1. Messages
  2. Article on Screen Reader History (including NVDA)

Re: Article on Screen Reader History (including NVDA)

Rosemarie Chavarria
 

I remember Window-eyes. It was the first screen reader I learned to use when I got my very first computer. I remember Raul Gallegos. He did the tutorial on thunderbird and it was quite good.

 

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

From: Sky Mundell
Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2022 2:30 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Article on Screen Reader History (including NVDA)

 

Hello David. Window-Eyes was developed by a sighted guy, named Doug Geoffray, and Dan W. They they did have Clarance Wally, who was a blind man, and who was their blind sales man, and they also had blind tech support specialists, as well, remember Raul A. Gallegos, Steve Klower, and Jeremy Curry?



On Jul 24, 2022, at 2:21 PM, David Goldfield <david.goldfield@...> wrote:

 

It’s possible that Window-eyes wasn’t mentioned in the article for two reasons.

First, the article’s focus was on blind programmers who were solving the accessibility barriers from Windows.I’m not sure if the WE developers were blind. Also, Window-Eyes isn’t available anymore and so cannot be considered as a modern solution. 

 

David Goldfield,

Blindness Assistive Technology Specialist

 

Subscribe to the Tech-VI announcement list to receive news, events and information regarding the blindness assistive technology field.

 

From: nvda@nvda.groups.io <nvda@nvda.groups.io> On Behalf OfGene
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2022 7:29 PM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] Article on Screen Reader History (including NVDA)

 

the article is interesting and it has good information about JAWS and NVDA.  But it has problems.  It should have said something about Window-eyes because a lot of people used it and it was a good screen-reader.  It helped in development of screen-reader innovations in ways that should have been noted.

But a serious problem in the article is that it gives the reader the impression that there shouldn't need to be independently developed screen-readers if developers of software built accessibility into them.  This is erroneous for two reasons.

First, yes, accessibility should be built into programs and operating systems but we have been better served by screen-readers being developed outside of operating system programmers.  We are much better off having choices when it  comes  to Windows screen-readers.  It is a constantly stated truism that some screen-readers work better with some programs than others.  If Microsoft had developed a good screen-reader from the outset, we would probably only have one screen-reader and even if we would benefit from having more, we wouldn't.  

The article doesn't discuss this at all and the author is evidently completely unaware of the arguments about which is better, one screen-reader developed by the developers of an operating system or what exists regarding Windows.

I think we are much better off as things are.  

Gene

On 7/14/2022 10:06 PM, Laurie Mehta via groups.io wrote:

Hi,

I came across this today and am sharing it here because I think that many here will find it interesting. (Link below my name…)

-Laurie

 

The hidden history of screen readers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Join {nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.