----------------------------------------------------------------- For Immediate Release Turbo Braille Version 3.5 Available February 21, 1997 The latest release of Turbo Braille is now available by FTP from "ftp.crl.com" in the directory "/ftp/users/ka/kansys". The name of the file to retrieve is "tbrl35.zip". Licensed owners of earlier versions can perform free upgrades to version 3.5 unassisted by downloading this file, unzipping it into a temporary utility directory somewhere on the hard disk, and executing the utility "retrofix" included in the release. Be sure the registered version is already installed on the hard disk in a directory on the DOS path, and be sure not to unzip the version 3.5 release into the same directory as the registered copy. There is no charge for this upgrade, nor for future upgrades as they become available. For several years, a free demo version of Turbo Braille has been available, limited to a single page of braille output per run. Occasionally a user has been satisfied with the demo, using successive runs to produce page 1, then page 2, then page 3, running the program as often as necessary to braille an entire document. It was our hope that the nuisance value of this method would serve as pressure to purchase the package, and in fact it often has worked just that way. Recently we have learned about a less honorable practice in which demo copies of Turbo Braille have been combined with (would you believe it) NFB-Trans, a product removed from the market and placed in the public domain several years ago. The demo of Turbo Braille serves as a "front end" in this package, converting a Word Perfect file to its internal "braille intermediate file" or BIF format. The package includes an original conversion routine translating Turbo Braille format commands into NFB-Trans format commands, so that NFB-Trans can finish the job. We believe this practice is a clear violation of common decency, if not of our copyright, and we wish you to know that it is being carried out without our permission or approval. If you have paid any money for such a package, using Turbo Braille for any purpose other than to sample its own performance, you have been duped into aiding and abbetting a possibly illegal practice. For that reason, an additional restriction now applies in version 3.5 of Turbo Braille: BIF files will no longer be written to disk when they are generated. We are happy to continue to support our registered users, as well as users of demo copies, as long as their software is the new 3.5 version or later. We regret having to impose this additional restriction, but prudent self- defense requires that we do so. For software support, or for information about price and Turbo Braille, please contact Cindy at: cindyh@idir.net THE DOTTED LINE Telephone: (913) 843-8700 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Chuck -- Kansys, Inc. N0MQP & Dash: Back Home Again In Thunder Country "A Mighty Shepherd Is My Dog" Net-Tamer V 1.08.1 - Registered --- * Origin: NFBnet <--> Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E2T00008Date: 02/22/97 From: DAVID ANDREWS Time: 12:28am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Using telnet in the GUI environments. (F00:28:5602/22/97 * Original Area: NETMAIL * Original From: Visually.Impaired.Pittsburgh.Area.C (99:1/1) * Original To : root:nfb-talk@echogate (1:282/1045) From: Visually.Impaired.Pittsburgh.Area.Computer.Enthusiasts!@visi.com Subject: Using telnet in the GUI environments. (Forward) I've recently heard of Kermit 95 which is a possible solution to the issue of terminal and telnet access. There are versions for Win 95, Win NT, and Warp. Connections may be made via modem or tcp/ip and 26 terminal emulations are available. Commands can be issued and it uses a text based console and keys may be re-mapped easily. I haven't tried it with a screen reader, but it ought to be worth a try. Check out : http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ and http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/whatsnew.html and report on how it works with screen access. -- Mark Visually Impaired Pittsburgh Area Computer Enthusiasts! Success isn't how far you got, but the distance you traveled from where you started. vipace@trfn.pgh.pa.us On Thu, 20 Feb 1997, Darrell Shandrow wrote: > Greetings colleagues, > > This article addresses the problem of using text-based telnet programs in a > GUI environment. As blind computer users, we face special challenges when > using these text-based programs in a non-text-based environment where all > the "standard" DOS stuff is out the window. Here are some of my > perspectives on the situation. Please feel free to start some lively > discussion of these topics. > > Traditionally, us blind folks have used the Internet via text-based Unix > shell accounts. We ran DOS-based terminal emulation programs like Procomm, > Telix and Commo. All the prompts and text was spoken automatically because > it was written through the BIOS using DOS calls. This fact, along with > robust screen reading software, made it fairly straightforward to use many > Internet services such as E-mail, telnet, ftp, irc, lynx and anything else > one could use in Unix. If you heard too much information at one time > automatically, you could silence your speech and use screen review ommands. > > When we used irc to chat with users or telnet to access bulletin board > systems, we actually required the text to be written through DOS BIOS so > that we had automatic speech regardless of our screen reader. This worked > extremely well and the use of these two Internet services almost always > went smoothly. > > Now, the Internet; and all other computer applications; are moving to the > GUI platforms like Windows, OS/2 and Macintosh. These platforms have > varying degrees of accessibility and it is possible to do many things just > as well as a sighted user. One can even utilize screen access software in > Windows to browse the Web with Netscape, Internet Explorer or just about > any other GUI web browser. One can easily use Eudora to read and send > electronic mail. However, current experience indicates that terminal > emulation is still a problem. > > It is actually quite possible to use terminal emulation under Windows in > various job situations where the applications are specifically programmed > using macros to allow the blind employee (usually a customer service rep) > to obtain necessary information. Automatic speech is not required and, > usually, undesirable in these situations. So, this is not exactly what I > am addressing here. > > I am talking about the use of a terminal emulation interface like telnet to > access other computers on the Net interactively. The various GUI-based > telnet clients have various problems with accessibility when it comes to > the interactive speaking of information. These problems are due to the > fact that there is no such thing as BIOS calls in a GUI. Text is scrolled > to the screen and it is up to the screen reader to figure out how to speak > it well. This is fine for standard controls like dialog boxes and menus > because the information is fairly specific and predictable. Due to the > nature of Windows controls, the screen readers seem to have an easier time > dealing with these things. > However, scrolling text from an interactive connection is much less > predictable and screen readers don't perform well. Since it is unlikely > that there will ever be anything similar to BIOS calls in the GUI > environments, I propose the following choices to solve the interactivity > problems: > > Text-based telnet client: > A text-based telnet client could be written to work much like the FTP > client that comes with Windows '95. The FTP program is text-based and > works extremely well in a DOS box with a DOS screen reader. Similarly, a > telnet client could be written that uses the Windows '95 (or other GUI) > networking resources. This client should have solid VT100 and ansi-bbs > emulation and support file transfers with Zmodem and kermit. Ideally, it > should be able to do an rlogin when that situation is required. > > Another possible solution would be to write a program that could use the > GUI's built-in networking resources to emulate a standard DOS packet > driver. This would work like the cslip and slipper drivers currently > available. If this were done, programs like Minuet and NCSA telnet could > be used in a DOS box. It would allow for some flexibility. > If this solution were adopted, the packet drivers should be non-obtrusive > so that one could still use their Windows Internet applications like > Netscape even when the DOS client is running. > > The final solution I will suggest is to emulate a virtual com port so that > one could use a DOS-based terminal emulator like Procomm or Commo over a > telnet connection. I am not certain how this one could work, because you > would need to have a way to specify the address of the host to which you > wanted to connect. If this solution were adopted, one could use whichever > program they liked and have complete functionality when connecting to a BBS > or attempting some other interactive text-based session. > > I feel that this is extremely important, since shell accounts are becoming > less and less available. It will be very useful if a blind person who has > only a PPP connection can still use their computer to connect to services > like GBX and NfbNet. > > I hope this generates some lively discussion and some real solutions. Thanks. > > Regards, > > Darrell Shandrow [http://www.qfi.org] > Technology Specialist, Colorado Center for the Blind > I am not representing the CCB. This is just me... > Changing what it means to be blind every day and in every way! > > --- --- Maximus/2 2.02 * Origin: NFB NET St. Paul, MN (612) 696-1975 (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E2V00000Date: 02/25/97 From: DAVID ANDREWS Time: 09:06am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: 3rd LIteracy Conference From: David Andrews Subject: 3rd LIteracy Conference Getting in Touch With Literacy Minneapolis, Minnesota September 1997 MARK YOUR CALENDAR for The Third Biennial Conference of GETTING IN TOUCH WITH LITERACY A National Conference Focusing on the Needs of Individuals who are Blind or Visually Impaired will be held at; Radisson Plaza Hotel Minneapolis, Minnesota September 25, 26, and 27, 1997. Organized by MN Teachers of the Blind & Visually Impaired, MN State Services for the Blind, National Federation of the Blind of MN, MN Department of Children, Families and Learning, MN Deaf/Blind Technical Assistance Project, MN State Academy for the Blind and Visually Impaired, AER of MN, and the Wisconsin Bureau of Exceptional Children. Help us make the 3rd Biennial Conference exceptionally exciting! A conference of innovative as well as practical applications to literacy in all stages of life. For further information contact: Jean Martin, Minnesota Resource Center for the Blind/Visually Impaired Box 308, Faribault, MN 55021-0308 (507)332-5510 mnrcblnd@edu.gte.net David Andrews (dandrews@visi.com) or BBS: Fidonet 1:282/1045 (612) 696-1975 Net-Tamer V 1.07 - Registered --- * Origin: NFBnet <--> Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E2V00001Date: 02/25/97 From: DEAN MARTINEAU Time: 12:30am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: looking for roommates in Houston and New00:30:0302/25/97 From: Dean Martineau Subject: looking for roommates in Houston and New Orleans (Forward) I'll be exhibiting at both conventions this summer, and might like to find a male roommate. I'm looking for somebody quiet, or perhaps somebody who spends almost no time in the room. After a day of exhibiting, I often go to the room to get away from the mases. If you might be amenable to the idea, please email me, not the list. thanks for considering the idea. Dean Martineau deamar@eskimo.com --- * Origin: NFBnet <--> Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E2X00000Date: 02/26/97 From: LINWOOD GALLAGHER Time: 01:41pm \/To: DAVID ANDREWS (Read 0 times) Subj: nfbtrans Dear David, I am translating documents that are prepared using Word Perfect for Windos and those files are converted by that program into files for Word Perfect v5.1 before they are loaded onto a disk and given to me to be put into braille. The person preparing the document believes they can save it as an ASCII file so I don't get interference stripping some codes but not others. I take those v5.1 files and use "Text Out 5" to convert the files to a text file which I then use brltrans to convert to grade two. An interesting thing is that after I translate one file, I find that I must warm boot the computer to convert a second file as it seems that unless I do that, Nfbtrans does not recognize the Braille Blazer I use. Is this a quirk in the program? Anotherobservation is that the first page of every document has a one line top margin and a one line bottom margin, but subsequent pages braille on the line that is just above the perferations that seperate each page. my .cnf settings include cl32, pw32, pl25, lm1, and others I can give if you need them. the settings on the Blazer are: pl27, pl11, lm1, rm34, tm1, bm1, and others if you need those. tried changing but the new codes for pw and pl in Nfbtrans have no effect which leeds me to believe that control codes are not being stripped out somewhere in the lond chain. Any suggestions you might have will be most appreciated --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: Library COM -* Reno, NV USA *- (702) 785-4191 (1:213/742) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E2X00001Date: 02/25/97 From: PETE DONAHUE Time: 11:53pm \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: harness up From: Pete Donahue Subject: harness up Fellow Federationists and Friends, I am curious to know if anyone has received the fall-winter edition of Harness Up; the Magazine of the National Association of Guide Dog Users? I am curious to know as I have yet to receive it and there is the possibility that it may have gotten lost and I will need to notify them so I can get it replaced. But if no one else has gotten there copy I have nothing to worry about. Please let me know. Thanks. peter Donahue --- * Origin: NFBnet <--> Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E3100000Date: 02/28/97 From: RICHARD WEBB Time: 06:56am \/To: ALL (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Assistive Technology Lemon Law From: Richard Webb Subject: Re: Assistive Technology Lemon Law Hello Greg, Recently, you wrote in nfb-talk: >There is a bill currently pending before the New Mexico legislature >which would create an assistive technology lemon law. If passed and >signed into law, the law would require makers of assistive >technology devices to place a 1 year warrantee on their products. >I seem to recall some discussion that such laws would have an >adverse impact on the blind because they would discourage >development and marketing of assistive technology products designed >for use by the blind; the argument being that the market for blind >persons is so small that anything that reduces profitability would >mean fewer new products. Does anybody have any comments? I don't know how other folks are doing with the assistive technology of choice, but, I've been using asap and asaw. In the case of asap, since 1993. The technical support I've gotten from Larry and Dennis, when needed, has been excellent. I don't know how others fare, I'm sure your mileage may vary, but from what I've heard, Blazie does an excellent job also. For other communities, such a law might be beneficial, because, as a lawyer, you know that plenty of folks are out there selling "Snake oil" and see a chance to make a buck, and damn the consequences. So far, though, I don't think too many of them are involved in assistive technology for the blind. If they are, they're not major players in the market at this point. I think there are plenty of so-called services available to the blind which are lemons at best, but they're not in the assistive technology business. In my humble opinion, rfb comes darned close, and I can say with even more first hand knowledge that the out of touch radio reading service funded and provided by AFB is definitely in the lemon category. Notice both of these use volunteer readers of varying quality, and their products vary in quality too. What I've seen from rfb has been one or two older ascii books, which were fine enough, but a college student friend of mine has some books for some course work which are quite poorly done on cassette for afb. One such is for transcription type work, and the reader doesn't even bother to give proper punctuation or other pertinent info. Her boyfriend ends up reading out of the ink text to tell her where such things would be placed, but that's another issue entirely. AS for assistive technology in our field, though, I think that we have conscientious developers of assistive technology. The problem, I think, comes with a lot of places where you have to buy from a local dealer who is not knowledgeable about the product. Therefore, he/she can't provide adequate support, and it falls back on the developer to provide it, while only adding cost. There needs to be some streamlining in those cases, but I don't think that a lemon law is the way to go at this time. Just my $0.02 worth. Regards, Richard Webb, Electric Spider Productions Recording and sound Amateur call kb0ruu --- * Origin: NFBnet <--> Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E3100001Date: 02/28/97 From: MIKE FREEMAN Time: 10:11am \/To: GTRAPP@ABQ.COM (Read 0 times) Subj: Assistive Technology Lem In an epistle to All dated 27 Feb 97 23:41, Gtrapp@Abq.Com says: Gt> From: gtrapp@abq.com Gt> Subject: Assistive Technology Lemon Law Gt> There is a bill currently pending Gt> before the New Mexico legislature Gt> which would create an assistive Gt> technology lemon law. If passed and Gt> signed into law, the law would require Gt> makers of assistive technology Gt> devices to place a 1 year warrantee on Gt> their products. I seem to recall Gt> some discussion that such laws would Gt> have an adverse impact on the blind Gt> because they would discourage Gt> development and marketing of assistive Gt> technology products designed for use Gt> by the blind; the argument being Gt> that the market for blind persons is Gt> so small that anything that reduces Gt> profitability would mean fewer new Gt> products. Does anybody have any Gt> comments? Sorry to quote in full but I thought the subject of sufficient importance to merit quoting of the entire query. I had not thought of this subject until five minutes ago when I read the above message. Hence, my thoughts are off-the-cuff and perhaps I may change my mind later. nevertheless, here goes. It seems to me that blind persons, as other citizens, deserve to be able to purchase products which perform as advertised. We all know that, though the assistive technology market has been an exemplary one in that few devices have been "lemons", there have been some spectacular exceptions -- exceptions which have, in some instances, cost blind consumers money. It seems to me that reputable purveyors of assistive devices have nothing to fear from a lemon law such as you outline. That the market for assistive devices for the blind is small seems to me insufficient reason to give an exception for such devices in the law and, furthermore, such an explicit exception might send the wrong message. It sure would to me -- it would say that the blind aren't good enough as a class to deserve the same sort of protection afforded other disabled persons under the proposed law. In general, therefore, I think there should be *no* exceptions. Havint said this, however, some questions come to mind. What happens in the situation wherein, say, a blind user (or an entity acting on behalf of a blind user -- say, an employer) purchases a particular screen-reading system in anticipation that this system would make a certain program accessible and such program turns out *not* to be accessible, at least at the time of purchase? Certainly, if the vendor of the screen-reading system claims that the program to be accessed is accessible, the vendor should be subject to the proposed lemon law. But what if the vendor makes no such claim? Is it, as now, a case of caveat emptor? Or does the lemon law protect the blind user, entitling him/her to get his/her money back? This would be great for the user but I could see it working a considerable hardship on small vendors who might not even have known the purchaser was going to use the system to access the currently-inaccessible program. This sort of situation must be coming up rather frequently these days since we are in the relative infancy of screen-readers which can handle the G.U.I. and programs, for the most part, may not cooperate yet with such screen-readers. It's a jungle out there and I am in somewhat of a quandry as to how it is to be tamed, particularly when we, the blind, in the aggregate, don't know enough about the graphical environment to know what sort of access we need. Just food for thought. Mike Freeman Internet: mikef@pacifier.com ___ PCRR QWK 1.60 --- Maximus/2 2.02 * Origin: NFB NET St. Paul, MN (612) 696-1975 (1:282/1045) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 233 NFB BLIND NEWS Ref: E3100002Date: 02/28/97 From: MIKE FREEMAN Time: 10:14am \/To: DIANE DOBSON (Read 0 times) Subj: Re: Assistive Technology In an epistle to All dated 28 Feb 97 01:21, Diane Dobson says: DD> As lawyers cant you recognise Blackmail ? Hey, don't you think that's a rather low blow? Mike Freeman Internet: mikef@pacifier.com ___ PCRR QWK 1.60 --- Maximus/2 2.02 * Origin: NFB NET St. Paul, MN (612) 696-1975 (1:282/1045)