Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
typodupeerror delete not in

Comments: 220 + -   Oracle Drops Sun's Commitment To Accessibility on Monday February 08 2010, @10:43PM

Posted by kdawson on Monday February 08 2010, @10:43PM
from the don't-need-it-until-you-need-it dept.
gnome
oracle
sun
news
technology
An anonymous reader writes "What I feared has come true: after buying Sun, Oracle had a look at its accessibility group and made big cuts in it by firing the most important contributors to the Linux accessibility tools. This is a very sad day for disabled people, as it means we do not really have full-time developers any more." The coverage in OSTATIC has a few more details, including the caution: "This just shows that all too few companies are sponsoring a11y work. If one company laying off a couple of developers spells trouble for the project, then there were problems before that happened" (thanks to reader dave c-b for pointing this out).
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by VendettaMF (629699) on Monday February 08 2010, @10:56PM (#31068260) Homepage

    Surely this does not come as a surprise to anyone?

    Oracle, who have deliberately lessened the abilities of their own products (from a reasonably solid database system 10 years ago to a steaming turd now) in order to sell more licenses to do the same amount of work will continue to cut anything that is not immediately profitable.

    Anything that Sun pursued on moral or ethical grounds, and anything that shows "future promise" will be axed as soon as they spot it.

    As well as anything that could potentially compete with their more expensive in-house crap.

    People have been worrying about MySQL. They have been right to worry. However, as a corporation, Oracle can and will have all relevant American laws re-written/re-interpreted as necessary to see all commercial deployment of MySQL in the USA dead within two years.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      It might not have been a surprise but it is very unfortunate that Oracle did this.

      • Pardon my naivete, but couldn't this be an opportunity for some other company to step in and fill the gap left behind by Oracle?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by euxneks (516538)

      People have been worrying about MySQL. They have been right to worry. However, as a corporation, Oracle can and will have all relevant American laws re-written/re-interpreted as necessary to see all commercial deployment of MySQL in the USA dead within two years.

      MySQL needs to be forked, before it gets forked in the rear by Oracle.

      ...I apologise for the horrible pun.

    • by williamhb (758070) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:46PM (#31068530) Homepage Journal

      Surely this does not come as a surprise to anyone?

      Oracle, who have deliberately lessened the abilities of their own products (from a reasonably solid database system 10 years ago to a steaming turd now) in order to sell more licenses to do the same amount of work will continue to cut anything that is not immediately profitable.

      Anything that Sun pursued on moral or ethical grounds, and anything that shows "future promise" will be axed as soon as they spot it.

      Or, if we take off our doom-coloured spectacles, we might realise that Oracle (largely a server applications company) and Sun (largely a server hardware company) probably don't consider a niche open source desktop environment to be part of their core business. In other news, I hear the Dunlop tyre company hasn't spent much on improving the accessibility of car stereos either.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by VendettaMF (629699)

        Which is all well and good until you look at what else Oracle are cutting/dropping/lining up to destroy.

    • by IntlHarvester (11985) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:02AM (#31068600) Journal

      People have been worrying about MySQL. They have been right to worry.

      Its funny. With all the hubbub surrounding MySQL, hardly anyone has even bothered asking what's going to happen to OpenOffice.org.

      • by 0x000000 (841725) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:06PM (#31068320)

        Why? Oracle is not required under any laws to provide development time to help make Linux or any OS more friendly towards people with disabilities. Sun was doing this out of their own great good heart.

        It is in their best interest to make Solaris/OpenSolaris more friendly towards people with disabilities in an attempt to capture more market share that otherwise would go to Apple Mac OS X or Microsoft Windows where such products already exist.

        • by Sri Ramkrishna (1856) <`sriram.ramkrishna' `at' `gmail.com'> on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:17AM (#31068700)

          Why? Oracle is not required under any laws to provide development time to help make Linux or any OS more friendly towards people with disabilities. Sun was doing this out of their own great good heart.

          It is in their best interest to make Solaris/OpenSolaris more friendly towards people with disabilities in an attempt to capture more market share that otherwise would go to Apple Mac OS X or Microsoft Windows where such products already exist.

          Actually, they did this because if Sun wants to get Solaris with GNOME on government desktops they need to have accessibility. So this is to comply with government contracts. Nobody pays for this kind of thing out of the goodness of their hearts. This is a public-ly traded company.. sheesh. sri

  • Oracle DB (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chris Lawrence (1733598) on Monday February 08 2010, @10:59PM (#31068276) Homepage

    Oracle has a solid core DB engine. It dates back to the seventies, but it has evolved and it's still really good. Everything built around it is pretty much crap. But people buy from Oracle for the DB engine, then get stuck buying a lot of other super-expensive, bad quality software. I love PostgreSQL, and it's getting better every day, but there's still some stuff the core Oracle engine did ten years ago you can't get anywhere else.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by rtaylor (70602)

      there's still some stuff the core Oracle engine did ten years ago you can't get anywhere else

      I am genuinely interested in what these include, particularly the business case or problem you are solving with them. There are lots of features or specific implementations of features that are unique to Oracle.

      • Re:Oracle DB (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Chris Lawrence (1733598) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:33PM (#31068464) Homepage

        It's not any one thing. It's lots of little things. Lots of flexibility and subtlety with SQL statements. Some obscure functions you wouldn't find anywhere else. More powerful and intricate subqueries and triggers. Extreme flexibility in modifying existing tables and other data structures live. An almost insane level of customizability (any good book on Oracle spends half the book talking about installation.) Now it's not perfect, they still don't have a proper time/date format (time_t anyone??), making date calculations across timezones and taking daylight savings into account a real pain.

        Granted, most people don't need this stuff. PostgreSQL is good enough for most roles. The complexity versus reward ratio might not work out for a lot of things anymore, nevermind the cost. I'm out of the game now, so I don't know what the latest stuff does, but they were definitely ahead of the pack for a long time. But they're kind of just going on inertia now. They don't even define themselves as a database company anymore, though that's the only really good product they have. I probably wouldn't buy it today, but I have some fond memories, and it really helped me to build some great stuff.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          That's not because it's insanely flexible. That's because Oracle installers stink. I've had to rewrite the Linux installer every single time I've used it over more than a decade. It's nearly as stupid as the Java installers on Linux: it does _not_ take a running Java instance to simply drop a lot of files into a directory and make a few symlinks. I'm afraid that now we could have the worst of both worlds.

      • Re:Oracle DB (Score:5, Informative)

        by afabbro (33948) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @01:01AM (#31068936)
        • Standy databases. Yes, I know MySQL and PostgreSQL have some replication, but it's nothing like DataGuard. Do you want physical or logical? Log shipping or transactional? How about maybe you'd like to activate and test your standby database and then press a button and it's back to where it was?
        • Oracle streams - a form of SQL-level replication. Master-slave, multimaster, transformational, complex business rules, etc. Nothing like it in open source.
        • The whole family of Flashback: e.g., "I'd like to do a query and have the results as of the state of the database four hours ago". Or "I'd like to immediately change the database back to its state at 01:20:03am". Or "oops, I dropped a table, please bring it back instantly." Etc.
        • High-performance compression that in many cases is faster than non-compression. You can encrypt it, too.
        • For nearly every DB feature, Oracle has "more". It's great you have B-tree indexes - Oracle also offers bitmap and there are cases where they are really useful. It's nice that you offer hash partitioning (if you do), but Oracle can partition on a half-dozen different things. Etc.
        • RAC (Real Application Clusters) - active/active (or as many "Actives" as you'd like) clusters, all instances talking to the same DB.
        • Online redefinition (change your tables, views, etc. and have Oracle store everything up until you snap everything over at once - great for reducing downtimes).
        • Very sophisticated introspection. By this I mean the amount of stats the DB collects on itself. There is an insane level of instrumentation and it's very easy to see where waits and delays are.
        • Ability to generate and playback workloads.
        • A lot of migration assistance - e.g., "here is how your database would run if you upgraded it", "here is the SQL that will not run as well if you upgrade", "here is the recommendation for fixing your PL/SQL to run better in the next version," etc.
        • Query analysis is enormously better than open software (explain plans, etc.)
        • Auditing is several orders of magnitude more advanced
        • Star queries, OLAP, cubes, spatial, all of that.
        • XML and text support are much better.
        • Virtual Private Databases
        • PL/SQL, Java, etc. native to the DB, as well as an entire GUI-front-end building system (Application Express)
        • A fully-integrated volume/filesystem manager (ASM), cluster software, and VM, all manageable by the DB ;-) ASM is really very nice.

        I'm sure I'm missing some things - those were off the top of this Oracle DBA's head. Here [oracle.com] is a quick list of features.

        I love PostgreSQL as well, and MySQL to some extent, and even SQL Server. But they're not Oracle. DB/2 is the only thing approaching its class (along with more specialized niche players like Teradata). Most of the features I mentioned above don't come into play until you're in a 24x7 high availability environment, are trying to minimize downtime, or are working at big scale.

        • Re:Oracle DB (Score:4, Informative)

          by GooberToo (74388) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @10:36AM (#31071804)

          Oracle streams - a form of SQL-level replication.

          Sounds like a subset of functionality is coming in PostgreSQL 9.0, which supports streaming replication in addition to transactional and log shipping.

          High-performance compression that in many cases is faster than non-compression. You can encrypt it, too.

          Here you can see Greenplum's commercial PostgreSQL offering which is 10x-20x faster than stock PostgreSQL. [blogspot.com] A large portion of its performance boost comes from its support of high performance and effective compression as well as parallelism. I strongly suspect its faster than Oracle in many use cases.

          It's great you have B-tree indexes - Oracle also offers bitmap and there are cases where they are really useful. It's nice that you offer hash partitioning (if you do), but Oracle can partition on a half-dozen different things. Etc.

          PostgreSQL has had bitmap indexes for a while now. Not to mention you can actually create your own index types too. PostgreSQL is very extensible. That's one of the reasons why PostGIS [refractions.net] is so capable. And please note they just announced a major new release. [refractions.net]

          Let's also not forget PostgreSQL, like Oracle, supports function indexes, which are in of themselves extremely powerful.

          Online redefinition (change your tables, views, etc. and have Oracle store everything up until you snap everything over at once - great for reducing downtimes).

          PostgreSQL can do this too for most everything. There are some exceptions but by in large, PostgreSQL has this covered.

          PostgreSQL is one of the few databases which supports transactional DDL and has done so for a very long time. So for example, you can create types populate and even create indexes within a single transactional boundary. Which means you can actually do all this within the confines of a TPC transaction, which can wait a long time (logging implications and caveats here). Then when ready you can commit the TPC transaction and *BLAM*, you new table, fully populated, with deferred index creation, is now online. That's just one example of what can be done with PostgreSQL.

          Query analysis is enormously better than open software (explain plans, etc.)

          PostgreSQL has very good query analysis features. Its query plans are also excellent and typically does so without the many hints Oracle often requires. Having said that, IMO, PostgreSQL query plans are only exceeded by that of Oracle's and even then PostgeSQL genetic planner offers capabilities to niche projects unavailable in even Oracle.

          Virtual Private Databases

          Hotly debated on PostgreSQL mailing lists. PostgreSQL offers this capability today via its schema and security models. They just don't call it VPDs.

          PL/SQL, Java, etc. native to the DB

          PostgreSQL blows Oracle and every other database out of the water when it comes to native PL language support. What's you're flavor? PL/pgSQL? Perl? Python? Tcl? Java? C? Lua? And I think I many be forgetting a couple.

          No bones about it, Oracle is more feature rich. It is true Oracle still addresses many high end solutions where stock PostgreSQL does not yet compete. Just the same, many commercial PostgreSQL offerings are starting to compete in arenas which were previously Oracle only domains. Furthermore, stock PostgreSQL continues to egress further and further into extremely large databases and warehousing solutions. Additionally, once you step outside of high end databases, for the vast majority of people, PostgreSQL is a very competitive solution to Oracle and in many cases, unofficially faster.

          It sounds like you need to take a hard second look at PostgreSQL because based on my of your comments, it sounds like you're somewhat out of touch with the current capabilities and features provided by PostgreSQL.

        • Re:Oracle DB (Score:4, Informative)

          by fusiongyro (55524) <faxfreemosquito.yahoo@com> on Tuesday February 09 2010, @01:08AM (#31068966) Homepage

          That's actually something they just added in 8.4. [postgresql.org] I wrote a little bit about using this functionality on my blog [storytotell.org]. The syntax is different than Oracle's though.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Datasage (214357)

          It can be done in mysql without using loops, but its not as elegant and requires an extra table. Simply create an association table that links each child node back to each of its parents. You will have to keep it up to date, but it can be easily rebuilt if it gets out of sync. But the query then is as simple as joining that table when you need to select all the child nodes under a given parent.

    • As long as Oracle is not selling Linux, Oracle has no legal obligation under 508 to make Linux accessible.

      A lot of Linux gets deployed in government settings, not because somebody sells it, but because a local agency, school or office picks it up and realizing it is useful and free. This was possible as long as Sun was doing the heavy lifting of developing access tools that are required in government settings, under section 508 and ADA.

      If accessibility development for Linux goes away, U.S. government offic

      • I commented on accessibility on another thread. Sorry if the topic took me back. I didn't mean to reminisce inappropriately.

  • Bad title (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mysidia (191772) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:01PM (#31068286)

    It should say: Oracle breaks their commitment to accessibility, that they inherited when they acquired sun.

    In other words, Oracle is going back on their word, and is perhaps about to show how dishonest, despicable, and evil they (apparently) are, or not, depending on whether they keep their word (or not).

    Once you make a commitment, you can't "drop it". You either uphold your promise, or you break it.

    It looks like Oracle's about to break their promise.

    It doesn't matter at all that people who worked for Sun originally made the promise. Oracle acquired Sun, so they acquired all their promises, obligations, and dirty laundry too.

    Revising or 'dropping' a promise you made is called reneging on obligations you made.

    When a company says they're committed to something, they've made a promise. They can't become "uncommitted" or "no longer committed" without either succeeding, or having lied in the first place.

    • Re:Bad title (Score:4, Insightful)

      by williamhb (758070) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:34PM (#31068466) Homepage Journal

      It should say: Oracle breaks their commitment to accessibility, that they inherited when they acquired sun.

      In other words, Oracle is going back on their word, and is perhaps about to show how dishonest, despicable, and evil they (apparently) are, or not, depending on whether they keep their word (or not).

      Did I miss the press release -- does Sun now own Linux or Gnome in order to be solely responsible for its accessibility? Surely that'd be the bigger news story if it were true. I was under the impression, and I suspect so is everyone else on Slashdot, that Linux and Gnome are independent open source projects owned by the community; if Sun choses not to contribute code to a particular portion of the source tree any more, so be it, and we should thank them for their extensive work thus far, rather than pillory them for no longer being willing to be the only sucker actually doing anything about this community responsibility to improve Gnome's accessibility.

      I mean... those villains at Sun/Oracle haven't repainted my house for me either, or swept my yard -- the scoundrels!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by B3ryllium (571199)

      But "drop" is an SQL command, thus, it makes the headline punny.

    • Re:Bad title (Score:5, Informative)

      by fm6 (162816) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:21AM (#31068720) Homepage Journal

      I agree, the headline's wrong. But not about what got broken. When did Sun ever make a "commitment to accessibility"?

      Here's what they did have: their perpetual fantasy that they could come up with a desktop that would challenge Windows. Their latest form of this fantasy was Java Desktop System, which actually has nothing to do with Java. It's just a rebranded GNOME, ported to Solaris. When I was at Sun, Sun Rays running JDS were all over the place, and JDS was heavily pushed at our customers. Though even within Sun, use of Windows or Mac PCs (usually laptops) got more and more pervasive.

      JDS has to comply with federal accessibility rules, or nobody will buy it. (Nobody bought it anyway, but that's another issue.) So Sun needs GNOME to have good accessibility support. Presumably that's why Sun started contributing accessibility development. That's how all corporate contributions to OS projects happen — it isn't generosity, it's the contributor needing the product to do something it doesn't already do.

      I haven't seen any announcement, but it's to be expected that Oracle will finally put an end to this expensive and futile quest for a Windows-killer. Which is why you can't find JDS anywhere on oracle.com. (The old JDS page on sun.com redirects to Oracle's Solaris page.) If Oracle doesn't need JDS, then they don't need accessibility software.

      One of many Sun windmill-tilting projects that are getting the axe.

  • Good Luck. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ddxexex (1664191)
    I have to agree with Joanie that I hope that the laying off (not fired as in the summary) was an accident. But since they've laid off a bunch of other people working for accessibilty, it doesn't look all that good. Hope the letter helps, but if they've already started I don't think they mind having the bad "we don't like the disabled/orphans/elderly/puppies " PR. Good luck for getting the letter to work.
  • Perhaps Sun has "promised" too much over the years on things that don't produce a return on investment. Perhaps this is why Oracle scooped them up. Perhaps Oracle wants to remain profitable.
    • So what? That division was a good thing for society; the loss of it is a *bad* thing for society, and the fact that nobody is stepping in to pick it up is a bad thing too.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2010, @11:17PM (#31068376)

    The main guideline for accessibility is Section 508 Amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. From the Wikipedia entry: "The law applies to all Federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology."

    So if you want to sell to the federal government, you have to be 508 compliant. The EU has a comparable set of regulations. Oracle knows this and won't jeopardize their government sales by ignoring it, the opinions of the quoted blogger notwithstanding.

    • I suppose we could complain about Oracle selling inaccessible RedHat clone licenses, which are not accessible because the RedHat code they copied doesn't properly support Sun's accessiblity code (Orca, in particular).

      Anyone know a good lawyer who might want to do a bit of pro-bono work for the blind?

  • Some perspective (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PCM2 (4486) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:24PM (#31068426) Homepage

    While anyone losing their job is a bummer, the tone of the submission is a little histrionic. What actually happened here is that Oracle laid off two people who were working on accessibility. Again, that's a shame... but as the OSTATIC article points out, if Gnome accessibility work was really just two layoffs away from ending for all time, there were problems with the project before Oracle ever got here.

    Also, Oracle already sponsored an OpenSolaris accessibility group, and now they're in charge of the OpenOffice accessibility work as well, to say nothing of making sure their business applications are up to government standards... is it really fair to expect it to shoulder the burden of accessibility for Gnome, too?

    Maybe Novell wants to hire these guys? Or Red Hat?

    • Re:Some perspective (Score:5, Interesting)

      by WaywardGeek (1480513) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:45PM (#31068520)

      It turns out that one of the people Oracle fired is effectively the Linus Torvald of Linux accessibility. He architected it, and wrote a ton of it. It's like firing Linux, and complaining that after all, it's only one guy.

      As for OpenOffice accessibility, kiss it goodbye on Linux. Without Willie or a team of several guys to replace him, it will slowly degrade in to unusablity.

      I'm 100% with you on the other guys hiring Willie. My preference would be Canonical (Ubuntu), but RedHat would be a decent fit, and I could even live with Novell. Maybe they could start working off the evil taint.

  • If there's a need (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dunbal (464142) * on Monday February 08 2010, @11:45PM (#31068526)

    Since when did decisions by profit maximizing big business have any impact on Open Source Software? Yes, it may have been nice that Sun was spending money on supporting this sort of thing, but why have you come to expect - nay, DEPEND on a hand-out, as if the very life of the program was tied to it?

    When there is a need, the code will get written. By the grandson of the blind grandmother. Or the father of the deaf child. That has been the story of the whole open source movement to date. If you don't like what Oracle is doing, then fork and to hell with them. If you're whining because your subsidized job has been canceled - well too bad. Life sucks sometimes.

    There's a reason Sun was losing money and got bought out. If you can't work on your project without pay, well, your motives have suddenly become clear. You don't care about the project but rather the paycheck. Stop pointing out how wonderful your project was going to be - because obviously it isn't important enough for you to keep working on it without being paid. And for God's sake don't blame Oracle for taking a business decision. I know it's hard to think this way today in the United Socialist States of America, but maybe Oracle doesn't want to go under like Sun did and therefore is canceling frivolous "feel good" projects that add ZERO to their bottom line.

  • by Lord Kano (13027) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:35AM (#31068792) Homepage Journal

    This is a very sad day for disabled people, as it means we do not really have full-time developers any more.

    When I read this my first thought was "They should march...Um. I guess they can't."

    LK

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      This has absolutely nothing to do with "wanting something for nothing." The more people working on accessibility, the quicker the work gets done. Naturally the reduction of contributers would be viewed as a bad thing by the OSS community.

      • by WaywardGeek (1480513) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:00AM (#31068596)

        A lot of the fear in blind-linux land isn't because Oracle fired two people, but because they fired Willie Walker. So far as I can tell from all the accessibility code I've read, Willie roughly plays the same role for open-source accessibility that Linus Torvalds plays for Linux. It's as if someone bought the company Linus works for, and said, "This guy is overpaid. Let's save some money."

        I'm slowly losing my own vision, but while I can still use inaccessible software, I'm hacking like crazy in my free time to improve the things in Linux land. So, I've read a lot of code, and Willie's name is all over the place. The most important centerpiece of Linux accessibility is the Orca screen reader for the Gnome desktop. Who do you think was in charge of both Orca and Gnome accessibility? Willie, and for damned good reasons.

        For guys like me who write code on Linux boxes for a living, Willie's departure from Sun is scary as hell.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:24AM (#31068722)

          I hate asking this - but would it be possible for the people in need of this kind of software to create a facebook page and ask for donations. At @$250 per person, you need just 400 to hit the magic $100K number. I would happily donate for this cause, and I think a lot of others would too.

          While working on such issues is very important. it is hard for companies to keep employees just cos they are working on something which is not directly productive to a company ( or convince google .. intel or someone else to fund your 'accessiblity' program.)

          My sympathies to you, and I look forward to hearing that you have a facebook page for Willie Walker - and that you raise a lot of money. I look forward to dontating.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by war4peace (1628283)
          I don't understand one thing: what stops Willie from continuing his work? Did Oracle fire him and take his brains away? Did he leave his knowledge in Oracle's courtyard and start playing Minesweeper for the rest of his life?
          Gnome Accessibility code is Open Source AFAIK. Correct me if I'm wrong please. Therefore, anyone can continue doing that, including the oh-so-famous Willie. If a company decides there's no gain involved in keeping someone, the company will let the guy go. Furthermore, if Willie is as fa
    • In general, you're right. You want a feature in OSS, and no one is doing it? Do it yourself. Accessibility falls into a different category. You *could* say, sorry you weren't born with sight, try again next life. But that wouldn't be a very nice thing to say. We have two main commercial operating systems, Mac OS X, and Windows. So, let's say both companies decide accessibility doesn't matter, just screw it. Are people with disabilities supposed to just lie down and take it? I would hope we've evolv

        • by Chris Lawrence (1733598) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:35PM (#31068470) Homepage

          Yeah, let's stop paying for a public police force. If you can't afford to pay protection, you deserve what you get.

            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward

              Accessibility options only benefit a tiny minority.

              Obviously you plan on getting yourself killed before you get old. You certainly are dumb enough to succeed.

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by msclrhd (1211086)

              Quoting from a comment I made on the ostatic blog:

              """
              Few companies realise the benefits of accessibility. If your product is accessible, you can take advantage of that API to perform tests on the GUI -- that is, driving the GUI through the accessibility layer.

              Being accessible means respecting the users colour scheme preferences, fonts and other system settings. This makes the application fit better into the users preferences. This does not just affect accessibility -- try using most applications with a blac

        • by WaywardGeek (1480513) on Tuesday February 09 2010, @12:20AM (#31068710)

          Let me tell you, you're right that the blind do take control and solve the problem themselves. If you lost your sight and hearing, and you were a big Linux hacker, what would you do? Buy a Braille display, slap some low-level code to drive it into the kernel to read the console, and you're off coding! That project is called "speakup", and it's great for blind-deaf programmers, and not bad at all for the blind who can hear. What if you're a really good emacs hacker who loses your vision? What do you do? Rewrite the entire desktop environment based on talking emacs? That project is called emacspeak, and many consider it the most productive environment for blind programmers with good hearing.

          What if you want access to all those great Gnome applications like FireFox and OpenOffice? Now, you're at the mercy of the big Linux distros, because it involves 100 binary packages that the distro ships to all take part. That's where you need a guy like Willie Walker, who has the clout at all the major distros to set the direction for the entire linux accessibility community. That's the guy Oracle fired. That's the code which may fall apart, and the blind will not be able to fix it, not unless they find a new Willie Walker.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            As a Legally Blind It Pro I'm with you. And here's something a lot of people are missing on this discussion. Linux or what ever oracle is pushing selling is going no-where without accessibility. Because I'd imagine some of the first places to pick it up would be the government and the Feds can't touch it if it doesn't have accessibility features.
    • "Oracle is committed to creating accessible technologies and products that enhance the overall workplace environment and contribute to the productivity of our employees, our customers, and our customers' customers."
      --Safra Catz, President and CFO, Oracle

      For many reasons--legal, business, and ethical--Oracle recognizes the need for our applications, and our customers' and partners' products built with our tools, to be usable by the disabled community.

      So not really "bellyaching", more of a "holding a company to the claims they make."

      A lot of people were worried what would happen to the support of these programs when the buyout was announced. Almost as if they were part of a community that used the products and hoped that the support they have given the company wasn't going to result in them being abandoned after the merger.

      I'm Joanie. By day, I'm an assistive technology specialist working with individuals who are blind or visually impaired. By night, weekend, and holiday for almost four years now, I've been a GNOME community contributor working primarily on the Orca screen reader, a project led by Sun's Accessibility Program Office.

      ---The author of the article you didn't read.

      • by Cryacin (657549) on Monday February 08 2010, @11:10PM (#31068348)
        I guess the blind didn't see that one coming!

        They should have consulted the Oracle!

        Thank you, thank you, I'll be here till next thursday, please tip your waitress!
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Nice troll. But in reality, any desktop based on the archaic X11 system will fester away in total obscurity on engineering workstations and in virgins' basements. Eventually the themes will look tastelessly out of date, and even the most arduous zealots won't be able to deny the obsolesce caused by the death of investment into the failed project of the Linux desktop.

        In ten years its easy to imagine that something like Android might dominate whatever is left of the *nix desktop market.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by delinear (991444)
        Well, it's not that straightforward - moral considerations aside there is a not inconsiderable (particularly if your disability means you aren't able to work) cost associated with a move to Windows from Linux which obviously doesn't exist when the situation is reversed, so to many people it would be more applicable.
I like work; it fascinates me; I can sit and look at it for hours.