[mikeash]

Accessible design tends to be easier to read in general, helping everyone. Non-blind people may like to use a screen reader so they can do stuff by ear. I suspect a lot of HN readers like to navigate web sites by keyboard, something a lot of sites fail at and something accessibility design ensures. Lots of people who would never describe themselves as "disabled" require corrective lenses and accessibility can help them when their glasses are in the next room. And everyone will reach that point eventually, unless they die young. So my post was not 100% correct. There are some people who do not benefit from accessibility at all: those who are in excellent health and will die a sudden death before they age too much.

More discussion about how both digital and physical accessibility helps everyone:

https://blog.ai-media.tv/blog/why-designing-for-accessibilit...

https://medium.com/@mosaicofminds/the-curb-cut-effect-how-ma...

https://www.npr.org/2015/07/24/423230927/-a-gift-to-the-non-...

[Bendingo]

> Accessible design tends to be easier to read in general, helping everyone.

This is not necessarily so. I develop mobile apps for a large corp. Our designers are often told by the accessibility team to change their design in ways that make the more accessible, but reduce the usability for normal users. I'm talking about simple controls that most people take for granted, like date/time pickers, carousels etc.

[aaronbrethorst]

Can you give a specific example?

[praneshp]

Thank you, that's exactly the kind of answer I was looking for.

[mikeash]

Glad to be of service. It's not obvious if you don't already know about it, but once you do, you start to see how "accessibility" is so much more than "accommodate a few disabled people."