Hi,
I think mpchc is more accessible, but VLC is probably the most complete
player.., audio, video, stream, encoding... and it doesn't require codecs.
However, I've the two programs installed because moving in dvd menus is so
easy with MPCHC.
About key commands, the problem is the interface has old translations, so
the commands doesn't work, but it is a problem of the commands are wrong...
the best option is to search the correct commands in the web of in vlc's
help.

Regards,
mk.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Gene New Zealand <
hurrikennyandopo@outlook.co.nz> wrote:

Hi

I use it more to watch dvds with audio description. it seems very friendly
with a screen reader, there is also a add on that you can get for it as
well. If i remember right there is a whole list of shortcut keys that you
can use as well. If you are interested I do have a basic tutorial on how to
use VLC to watch a dvde with audio description. It can be found on the nvda
tutorials for other programs page on my website at
<http://www.accessibilitycentral.net>;http://www.accessibilitycentral.net
You can jump down by headings quickly to the section once you have got to
that page to read it.

Gene nz


On 05-Apr-16 9:03 PM, Isaac wrote:

Hi, how many of you guys use vlc, and is there any spiware in it as far as
you know, sure is much more responsive then winamp as far as opening and
closing files, please if some of you could give your opinion.
Thanks


--
Check out my website for nvda tutorials and other blindness related material at http://www.accessibilitycentral.net

  Hi people!
I decided it will be good to use NvdA-add-on for skype7. I've found a
very good explanation for the add-on but on this website I couldn't find
link for downloading this add-on. Recommend me please a good place for
download of the latest final version of this add-on! Thanks in advance!
Cheers!
Georgi

---
Този имейл е проверен за вируси от Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ari Sepulveda asked, "So, what exactly does good browsing hygiene entail? I've heard a lot about this over the years, but I've never really understood what it means."

This is an excellent question that has no absolutely precise answer, but there are some general guidelines.

Most of "good browsing hygiene" revolves around analyzing what you're clicking on before you click on it, most specifically links.  These days, and for legitimate reasons, most links are not presented as what I call naked links, in full http plus address format, but using click through text.  This is very convenient, as it tells you much more about what the intended point of clicking is, but it can also mask attempts to get you to click on something that "looks legit" but is intended to take you somewhere that will infect your machine with malware or spyware.

The first thing you need to do before even thinking about clicking any link is to, "Consider the source," as far as the person or entity who provided it to you.  If you are browsing the New York Times website, or Amazon to shop, or eBay, or an e-mail message sent to you by a person you know or a company you do business with that doesn't set off your "something's not quite right about this message" radar, you can be quite safe in assuming that clicking links in those circumstances will be perfectly OK.  One could drive oneself crazy checking each and every link one clicks when the chance of a malicious one coming from "a legitimate source" is really quite small.  If you have any suspicion, then do double check.  I know that there is some way, when you are sitting on a link presented via click-through text, to make your screen reader actually read the "naked" version of the link itself.  When I hover over one the "naked" version of the link shows up in the status bar at the bottom of my web browser, but I'm somehow missing how to make NVDA read that information.  The same things shows up there if I use the INSERT+F7 feature, list links, and then "Move To" a given link.

If you have any reasonable suspicion that a link might not be taking you where you think it might, it's worth getting the "naked" version of the link announced.  If you have a link, for instance, that appears to be taking you to an eBay item listing, but when you have it announced doesn't include "rover.ebay.com" or "ebay.com" anywhere in the link you can almost be assured that someone's trying to take you down the garden path, and said garden won't be full of anything but cyber-weeds.  This idea applies generally in that you can get a sense of whether you recognize where a link wants to take you.  Here's a real-world example taken from the Spam folder of my own e-mail account (which was put there because Google's filter's already identified it as a suspicious e-mail). Let's presume it didn't get filtered, though.  That e-mail has the title, "Attn:Your CVS ExtraCare-Store Card(s), Has Just Been-Updated. Must Be Confirmed by April 10th. #4413"  The title itself should arouse suspicion, since it uses syntax (the parenthesis s is one give away, the weird hyphens another, and the "#4413" at the end a third), and it does.  It contains a link where the click-through text reads, "Go Here to Confirm Your New CVS Extra-Care Reward-Card."  First, the link itself is suspicious because it spells Extra Care as two words with a hyphen between (and, I  know, this may not be something obvious if you can't see it, but I want to include all hallmarks) when CVS itself always uses a single word, ExtraCare, with the E and C capitalized, when referring to its program.  It has a hyphen between reward and card, which is completely unnecessary, and it uses the singular while the message title used the parenthesis S bit.  Finally, if you take yourself to that link and hover over it, what you get shown is a URL that is only 10 characters long and has CVS nowhere to be seen.  All of these things tell you that someone is trying to take you somewhere and to get you to do something you should not be doing.  In this case I'd suspect it's trying to get you to enter personal information as part of an identity theft scheme, but there's no way I'm clicking to find out.

What it boils down to is to, "Consider the source," take a closer look if the source may be OK but also might not be, and never to click unknown links from unknown sources, period.

Also, avoiding things like porn websites (not all are spyware/malware havens, but many are) or clicking through on anything in a pop-up that didn't clearly pop-up because you did something where a pop-up window would be expected, e.g., clicked on an "edit your contact information" button and the contact information comes up in a pop-up window, all of which you're doing on a website you already know to be legitimate.

Reasonable caution and looking out for yourself rather than trusting and/or falling prey to "Ooooooh, shiny!" syndrome in terms of clicking random links without seeing if they appear legitimate first.  This forms the basis of good browsing hygiene.

Brian

Hi, Brian,

This is very good information. My next-door neighbor got a virus years
ago from clicking on a link. It destroyed her drives so she ended up
having to get a new computer. I try to be careful about what sites I go
on. As far as online shopping, I only go on 3 sites--amazon, the safeway
site and National Braille Press. Thank you for posting this information.

Rosemarie
On 4/5/2016 10:07 AM, Brian Vogel wrote:

Ari Sepulveda asked, "So, what exactly does good browsing hygiene
entail? I've heard a lot about this over the years, but I've never
really understood what it means."

This is an excellent question that has no absolutely precise answer,
but there are some general guidelines.

Most of "good browsing hygiene" revolves around analyzing what you're
clicking on before you click on it, most specifically links. These
days, and for legitimate reasons, most links are not presented as what
I call naked links, in full http plus address format, but using click
through text. This is very convenient, as it tells you much more
about what the intended point of clicking is, but it can also mask
attempts to get you to click on something that "looks legit" but is
intended to take you somewhere that will infect your machine with
malware or spyware.

The first thing you need to do before even thinking about clicking any
link is to, "Consider the source," as far as the person or entity who
provided it to you. If you are browsing the /New York Times/ website,
or Amazon to shop, or eBay, or an e-mail message sent to you by a
person you know or a company you do business with that doesn't set off
your "something's not quite right about this message" radar, you can
be quite safe in assuming that clicking links in those circumstances
will be perfectly OK. One could drive oneself crazy checking each and
every link one clicks when the chance of a malicious one coming from
"a legitimate source" is really quite small. If you have any
suspicion, then do double check. I know that there is some way, when
you are sitting on a link presented via click-through text, to make
your screen reader actually read the "naked" version of the link
itself. When I hover over one the "naked" version of the link shows
up in the status bar at the bottom of my web browser, but I'm somehow
missing how to make NVDA read that information. The same things shows
up there if I use the INSERT+F7 feature, list links, and then "Move
To" a given link.

If you have any reasonable suspicion that a link might not be taking
you where you think it might, it's worth getting the "naked" version
of the link announced. If you have a link, for instance, that appears
to be taking you to an eBay item listing, but when you have it
announced doesn't include "rover.ebay.com" or "ebay.com" anywhere in
the link you can almost be assured that someone's trying to take you
down the garden path, and said garden won't be full of anything but
cyber-weeds. This idea applies generally in that you can get a sense
of whether you recognize where a link wants to take you. Here's a
real-world example taken from the Spam folder of my own e-mail account
(which was put there because Google's filter's already identified it
as a suspicious e-mail). Let's presume it didn't get filtered, though.
That e-mail has the title, "/Attn:Your CVS ExtraCare-Store Card(s),
Has Just Been-Updated. Must Be Confirmed by April 10th. #4413/" The
title itself should arouse suspicion, since it uses syntax (the
parenthesis s is one give away, the weird hyphens another, and the
"#4413" at the end a third), and it does. It contains a link where
the click-through text reads, "Go Here to Confirm Your New CVS
Extra-Care Reward-Card." First, the link itself is suspicious because
it spells Extra Care as two words with a hyphen between (and, I know,
this may not be something obvious if you can't see it, but I want to
include all hallmarks) when CVS itself always uses a single word,
ExtraCare, with the E and C capitalized, when referring to its
program. It has a hyphen between reward and card, which is completely
unnecessary, and it uses the singular while the message title used the
parenthesis S bit. Finally, if you take yourself to that link and
hover over it, what you get shown is a URL that is only 10 characters
long and has CVS nowhere to be seen. All of these things tell you
that someone is trying to take you somewhere and to get you to do
something you should not be doing. In this case I'd suspect it's
trying to get you to enter personal information as part of an identity
theft scheme, but there's no way I'm clicking to find out.

What it boils down to is to, "Consider the source," take a closer look
if the source may be OK but also might not be, and never to click
unknown links from unknown sources, period.

Also, avoiding things like porn websites (not all are spyware/malware
havens, but many are) or clicking through on anything in a pop-up that
didn't clearly pop-up because you did something where a pop-up window
would be expected, e.g., clicked on an "edit your contact information"
button and the contact information comes up in a pop-up window, all of
which you're doing on a website you already know to be legitimate.

Reasonable caution and looking out for yourself rather than trusting
and/or falling prey to "Ooooooh, shiny!" syndrome in terms of clicking
random links without seeing if they appear legitimate first. This
forms the basis of good browsing hygiene.

Brian

Ari Sepulveda asked, "So, what exactly does good browsing hygiene entail? I've heard a lot about this over the years, but I've never really understood what it means."

This is an excellent question that has no absolutely precise answer, but there are some general guidelines.

Most of "good browsing hygiene" revolves around analyzing what you're clicking on before you click on it, most specifically links.  These days, and for legitimate reasons, most links are not presented as what I call naked links, in full http plus address format, but using click through text.  This is very convenient, as it tells you much more about what the intended point of clicking is, but it can also mask attempts to get you to click on something that "looks legit" but is intended to take you somewhere that will infect your machine with malware or spyware.

The first thing you need to do before even thinking about clicking any link is to, "Consider the source," as far as the person or entity who provided it to you.  If you are browsing the New York Times website, or Amazon to shop, or eBay, or an e-mail message sent to you by a person you know or a company you do business with that doesn't set off your "something's not quite right about this message" radar, you can be quite safe in assuming that clicking links in those circumstances will be perfectly OK.  One could drive oneself crazy checking each and every link one clicks when the chance of a malicious one coming from "a legitimate source" is really quite small.  If you have any suspicion, then do double check.  I know that there is some way, when you are sitting on a link presented via click-through text, to make your screen reader actually read the "naked" version of the link itself.  When I hover over one the "naked" version of the link shows up in the status bar at the bottom of my web browser, but I'm somehow missing how to make NVDA read that information.  The same things shows up there if I use the INSERT+F7 feature, list links, and then "Move To" a given link.

If you have any reasonable suspicion that a link might not be taking you where you think it might, it's worth getting the "naked" version of the link announced.  If you have a link, for instance, that appears to be taking you to an eBay item listing, but when you have it announced doesn't include "rover.ebay.com" or "ebay.com" anywhere in the link you can almost be assured that someone's trying to take you down the garden path, and said garden won't be full of anything but cyber-weeds.  This idea applies generally in that you can get a sense of whether you recognize where a link wants to take you.  Here's a real-world example taken from the Spam folder of my own e-mail account (which was put there because Google's filter's already identified it as a suspicious e-mail). Let's presume it didn't get filtered, though.  That e-mail has the title, "Attn:Your CVS ExtraCare-Store Card(s), Has Just Been-Updated. Must Be Confirmed by April 10th. #4413"  The title itself should arouse suspicion, since it uses syntax (the parenthesis s is one give away, the weird hyphens another, and the "#4413" at the end a third), and it does.  It contains a link where the click-through text reads, "Go Here to Confirm Your New CVS Extra-Care Reward-Card."  First, the link itself is suspicious because it spells Extra Care as two words with a hyphen between (and, I  know, this may not be something obvious if you can't see it, but I want to include all hallmarks) when CVS itself always uses a single word, ExtraCare, with the E and C capitalized, when referring to its program.  It has a hyphen between reward and card, which is completely unnecessary, and it uses the singular while the message title used the parenthesis S bit.  Finally, if you take yourself to that link and hover over it, what you get shown is a URL that is only 10 characters long and has CVS nowhere to be seen.  All of these things tell you that someone is trying to take you somewhere and to get you to do something you should not be doing.  In this case I'd suspect it's trying to get you to enter personal information as part of an identity theft scheme, but there's no way I'm clicking to find out.

What it boils down to is to, "Consider the source," take a closer look if the source may be OK but also might not be, and never to click unknown links from unknown sources, period.

Also, avoiding things like porn websites (not all are spyware/malware havens, but many are) or clicking through on anything in a pop-up that didn't clearly pop-up because you did something where a pop-up window would be expected, e.g., clicked on an "edit your contact information" button and the contact information comes up in a pop-up window, all of which you're doing on a website you already know to be legitimate.

Reasonable caution and looking out for yourself rather than trusting and/or falling prey to "Ooooooh, shiny!" syndrome in terms of clicking random links without seeing if they appear legitimate first.  This forms the basis of good browsing hygiene.

Brian

Patrick Le Baudour a écrit:  "What I usually do with nvda is open the context menu on the link, type c for copy link address, then nvda+c to tell the clipboard content."

This is the slightly slicker version of what I'd said, and at least it avoids having to open Notepad or any other program to paste the link from the clipboard.

Another program that I cannot recommend more highly, particularly to avoid bundled "junkware" being installed on your computer when you're installing something you've downloaded and want, is Unchecky.  It's useful to anyone, but particularly to the visually impaired and blind because of the loathsome practice of bundling.  I use it on my own computer just in case I miss one of those checkboxes I should be unchecking by accident.

Brian

Am 05.04.2016 um 20:43 schrieb Gene New Zealand <hurrikennyandopo@outlook.co.nz>:

Hi

Do you have under object presentation section in nvda, the following box
checked? report back ground progress bars checked?

Gene nz

On 06-Apr-16 6:38 AM, Lino Morales wrote:
Another way you could do this is the Navigational Sounds for Firefox.
I think Brian the XP fanboy from the UK suggested this to us on the
list. Good little add-on.

On 4/4/2016 10:39 AM, Afrim wrote:
You can hear sounds when activating or disactivating the browse mode,
but not when installing programs. There should be any add-on out
there which may play sounds in different areas of your Computer. If
you're talking about the sounds of percentage, they can be toggled on
by pressing insert plus U to indicate percentage.
Hope it helps. ,

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 4, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Ksenia Natapova via Groups.io
<ksenia.natapova=yahoo.de@groups.io> wrote:

Hello,
I have NVDA installed on my laptop. I don'g hear any sound when I
copy and paste a file or install a program...
I even tried to reset the NVDA settings but I still can't hear any
tone. Is there any way to turn on this option?
Best regards
Ksenia

--
Check out my website for nvda tutorials and other blindness related material at http://www.accessibilitycentral.net

Another way you could do this is the Navigational Sounds for Firefox.
I think Brian the XP fanboy from the UK suggested this to us on the
list. Good little add-on.

On 4/4/2016 10:39 AM, Afrim wrote:

You can hear sounds when activating or disactivating the browse mode,
but not when installing programs. There should be any add-on out
there which may play sounds in different areas of your Computer. If
you're talking about the sounds of percentage, they can be toggled on
by pressing insert plus U to indicate percentage.
Hope it helps. ,

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 4, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Ksenia Natapova via Groups.io
<ksenia.natapova=yahoo.de@groups.io> wrote:

Hello,
I have NVDA installed on my laptop. I don'g hear any sound when I
copy and paste a file or install a program...
I even tried to reset the NVDA settings but I still can't hear any
tone. Is there any way to turn on this option?
Best regards
Ksenia

You can hear sounds when activating or disactivating the browse mode, but not when installing programs. There should be any add-on out there which may play sounds in different areas of your Computer. If you're talking about the sounds of percentage, they can be toggled on by pressing insert plus U to indicate percentage.
Hope it helps. ,

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 4, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Ksenia Natapova via Groups.io <ksenia.natapova=yahoo.de@groups.io> wrote:

Hello,
I have NVDA installed on my laptop. I don'g hear any sound when I copy and paste a file or install a program...
I even tried to reset the NVDA settings but I still can't hear any tone. Is there any way to turn on this option?
Best regards
Ksenia

Ari Sepulveda asked, "So, what exactly does good browsing hygiene entail? I've heard a lot about this over the years, but I've never really understood what it means."

This is an excellent question that has no absolutely precise answer, but there are some general guidelines.

Most of "good browsing hygiene" revolves around analyzing what you're clicking on before you click on it, most specifically links.  These days, and for legitimate reasons, most links are not presented as what I call naked links, in full http plus address format, but using click through text.  This is very convenient, as it tells you much more about what the intended point of clicking is, but it can also mask attempts to get you to click on something that "looks legit" but is intended to take you somewhere that will infect your machine with malware or spyware.

The first thing you need to do before even thinking about clicking any link is to, "Consider the source," as far as the person or entity who provided it to you.  If you are browsing the New York Times website, or Amazon to shop, or eBay, or an e-mail message sent to you by a person you know or a company you do business with that doesn't set off your "something's not quite right about this message" radar, you can be quite safe in assuming that clicking links in those circumstances will be perfectly OK.  One could drive oneself crazy checking each and every link one clicks when the chance of a malicious one coming from "a legitimate source" is really quite small.  If you have any suspicion, then do double check.  I know that there is some way, when you are sitting on a link presented via click-through text, to make your screen reader actually read the "naked" version of the link itself.  When I hover over one the "naked" version of the link shows up in the status bar at the bottom of my web browser, but I'm somehow missing how to make NVDA read that information.  The same things shows up there if I use the INSERT+F7 feature, list links, and then "Move To" a given link.

If you have any reasonable suspicion that a link might not be taking you where you think it might, it's worth getting the "naked" version of the link announced.  If you have a link, for instance, that appears to be taking you to an eBay item listing, but when you have it announced doesn't include "rover.ebay.com" or "ebay.com" anywhere in the link you can almost be assured that someone's trying to take you down the garden path, and said garden won't be full of anything but cyber-weeds.  This idea applies generally in that you can get a sense of whether you recognize where a link wants to take you.  Here's a real-world example taken from the Spam folder of my own e-mail account (which was put there because Google's filter's already identified it as a suspicious e-mail). Let's presume it didn't get filtered, though.  That e-mail has the title, "Attn:Your CVS ExtraCare-Store Card(s), Has Just Been-Updated. Must Be Confirmed by April 10th. #4413"  The title itself should arouse suspicion, since it uses syntax (the parenthesis s is one give away, the weird hyphens another, and the "#4413" at the end a third), and it does.  It contains a link where the click-through text reads, "Go Here to Confirm Your New CVS Extra-Care Reward-Card."  First, the link itself is suspicious because it spells Extra Care as two words with a hyphen between (and, I  know, this may not be something obvious if you can't see it, but I want to include all hallmarks) when CVS itself always uses a single word, ExtraCare, with the E and C capitalized, when referring to its program.  It has a hyphen between reward and card, which is completely unnecessary, and it uses the singular while the message title used the parenthesis S bit.  Finally, if you take yourself to that link and hover over it, what you get shown is a URL that is only 10 characters long and has CVS nowhere to be seen.  All of these things tell you that someone is trying to take you somewhere and to get you to do something you should not be doing.  In this case I'd suspect it's trying to get you to enter personal information as part of an identity theft scheme, but there's no way I'm clicking to find out.

What it boils down to is to, "Consider the source," take a closer look if the source may be OK but also might not be, and never to click unknown links from unknown sources, period.

Also, avoiding things like porn websites (not all are spyware/malware havens, but many are) or clicking through on anything in a pop-up that didn't clearly pop-up because you did something where a pop-up window would be expected, e.g., clicked on an "edit your contact information" button and the contact information comes up in a pop-up window, all of which you're doing on a website you already know to be legitimate.

Reasonable caution and looking out for yourself rather than trusting and/or falling prey to "Ooooooh, shiny!" syndrome in terms of clicking random links without seeing if they appear legitimate first.  This forms the basis of good browsing hygiene.

Brian

Ari Sepulveda asked, "So, what exactly does good browsing hygiene entail? I've heard a lot about this over the years, but I've never really understood what it means."

This is an excellent question that has no absolutely precise answer, but there are some general guidelines.

Most of "good browsing hygiene" revolves around analyzing what you're clicking on before you click on it, most specifically links.  These days, and for legitimate reasons, most links are not presented as what I call naked links, in full http plus address format, but using click through text.  This is very convenient, as it tells you much more about what the intended point of clicking is, but it can also mask attempts to get you to click on something that "looks legit" but is intended to take you somewhere that will infect your machine with malware or spyware.

The first thing you need to do before even thinking about clicking any link is to, "Consider the source," as far as the person or entity who provided it to you.  If you are browsing the New York Times website, or Amazon to shop, or eBay, or an e-mail message sent to you by a person you know or a company you do business with that doesn't set off your "something's not quite right about this message" radar, you can be quite safe in assuming that clicking links in those circumstances will be perfectly OK.  One could drive oneself crazy checking each and every link one clicks when the chance of a malicious one coming from "a legitimate source" is really quite small.  If you have any suspicion, then do double check.  I know that there is some way, when you are sitting on a link presented via click-through text, to make your screen reader actually read the "naked" version of the link itself.  When I hover over one the "naked" version of the link shows up in the status bar at the bottom of my web browser, but I'm somehow missing how to make NVDA read that information.  The same things shows up there if I use the INSERT+F7 feature, list links, and then "Move To" a given link.

If you have any reasonable suspicion that a link might not be taking you where you think it might, it's worth getting the "naked" version of the link announced.  If you have a link, for instance, that appears to be taking you to an eBay item listing, but when you have it announced doesn't include "rover.ebay.com" or "ebay.com" anywhere in the link you can almost be assured that someone's trying to take you down the garden path, and said garden won't be full of anything but cyber-weeds.  This idea applies generally in that you can get a sense of whether you recognize where a link wants to take you.  Here's a real-world example taken from the Spam folder of my own e-mail account (which was put there because Google's filter's already identified it as a suspicious e-mail). Let's presume it didn't get filtered, though.  That e-mail has the title, "Attn:Your CVS ExtraCare-Store Card(s), Has Just Been-Updated. Must Be Confirmed by April 10th. #4413"  The title itself should arouse suspicion, since it uses syntax (the parenthesis s is one give away, the weird hyphens another, and the "#4413" at the end a third), and it does.  It contains a link where the click-through text reads, "Go Here to Confirm Your New CVS Extra-Care Reward-Card."  First, the link itself is suspicious because it spells Extra Care as two words with a hyphen between (and, I  know, this may not be something obvious if you can't see it, but I want to include all hallmarks) when CVS itself always uses a single word, ExtraCare, with the E and C capitalized, when referring to its program.  It has a hyphen between reward and card, which is completely unnecessary, and it uses the singular while the message title used the parenthesis S bit.  Finally, if you take yourself to that link and hover over it, what you get shown is a URL that is only 10 characters long and has CVS nowhere to be seen.  All of these things tell you that someone is trying to take you somewhere and to get you to do something you should not be doing.  In this case I'd suspect it's trying to get you to enter personal information as part of an identity theft scheme, but there's no way I'm clicking to find out.

What it boils down to is to, "Consider the source," take a closer look if the source may be OK but also might not be, and never to click unknown links from unknown sources, period.

Also, avoiding things like porn websites (not all are spyware/malware havens, but many are) or clicking through on anything in a pop-up that didn't clearly pop-up because you did something where a pop-up window would be expected, e.g., clicked on an "edit your contact information" button and the contact information comes up in a pop-up window, all of which you're doing on a website you already know to be legitimate.

Reasonable caution and looking out for yourself rather than trusting and/or falling prey to "Ooooooh, shiny!" syndrome in terms of clicking random links without seeing if they appear legitimate first.  This forms the basis of good browsing hygiene.

Brian

Brian Gaff offered, "I wonder if one of the issues is that she is just not being careful enough. Sooner or later if you do not take care, you will get something nasty, no matter what security you have on a machine you know."

And without any hesitation I second this idea, and it has nothing to do with whether one is blind or not.

The subject of infections and "things being missed" comes up endlessly on forums, and most tech geeks say exactly what Mr. Gaff has said in one way or another.  I have done the same recently, twice, on the JFW Group.  For anyone who might be interested the posts are, Recommendations for anti-virus, and, Forums Question & possible change request.  If you do not engage in good "browsing hygiene" you will get infected, period.  There is no way for antivirus, antimalware, and antispyware programs to be 100% up to date and 100% effective 100% of the time.

Brian