iPod Touch
A while back, the NY Times ran an article, For the Advanced in Age, Easy-to-Use Technology, which call the iPod easy to use.
An obvious success story is Apple; its iPod line is easy to use and stylish, and its appeal crosses generations. Apple retail stores are clean, sleek and inviting. Older people enjoy entering them because “the Apple stores make you feel smart,” Mr. Coughlin said.
The iPod Touch, like its more famous sibling, the iPhone, is laughably inaccessible to the profoundly blind, though there may be a tactile interface in the works. With no tactile or audio interface, lacking even the limited click wheel interface of the other iPods, there is no way for someone without sight to access the Touch. My question is how easy is the iPod Touch to use for those with partial vision. What the Times calls ease of use here, I would call more accurately intermediate accessibility. So, even if the Touch is not accessible to the blind, is it accessible to the visually impaired?
Apples
Apple lists some accessibility feature of the Touch/iPhone interface, but the only two Touch relevant ones are its zoom feature and adjustable fonts.
Zoom
To view content on iPhone up close, just “pinch out” or double-tap the screen. Its 3.5-inch high-resolution display and Multi-Touch interface let you zoom in on web pages, email, attachments, Google Maps, and photos.
This is the best accessibility feature on the Touch interface. When in the Safari web browser, the Mail program and a few other apps, a simple pinching movement on the screen zooms in or out. The max zoom, combined with my reading glasses (my vision is about 20/200), means I can read most text.
I wish more apps were zoomable, so to speak. I do not understand why this feature is not enabled at all times. Apple must figure that allowing zoom at all times would be confusing, though why they did not make this an option is anyone’s guess. Most apps are not zoom-enabled, for what, I suspect, is much the same reason.
There must also be a reason for the level set for the maximum possible zoom. Fairly often, I find myself asking for just that little bit more zoom. I definite do not know the technical trade-offs that underlie this choice on Apple’s part. Hopefully, improving technology will allow Apple to relax this constraint.
Allowing more zoom more of the time would make my the Touch much easier to use for me and for anyone with any level of visual impairment.
Giant Fonts for Mail Messages
For improved email readability, you can increase the default font size of email text from Medium (the default) to Large, Extra-large, or Giant.
“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” The word, giant, is a serious exaggeration. Even set to Giant, I can make out the text only with my low vision reading glasses. The good news is that I can make it out. Apple ought to add a few larger font sizes, but there are not many names left. I suggest enormous, gigantic and ginormous.
Like zoom, adjustable font size are not universally available. Few apps take advantage of this, keeping them out of my reach. There are a few and I will review them if I find them useful. I am currently testing Fliq Notes, which has adjustable font sizes, but there is no way to access the notes from a PC (only from a Mac).
The rest of Apples alleged accessibility features are either iPhone-only or not worth discussing.
Oranges
Apple misses the boat with what I find a very useful feature. The screen one the Touch rotates with the device for some apps, mainly the web browser. When zoomed in or with Giant fonts, using the Touch widescreen, rather than tall, makes it a lot easier to read text. With the Touch vertical, many words end up on their own line. Reading this way is not intuitive, so the switch to widescreen feels natural. Additionally, the Touch will stretch narow layouts to fill the widescreen format when swivelled. Mostly, these narrow layouts are used by sites designed for mobile devices, like the Touch. Oddly, the zoom feature does not work on these sites. Yet again, this swivelling display feature is not available in most apps. Developers seem to think only in the tall screen format.
Final Thoughts and Hopes
Without these features, the Touch would be no more useful to me than a regular iPod and much less accessible. There has been a trade off between the loss of the tactile and audible click wheel of the regular iPods, which I could handle blindfolded, and the new capabilities of the Touch. I am glad tht I have the Touch. For me, having portable web and email access, together with sudoku and a digital notetaker, outweigh the loss of the tactile click wheel.
In case any Apple designers read this, here is my accessible feature wish list.
- More universal zoom with a greater maximum zoom.
- More adjustable font sizes and color schemes (light-on-dark rahter than dark on light).
- More swivel-friendly apps, especially Mail.
- Audio cues – espcially in Music.
Read more about iPhone accessibility here.
If you find this post useful or interesting, please consider buying me a cup of coffee.
If you are interested in joining our mailing list, please submit your email below. 
The strange thing is: the iPod Nano is accessible, and it’s done beautifully. I can fully see a sleeve + a screenreader iPod app work, perhaps numerous iPod apps, for different sets of functionalities. I can’t understand why there is obviously (?) so much resistance against making the iPod accessible to the blind. If voiceover were to be ported to the iPod, that would be wonderful, but I simply don’t see it happen. What would “we” have to do to draw attention to this? (btw I have the same difficulties regarding the maemo community’s resistance against porting Orca to maemo)
I may not know what maemo is, but I know the feeling. This is an upcoming theme on my blog. Why are there so many small things that folks could do to make everyone’s lives easier (especially the disabled), but do not bother? Why the QWERTY keyboard? Why are subtitles so poorly implemented? Why are not more visual digital interfaces light-on-dard instead of dark-on-light? The lists goes on. Some of it is inertia, some active resistance. All of it is a waste.