A Transcript from a Special Apple Press Event Regarding Accessibility

The vibe was electric as Steve Jobs took the stage at a special press event called to unveil some “exciting news” pertaining to Apple’s highly-acclaimed and much discussed screen reading solution, Voiceover. The stage was covered with signage written in braille and many reporters and tech bloggers were in complete mystery as to what the big announcement would reveal.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was published on July 4th, 2011, which was prior to the public presentation of the finalized NFB resolution regarding Apple and accessibility. This post, by no means, reflects the actual resolution text, and therefore should not be interpreted as such. You can view all resolutions from the 2011 NFB national convention here.

Okay – so this is a hypothetical press event and accompanying transcript, but I thought it would be interesting to play out NFB’s proposed resolution that would have Apple block all inaccessible application offerings from its App Store. It’s an illogical request, an unfair response to the solutions Apple has put on the table in recent years, and limits creative innovations for application developers. I strongly disagree with this suggestion – and I hope you’ll continue to stand with me in opposition of such ideas.

“Hello all and thank you for joining us this afternoon. As you can tell, our stage is covered with some banners that have braille written on them. These banners represent some of the amazing things being done by blind and visually impaired users of our iOS devices. Some say “money identification”, others say “accessible reading solution”, while others read “navigation solution” and “notetaker”. Whatever the implementation may be, we’re encouraged that so many from the blindness community find freedom in our constant pursuit to provide accessibility right out of the box.”

“First, in true fashion for an Apple event, I’d like to share a few statistics with you. In 2008 we released the first fully-functioning, mobile iterations of Voiceover on our popular iPod Nano line. We were thrilled when the folks from Screenless Switchers> covered the developments as we made the iTunes and iPod experience much more accessible to the blindness community. Shortly thereafter in the summer of 2009, we completely changed the game when the iPhone 3GS came bundled with Voiceover built-in to the operating system. Blind users would no longer need to pay excessive prices to gain access to such common place technology as a mobile phone. Many users that had no interest in our little company started taking notice that we were in the accessibility market – and many began giving our product offerings another glance. In quick pursuit, we rolled Voiceover into the entire line of iOS products and, beginning with iOS 5, blind and visually impaired users can use the “triple tap Home” feature to activate their devices without sighted assistance.”

“We’ve watched our share in the accessibility market increase over the past couple of years and we’re honored to serve this overlooked community of users. The iOS experience has seen hundreds, if not thousands, of Voiceover enhancements through the years – and it just keeps getting better. How many tech companies have a direct means to contact their accessibility team, and they actually take your concerns to heart? The number of Voiceover users keeps growing – and fast. But more interestingly, the number of developers joining our efforts is increasing, as well. That’s why I think you’re going to be pretty surprised at what we have for you today.”

“We were slammed pretty hard this year by a national organization representing the blindness community. Even after all that we had done for the community – they felt we still weren’t sensitive enough to the blind and visually impaired. It seems that too many applications were inaccessible to Voiceover users and many were frustrated with us for not intervening. We at Apple care about our users. Even when other developers were rolling out multitasking solutions, we held off until we could offer something that wouldn’t kill your battery. Our user experience is completely intentional – whether you have eyesight or not. That’s why we were taken aback by this litigation. In any event, we knew we needed to do something, and that we’ve done.”

“We’d like to introduce the A11y Store, rebuilt from the ground up with the blindness community in mind, which will completely replace our longstanding App Store. That’s right – due to litigation and forced functionality we’ve had to strip back any and all applications that aren’t accessible to those users without eyesight. Each and every app in the A11y Store is fully functional with Voiceover – so no more frustrations for the blindness community and their national organizations.”

“Many of you are probably wondering – “What’s going to happen to my application if it’s not Voiceover accessible?” Easy answer. We won’t approve it into the A11y Store. Even though that means less money for developers and even less money for our company – our lawyers have been happy to make the change if it means putting a smile on a Voiceover user’s face. And with the A11y Store, you won’t find Angry Birds or Tiny Wings here. Why? Because the blind and visually impaired would never be able to play those games with Voiceover – so why should you?”

“We know you’re a creative bunch and don’t doubt your ability to make applications more accessible. And, sure, we considered other alternatives. We’ve been able to offer refunds to Voiceover users that purchased completely inaccessible offerings – and could have continued to do so. We could have included an indicator stating whether apps were accessible or not. It would have shown that we place high importance on accessibility and, in the process, grabbed the attention of application developers. But why have a retrofitted solution when you can just reinvent the wheel, right?”

“Litigation completely obliterates the need for innovation. You won’t have to think creatively anymore – just follow a few guidelines and make your apps accessible. We’ll double and triple check your work, and once the app has been rigorously tested for accessibility, it will be fast tracked into our A11y Store. I know many of you were eager to get creative when Voiceover users came to you about accessibility concerns – but this just saves them the heartache and you the headache. Do it – or your apps don’t make it into the store. We figure this will mean many of you will jump ship and move to another platform – which won’t be near as accessible to blind and visually impaired users as ours is – but that’s a risk our attorneys are willing to take.”

“And that’s not all. We’ve gone ahead and disabled all visual feedback from our iOS devices. We figured that, with Voiceover at the forefront of all our minds, who needs to look at a screen anyway? And, hey, it means way better battery life. Take that Android. The best part is – all of this new functionality will be rolled out this afternoon. No delays. You’ll see the App Store replaced with an A11y Store icon very soon.”

Not an exciting Apple event – that’s for sure. I bet there’d be a ton of very upset developers on hand. What do you think about Resolution 20112 and NFB’s desire for Apple to block all inaccessible applications from its App Store? What are your alternative solutions to this resolution? Share your insight with us in the comment section.

  • Mike Reiser

    This is definitely crazy and isn’t realestic. I would agree if they maybe asked Apple to approve apps that do an every day task be accessible if at all possible, but this totally blanket approach isn’t going to work. Just another example of a blindness organization that thinks it knows what’s best.

  • Aaron Howell

    Just further evidence that NFB==No Friend (of the) Blind.

  • http://twitter.com/kd6cae Monty

    Maybe what could be done is have a rating system or category of apps where accessibility is mentioned. No need to totally say no to non-accessible apps. Right now there is no way to know if an app is accessible without first trying to use it. If those needing accessibility could go to a section of the app store maybe that could be a good solution.

  • Pingback: NoEyesNeeded

  • Pingback: justinromack

  • Pingback: justinromack

  • Pingback: Liam Erven

  • Pingback: Scott Erichsen

  • Pingback: Mike Reiser

  • Pingback: Chris Skarstad

  • Pingback: Rick Harmon

  • Pingback: Alex Alex

  • Pingback: Ivan The Terrible

  • Pingback: Kerry Hoath

  • Pingback: Joe Green

  • Pingback: Casey Mathews

  • Pingback: Steve Wettlaufer

  • Nicolai Svendsen

    This reminds me of the review of Mac OS X that NFB attempted in 2009. Obviously, they haven’t learned all that much from their mistake, since a week is far from enough when you’re learning a new operating system which does things in an entirely different manner and integrates screen access software into itself, negating the need for specific help written for VoiceOver in regards to various applications that may be used most often such as Mail, Safari, iTunes and Text Edit. This seems like a preposterous attempt to slam Apple. There is no way this is going through. I can see a rating system, perhaps, but this isn’t going to work regardless of how hard and rigorously NFB demands it. Part of me wonders if they’ll eventually establish a similar resolution in regards to the Mac App Store, despite the fact that Mac OS X isn’t the primary focus at the moment despite the number of switchers is definitely growing.

    Again, this just seems ridiculous. I hardly even know who the NFB is, since I don’t live in America, so this would either mean that if it passed hypothetically, everyone worldwide would suffer from this stupidity or it would only apply to the US App Store.

    If it passes, I’ll eat my iPhone.

  • Pingback: Alena Roberts

  • Pingback: Brandon Hicks

  • http://Twitter.com/buschic Em Green

    Ok this made me smile, NFB as usual comes off looking like idiots, apple’s not going to do it, any business judge is going to throw it out, laughing as he does it.
    Living in Ontario Canada with the disabilities act that ain’t worth the paper it’s written on, is frustrating especially with only having the totally inept CNIB, to help most here, I’m actually giggling at the recent NFB escapades!
    90% of apple customers are sighted & therefore don’t care about blind issues, no one is going to take us (blind people) seriously if this ridiculous motion passes!

  • Pingback: Matthew Johnson

  • Pingback: NoEyesNeeded

  • Pingback: justinromack

  • Pingback: Samuel Miller

  • Pingback: Tom Dekker

  • Pingback: Ivan The Terrible

  • Pingback: Joanna Briggs

  • John

    That’s an awesome article. I honestly can’t believe this idea was ever taken seriously at a convention let alone made into a resolution. I just have one question. Why is apple the only company held to such high standards? Microsoft, google, Nokia, research in motion, and canonical don’t need to offer accessible solutions. At the same time apple must make sure every program from third parties works in addition to their own software? Where’s the logic in that? I bet the people passing that motion are a bunch of angry JAWS users who realized they paid as much for JFW 12 as they would have for a new IPhone. They are mad that JAWS has no new features, and they could have spent their money getting a fully functional device offering everything from radio, to GPS, to calendar in their pocket. As such, disgruntled JAWS users want to ruin apple for all of us so they don’t feel like such big dopes. Well, guess what guys, this just makes you look dopier. Nice work, now go reboot your computers after reading this message. JAWS is probably about to crash anyway.

  • Pingback: Tree Mabry

  • http://www.ashleycox.co.uk ashley

    Hahahahaha… this isn’t going to happen. Besides, steve is an angry birds fan.

  • http://First Keith Hinton
  • http://www.keithnet.us Keith Hinton

    Oops..accidentally typed the wrong thing into the comment form. :) That aside, I don’t agree with NFB’s stupid screwd up resolution. First, they have no authority to tell Appel, who could, simply retract all accessibility if they chose to, what to do about the apps in the APple store. Apple, for it’s part, has no way of enforcing all applications to be programmed for accessibility. It’s an outrage! Backward thinking, horible ideas being shared, retract retract I say! Take that resolution and your backwards ideas NFB.org and anyone who is part of your organization and take them somewhere where you’ll be helped along like the little children you are!
    Your not that good, NFB!
    As for suggestions:
    I’m really not sure.
    I don’t involve myself with NFB that much honestly, so wasn’t aware of this until recently.
    Perhaps I’ll start my own blog about this as well, or even link to this one.
    If anyone wishes to check out my technology podcast, as I’m always looking for new folks to record and interview ont he site, please get in touch with me via the contact form at:
    http://www.keithnet.us
    Trust me-I’m not promoting this resolution at all on my site!
    Hopefully the NFB realises that they have limits on there power in the court systems of the U.S, and that they can’t force a larger company who potentially could make far more money than the NFB could make in a year, to conform. If I was under a lawful threat from the NFB to make all my stuff accessible assuming that I was for a moment an APple dev working on apps that were not meant to be used by the blind population wich I’m not, I wouldn’t do anything and would let the courts deal with me personally. Even in front of a judge, if it came down to it, I would still not do that. If sighted people had apps in the Apple store, and I was one of those types of developors, regardless of any judge, police officer, etc, I would simply throw a law book in the faces of those people and tel them to start making there stuff accesible first or to shut up. After all, I don’t think that a law exists saying that you’ll be kicked out of the U.S.A for not complying with accessibility demands. Not all programmers care people, come on. It’s a fact of life. You can’t expect everyone to be nice, and want to help people get access to programs.
    It’s nice to have accessibility. But accessiibility as far as I know is not a right, under any law in teh U.S, and never has been.
    It’s something that people choose to put into place, or not as far as I’m personally concerned. And the NFB has no power to dictate this type of horrible decisian.

    Come on!

  • Pingback: Mika Pyyhkala

  • Pingback: Mike Calvo

  • Pingback: Onj

  • Pingback: Christopher Toth

  • Pingback: James Malone

  • Nehemiah

    Sigh. Why don’t you read the actual resolution, rather than spewing inaccurate vitrial out of both ends?
    Here. Chris Toth made it easy for you: http://qwitter-client.net/resolution3.txt

  • Pingback: Matt

  • Pingback: Norali Ali Yusop

  • Pingback: Tony Olabode

  • Pingback: Michael Lauf

  • Chris Gray

    I understand what NFB is trying to do, never mind the sledge hammer approach which will only alienate Apple needlessly. This reminds me of a conference held many years ago during which Ken Jernigan vowed to stop the Windows Graphical User Interface in its tracks because of the damage it was doing to blind people. Good enough sentiment, but what an amazing exercise in misplaced ego. Working to ensure maximum accessibility would have been the wiser course.

  • Pingback: Ranger1138

  • Pingback: Quintin Williams

  • Pingback: Jonathan Lancett

  • Pingback: Kevan P.