Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
Dear forum Members, Prusa Fans, and Staff,
I write to you today driven by a sense of helplessness—a sentiment I know I am not alone in feeling.
Firstly, I must express my deep respect for Prusa Research. At the foundation I manage, we operate six Original Prusa 3D printers, including Mini+, MK3S+ (with MMU), and MK4. These machines are robust and their flaws very minor. Also Prusa support team has been invaluable in troubleshooting many issues and answering our questions. Our interactions at 3D printing events such as SMRRF, where both our teams have exhibited, remain cherished memories.
I also commend Prusa for their commitment to open-source licensing—a principle that aligns strongly with our foundation's ethos and activities.
However, I am profoundly disappointed by Prusa’s approach to accessibility for blind individuals. In the time of European Union’s rollout of the European Accessibility Act, and when industries as varied as video gaming are advancing in accessibility, Prusa seems to have largely ignored our appeals. Initially, I feared I was the only blind person facing these challenges, but numerous others have echoed my concerns in the PrusaSlicer software inaccessibility report (#7595) I initiated in 2021. Despite this, the issue remains unresolved, with each software update diminishing accessibility further. Our requests have been met with vague promises and an underlying suggestion that our needs are of low priority.
I have attempted to rectify these issues independently, proposing code modifications. Unfortunately, due to delays in review, these changes became obsolete before they could be implemented, and the situation has only deteriorated with subsequent updates. Currently, using PrusaSlicer with a screen reader is arduous; users must memorise the function and position of each control or rely on INI files. Some tools, like autopainting of supports and adjusting autoarrangement, are completely unusable.
The firmware for the 3D printers presents a similar barrier. Previously, the 8-bit firmware allowed access to EEPROM, enabling changes to settings via appropriate D-Codes, thus making the hardware fully accessible. This capability has been stripped away with the introduction of the 32-bit firmware, and our report on this issue from 1 March (#3801) has yet to receive a response.
This situation is all the more disheartening when compared not only to other sectors but also to the broader 3D printing industry. For instance, my submissions and pull requests to improve OctoPrint’s accessibility were swiftly integrated, enhancing the software’s usability with each release. My thanks to @foosel and the community for their prompt and effective action.
It is with a heavy heart that I bring these issues to public attention, hoping it will prompt some change at Prusa Research or, at the very least, raise awareness about these significant barriers.
On a brighter note, I invite you all to view our work at the foundation. Aside from volunteer-created mock-ups, all the OpenSCAD models have been designed by myself, a person blind from birth, proving that visual impairment is no barrier to operating a 3D printer. You can see our work here:
https://printables.com/@prowadnica
Thank you for your understanding and support.
Yours sincerely,
Dawid Pieper
RE: Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
This has been real eye opener for me. I am hoping we can keep this thread going and up to date.
RE: Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
Sad to hear, but not unusual from my experience with software companies. Prusa appears to have a young median age for the employees and may lake empathy. I turned in thousands of reports for software fixes and enhancements in my business career. I was able to get 30% of the enhancements implemented. That is a huge success in the CAD/CAM arena. Some ideas.
When you report problems target the decision maker. As software groups grow, the decision maker is not the one writing the code. You don't convince the decision makers with technical specifications.
Get multiple people involved in reporting the issue. Show the competitive need. Keep reminding them and be professional and positive in your approach. Anger and recrimination will just get the problem burried. Keep at it, if you give up so will they.
An enhancement of this nature must be driven from the top and added to the basic design requirements. I would find the names of the software development leaders and send them blindfolds and ask them to use the software blindfolded. Even Josef Prusa. Then point out they have the opportunity to turn a potential public relations nightmare into a win for Prusa Research.
For fun my software rules. The first 20 were written and used in the office to save my job many years ago.
RE: Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
Sad to hear, but not unusual from my experience with software companies. Prusa appears to have a young median age for the employees and may lake empathy. I turned in thousands of reports for software fixes and enhancements in my business career. I was able to get 30% of the enhancements implemented. That is a huge success in the CAD/CAM arena. Some ideas.
When you report problems target the decision maker. As software groups grow, the decision maker is not the one writing the code. You don't convince the decision makers with technical specifications.
Get multiple people involved in reporting the issue. Show the competitive need. Keep reminding them and be professional and positive in your approach. Anger and recrimination will just get the problem burried. Keep at it, if you give up so will they.
An enhancement of this nature must be driven from the top and added to the basic design requirements. I would find the names of the software development leaders and send them blindfolds and ask them to use the software blindfolded. Even Josef Prusa. Then point out they have the opportunity to turn a potential public relations nightmare into a win for Prusa Research.
For fun my software rules. The first 20 were written and used in the office to save my job many years ago.
That was a very fun read. My favorite:
In order of increasing magnitude there are:
Lies
#@%* lies
Software demos
RE: Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
Thanks for posting this. I am totally blind and own an MK4. I absolutely love this printer!
I do have to agree that the accessibility of Prusa Slicer is horrible. I am able to use it, but barely. That's also because I'm a very technical person and I know how to work around odd behavior in software. There are many aspects of the software, as mentioned, that are impossible for me to use.
Please make the accessibility of this software a priority!
RE: Discrimination of blind individuals by Prusa Research
Thank you very much for your expressed support and interest in the topic.
Actually I did some work on the initial accessibility of PrusaSlicer version 2.7.1. I managed to correctly label majority of text fields, buttons and checkboxes.
I hoped that this would be a good starting point for further works or at least satisfactory accessibility improvement. Unfortunately, instead we got further versions that only broke compatibility with these changes.
In fact, the introduction of full software accessibility was completely feasible before version 2.7.0, by which time my issue had already been published for more than two years. At that stage PrusaSlicer still based on native controls and it was possible to introduce full compatibility with ease and then design new controls making sure not to loose accessibility during development.
Unfortunately, PrusaSlicer 2.7.0 introduced completely new controls without any thought of accessibility, leaving us with only not compliant with accessibility guidelines and unintuitive workarounds. But still, better non-intuitive workarounds than no workarounds, and for the time being that's what we're getting. 🙁
Then came PrusaSlicer 2.8.0 and we got even worse accessibility (I mean new menu). It's not as tragic a change as in 2.7.0, but again it's even worse than it was.As I suggested many times, I am willing to help with this. My pull request #11651 is a good starting point and a lot can still be done. Unfortunately, even such an open willingness to help is ignored. Immediately after the 2.8.0 alpha release, I proposed using this opportunity to work on accessibility for the 2.8.0 final, again I offered my help. I didn't even get a reply. 🙁