1237a644fe40
tech



Hello Wayne - 

CA>> It scared the hell out of me when it began. My eyesight
CA>> was degrading so rapidly I expected to be legally blind by
CA>> now. 

WC> Doesn't scare me near as much as the pain I awake to every
WC> morning. 

Being allergic to pain is to be expected. Losing your eyesight
comes as a shock when there have been no trauma(s) to the head? 

CA>> I was crushed. I had heard bits and pieces of how others
CA>> tried to cope with similar problems but had (and still do
CA>> not) little knowledge of what was state-of-the-art and had
CA>> resigned myself to the fact that these were my last few
CA>> years using a computer and then it would end. 

WC> I should learn touch typing NOW for just such a reason and
WC> there are audio aids for reading text but as you're too
WC> well aware not so much by way of browser friendly let alone
WC> sight impaired friendly web sites. 

I've touch typed for 40+ years now. :-) 

I really don't think accessing the Internet would be realistic
once I was legally blind. I know people seem to think they need
the Internet but how much good could it do at that point? 

CA>> This was one reason I didn't upgrade to W9x. The icons are
CA>> were already difficult for me to see and the text far too
CA>> small. I assumed that in a year or two at most I would be
CA>> unable to see the screen. Using DOS or W31 I thought would
CA>> buy me another year or two? 

WC> You can drop the resolution to the same as win 3.1 in 98,
WC> currently I'm struggling a bit at higher resolution. 

As has been pointed out text won't fit on buttons and boxes,
the system tray is a mess, and applications may or may not
accomodate the larger text and icon sizes. 

W9x and browsers only marginally support 640x480 with 800x600
being the new 'norm' these days and 1024x768 for new equipment. 

I did enable the text 'smoothing' and increased the scan rate
for the monitors for W95 at work and it did make a difference.
Much easier to read text after that.

CA>> The degradation has slowed down but not stopped completely
CA>> and I wear bifocals but cannot easilly read magazines or
CA>> newspapers even using my glasses. 

WC> Same here, don't feel like the Lone Ranger. Stopping at
WC> Home Depot this month to cobble together a reading lamp
WC> I'll rig to the headboard of the bed as overhead lighting
WC> no longer cuts it :-( 

I know there are others.

CA>> I have tried to keep my webpages viewable to as many
CA>> others in my situation as possible and useable for
CA>> text-only browsers partly because I feared one day I would
CA>> be unable to _maintain_ the website if I did not. The
CA>> website is probably going to be my last or next to last
CA>> attempt to put what I've learned about DOS and W31 out
CA>> there for others like myself who have legitimate reasons
CA>> for not 'upgrading' and must use either DOS or W31. I am
CA>> not certain there will be time to create another such
CA>> website before I am unable to complete the task. 

WC> Not sure how long my sight is going to hold up either. I
WC> too once had better than normal eyesight, 20-15. 

I never understood those numbers but was told something like
40/20 and when I asked what that meant the eye doctor said I
could see details at 40 feet as well as others could at 20. I
basically had almost twin microscopes in my head. The reason I
was there was the strain on my eyes (muscles that stretch the
lens) was causing occasional dizziness and some pain after
10-12 hours of work. I would look up across the room and it
would look like a camera zooming in/out/in for awhile then
focus. 

It's possible that better than average eyesight is one of
the reasons we became 'techs'.  For us it was easier than
for others?

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01