3 ms·

I feel like Google Talkback can do basically the same with. You hover over the screen and Talkback tells you, what's underneath your finger. It can even notific

I feel like Google Talkback can do basically the same with. You hover over the screen and Talkback tells you, what's underneath your finger. It can even notifications out loud. I would even go that far and say that it can do at least 90% of what VoiceOver can. Yes, it might not work magically in every app, but with a good choice of apps, a blind person should be able to do most of the normal activities. If I'm wrong, please, let me now.

simonh 10y ago
This seems like a pretty good evaluation[0]. Basically accessibility seems to be a fundamental part of Apple's UI philosophy, while on most other platforms support for it is pretty uneven. I'm sure the TalkBack team work hard at it for example, but at Apple accessibility isn't just the responsibility of one team, every team that works on UI is responsible for accessibility. [0]http://pauljadam.com/iosvsandroida11y/ http://pauljadam.com/iosvsandroida11y/
RobMurray 10y ago
Yes it does work, it's just seriously lacking in features and responsiveness. I use both Talkback and Voiceover and can get things done far faster with Voiceover.
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  Even the name "Talkback" sounds awfully derivative of "Voiceover" -- it follows the same <verb><preposition> pattern but just replaces the verb and preposition with approximate synonyms.
MBCook 10y ago
So you've never used it, it probably doesn't work with every app, but it does a few of the same thing so it's probably the same? That seems like it would be offensively dismissive to people who have to deal with this issue. Apple puts a phenomenal amount of work into allowing people with all sorts of different handicaps and disabilities to be able to use their devices. I remember being in college before the iPhone was out. I had a blind classmate who had a special Nokia Symbian phone with thousands of dollars of software on it just so he could use it. All paid for by insurance, and it crashed all the time. I don't think I've ever seen an article say a bad thing about Apple's assistive technologies. They are built-in, they don't cost extra, they basically work everywhere. Developers don't even have to put in that much work to make use of it. It's a core part of the system which means that when they decided to build watchOS it was already there and ready for people with disabilities. When they updated the Apple TV to use a version of iOS it got lots of the accessibility features as well.
- Tajnymag 10y ago
  Fair enough. I didn't want to sound offensive. I just wanted to hear someone else's opinion to how they differ and why one is better than the other. Completely neutral here.

simonh 10y ago

This seems like a pretty good evaluation[0]. Basically accessibility seems to be a fundamental part of Apple's UI philosophy, while on most other platforms support for it is pretty uneven. I'm sure the TalkBack team work hard at it for example, but at Apple accessibility isn't just the responsibility of one team, every team that works on UI is responsible for accessibility. [0]http://pauljadam.com/iosvsandroida11y/ http://pauljadam.com/iosvsandroida11y/

RobMurray 10y ago

Yes it does work, it's just seriously lacking in features and responsiveness. I use both Talkback and Voiceover and can get things done far faster with Voiceover.

DonHopkins 10y ago
Even the name "Talkback" sounds awfully derivative of "Voiceover" -- it follows the same <verb><preposition> pattern but just replaces the verb and preposition with approximate synonyms.

MBCook 10y ago

So you've never used it, it probably doesn't work with every app, but it does a few of the same thing so it's probably the same? That seems like it would be offensively dismissive to people who have to deal with this issue. Apple puts a phenomenal amount of work into allowing people with all sorts of different handicaps and disabilities to be able to use their devices. I remember being in college before the iPhone was out. I had a blind classmate who had a special Nokia Symbian phone with thousands of dollars of software on it just so he could use it. All paid for by insurance, and it crashed all the time. I don't think I've ever seen an article say a bad thing about Apple's assistive technologies. They are built-in, they don't cost extra, they basically work everywhere. Developers don't even have to put in that much work to make use of it. It's a core part of the system which means that when they decided to build watchOS it was already there and ready for people with disabilities. When they updated the Apple TV to use a version of iOS it got lots of the accessibility features as well.

Tajnymag 10y ago
Fair enough. I didn't want to sound offensive. I just wanted to hear someone else's opinion to how they differ and why one is better than the other. Completely neutral here.