- Blind-sysadmins - lists.hodgsonfamily.org

Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible?
by Ryan Shugart 24 Sep '09

24 Sep '09

Scott: I totally agree. I don't see the point in all these bundled download managers anyway. FTP or HTTP is fine by me, and if I so choose I can install my own download manager. My only point is the choice to use or not use it shouldn't be based on accessibility. And, if Cisco wrote their application properly, then the accessability issues aren't their problem. I think we're on the same page their. Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Scott Granados <scott(a)granados-llc.net> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:59 AM To: Blind sysadmins list <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible? Ryan, you have a point. I think Java support should be a non issue by now and for some reason, the screen reader folks don't take it seriously. However, in this case it's not just the blind community that's pissed. Lots of network engineers need a quick / easy way to get their software images. Cisco used to do simple ftp / rsync / http access secured with a name and password. You could kick these processes off from anywhere (including directly from the router) and not be dependent on anything like JRE version, whether you have Java at all, browser and so on. Now this bloated tool keeps the user in this box where they have to use the right Java with the right browser and field upgrades directly from with in the hardware aren't possible. It sucks! This just reflects a trend to make things on the web pretty, not functional and for some reason vendors don't care if their largest customers don't like the service. It's marketing girls gone wild! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Shugart" <rshugart(a)pcisys.net> To: "Blind sysadmins list" <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:18 PM Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible? I'm not sure 508 will help us here. In my experience with dealing with government agencies, most of them don't understand section 508 themselves, and the few that do, on the organizational level, look at it as something to be worked around, not complied with. There are a lot of good people who do take 508 seriously, but my experience is they're just lost in the wind. On the specific topic of Cisco, my company just deployed Cisco's Anyconnect VPN, and that's perfectly accessible. Its all web based, the pages are very basic HTML, there is a Java or ActiveX plugin to handle the actual VPN and network traffic, but it has no UI and everything's HTML based. So some Cisco products work, and as far as VPNs go Any Connect seems to be the wave of the future, as I don't think the standard VPN client will work on X64 based systems. As to the problem of the web site and such using Java, this brings up a good question. Should we tell Cisco to not use Java or any of these newer standards because they're inaccessible, or should we make the newer standards accessible? Java accessibility in particular is a joke. For a platform that's been in wide spread use for at least ten years, if not fifteen, it should be much more widely used. Both leading screen readers have very bad Java support. I honestly don't know if this is the fault of the screen reader vendors, Sun or the Java programmers, but unless Cisco's Java isn't using the accessibility standards, its not Cisco's fault their site and downloads are inaccessible, its either the screen reader vendors or Sun's. Again I don't know whose fault that is, I'm just saying the answer to this isn't to push Cisco to stop using these newer technologies, its to push the adaptive technology industry really hard, and possibly in some uncomfortrable directions for th em. Ryan -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Scott Granados Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 5:47 PM To: Blind sysadmins list; dave.mehler(a)gmail.com Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less andlessaccessible? I don't work for the feds so it won't help me much but I know people who do.:) I'd love to see the government threaten to stop buying Cisco for 1 day, that would put this whole thing to rest once and for all. I'm hopeful though, the sited folks don't like the state of things either so hopefully they will redesign a lot of this stuff for the whole market, that's much more likely. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher McMillan" <christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com> To: <dave.mehler(a)gmail.com>; "'Blind sysadmins list'" <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less andlessaccessible? I dealt with Section 508 for ALVA Access Group and also worked for the Federal Government in IT and the early stages of 508 Regulations. Feel free to e-mail me off list and I can send the regulations forward to help with this issue. This relates to Federal Agencies using the equipment and not the public workforce. I can tell you that much. I will be going on vacation till 10/13/09 so it will take awhile if I don't hear from any one privately. I can be reached at christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com or work e-mail at chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com. Sincerely, Christopher McMillan, CIO CEEK Technology Blog: http://ceektechnology.spaces.live.com Web Site: http://www.ceektechnology.com WM: chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com or christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com E-mail: chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com or christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Dave Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 7:14 PM To: 'Blind sysadmins list' Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less and lessaccessible? Hi, Emphatically yes i am seeing the same thing. I have a Linksys WRT54g2 router and I can not use the java download page the dropdown box like thing, emphasis on, is not jfw friendly at all. This to me is unacceptable. I've emailed them feedback but have heard nothing. I really want to get the latest firmware as i'm hoping that that will make a linux upgrade easier. And the law i believe is called Section 508, I think it says something and this is a paraphrase: to market to the government products and services which i suppose sites would be in that group must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Hth Dave. -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Scott Granados Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:12 PM To: Blind sysadmins list Subject: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less and lessaccessible? Hi all, I know this has come up in some forms before but has anyone else noticed how unfriendly to screen readers Cisco's web site and products are becoming? I just tried to download the latest windows VPN client and got lost in a java based download manager that had absolutely no output recognizable to JFW. This sucks! In fact, WTF! I guess this makes my decision to suggest that my company migrate over to Juniper even easier. Isn't there some federal accessibility standard or some such in place that Cisco has to conform to in order to market the US government? Can't some pressure be applied from that angle? Thanks Scott _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins

1 0

Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible?
by Ryan Shugart 24 Sep '09

24 Sep '09

Scott: I totally agree. I don't see the point in all these bundled download managers anyway. FTP or HTTP is fine by me, and if I so choose I can install my own download manager. My only point is the choice to use or not use it shouldn't be based on accessibility. And, if Cisco wrote their application properly, then the accessability issues aren't their problem. I think we're on the same page their. Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Scott Granados <scott(a)granados-llc.net> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:59 AM To: Blind sysadmins list <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible? Ryan, you have a point. I think Java support should be a non issue by now and for some reason, the screen reader folks don't take it seriously. However, in this case it's not just the blind community that's pissed. Lots of network engineers need a quick / easy way to get their software images. Cisco used to do simple ftp / rsync / http access secured with a name and password. You could kick these processes off from anywhere (including directly from the router) and not be dependent on anything like JRE version, whether you have Java at all, browser and so on. Now this bloated tool keeps the user in this box where they have to use the right Java with the right browser and field upgrades directly from with in the hardware aren't possible. It sucks! This just reflects a trend to make things on the web pretty, not functional and for some reason vendors don't care if their largest customers don't like the service. It's marketing girls gone wild! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Shugart" <rshugart(a)pcisys.net> To: "Blind sysadmins list" <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:18 PM Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming lessandlessaccessible? I'm not sure 508 will help us here. In my experience with dealing with government agencies, most of them don't understand section 508 themselves, and the few that do, on the organizational level, look at it as something to be worked around, not complied with. There are a lot of good people who do take 508 seriously, but my experience is they're just lost in the wind. On the specific topic of Cisco, my company just deployed Cisco's Anyconnect VPN, and that's perfectly accessible. Its all web based, the pages are very basic HTML, there is a Java or ActiveX plugin to handle the actual VPN and network traffic, but it has no UI and everything's HTML based. So some Cisco products work, and as far as VPNs go Any Connect seems to be the wave of the future, as I don't think the standard VPN client will work on X64 based systems. As to the problem of the web site and such using Java, this brings up a good question. Should we tell Cisco to not use Java or any of these newer standards because they're inaccessible, or should we make the newer standards accessible? Java accessibility in particular is a joke. For a platform that's been in wide spread use for at least ten years, if not fifteen, it should be much more widely used. Both leading screen readers have very bad Java support. I honestly don't know if this is the fault of the screen reader vendors, Sun or the Java programmers, but unless Cisco's Java isn't using the accessibility standards, its not Cisco's fault their site and downloads are inaccessible, its either the screen reader vendors or Sun's. Again I don't know whose fault that is, I'm just saying the answer to this isn't to push Cisco to stop using these newer technologies, its to push the adaptive technology industry really hard, and possibly in some uncomfortrable directions for th em. Ryan -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Scott Granados Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 5:47 PM To: Blind sysadmins list; dave.mehler(a)gmail.com Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less andlessaccessible? I don't work for the feds so it won't help me much but I know people who do.:) I'd love to see the government threaten to stop buying Cisco for 1 day, that would put this whole thing to rest once and for all. I'm hopeful though, the sited folks don't like the state of things either so hopefully they will redesign a lot of this stuff for the whole market, that's much more likely. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher McMillan" <christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com> To: <dave.mehler(a)gmail.com>; "'Blind sysadmins list'" <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less andlessaccessible? I dealt with Section 508 for ALVA Access Group and also worked for the Federal Government in IT and the early stages of 508 Regulations. Feel free to e-mail me off list and I can send the regulations forward to help with this issue. This relates to Federal Agencies using the equipment and not the public workforce. I can tell you that much. I will be going on vacation till 10/13/09 so it will take awhile if I don't hear from any one privately. I can be reached at christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com or work e-mail at chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com. Sincerely, Christopher McMillan, CIO CEEK Technology Blog: http://ceektechnology.spaces.live.com Web Site: http://www.ceektechnology.com WM: chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com or christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com E-mail: chrismcmillan(a)ceektech.com or christophermcmillan(a)hotmail.com -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Dave Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 7:14 PM To: 'Blind sysadmins list' Subject: Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less and lessaccessible? Hi, Emphatically yes i am seeing the same thing. I have a Linksys WRT54g2 router and I can not use the java download page the dropdown box like thing, emphasis on, is not jfw friendly at all. This to me is unacceptable. I've emailed them feedback but have heard nothing. I really want to get the latest firmware as i'm hoping that that will make a linux upgrade easier. And the law i believe is called Section 508, I think it says something and this is a paraphrase: to market to the government products and services which i suppose sites would be in that group must be accessible to persons with disabilities. Hth Dave. -----Original Message----- From: blind-sysadmins-bounces(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org [mailto:blind-sysadmins-bounces@lists.hodgsonfamily.org] On Behalf Of Scott Granados Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:12 PM To: Blind sysadmins list Subject: [Blind-sysadmins] Anyone else noticing Cisco becoming less and lessaccessible? Hi all, I know this has come up in some forms before but has anyone else noticed how unfriendly to screen readers Cisco's web site and products are becoming? I just tried to download the latest windows VPN client and got lost in a java based download manager that had absolutely no output recognizable to JFW. This sucks! In fact, WTF! I guess this makes my decision to suggest that my company migrate over to Juniper even easier. Isn't there some federal accessibility standard or some such in place that Cisco has to conform to in order to market the US government? Can't some pressure be applied from that angle? Thanks Scott _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins

1 0

managing a computer via msc
by Dave 23 Sep '09

23 Sep '09

Hello, I am trying to manage a remote xp pro machine located across my network. Both machines can ping each other. The machine to be managed can list shares on other network machines, but existing shares can not be viewed on it, don't know if this is important. When i created an mmc console i told it to manage a remote computer, i right click the console and choose runas, give it the admin user/password on the other machine, mmc opens, displays the machine's name at the top of the tree, then about 15 seconds later times out with the network path was not found. A suggestion was to enable the remote administration firewall exception, i didn't see that one, i do see remote assistance and remote desktop, neither of which are what i need but i turned them on anyway. I do have powershell on this box and added an exception for it so i should be able to access the box via powershell. I'm starting to think the box needs a service on that isn't, either for powershell or remote admin. I am not seeing it. Any suggestions appreciated. Thanks. Dave.

2 3

server 2008 core?
by Dave 21 Sep '09

21 Sep '09

Hello, I've just heard about Windows Server 2008 core. I was wondering if it was usable in terms of installing, administering, and configuring? Thanks. Dave.

5 10

Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools?
by Ryan Shugart 12 Sep '09

12 Sep '09

Andrew: I saw the same thing you did. My understanding is this would not apply to Exchange 2010, but the version after that, if it happens at all. An interesting question, should we try to peswade the Exchange team against Silverlight, or get an accessible version of Silverligh? Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hodgson <andrew(a)hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 9:55 AM To: Blind sysadmins list <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Subject: [Blind-sysadmins] Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools? Hi all, Just reading various blogs this morning, and came across this: http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2009/08/27/452169.aspx The Exchange team are considering using Silverlight with some sort of web interface. There is a link there to a survey, which I believe we should take part in in order to express our views about the accessibility of this technology, and what it could mean if more MS interfaces start going down this approach. Thanks. Andrew. _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins

2 8

Re: [Blind-sysadmins] Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools?
by Ryan Shugart 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

Andrew: I saw the same thing you did. My understanding is this would not apply to Exchange 2010, but the version after that, if it happens at all. An interesting question, should we try to peswade the Exchange team against Silverlight, or get an accessible version of Silverligh? Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hodgson <andrew(a)hodgsonfamily.org> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 9:55 AM To: Blind sysadmins list <blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org> Subject: [Blind-sysadmins] Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools? Hi all, Just reading various blogs this morning, and came across this: http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2009/08/27/452169.aspx The Exchange team are considering using Silverlight with some sort of web interface. There is a link there to a survey, which I believe we should take part in in order to express our views about the accessibility of this technology, and what it could mean if more MS interfaces start going down this approach. Thanks. Andrew. _______________________________________________ Blind-sysadmins mailing list Blind-sysadmins(a)lists.hodgsonfamily.org http://lists.hodgsonfamily.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-sysadmins

1 0

Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools?
by Andrew Hodgson 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

Hi all, Just reading various blogs this morning, and came across this: http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2009/08/27/452169.aspx The Exchange team are considering using Silverlight with some sort of web interface. There is a link there to a survey, which I believe we should take part in in order to express our views about the accessibility of this technology, and what it could mean if more MS interfaces start going down this approach. Thanks. Andrew.

1 0

Silverlight for MS Exchange admin tools?
by Andrew Hodgson 11 Sep '09

11 Sep '09

Hi all, Just reading various blogs this morning, and came across this: http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2009/08/27/452169.aspx The Exchange team are considering using Silverlight with some sort of web interface. There is a link there to a survey, which I believe we should take part in in order to express our views about the accessibility of this technology, and what it could mean if more MS interfaces start going down this approach. Thanks. Andrew.

1 0

who here has played with Windows Server 2008 R2?
by Ryan Shugart 10 Sep '09

10 Sep '09

So out of curiosity, has any one here played with Windows Server 2008 R2? I've been messing with it for a few days now. One odd issue I'm seeing is if I RDP into a Windows Server 2008 R2 machine and run a screen reader, the visual display freezes, and nothing goes into the screen reader's offscreen model, but otherwise the screen reader runs. In this case I'm using Window-Eyes 7.1. Out of curiosity is anyone else seeing this with any screen reader? Thanks. Ryan

7 11

who here has played with Windows Server 2008 R2?
by Ryan Shugart 10 Sep '09

10 Sep '09

So out of curiosity, has any one here played with Windows Server 2008 R2? I've been messing with it for a few days now. One odd issue I'm seeing is if I RDP into a Windows Server 2008 R2 machine and run a screen reader, the visual display freezes, and nothing goes into the screen reader's offscreen model, but otherwise the screen reader runs. In this case I'm using Window-Eyes 7.1. Out of curiosity is anyone else seeing this with any screen reader? Thanks. Ryan

1 0