On Thu, 20 Nov 1997, woods.. wrote:

> FYI, connie woods, greater pittsburgh chapter nfb of pa
>
>
> What good is having someone who can walk on water
> if you don't follow in his footsteps?
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thr, 20 Nov 1997 06:03:19 +0600
> From: Curtis Chong <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Multiple recipients of NFBnet Blind-Talk Mailing List
>      <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Letter To Bill Gates From National Federation of the Blind (Forward From [log in to unmask])
>
>
>
> The following letter was sent on November 14, 1997, to Bill Gates
> by the National Federation of the Blind.
> Regards,
> Curtis Chong
> [log in to unmask]
> =================================================================
> November 14, 1997
> Sent by facsimile and United States mail
> Mr. William H. Gates III
> Microsoft Corporation
> One Microsoft Way
> Redmond, Washington 98052
> Dear Mr. Gates:
> A number of individuals and organizations have written to you and
> other officials at Microsoft concerning Internet Explorer 4.0 and
> its lack of accessibility to persons who are blind.  Furthermore,
> you (or others at Microsoft) may have received some specific
> recommendations from an ad hoc group of organizations in the
> blindness field in furtherance of the goal of full accessibility to
> Microsoft software by the blind.
> The National Federation of the Blind, the nation's largest
> organization of the blind, has always believed in communicating
> directly with the companies and individuals whom we wish to
> influence.  Although we may agree in principle with statements made
> by other organizations and individuals within the blindness field,
> it is our belief that the Federation should present its own message
> and recommendations to you in particular and to Microsoft in
> general.  By the same token, we expect to receive the same courtesy
> from large corporations such as Microsoft, which should be aware of
> how things are in the blindness field today.
> Having said all of that, here are our recommendations:
> 1.   Microsoft must assign responsibility for product accessibility
>      to a top management official so that accessibility concerns
>      are given a high priority during the product development
>      phase.
>      Microsoft currently makes much of its corporate policy on
>      accessibility.  Yet, there are no clearly defined lines of
>      responsibility nor are there any specific outcome requirements
>      that must be met pursuant to that policy.  Moreover, it is
>      clear from discussions with various Microsoft developers that
>      various product groups are free to do as they wish with
>      respect to accessibility, with no strong leadership from the
>      top.
> 2.   By December, 1997, Microsoft should deliver a version of
>      Internet Explorer which either meets or exceeds the
>      accessibility (from the viewpoint of the blind computer user)
>      of Internet Explorer Version 3.02.  This release should
>      include full implementation of Microsoft Active Accessibility
>      (MSAA) and keyboard access to all Internet Explorer features
>      and functions.
> 3.   Microsoft Active Accessibility should be an integral component
>      of all current and future Microsoft operating systems,
>      including Windows 98, Windows/NT, and Windows/CE.
>      With regard to Windows/CE, there has been an argument made
>      that the platforms on which this operating system is likely to
>      operate have neither the memory nor the processing power to
>      run screen access technology for the blind.  We regard this as
>      a short-sighted position and do not accept the argument.
> 4.   MSAA should be implemented fully in the next release of
>      Microsoft Office.   In addition, it should be possible to
>      invoke all critical Office features and functions from the
>      keyboard.
> 5.   All future releases and upgrades of Microsoft products must
>      include full keyboard access to all major functions and
>      features.  Moreover, we prefer to have Microsoft products use
>      standard Windows classes and controls.  If this is not
>      possible, then it is vital that Microsoft products fully
>      implement MSAA, which is an interface that screen access
>      vendors have already adopted.
> 6.   Microsoft's developer tools must encourage the creation of
>      accessible applications containing full MSAA implementation,
>      keyboard access, and other accessibility features.  Also, the
>      tools themselves must be accessible to the blind.
> 7.   Microsoft should hasten and strengthen the implementation of
>      the Windows Logo program insofar as it relates to
>      accessibility.  Support of MSAA, keyboard access, and other
>      accessibility features should be mandatory for any application
>      seeking certification as Windows-Compliant software.
> 8.   Microsoft should use its vast marketing capability and
>      expertise to promote MSAA and other accessibility concerns.
>      Currently, we have noticed a striking lack of energy on the
>      part of Microsoft in this regard.  In short, accessibility to
>      Microsoft products does not seem to be as important to
>      Microsoft marketers as pushing the latest edition of Windows
>      or Office.
> 9.   Microsoft should incorporate a formal testing process into its
>      development cycle to ensure that the products it produces will
>      work with screen access technology for the blind.
>      Exchanging information with screen access vendors (the
>      so-called ISVs) is simply not enough.  Before the
>      shrink-wrapped version of a new Microsoft product hits the
>      street, its compatibility and usability with screen access
>      technology for the blind need to be tested, using a formal and
>      structured process.  Today, such testing does not take place
>      at Microsoft.  It is high time for this kind of testing to
>      start.
>      Finally, Microsoft must come to understand the value of
> dealing directly with the National Federation of the Blind.  The
> National Federation of the Blind is the most powerful force in the
> field of work with the blind today.  If you have serious doubts
> about this, simply ask anyone in the field of blindness who it was
> who saved the rehabilitation system when it was about to be closed
> down by Congress.  They will tell you that it was the National
> Federation of the Blind.  In the area of technology, the Federation
> has in its National Headquarters in Baltimore the International
> Braille and Technology Center, the largest technology center for
> the blind in the world.  No one else in the field of blindness has
> made as large a commitment as the Federation, both financially and
> in terms of physical plant, to have in-house every Braille
> embosser, every speech synthesizer, every English-speaking Windows
> screen reading program, every refreshable Braille display.  We have
> the necessary expertise and, more importantly, the political will
> and expertise to serve as a collective force on behalf of the
> blind.  We regard Microsoft as a major player in the computer
> field; Microsoft should understand that the Federation is a major
> player in the blindness field and act accordingly.
> Yours sincerely,
> Curtis Chong
> Director of Technology
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>

I would not say someone as pigheaded and narrow-minded as Mr. Gates walks
on water, and if I had a choice between making his kind of money and
making a better computer system than the one behind which he stands, I'd
still opt for Number 2.  Just remember, good people don't often win and
winners aren't very often good.