Accessibility Software Suffers Following Apple's Faceshift Acquisition

[keysofanxiety]

bias is bias. Especially since you admit you don't have much experience with Android.

Well quite obviously I meant in the context of accessibility. And I have no reason to believe it's not true with regards to accessibility, seeing as none of the experts recommend it. Plus I don't think there is anybody who would argue Android has better accessibility features.

I guess the onus would be on you to prove otherwise.

 

[nt5672]

I'm sure they'll sort this. Apple likes to be subtly evil, not to be a raging PR disaster

Apple has no problem being evil (will not evil but to exercise its power absolutely). What you mean is that usually Apple reverses itself when publicly caught in order to avoid a raging PR disaster.

 

[Johnny907]

I'd wager this wasn't a conscious or willfully planned consequence of the acquisition and Apple will resolve the issue.

Of course it was, because this is SOP for Apple. It's one thing when they refuse to license something to protect their artificially closed ecosystem, but quite another when they buy an outside company that had been providing services or software to other companies that has absolutely nothing to do with and poses no threat to Apple directly or indirectly, and then shut it all down.

As a company, this has been a big gripe for me with Apple for years, and why I take no small amount of joy everytime they lose a patent or licensing case. I hope the media has the stones to humiliate them over this because this is reprehensible and they should be ashamed.

 

[kemal]

I would be shocked if Sir Jonathan gave an gnats a== about usability for the disabled.

 

[needfx]

Based on what?

call it a failed attempt at humour

 

[LordVic]

Ahh, I don't think it was a conscious decision. Again I do contest that this was an unforseen/predicted hiccup that will be resolved very quickly, as soon as it reaches Cook's ears.

I believe it was concious, and it isn't the first time Apple has done this sort of behaviour of buying up a 3rd party tech company, killing off it's existing contracts and keeping exclusive access.

For Example: The capacitive technology Apple uses and based it's glass trackpads, and touchscreens based on, was actually invented/developed by a company called FingerWorks. They were well known for gesture based devices, and other input methods for disabled people.

Apple purchased the company in 2005, All other products were discontinued and licenses revoked from any other company, and Apple maintained exclusive use of their technologies

Here's a hint. Apple does not care what damage it causes to other industries or technologies, as long as they maintain control and power over technology that they can profit from.

they did the same thing with TouchID and Liquid metal as well.
[doublepost=1470425710][/doublepost]

I suppose you don't know much about how these things work. Since the company was bought, the licenses would almost certainly need to be re-issued by the NEW owner of the technology. Who depends on a contract to license something from a company that doesn't exist anymore?

When a company is purchased, all licenses and deals are still valid and are in place without the need to renegotiate. the purchasing company, in this case Apple, must take on all contracts as they exist and current ownership.

Apple can then do what they legally have power to do based on those contracts. So if Apple bought the company, and then killed the contracts, it was likely an executive level decision, that had to go through a slew of legal steps in order to cancel.

nothing here was done by oversight or accident

 

[butterburger cookybutter]

I'd wager this wasn't a conscious or willfully planned consequence of the acquisition and Apple will resolve the issue.

Oh, puh-leez. Apple knows exactly what it is doing. They do not look at companies and buy them up, quickly "in a flash". It is not as if they shopped in a candy store. Buying a company involves lots of heads, lots of consideration, weighing pros/cons and making a case why they should do it, and approval from bosses/managers.

They know how many lights will go out, when they "bag" a company. They did not just buy a dorm room programmer with zero customers: they bought an established company with customers depending/relying upon their technology/I.P.

It makes no difference to Apple, that one consumer happens to use subject proprietary technology to develop an assistive/enabling product.

If true...very shortsighted decision...and OUCH for those depending on the software.
Actualy, if indeed true...apple may very well be in for some fire and brimstone...and rightfully so.

The masses will not care today, and this crowd will largely forgot about it, "tomorrow". It is a little deal. Just a normal business day.

Maybe it was an oversight

Apple is not new to buying companies, they did not "just start yesterday".

Does anyone here remember FingerWorks? FingerWorks made assistive/accessibility/enablement devices. Keyboard substitutes. Apple bought FingerWorks, bought their patents and their brains, and took a physical device off of the market. That annoys me more, than taking-over a software-only company. There is lots of other machine vision development around world, in academic, commercial, private, and public (libre) realms. FingerWorks's capacitive multi-touch products were one of a kind.

Apple doesn't care much about accessibility here in some areas.

Sure shooting. Sticky Keys option 'Display pressed keys on screen' was broken in Mac OS X 10.8 10.9 and 10.10.

Apple's non-written policy is to support latest three versions of OS X. The fourth-newest one is not supported, will have major security bugs. When a feature breaks in a new Mac OS, general advise is "keep using the older OS if it still works" and hope said feature gets fixed (whether in an update, or not until next entire OS release). Apple skipped three versions of Mac OS before fixing the problem. Since 10.10 Yosemite until 10.11 El Capitan, there was no maintained/supported Mac OS with reliable Sticky Keys on-screen display.



edit add:

FingerWorks

Big "Like" to you, LordVic. I did not see your post until after I finished composing mine.

 

[jonnysods]

This is sad to hear because it sounds incredibly helpful to those with special needs. I hope that the powers that be get wind of this and do the right thing.

 

[jameskatt]

Article Link: Accessibility Software Suffers Following Apple's Faceshift Acquisition

There is nothing wrong with what Apple did.

The title of this article should be: Apple's competitors suffer because Apple is going to get even better in Accessibility.

Apple hires disabled engineers - who are blind, deaf, deaf and blind, etc - to design and engineer the accessibility features of its products. This is why all of Apple's Products have better accessibility than its competitors. The disabled literally engineer Apple's accessibility features for themselves and disabled.

Apple bought Faceshift to further improve its engineering staff and to further improve its accessibility features.

Obviously, the acquisition hurts Apple's competitors who were licensing Faceshift's technology. But that is what happens in business.

Anyone with disabilities already realizes Apple's products are the best choice. Stevie Wonder loves his iPhone.

 

[D-Dave]

I suppose you don't know much about how these things work. Since the company was bought, the licenses would almost certainly need to be re-issued by the NEW owner of the technology. Who depends on a contract to license something from a company that doesn't exist anymore?

While I am by no means an expert on the issue (no patent lawyer) I do know that all the deals our company made regarding software and tech use are NOT broken by the other party selling the property.
Example 1: Softwarefunctionality licensed to use in a Product; paid once, License is not time limited = even if the programmer sells that software/code it does NOT void our license (else buying any license would be a VERY stupid thing as anyone could take away what you paid for by selling it to someone else)
Example 2: we licensed a technique how a product is treated before packaging and pay a monthly fee (contract has a fixed duration of 5 years with an option (for us) to prolong it for another 5 years )...again this contract would not be void by the IP-Owner selling his IP...
So unless the specific contract (that I obviously have no access to and think you don't either) is in some way limited to the partys and not the product it will not be vioded by a sale...which makes the point of you being "almost certain" about me not knowing how "these things work"...well...pointless.

 

[S.B.G]

Probably due to so legal mumbo jumbo during the acquisition I bet. I hope Apple, or whomever, reverses the licensing decision for the users sake. Otherwise, I hope this isn't a story like that of what Motorola Solutions typically does where they acquire a company for its technology, use it for a few years and realize they made a mistake and then dump it into the Motorola graveyard of failed ventures.

 

[Johnny907]

Probably due to so legal mumbo jumbo during the acquisition I bet. I hope Apple, or whomever, reverses the licensing decision for the users sake. Otherwise, I hope this isn't a story like that of what Motorola Solutions typically does where they acquire a company for its technology, use it for a few years and realize they made a mistake and then dump it into the Motorola graveyard of failed ventures.

Most likely they won't. Apple is ridiculous when it comes to licensing anything, even something they didn't directly create.

 

[infobleep]

MacRumors has reached out to Apple for comment and we'll update this story with any forthcoming response.

Article Link: Accessibility Software Suffers Following Apple's Faceshift Acquisition

I've noticed that since the story back in the beginning of August, Apple hasn't commented. Clearly they don't want to know or at least have it to talked about in public. Bad publicity and all that.

On a slightly related note, I helped my blind father by a MacBook because all the accessibility features were built in. With Windows you had to buy third party add ons and work out which ones you liked etc. Then what if one gets discontinued.

Mac OS accessibility isn't perfect but it's better than Windows. I'm referring to Windows 7. Even 8.1 I don't think is as great. Can't comment on 10 as I only use XP, 7 and 8.1, along with my two Macs running Mountain Lion and El Capitan.