> Everybody makes sure their website or product works with a screen reader and out the door it goes I don't think even a majority do anything to test or ensure

> Everybody makes sure their website or product works with a screen reader and out the door it goes I don't think even a majority do anything to test or ensure their website or software works with a screen reader or other assistive technologies. I think it can be useful to think of accessibility as an aspect of usability. To that end, user testing, which involves people who aren't necessarily technically knowledgable or "geeks," should include people with disabilities, particularly those who use assistive technologies (AT). I mainly think about web accessibility which doesn't pose some of the challenges that hardware products have. With web sites, someone can pay you for an hour of two of your time to get on Skype (or whatever), share your screen, they give you a URL to visit, and ask you to perform some tasks. They watch to see what fails and listen to you talk about your thought processes regarding how you go about performing a task or when you think you've run into an obstacle that may or may not be AT-related. This kind of remote user testing has many advantages unrelated to accessibility but especially for testing with AT it means not having the expense, expertise, and logistics of having a facility that's easy to get to and equipped with many different kinds of AT.