Seriously, I was thinking about the Envision and Seleste glasses earlier. I was feeling frustrated by the fact that I am struggling to come up with a consistent way of evaluating products like this. The good thing, the great thing, is that this problem is only going to get worse! Which will be good for me, good for all of us, because we will have really useful new tech at the end of it all.
So here is my question, dear AppleVis friends:
I think that, when it comes to what I will call, wearable assistive technology, it is a trade off between Utility and Weirdness?
For those who don’t like ‘weird’ neither do I, but it so perfectly fits…canes, dogs, Braille – all weird, but useful. We all know those products that are super weird and useless – smart cane that doesn’t work in the rain anyone?
So, if we are going to come up with a framework for evaluating Wearable Assistive Technology – can anyone suggest anything better than my Useful/Weird index?
Your friend Lottie, remember, I love you, be nice!
Comments
Perhaps...
1. Is it rain proof.
2. Can it guide you where you need to go.
2.1. Can it do it consistently.
3. Is there a cheeper and perhaps better version out there.
4. Can you keep the product.
5. Does it look cool or is it a bulky blind product that's going to, not only go out of stile, but also be useless in a year or so.
Weirdness doesn't bother me.
I don't care what the thing looks like as long as it gets me from point A to B and back again.
If it's bulky it's annoying but we're used to products like that, it's just now they're really slimming down.
Thoughts
I like this and agree with what you have so far. Weirdness is definitely a problem for me.
I don’t know where it fits in your categories, but I also consider if I like the form factor in another way. As someone who would very much benefit from one of these products, but also have some usable sight remaining, I’m not super keen on them being glasses.
Glasses get in the way of me using the sight I have, either because I don’t want to darken my view with sunglasses like Meta Ray-ban, or simply that the frames etc block some of my field of view.
This is why I still hold out some hope for ARX. I’m hoping I’ll be able to give their second generation a try, as the first generation were disappointing.
Not sure how to express this well
I think it fits under visually-obtrusive weirdness of the device. I don't want to be hounded, pushed and shoved into wearing "those glasses for the blind" if I don't want or need to. The underlying technology doesn't require glasses, and I suspect the variety of frame styles will be limited and recognizable from at least a mile (1.6km) away. If the glasses actually provided sight of some sort, that might be worth it. For example, those Brainport" devices they were working on a time back that projected an electric image onto a device on the roof of your mouth that you could feel with your tongue; direct, instant and real-time without translating the Jabberwocky.
Weirness?
Came, dogs are not consider to be weir by all. Maybe 100 years ago but today not. Glasses that look strange and goofy are so.
Perhaps eReaders?
Hmmmm, interesting thoughts. I'm thinking of the product in the subject line specifically because these are being provided to NLS patrons free of charge, as is anything that the NLS does. I got mine last year and while I've never taken it anywhere--or at least not much--it does have a lanyard. I have on occasion worn said lanyard. I'm finding my eReader to be extremely useful. Maybe not weird, although some people around here don't exactly understand why I need it since I've also got an iPhone and a Mac to boot. But they are coming around and that, my friends is a good thing. I love technology and have also carried my iPhone(s) around in my pocket. Yes indeed, this is my second iPhone and the more I use it, the more I like it. I only got it last week. I don't know where exactly I was going with this, but needless to say all this techie stuff is awesome and I hope it sticks around!
I've heard the same thing about a blind person in America.
I actualllydon't own any blind devices so I say i don't mind bulky things but I guess I do.
I don't want to buy something that's to "blind," it's not really because I'll be seen as wierd, it's more that this stuff is either years behind, isn't up to date with current software, has things I just don't use or is just to expencive.
Charlotte
That was an excuse by the police to explain why they did what they did. Unless the police officer needs glasses. I do not recall ever the Chicago police doing so! They had done many things that are questioning in the past so even they did not do so against any poor blind person who uses a came.
Technology changes so rapidly, can you keep up?
We're all weird in the sense, we use different ways of doing things, How i do something might differ from how someone else does, end result, I made dinner, eat. You microwaved a frozen pizza, still it's dinner. Technology is so expanding, there's never going to be on par with everyone else when it comes to such a small market as this community, forget deaf-blind etc. That's one of the reasons the prices of things which might improve our lives are expensive and only are bought by state agencies who have a quota to buy and probably give out, or we scrimp and save, or other nefarious ways of obtaining product can be obtained. I don't need the latest and greatest in technology, I have a newer Mac, and iPhone 12 and that's fine with me. I don't see the upgrade every year idea working for me. With a blindness product, it might be necessary. You can update to version whatever number you want. eventually, your camera might be unable to have the resolution that can depict that makeup stain you're trying to get out of your dress before romantic date night with partner, sighted or blind doesn't matter. Unless we really start pushing companies of any product, food, technology, to include everyone, we're stuck in this niche. I for one will do everything i can to make companies more aware and not let them blow smoke up my skirt to say that we are "inclusive". That's just like the serial cheater who "won't do it again".
Re: Canes and Dogs
Lately, people are abusing the status of support/service animal vests or harnesses as a way to bring pets where they are otherwise excluded. I don't have an answer as to how to prevent that. However, it does raise the question, are you going to be allowed to use your wearable blind-tech where cameras are forbidden, like some entertainment venues, just because your blind? And if so, will bootleggers pretend to be blind if these glasses become a stereotypical, blind device?
I do worry about police not recognizing I'm blind, and would hope they have some training to at least recognize the cane and be verbal. It can be an extremely dangerous situation, not realizing law enforcement are attempting to communicate with you, where I live. And now that I think of it, I probably wouldn't have the cane if I'm navigating around my own yard...
Weird as a fashion statement
In my younger days, I made an effort to stand out fashion-wise. I had the piano keyboard scarf, the red and blue shoes I lifted from a bowling alley, and the tortoise shell glasses that were just a notch below Elton John-caliber. I drummed in an alternative music band (we called it new wave back then). We'd wear the most garish things imaginable onstage, from rain slickers to florescent spray-painted coveralls.
But that's neither here nor there.
I used to work as a programmer in the virtual reality industry. While we have lots of cool new tech gadgets today, it wasn't so long ago that virtual reality and augmented reality meant wearing all manner of cumbersome gear, from powered glasses to articulated gloves, and weilding multi-buttoned control rods like some kind of retro light saber. As developers working in that nascent industry, we were painfully aware of the inverse relationship between the size, weight, and quantity of hardware and the adoption rate of the new functionality afforded by that hardware.
Okay, not really sure where I'm going with that, either.
So I'll simply agree with Brad above. I don't care too much about how it makes me look as long as it provides some compelling benefit.
Thoughts
Honestly, I find the aesthetic to be just as important as the functionality. Jobs: going to job interviews, you have to look a certain way and dress a certain way for recruiters to listen and pay attention to you, it’s a sad reality, but it’s the truth. Being social: let’s face it, you get treated differently if you look different because of what you are wearing. It’s why no child wears a fanny pack in schools, it’s also why places of employment or schools have a dress code, people tend to not take you seriously when you present as someone with a disability. Let’s go back to the job interview for a second and let’s take a look at both the Seleste glasses and envision glasses. When you’re walking around or attending a job interview with the Seleste glasses people look at them and go(oh nice glasses). Now the envision glasses you look like a cyborg and you look like you have something big attached to the side of your face. That’s a distraction, for sighted folks. Now when you go to the job interview, all the recruiter is going to think is everything about that device, and not your ability to work. Sighted people get distracted when something looks out of the ordinary versus something looking like just a regular pair of glasses. Honestly, I can go into much further detail but I think yall can understand why the aesthetic can be just as important. Yes, looks do matter and that is just the harsh reality.
Mistreatment of the Misunderstood
In regards to wearable tech, I am someone who prefers subtlety over gaudy. I wear "normal" sunglasses all the time when out and about, because my photophobia is strong. So much so that most of the time light tears my up. So on that note, I am fine with carrying and/or wearing technology, whether it is "blind tech" or otherwise, but I do not want it to attract attention.
Regarding how people who are different are treated,wait 'till you get a load of this. . . .
https://www.thedailybeast.com/blind-navy-vet-james-hodges-takes-cops-to-court-over-bogus-arrest