
Apple Doesn't Want My Filthy Disabled Money - lizzard
http://deborah.dreamwidth.org/63403.html
======
sjs
If you are rude or demanding you will be treated accordingly, and this post
has a very demanding tone. Maybe I'm cold but I don't think being disabled is
a pass to treat other people in a condescending or rude manner. It sounds like
a frustrating ordeal and I am sympathetic but can't help but think the other
side of this story may be different.

You only need a credit check if you are getting a phone on a contract. Perhaps
the carrier you want a contract with has some policy about credit checks or
driver's licenses. Did you try going through the carrier directly?

It sounds like you've given up or are at least very soured at this point (I
don't blame you) but it might be worth cooling down and trying again via the
carrier. Here in Canada you can get a credit check done with an existing
credit card number and your SIN (social insurance #). Politely suggesting, to
Apple or a carrier, that a credit card and SSN should be enough for a credit
check could be worth a shot.

------
shinratdr
Alternate Headline: Disabled woman outraged that things aren't just handed to
her because she is disabled, actually has to do stuff.

For the record, I'm Canadian and I have never once had to proffer ID to
purchase an iOS device, and I've owned an iPhone, iPod touch and iPad. Sounds
like a requirement of whatever carrier you are trying to get the phone from
because you don't have much of a credit history or an existing relationship
with a carrier. Not exactly Apple's fault.

I'll give her the accessibility thing, but when is that ever the case? I mean
with the exception of possibly wheelchairs and items that are designed for
disabled people, what company has reps that can properly explain all the
accessibility features in a given product? Accessibility in iOS and OS X is
documented much better online.

How about this: just buy the damn thing from Best Buy, try out the
accessibility features, and if you feel they aren't adequate, return it within
30 days. You'll learn everything you need to know, and you'll give some kid an
open box iPod touch to purchase at a discount. Everyone wins.

> I understand that Apple is trying to position the iPhone as the phone that's
> great for people with disabilities (which to Apple means "blind people").

Custom vibrations are for blind people? Screen flashes/LED flashes for alerts?
Mono audio? Custom gestures and TouchAssist? I don't know why she found it
necessary to throw in that little condescending comment at the end.

Apple bakes in thousands of dollars (literally, what it costs to add these
features in to Windows 7 or XP) of accessibility features into iOS and OS X,
for people with all sorts of disabilities. It's really insulting to
characterize that as just some token features for the blind.

------
ben1040
_Discover on my frustrated way out the store that "expert in accessibility"
apparently meant "took the accessibility training"._

What more do you expect from a retail store? They're going to have someone who
went through a training course on the devices they sell.

They're not going to have someone on staff who has studied and published
manuscripts on device accessibility, just like they're not going to have a
baseband firmware engineer there on staff to tell customers what airplane mode
means.

------
lisper
I call BS. I just went through the process of ordering an iPhone from the
Apple store. No drivers license required, only an SSN, and that is SOP for any
credit check. If you order an unlocked phone and pay full freight you don't
even need an SSN.

~~~
shinratdr
Clearly. As anyone who has ever purchased any iOS device besides an iPhone
locked to a carrier knows, Apple couldn't care less about your drivers license
number. That's something the carrier you picked wants so that they can run a
credit check.

------
leoedin
One thing that seems to be missing from this page, the "trying to buy an
android phone" page, and the about me page, is what the actual disability of
the author is. I'd be interested in knowing what they can't do - it's worth
taking it into account when designing your own UIs.

It's very hard for someone who doesn't suffer from a disability to imagine how
someone with a disability will interface with their product. Screen
readers/accessibility for the blind is relatively easy - write some software
that reads the screen and presents what it sees in an auditory menu. Imagining
how other disabilities affect the user, and then working around that, is hard.
Given the extensive range of disabilities in the world, it's impossible to
take into account everything. A device has to be designed with the most common
disabilities in mind.

------
epo
Whiny, rude, disrespectful, also not smart enough to proffer alternative ID.
Her problem isn't disability, its stupidity.

~~~
mcherm
> Whiny, rude, disrespectful, also _did not choose_ to proffer alternative ID.

Her problem may be rudeness. But rudeness is not stupidity. Confusing the two
is either stupid or rude (depending on the reason for the confusion).

------
nknight
Every time someone or some system lazily says "driver's license", substitute
"state-issued photo ID" in your head. You can get one from your local DMV
office for a few dollars and a little time. It and its number will work fine
in any context (other than actually driving) in which a driver's license may
be called for.

~~~
jiggy2011
In that case why specifically say "driver's license"? And when she complained
that she did not have one surely it would have been easy for the person on the
phone to correct her and state that any valid ID would be fine rather than
insist on a driver's license, I'm sure it's not the first time this has come
up.

In the UK people will usually say "Passport or Drivers License" (or if your in
a bar just 'ID?') since almost everybody will have at least one of the two.

Pherhaps this is because less people in the US have a passport?

~~~
shinratdr
> In that case why specifically say "driver's license"?

Because more people are confused by government ID thinking it means passport,
military ID or something like that, than are confused by thinking Drivers
License means only a drivers license and nothing else. They may also try to
offer items that don't count, such as a photo-ID health card.

~~~
jiggy2011
My point here was more that once she mentioned that she did not have a drivers
license , I would have assumed a good customer service person might suggest
some specific alternatives at that point to avoid confusion. I'm assuming a
passport or military ID would have been adequate.

It just seems to me surprising to declare someone as stupid for assuming that
'drivers license' literaly meant 'drivers license' as opposed to 'drivers
license or equivilent' especially when the customer service person did not
help them understand, lots of people end up with various forms of ID from
passports to membership cards, it doesn't seem that surprising that someone
might not know exactly which forms are equivilent by memory.

Reminds me of confusion in the early 90s with some software requirements
specifying "IBM PC" when really meaning "IBM Compatible PC".

~~~
nknight
> _I'm assuming a passport or military ID would have been adequate._

I really can't emphasize enough the degree to which the US revolves around
state-issued photo IDs, whether in the form of a driver's license or a simple
ID card. This assumption is baked into everything.

Take a look at this page:
[http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/ppi/stats/stats_890.htm...](http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/ppi/stats/stats_890.html)

In 2000, there were fewer than 50 million valid US passports. That's less than
18% of the population at the time, and a chunk of those passports were
probably not truly valid -- US passports are good for 10 years, and nobody
bothers to tell the State Department when somebody dies.

10 years earlier, in 1990, there were only about 11 million passports, less
than 4% of the US population at the time.

This is because nobody needed one. Few Americans leave the US to go anywhere
other than Canada or Mexico. Until 2009, land-based travel to Canada and
Mexico did _not_ require a passport, and until 2007, air travel to Canada and
Mexico didn't, either.

This isn't Europe, you can't drive across multiple international borders on a
day trip. It's possible to traverse over 4,400km in a straight line (on land)
without leaving the 48 contiguous US states, and over 6,600km in a straight
line (on land) going from northwestern Canada to southern Mexico, with only
the US in between.

In contrast, by the time it became common for Americans to need an ID card at
all, drivers licenses were also becoming common. Win-win.

