[syshum]

Your logic is extremely flawed, accessibility at many commercial companies takes a back seat because it is not viewed as something that will drive metrics or adoption. Dev Time will be spent on things that will drive new users, or improve profitability, Accessibility rares makes that cut.

I am not sure where you believe that more users == more time given to accessibility features.

Open Source on the other hand is development driven by need, thus if an an open source software does not do what I need, I can modify to do that thing. This allows a small niche of users to adapt the software to meet their particular accessibility needs, or for a charity to pay a developer to do so, neither of which is possible with close source software. So at the end of the day people that need or want accessibility features have to shame the closed source companies into doing it, or have regulations passed that require it, both of which will result in just enough development time to either cover the regulations, or the bad PR, and likely will result in a subpar experience to that of Open Source (IMO)

[rimliu]

And yet iPhone is one of the best examples of accessible product. Can you provide any examples supporting your "IMO"?