Alternate Headline: Disabled woman outraged that things aren't just handed to her because she is disabled, actually has to do stuff. For the record, I'm Canadi

Alternate Headline: Disabled woman outraged that things aren't just handed to her because she is disabled, actually has to do stuff. For the record, I'm Canadian and I have never once had to proffer ID to purchase an iOS device, and I've owned an iPhone, iPod touch and iPad. Sounds like a requirement of whatever carrier you are trying to get the phone from because you don't have much of a credit history or an existing relationship with a carrier. Not exactly Apple's fault. I'll give her the accessibility thing, but when is that ever the case? I mean with the exception of possibly wheelchairs and items that are designed for disabled people, what company has reps that can properly explain all the accessibility features in a given product? Accessibility in iOS and OS X is documented much better online. How about this: just buy the damn thing from Best Buy, try out the accessibility features, and if you feel they aren't adequate, return it within 30 days. You'll learn everything you need to know, and you'll give some kid an open box iPod touch to purchase at a discount. Everyone wins. > I understand that Apple is trying to position the iPhone as the phone that's great for people with disabilities (which to Apple means "blind people"). Custom vibrations are for blind people? Screen flashes/LED flashes for alerts? Mono audio? Custom gestures and TouchAssist? I don't know why she found it necessary to throw in that little condescending comment at the end. Apple bakes in thousands of dollars (literally, what it costs to add these features in to Windows 7 or XP) of accessibility features into iOS and OS X, for people with all sorts of disabilities. It's really insulting to characterize that as just some token features for the blind.