the number thirteen 13. When I read back the number, I hear thirteen sixty-five. The number is in superscript, but that is not always necessary to confuse JAWS 17. JAWS 16 NEVER has this problem.
Of course the whole file layout is different. As I sadly discovered, the Keyboard Manager in JAWS 17 is brain-damaged.
At the same time I bemoan the new features, it is some of these features that keep me using JAWS. Even as badly as JAWS handles track changes, when I last checked NVDA didn't handle track changes at all.
ALAS! Perhaps I'll try NVDA again.
I was hoping JAWS 18 would fix the problems in JAWS 17. It looks like that was a vain hope.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tim Ford
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:20 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book, and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram.
It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only
up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us.
JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has, JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford




----------------------------------------------------------------------
This E-mail message is confidential, is intended only for the named recipients above and may contain information
that is privileged, attorney work product or otherwise protected by applicable law. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender at 402-346-6000 and delete this E-mail message.
Thank you.


Re: Statistics software accessibility

Peter op t Hof
 

Hi,


You can also use the stat-language R.

This is fully accessible and several blind people have published about it.


I use it for study and work.


Gr,


Peter.



Op 9-12-2016 om 04:41 schreef Tim Ford:

Hello Russell,

SPSS is supposed to be somewhat accessible, at least IBM seems to be claiming that, and IBM has a lot on SPSS accessibility, according to a browser search using the terms IBM, accessibility, and SPSS. I take it you have not been using SPSS?

Tim Ford

-----Original Message----- From: Russell Solowoniuk
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 6:59 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Statistics software accessibility

Hi everyone,

Our university is considering moving to a freeware statistics program called PSPP in place of SPSS.
Is anyone familiar with this freeware statistics program? Is it accessible with a screen reader? I'm not even sure that SPSS is accessible. Any comments on that?

Thanks for any and all help.

Russell Sent from my iPhone




JAWS 17 and 18 have some basic inherent flaw.

Tim Ford
 

Hi All,

I warn readers that my post here is a bit long, but for those of you who want to help things improve with JAWS, I urge you to take the time to consider my observations and opinions described below.

Back early on with JAWS 17, I reported to Freedom Scientific the sluggishness I was experiencing. I also reported that on this list. At the time, nobody else seemed to be having the problem, and FS said they had not heard of anyone but me having the problems. Maybe I was the first, but now it seems obvious the problem is steadily affecting more and more of us.

I tried every update of JAWS 17, hoping it would fix the problems, but the sluggishness became worse. I tried all beta test versions of JAWS 18, and although it seemed a bit better, eventually J 18 was impacted to the point that I quit using it.

I completely uninstalled every piece of FS software, other than Open Book, and did a new install of JAWS 16 from the installation CD. I have not had any of the sluggishness, now going on about 3 weeks.

It thus seems clear there is a fundamental problem with J 17 and 18, that it affects different computers at different rates of onset, like a disease that started slowly, and is now gathering steam as it spreads.

My machine is an HP laptop running Windows 7 Pro, 32 bit, with 6 GB of ram. It is a state government agency machine, with Semantic encryption and anti-virus, and Office 2013. Somewhere in our experiences are the clues towards a solution, and I hope FS figures it out soon.

For now, I will stay with J 16. If I decide that JAWS is not worth the problems, I will go to NVDA, but not beat myself up any longer dealing with the performance problems JAWS 17-18 have. My current license is good only up to version 17, and I just wont' pay for any more worthless upgrades.

From my vague recollection, to find good JAWS stability, we would have to go back to something like JAWS 7, maybe up to 10, but after that, FS was focusing too much on developing new features, in order to justify us continuing to work with them.

That said, I also appreciate that Windows and web design has become vastly more complicated, to come up with all those nifty visual features, and it has been a constant battle for screen readers to keep up. JAWS is losing the battle.

My humble suggestion is that Freedom Scientific should accept that JAWS basic stability and features have now become too unstable for most of us. JAWS created the new "feature" of having an automatic reboot of JAWS when the system senses a lockup. That "feature" is a complete acknowledgement of how unstable JAWS has become.

In order for a private vendor such as FS to be motivated to quit trying new features for a while, and concentrate on stability of what JAWS already has, JAWS users need to send a clear message to FS, that we will be willing to accept less new glitz, in exchange for stability.

Maybe us JAWS users have to share some of the blame for allowing ourselves to get excited about new JAWS versions, but we never were asked whether we valued new features over stability. I suggest that it is now time for us to make that clear, that glitz is fine, but not at the expense of stable performance for our day in and day out use of computers.

Thank you for considering my long rant.,

Tim Ford


Re: saving settings based on a website

Soronel Haetir
 

The comments on domain-specific entries in confignames.ini makes me
think you could save site specific settings"
;The following section defines the mapping between domain names and script sets.
;A script set includes JSB/JSS, JBS, JKM and JCF.

Specifically the fact that a script set includes the .jcf. However I
don't think settings center is set up to make doing so easy.

On 12/8/16, Juan Hernandez <juanhernandez98@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,



Does jaws v18 have the capabilities to save settings when loading a
specific
website? Like it does for specific applications?



I'd like to save my settings for google drive and docs etc since I spend a
lot of time in it for my work.



Thank you so much in advanced.



Best,



Juan



Juan Hernandez

<mailto:Juanhernandez98@gmail.com> Juanhernandez98@gmail.com

619-750-9431 (M) | 858-777-3311 (F)

<http://www.juanhernandez.me/> My WebSite | Twitter |
<https://www.facebook.com/blindwiz> FaceBook |
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/juanmhernandez> LinkedIn



--
Soronel Haetir
soronel.haetir@gmail.com


saving settings based on a website

Juan Hernandez
 

Hi All,

 

Does jaws v18 have the capabilities to save settings when loading a specific website? Like it does for specific applications?

 

I’d like to save my settings for google drive and docs etc since I spend a lot of time in it for my work.

 

Thank you so much in advanced.

 

Best,

 

Juan

 

Juan Hernandez

Juanhernandez98@...

619-750-9431 (M)         |  858-777-3311 (F)

My WebSite | Twitter | FaceBook | LinkedIn

 


Re: Statistics software accessibility

Tim Ford
 

Hello Russell,

SPSS is supposed to be somewhat accessible, at least IBM seems to be claiming that, and IBM has a lot on SPSS accessibility, according to a browser search using the terms IBM, accessibility, and SPSS. I take it you have not been using SPSS?

Tim Ford

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell Solowoniuk
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 6:59 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Statistics software accessibility

Hi everyone,

Our university is considering moving to a freeware statistics program called PSPP in place of SPSS.
Is anyone familiar with this freeware statistics program? Is it accessible with a screen reader? I'm not even sure that SPSS is accessible. Any comments on that?

Thanks for any and all help.

Russell Sent from my iPhone


Statistics software accessibility

Russell Solowoniuk
 

Hi everyone,

Our university is considering moving to a freeware statistics program called PSPP in place of SPSS.
Is anyone familiar with this freeware statistics program? Is it accessible with a screen reader? I'm not even sure that SPSS is accessible. Any comments on that?

Thanks for any and all help.

Russell Sent from my iPhone


Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

Carolyn Arnold <4carolyna@...>
 

I take off theQuick Navigation Key , Insert-X or JAWS Key-X, and the net works better for me. I have to work harder at it than I might, but at least, I can get there. I opened a couple of articles from emails - one from our TV station here and the other in Facebook from a cousin. I had to play tricks, but got into both. As someone said once, would sighted people run through hoops like this? Probably, if they had to.

Bye for now,

Carolyn

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of brian albriton
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 6:10 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

I have seventeen but not sixteen. I'll go back to 17 for a spell and see how that works.
Otherwise, can always roll back.
This is one of the lovely things about jaws I much appreciate.
Brian


-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dave Carlson
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 7:03 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

Brian,

If you still have JAWS 16, give that a try to see if the sluggishness disappears. In my case, the difference is dramatic and repeatable.

Dave
Oregonian, woodworker, Engineer, Musician, and Pioneer


----- Original Message -----
From: "brian albriton" <cocanut50@ca.rr.com>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 13:04
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11


I've been seeing this behavior for longer than I can remember, with all versions of 18. In my case, perhaps my computer is aging. I bought this sony vio in 2011. It’s a desktop replacement

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Kimber Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 6:13 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

Well, at least I know it's not my hardware/configuration. Guess I'll just go back to version 17.

Thanks for the verification.

On 12/7/16, Kimber Gardner <kimbersinbox1963@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,

I'm using Jaws 18 on my work laptop with windows 7 and IE11 and I'm
noticing quite a bit of dragging as I attempt to read through web
pages. For example, this morning I was trying to read an article in
the New Yorker and having a hell of a time. As I arrow down the page I
encountered several seconds of silence before Jaws would read each
line. Sometimes arrowing back up a few lines would sort of wake jaws
up and get it moving again.

I switched back to version 17 and the delays disappeared. I was able
to read the article with no problems or delays.

Is anyone else seeing anything like this?

Incidentally, I am using the previous release of version 18, not the
one that just released.

Thanks

--
Kimberly




--
Kimberly


Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

brian albriton
 

I have seventeen but not sixteen. I'll go back to 17 for a spell and see how that works.
Otherwise, can always roll back.
This is one of the lovely things about jaws I much appreciate.
Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Dave Carlson
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 7:03 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

Brian,

If you still have JAWS 16, give that a try to see if the sluggishness disappears. In my case, the difference is dramatic and repeatable.

Dave
Oregonian, woodworker, Engineer, Musician, and Pioneer


----- Original Message -----
From: "brian albriton" <cocanut50@ca.rr.com>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 13:04
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11


I've been seeing this behavior for longer than I can remember, with all
versions of 18. In my case, perhaps my computer is aging. I bought this sony
vio in 2011. It’s a desktop replacement

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Kimber
Gardner
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 6:13 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: Jaws 18 dragging in IE11

Well, at least I know it's not my hardware/configuration. Guess I'll just go
back to version 17.

Thanks for the verification.

On 12/7/16, Kimber Gardner <kimbersinbox1963@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi All,

I'm using Jaws 18 on my work laptop with windows 7 and IE11 and I'm
noticing quite a bit of dragging as I attempt to read through web
pages. For example, this morning I was trying to read an article in
the New Yorker and having a hell of a time. As I arrow down the page I
encountered several seconds of silence before Jaws would read each
line. Sometimes arrowing back up a few lines would sort of wake jaws
up and get it moving again.

I switched back to version 17 and the delays disappeared. I was able
to read the article with no problems or delays.

Is anyone else seeing anything like this?

Incidentally, I am using the previous release of version 18, not the
one that just released.

Thanks

--
Kimberly




--
Kimberly


Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Lisle, Ted (CHFS DMS)
 

Besides, programs like thunder and NVDA may not run oddball programs out of the box the way JAWS often can. I demoed both a while back, hoping they could fill holes in JAWS 11-12, but neither was a keeper.

Ted

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Sieghard Weitzel
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 12:34 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

I agree, 2 years (104 weeks) means it is actually $1.15 a week or about $4.60 a months. Many of us pay double that for whichever music subscription we may have, many of us spend that much on one or two coffees from Starbucks or some other luxury they enjoy. Yes, NVDA is open source and free, but you can't expect a company which has headquarters and pays salaries to employees to offer a free service and comparing Jaws or VFO Group to Apple, Google or Microsoft is in my view not a valid comparison, all of these companies have huge streams of revenues from other product lines or services they provide with which they can fund and subsidise their accessibility efforts.

Regards,
Sieghard

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angel
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 3:51 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Well, one hundred twenty dollars divided by 24 equals 5 dollars. divided by four equals one dollar 25 cents weekly. Considering the amount we pay for other helpful assists. Such as driver services, and gifts we purchase for
our friends, and for others who assist us as personal employees. the cost
for upgrades for such a valuable program doesn't seem like such a high price to pay. I have been paying for soft ware maintenance agreements since I got my first Jaws program in 97.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sieghard Weitzel" <sieghard@live.ca>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com


Hi,

Not sure how you figure that $120 divided by 24 months is $2.5, but I actually agree, even at the correct price which is $5/month it really is not all that much.
That of course is for the Home version, but there is not all that much reason to have the Pro version any more for a private person since the Home version now works with any Pro version of the Windows operating system, I believe the Home version may still not support remote desktop, but once again this is probably not something a lot of people use.


Regards,'
Sieghard

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angel
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 4:12 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Jaws requires soft ware maintenance once every two years. If this is done faithfully, the cost is 120 dollars. Which amounts to approximately two and a half dollars each month. or 62 cents a week. Which one of us can't afford to pay 62 cents a week I ask?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Ulrich" <mulrich@centurylink.net>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com


Well I do understand that, but if a blind person is using their
screenreader for just personal home use; how would they afford an
update every year? I sure can't.
This is the biggest crunch when it comes to computer technology for
the blind. It is an added expense that doesn't apply to sightlings.
Bummer!

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of
Jason White via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 12:00 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Mike Ulrich <mulrich@centurylink.net> wrote:
So do you think that'll mean that all users must upgrade their screen
reader programs as often? Or perhaps a lot less?

Given the speed at which Web standards and Web applications are
evolving, those who do not keep their screen readers up to date will
increasingly be left behind so far as accessibility is concerned. For
example, in the release notes of the latest JAWS 18 update you'll
notice various enhancements that support new features in ARIA (a
technology used widely by Web application developers to make their
software accessible to screen reader users).

It won't be long before Web application developers start using those
features to improve accessibility. To gain the benefit, however, users
will need up to date screen readers. These features of JAWS 18 are
only examples of a larger trend.

I keep all of my software up to date. I don't use old versions of
software except perhaps for a short time to work around a problem with
a newer release while awaiting a fix. There are enough accessibility
problems as it is without making the situation worse by using old
versions of screen readers, operating systems, etc. So my advice is:
use current releases of software whenever possible.







Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

 

I agree, 2 years (104 weeks) means it is actually $1.15 a week or about $4.60 a months. Many of us pay double that for whichever music subscription we may have, many of us spend that much on one or two coffees from Starbucks or some other luxury they enjoy. Yes, NVDA is open source and free, but you can't expect a company which has headquarters and pays salaries to employees to offer a free service and comparing Jaws or VFO Group to Apple, Google or Microsoft is in my view not a valid comparison, all of these companies have huge streams of revenues from other product lines or services they provide with which they can fund and subsidise their accessibility efforts.

Regards,
Sieghard

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angel
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 3:51 AM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Well, one hundred twenty dollars divided by 24 equals 5 dollars. divided by four equals one dollar 25 cents weekly. Considering the amount we pay for other helpful assists. Such as driver services, and gifts we purchase for
our friends, and for others who assist us as personal employees. the cost
for upgrades for such a valuable program doesn't seem like such a high price to pay. I have been paying for soft ware maintenance agreements since I got my first Jaws program in 97.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sieghard Weitzel" <sieghard@live.ca>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com


Hi,

Not sure how you figure that $120 divided by 24 months is $2.5, but I actually agree, even at the correct price which is $5/month it really is not all that much.
That of course is for the Home version, but there is not all that much reason to have the Pro version any more for a private person since the Home version now works with any Pro version of the Windows operating system, I believe the Home version may still not support remote desktop, but once again this is probably not something a lot of people use.


Regards,'
Sieghard

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angel
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 4:12 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Jaws requires soft ware maintenance once every two years. If this is done faithfully, the cost is 120 dollars. Which amounts to approximately two and a half dollars each month. or 62 cents a week. Which one of us can't afford to pay 62 cents a week I ask?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Ulrich" <mulrich@centurylink.net>
To: <main@jfw.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com


Well I do understand that, but if a blind person is using their
screenreader for just personal home use; how would they afford an
update every year? I sure can't.
This is the biggest crunch when it comes to computer technology for
the blind. It is an added expense that doesn't apply to sightlings.
Bummer!

-----Original Message-----
From: main@jfw.groups.io [mailto:main@jfw.groups.io] On Behalf Of
Jason White via Groups.Io
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 12:00 PM
To: main@jfw.groups.io
Subject: Re: JAWS 18.0.2118 ... now can sign into chase.com

Mike Ulrich <mulrich@centurylink.net> wrote:
So do you think that'll mean that all users must upgrade their screen
reader programs as often? Or perhaps a lot less?

Given the speed at which Web standards and Web applications are
evolving, those who do not keep their screen readers up to date will
increasingly be left behind so far as accessibility is concerned. For
example, in the release notes of the latest JAWS 18 update you'll
notice various enhancements that support new features in ARIA (a
technology used widely by Web application developers to make their
software accessible to screen reader users).

It won't be long before Web application developers start using those
features to improve accessibility. To gain the benefit, however, users
will need up to date screen readers. These features of JAWS 18 are
only examples of a larger trend.

I keep all of my software up to date. I don't use old versions of
software except perhaps for a short time to work around a problem with
a newer release while awaiting a fix. There are enough accessibility
problems as it is without making the situation worse by using old
versions of screen readers, operating systems, etc. So my advice is:
use current releases of software whenever possible.