Beauty over function (personal preference)

Posted by Noah Senecal-Junkeer – March 8, 2026

Something that isn’t often discussed when recommending assistive technology: why beauty and discretion matter as much as function.

We care about how assistive technology (AT) functions and how much it costs, but we should also consider how people feel when using it.

I’m hesitant to use AT in public

I've used many adaptive input devices. Headmouse, alternative switches, bite-activated controls, camera-based tracking systems. They all help me a ton, but they draw attention, which is something

There’s more to it than function and cost

We spend a lot of energy evaluating assistive technology on performance and price. Those matter. But how visible is this thing? Does it look like a hospital device or some cool technology from the future?

Sometimes I compromise on performance

I find myself gravitating toward whatever comes built into my laptop or phone, or something that looks sleek. The built-in options aren’t always the best. But they’re simpler, they travel easier, and they’re far less distracting in a meeting or in public.

I’ll pay more or accept a less capable tool if it means I can use it without drawing attention. Not that people should feel this way, and I wish I didn't, but it’s the reality.

Ask how it feels

Before we recommend a new tool to someone, let’s ask them how they feel about using it. Not just whether it works!

Where’s your current taking you?

We’d love to hear what you're exploring in accessibility and see how we can help along the way.

Get in touch