I came to that question via a circuitous route. Scott Weiss – the Symbian UI expert – is speaking at Over the Air next week. Here are the details of the conference – and it is free.
I checked out the blog for Over the Air and followed the link to Opera Evangelist Henny Swan’s blog and on from there to Boagworld forums.
Henny’s blog includes an interview with a web designer, Jamie Knight, who has autism. It’s not an issue I’ve ever thought about. Jamie’s specific problem includes a lot of sensory overload. Autism spectrum is a growing health problem with some frightening stats, especially in the USA where it is probably more diagnosed than in Europe.
Leaving aside the specifics though the bigger question of how a mass medium like mobile becomes truly accessible is an interesting one. Job done, no?
But obviously not.
More broadly it’s interesting to see a browser take up these issues and a little shamefacedly I have to confess I gave up using Opera about three years ago.
Yes, I now use Firefox and I use Google’s mail facility. The features in Google mail…. well I had them there in Opera long before I used them in Google.
I wonder what design features lie behind my choice? It feels a little like the iPhone-other debate in smart phones. There’s no tangible reason I can put my finger on but I gave up a great browser with unsurpassed organising features that also included searchable mail.
These intangibles seem to be an imortant dynamic in the mobile world right now.
We can analyse and project, but user choices are so confusing I dont know why I make decisions for myself. Hope to get to Over the Air to find a little more out.
I suspect my choices are made on the basis of a gamut of accessibility and usability criteria I’m only half aware of. In part is it the momentum of what other people are doing that persuades me/us?
At least for some people, the accessibility can be at the top of the criteria list when it comes to choosing a particular mobile – I have been working on a screen reader for the blind (Nuance TALKS) for quite a while, and experience every day how “But is it S60? Does it run TALKS?” is what really makes or breaks a phone for many of our blind customers.
Once this has be ascertained, the next issue are personal preferences such as slide vs. candybar, tactile keyboards vs. slim etc. that aren’t all too different from what a sighted user would consider.
However, there are some recent trends, such as touch screens and non-accessible UIs, that are making this choice more difficult (and Nokia have thrown us a bit of a curve-ball by starting to name new mobiles that do not use Symbian with numbers previously used for S60 devices, such as “6600″ and “7610″ – so our compatibility lists now become a lot more complex).
I have posted a summary of what I think the future holds for accessibility at the Symbian UI level to the UI Council’s forum:
http://developer.symbian.org/forum/showthread.php?p=7241
Note that this is somewhat biased from a blindness/low-vision perspective, as in terms of adaptive technology this is probably one of the best-understood disabilities, and happens to be my personal focus right now.
Then again, many features, such as eyes-free interfaces for the blind, or attempts to reduce desktop “clutter” would probably benefit anyone – try setting up a modern Vista PC with lots of pre-installed antivirus, multimedia, internet access and office applications for the first, which all jump at you with license agreements, opt-ins, 30-day trials, features they want you to activate etc., and you know what “sensory overload” feels like.
ciao marcus
Hi Marcus, I notice you are a regular poster to the developer site – the issue you are raising here is one we can easily overlook but I presume the future lies in being more precise about the niches a phone is serving. There are so many handsets – and the number will grow. To date I haven’t seen a successful attempt to identify and brand a core user base for any particular hadnset. You can say oh this is cheap so its for everyone who can’t afford the next one up but that is naive marketing. This is a rambling way of saying is there a case for specific accessibility niches? I have to say the only reason I stuck with an iPhone is I can’t see the text on the screens on the phones that I used to use. Just being able to see it has converted me into a true 3G user. So that process has all been about accessibility.
If accessibility is just a niche, why do Android, Blackberrys and the iPhone have accessibility frameworks and APIs for their OS? Just because of existing and coming legal constraints? Perhaps, but also because companies such as Apple, Google and RIM have a better understanding of the meaning of corporate responsibility?
Next to my new iPhone, I still love my S60 Nokia. Together with the open source Loadstone-GPS application, it is a very useful aid for blind mobility, but I and many many others need a screen reader such as Nuance’s Talks to use it. It would be a pitty if blind and visually impaired persons can’t be Symbian users in the future.
It is conspicuous that nobody has responded to Mr. Groebers post “Accessibility in QT and beyond”. I know that there are a few people at Nokia/Symbian who would like to push accessibility, but they are lonely folks who get no support from their colleagues and bosses. Apple has a whole accessibility department, Google and the Open Handset Alliance members support accessibility and RIM has an accessibility product manager. They all communicate their efforts and collaborate with accessibility advocates. This should be a model for Symbian respectively Nokia. Accessibility can improve the user experience for all and isn’t just important for disabled customers. Spending less than 0,1 % of Nokias PR budget on this issue would make things much better. Thank you for attention.
Hi Per – are you in touch with Scott Weiss? I want to just clear up what I meant by niches. I have a Mac Air for my work – so I can carry it around comfortably as I travel and as I got from office to office. I have a PC at home and I have a heavier laptop that has ore power. I have an iPhone and I should not have got rid of my Sony Ericsson phone because the camera was great. I’m pretty sure I’ll end up with a tablet device.
My problem with the phone industry is I don’t generally see devices targeting needs in a delineated way. The iPhone brought me into G 3 usage because I could see the screen properly for the first time with any phone – for all the usability praise that has been heaped on it, for me it is simple – bigger screen.
I can see devices being made that respond to particular needs. I was talking today to a guy who researches device implants for different medical conditions -for example heart problems, and he wants to use mobile phones to collect data from this and transit to a car professional.
I ca imagine that market developing several types of mobile device with some voice service phone attributes. But I don’t imagine it has to contain all the attributes that currently get loaded into a phone.
But back to your main point – there’s no excuse for not addressing the issues you set out. I’ll put a note around internally and see how and how can respond.
There is nothing that prevents any one individual or any one business from both setting the priority for an accessibility framework, and modifying or adding to code in such a way that these features become available in a future distribution.
We have an open governance model for this purpose, and it would be good to focus on setting up the momentum for such activities, e.g. form a working group, setup a discussion forum, submit proposals to release councils, lobby package owners, etc., opposed to expecting that we as an organization would deliver the development work necessary to implement such a feature set.
I for one support the idea.
// Lee