"Shame on Apple. How does Jobs justify it? Is there any excuse at all?"
Read. The. Fvcking. Thread.
There are plenty of reasons. You may disagree with them, but all you need to do is SCROLL UP WITH YOUR SCROLL WHEEL and read them. In particular, Amorph.
Am I the only one that loves the one button mouse?
I want Apple to keep them, if U prefer a 100 button mouse why don´t U buy one?
Okay, first I had someone about Apple not doing a ?5-button mouse? (which I NEVER advocated). Now THIS guy is upping the ante to a 100-button mouse.
In your passion and attachment to Apple?s one-button design (hey, I like it too, but the more I find myself surfing/reading online and accessing the contextual menus, I think there?s a better, more effiicent and practical way), the only thing some people seem to be able to do is adopt a ?one button vs. 5-100 button? philosophy.
It?s TWO buttons, okay? One for standard clicking, one for little menus (they save time...really!) and a * gasp * scroll wheel for skootching quickly and easily through long documents or webpages.
NOBODY here wants a stupid 100-button mouse, alright? I?m quite certain only 3 or 4 would even want one of those ridiculous 5-button models that Kensington and Microsoft offer.
It?s really simple: two buttons, one wheel. That?s hardly a stretch and it?s hardly going to bring Apple to the brink of ruin.
AND, as stated before, I?m cool with Apple making them BOTH. Ship all systems with 2-buttons, but if someone honestly just can?t handle it, they can get a cheap one button. I guarantee you that they?d never sell too.
The only reason I?m big on Apple doing it is, because like everything else they?ve touched, I?m convinced they could do it better, smarter and cooler than Kensington, Logitech, Belkin, etc.
In any case, if the ?one button only? crowd?s only counter to a 2-button idea is to keep throwing out ever-increasingly silly notions of ?48 buttons? and 7 scroll wheels? (which nobody is wanting), get some new ammo.
I think the excuse that Amorph is getting, the "what's going to happen to UI if we go to multi-button mice?" is rather alarmist.
We've already gone to multi-button mice, that is, most Mac and PC users have. Contextual menus are here to stay...whether any one of us likes it or not. I agree with Amorph's assessment that contextual menus and right-clicking are counter intuitive. I also agree that everything a contextual menu can do should be represented by visual buttons or in clearly labelled menus.
But still, Apple needs to get with the program and use a two-button mouse. Little kids and grandmas don't like two buttons-tough. Kids will learn, and grandma can use the iMac-233 in Mac OS 9 if it makes her happy. The market for people who have never used computers is shrinking, and so there's no reason to pander to this tiny market in a way that affects the large majority of Mac users negatively.
Yes I know, you can go out and buy a two-button mouse, and most people do (I'm very attached to my new Kensington optical Orbit). But if most people are doing that already, why not help them out?
Personally I think Apple is sitting on a new paradigm for multi-button mousing, and they're gonna drop it on us when we least expect.
i think we should give some luv to the simplicity of the one-button (or essentially, no button) optical mouse that is provided w/ desktop macs...they track well, and are great for beginners!
i work w/ lots of professors(who certainly are intelligent and professional) but don't necessarily need to be "power users" to do what they want on the computer...the right and left click can be confusing when you start learning and the user shouldn't have to spend ANY EXTRA time figuring that out - who cares!? click, drag...
(if you've ever listened to a workshop w/ people explaining - right click this/that - it's very confusing and not intuitive)
apple provides the minimum to use the computer - they know any real computer professional already has their preference of trackball/mouse and is currently using it (as well as keyboard) - and it's a statement saying that our OS is the easiest to use!
i think we should give some luv to the simplicity of the one-button (or essentially, no button) optical mouse that is provided w/ desktop macs...they track well, and are great for beginners!
i work w/ lots of professors(who certainly are intelligent and professional) but don't necessarily need to be "power users" to do what they want on the computer...the right and left click can be confusing when you start learning and the user shouldn't have to spend ANY EXTRA time figuring that out - who cares!? click, drag...
(if you've ever listened to a workshop w/ people explaining - right click this/that - it's very confusing and not intuitive)
apple provides the minimum to use the computer - they know any real computer professional already has their preference of trackball/mouse and is currently using it (as well as keyboard) - and it's a statement saying that our OS is the easiest to use!
TOTAL popycock.
These same people drive cars, have kids and know how to turn on a computer, they can figure out a simple 2 button mouse for christ sakes.
Besides, we are talking about a 2 button mouse with a G5, a professional working machine. Why would ANYONE that can't handle a 2 button mouse want or buy a G5 ?????????
Did someone say that contextual menus are counterintuitive? Because they certainly aren't... in fact, they're the most intuitive form of control you can do. Because instead of trying to figure out how to "select" an object you want to do something to, and then hunting around the menus in the menu bar looking for the action you want to perform on the object, you just right-click and you have anything you want to do to the object right there. I agree that you should always be able to use a program if you have a one button mouse, but why are contextual menus bad? They've only made things easier for me.
I fully agree with pscates that there aren't really any people now who shouldn't be able to figure out a two button mouse. Basically all PC users have two button mice, and that's a huge proportion of the US population (and a very significant portion of the world population). Keeping a one button mouse around for the 1% of computer-idiots who can't figure it out is like a teacher choosing not to cover any new material in a class because of one dumb kid, thus unfairly holding back everyone else. Think about that analogy. Think about how the smart kids would feel towards the teacher. Then think that the smart kids represent most of the computer-using population, and the teacher represents Apple. Wouldn't it be better to leave a few people behind rather than insult everyone else? I mean, it's not like Apple is afraid of leaving people behind - they've been constantly whittling away at what hardware is supported under OS X, and they haven't had any problems charging full price for their OS even to people who bought all the previous versions.
Yes, the beloved Mac OS - and everything about it - has been radically altered at EVERY SINGLE LEVEL over the past couple of years...and guess what? It's BETTER.
We all adapted and "got with the program" and are better for it (thanks Apple).
But, ooooohhhh...don't you dare touch that one-button mouse! Why...why, it's blasphemy!
And, as someone mentioned above, if you can hold down a job, have children, work an espresso machine, own/use a cell phone, have a home theater system and have it all figured out, can book plane reservations online and juggle work, family, school, recreation, etc....YOU CAN GET THE HANG OF TWO $@#$@% BUTTONS ON A MOUSE.
Wow - what an emotive thread. I'll give you my perspective as a switcher...
I have used Apples since my parents bought an Apple II. We then progressed onto the SE and LC Macs. When I moved out of home, I couldn't afford an Apple so I bought a IBM clone, not even a Windows/Wintel machine back then as it was still running DOS. Of course I didn't realise how bloody awful this was and it was always a pleasure to go back home and use the LC. Still, I persisted with the IBM clone and reached an unhappy happiness when Windows 3.0 was released. (In retrospect I could have probably bought a second-hand Mac, but I can't remember whether these were hidiously expensive at the time or not).
Anywho, time marched on and Windows95 was released. I know what a lot of people think of 95, but for me, it was a godsend being able to get the graphical functionality of a Mac at a PC price.
Time continued to march on and I tried 98, ME, 2000 briefly and XP - which I very much like. To me, apart from the OS, the three most important things to me in a computer are the screen, keyboard and mouse. Currently I enjoy an LG Flatron monitor, MS Office Keyboard and MS Intellimouse Optical mouse. Plus all the innards which are pretty good.
Recently, however, the price of a Mac has dropped to the point where I thought the price / performance threshold had been mentally reached in my mind to justify a purchase. Now I'm the proud owner of an eMac (for about two weeks now) and we're all loving it. I wasn't sure for the first couple of days but that was just the shock of something new and very cool. I'm now at the point where I'll happily use both, but I did have to change a couple of things.
Firstly, I upped the RAM from 128Mb to 640Mb with a memory chip bought from my local Wintel store. Then I swapped out the mouse for the same one that is on my Windows machine. The one button / no scroll wheel was not well accepted, including the speed of the original mouse, which felt like it was on acid even when turned up to high. Then the keyboard was swapped to that mentioned above, because we like the feel of it. Then we added some Altec Lansing AVS300 speakers for a bit more oomph.
So what's the point of this long rant? I'm not even sure myself, but I went into the deal knowing that I would probably have to upgrade all of the above and even knowing that this pushed the price up significantly, I went ahead anyway. For my family and I, we have a great OS in a great machine with a great monitor, keyboard, mouse and speakers, even if we did have to option some of these. My only two criticisms would be that the internal fan(s) is/are fairly loud and that the power button is a bit of a reach (I prefer to have them within easy arm reach for me and the smaller people)
You will never please everyone, but ergonomics aside, I think a scroll wheel is a must. Myself, I use all four buttons + scroll wheel (plus the scroll wheel on the keyboard and the application switching buttons on the keyboard), but many wouldn't. I love the fact that I can go backward and forward in my browser (go Safari!!! - bleah Explorer for Mac) by using my mouse thumb and index finger. Speaking of Explorer for Mac, this is one of the things which turned me off buying a Mac a year ago (it just reeked of bleah). I lllooovvveee Safari.
So, you won't please everyone - it's just a matter of Apple deciding who they want to please most.
BTW, I love OS X. I'm glad Apple dropped the price $1500 (Australian) to a point where I could mentally make the leap again. My eMac OS X It ain't my Mum's old OS9 LC - and thank goodness for that!
And to think - we probably still wouldn't have one if we didn't buy an iPod - the seemless iTunes (yeah!) / iPod integration was a great selling point.
According to the number of times I've seen the people in my (all Win
[snip: excellent post]
That's exactly what the DOS wizards said about Macintoshes in 1984. It is not the user's responsibility to adapt to the tool. It is the tool's responsibility to be adapted to the user. Any consumer appliance whose utility is not self-evident right out of the box is broken.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a UNIX machine needs is 3.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Windows machine needs is 2.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Macintosh machine needs is 1.
Ship the mouse that your OS was designed for and forget about the critics that are on other OS's. If they have never used a Mac with one mouse button how do they know the mouse is missing anything?
If anything Apple should perhaps include a scroll wheel or other scrolling device on the keyboard. You can then design it so it doesn't cause any RSI issues.
What about a one button mouse with a scrolling device?
If same technology as the ipod scrolling wheel was used (just in a linear way instead of circular) it would be possible to design a very sleek mouse with the same simplicity as the existing one.
Two buttons or more is only usefull for hardcore gamers or 3D pros (In maya for instance its a small advantage when rotating or panning). Wireless mice are hopeless as you have 2 devices (transmitter and mouse) instead of one. They run out of battery. And they have terrible refresh rates making them barely useable.
For most tasks its better to be forced to learn the 'real' way of doing it (short cut, drag n drop etc). Being used to use the contextual menus for everything is slow and time consuming. The contextual menus works more as a kind of instant help menu. You are always able to do the same thing with fewer mouse clicks in another way.
The scroll wheel on contrary is a brilliant invention for scrolling and zooming.
THIS is why apple should stick with one button, but add the scroll device.
(I mainly use windows myself, but never use the 2. button)
(I mainly use windows myself, but never use the 2. button)
Perfect argument for why Apple should release a two button mouse: No one forces you to use the second button provided by the OEM, but for all Mac users who want to use two buttons they are forced into only using one button or forced into purchasing another mouse.
Perfect argument for why Apple should release a two button mouse: No one forces you to use the second button provided by the OEM, but for all Mac users who want to use two buttons they are forced into only using one button or forced into purchasing another mouse.
on the contrary, if a 2 button mouse became standard, more apps would REQUIRE the use of it...
ah, but it is also a mac... therefore the minimum should be 1, as it is...
There needs to be parallelism in arguments, i.e. if he uses an OS in one argument he needs to continue that trend in the remaining examples. Perhaps you learned that when you took English in school. Unix is an OS, Windows in an OS, Macintosh is a computer. Macintosh is a computer that uses a Unix OS.
Another note: as I've used all three OS's...
The minimum number of mouse buttons a UNIX machine needs is 1.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Windows machine needs is 1.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Macintosh machine needs is 1.
The preferred number of buttons is 3, 2, and 2, respectively.
Hand-press mice are counter-intuitive. As how many times do you press something with your whole hand? Go to an elevator, you press the floor level with your finger. Go to a computer keyboard, you press the keys with your finger. Turn the power on in your computer, you press the button with your finger. Change the channel on your TV, done with the finger, etc.
Keyboards are also counter-intuitive as the most prevalent form of communicating, prior to the computer, was done with pencil and paper. Yet, I don't think you'll make the argument we should abandon the keyboard because a person has to learn the QWERTY system. QWERTY, itself, is counterintuitve. Driving is counterintuitive, but I don't think anyone wants to change the way it's done.
Besides, we are talking about a 2 button mouse with a G5, a professional working machine. Why would ANYONE that can't handle a 2 button mouse want or buy a G5 ?????????
Buy a friggin Imac.
I second this. There is absolutely no reason in the world why a G5 shouldn't ship with a two button mouse. Apple is even marketing this machine as a workstation (Xeon bake-off). I first used a workstation (running HP-UX) 9 years ago and it *gasp* came with a 3 button mouse. After that, my Mac mouse seemed like a cute toy. Let's face it people. The crowd the G5 is marketed to demands the use of a 2+ button mouse. Why in the hell wouldn't you give them one?
Comments
Read. The. Fvcking. Thread.
There are plenty of reasons. You may disagree with them, but all you need to do is SCROLL UP WITH YOUR SCROLL WHEEL and read them. In particular, Amorph.
Originally posted by maclogic
Am I the only one that loves the one button mouse?
I want Apple to keep them, if U prefer a 100 button mouse why don´t U buy one?
Okay, first I had someone about Apple not doing a ?5-button mouse? (which I NEVER advocated). Now THIS guy is upping the ante to a 100-button mouse.
In your passion and attachment to Apple?s one-button design (hey, I like it too, but the more I find myself surfing/reading online and accessing the contextual menus, I think there?s a better, more effiicent and practical way), the only thing some people seem to be able to do is adopt a ?one button vs. 5-100 button? philosophy.
It?s TWO buttons, okay? One for standard clicking, one for little menus (they save time...really!) and a * gasp * scroll wheel for skootching quickly and easily through long documents or webpages.
NOBODY here wants a stupid 100-button mouse, alright? I?m quite certain only 3 or 4 would even want one of those ridiculous 5-button models that Kensington and Microsoft offer.
It?s really simple: two buttons, one wheel. That?s hardly a stretch and it?s hardly going to bring Apple to the brink of ruin.
AND, as stated before, I?m cool with Apple making them BOTH. Ship all systems with 2-buttons, but if someone honestly just can?t handle it, they can get a cheap one button. I guarantee you that they?d never sell too.
The only reason I?m big on Apple doing it is, because like everything else they?ve touched, I?m convinced they could do it better, smarter and cooler than Kensington, Logitech, Belkin, etc.
In any case, if the ?one button only? crowd?s only counter to a 2-button idea is to keep throwing out ever-increasingly silly notions of ?48 buttons? and 7 scroll wheels? (which nobody is wanting), get some new ammo.
We've already gone to multi-button mice, that is, most Mac and PC users have. Contextual menus are here to stay...whether any one of us likes it or not. I agree with Amorph's assessment that contextual menus and right-clicking are counter intuitive. I also agree that everything a contextual menu can do should be represented by visual buttons or in clearly labelled menus.
But still, Apple needs to get with the program and use a two-button mouse. Little kids and grandmas don't like two buttons-tough. Kids will learn, and grandma can use the iMac-233 in Mac OS 9 if it makes her happy. The market for people who have never used computers is shrinking, and so there's no reason to pander to this tiny market in a way that affects the large majority of Mac users negatively.
Yes I know, you can go out and buy a two-button mouse, and most people do (I'm very attached to my new Kensington optical Orbit). But if most people are doing that already, why not help them out?
Personally I think Apple is sitting on a new paradigm for multi-button mousing, and they're gonna drop it on us when we least expect.
i work w/ lots of professors(who certainly are intelligent and professional) but don't necessarily need to be "power users" to do what they want on the computer...the right and left click can be confusing when you start learning and the user shouldn't have to spend ANY EXTRA time figuring that out - who cares!? click, drag...
(if you've ever listened to a workshop w/ people explaining - right click this/that - it's very confusing and not intuitive)
apple provides the minimum to use the computer - they know any real computer professional already has their preference of trackball/mouse and is currently using it (as well as keyboard) - and it's a statement saying that our OS is the easiest to use!
Originally posted by iDebaser
i think we should give some luv to the simplicity of the one-button (or essentially, no button) optical mouse that is provided w/ desktop macs...they track well, and are great for beginners!
i work w/ lots of professors(who certainly are intelligent and professional) but don't necessarily need to be "power users" to do what they want on the computer...the right and left click can be confusing when you start learning and the user shouldn't have to spend ANY EXTRA time figuring that out - who cares!? click, drag...
(if you've ever listened to a workshop w/ people explaining - right click this/that - it's very confusing and not intuitive)
apple provides the minimum to use the computer - they know any real computer professional already has their preference of trackball/mouse and is currently using it (as well as keyboard) - and it's a statement saying that our OS is the easiest to use!
TOTAL popycock.
These same people drive cars, have kids and know how to turn on a computer, they can figure out a simple 2 button mouse for christ sakes.
Besides, we are talking about a 2 button mouse with a G5, a professional working machine. Why would ANYONE that can't handle a 2 button mouse want or buy a G5 ?????????
Buy a friggin Imac.
Originally posted by zoozx27
TOTAL popycock.
These same people...
Take it down a notch. I can't hear my music with all that noise you are making.
I fully agree with pscates that there aren't really any people now who shouldn't be able to figure out a two button mouse. Basically all PC users have two button mice, and that's a huge proportion of the US population (and a very significant portion of the world population). Keeping a one button mouse around for the 1% of computer-idiots who can't figure it out is like a teacher choosing not to cover any new material in a class because of one dumb kid, thus unfairly holding back everyone else. Think about that analogy. Think about how the smart kids would feel towards the teacher. Then think that the smart kids represent most of the computer-using population, and the teacher represents Apple. Wouldn't it be better to leave a few people behind rather than insult everyone else? I mean, it's not like Apple is afraid of leaving people behind - they've been constantly whittling away at what hardware is supported under OS X, and they haven't had any problems charging full price for their OS even to people who bought all the previous versions.
Yes, the beloved Mac OS - and everything about it - has been radically altered at EVERY SINGLE LEVEL over the past couple of years...and guess what? It's BETTER.
We all adapted and "got with the program" and are better for it (thanks Apple).
But, ooooohhhh...don't you dare touch that one-button mouse! Why...why, it's blasphemy!
And, as someone mentioned above, if you can hold down a job, have children, work an espresso machine, own/use a cell phone, have a home theater system and have it all figured out, can book plane reservations online and juggle work, family, school, recreation, etc....YOU CAN GET THE HANG OF TWO $@#$@% BUTTONS ON A MOUSE.
I have used Apples since my parents bought an Apple II. We then progressed onto the SE and LC Macs. When I moved out of home, I couldn't afford an Apple so I bought a IBM clone, not even a Windows/Wintel machine back then as it was still running DOS. Of course I didn't realise how bloody awful this was and it was always a pleasure to go back home and use the LC. Still, I persisted with the IBM clone and reached an unhappy happiness when Windows 3.0 was released. (In retrospect I could have probably bought a second-hand Mac, but I can't remember whether these were hidiously expensive at the time or not).
Anywho, time marched on and Windows95 was released. I know what a lot of people think of 95, but for me, it was a godsend being able to get the graphical functionality of a Mac at a PC price.
Time continued to march on and I tried 98, ME, 2000 briefly and XP - which I very much like. To me, apart from the OS, the three most important things to me in a computer are the screen, keyboard and mouse. Currently I enjoy an LG Flatron monitor, MS Office Keyboard and MS Intellimouse Optical mouse. Plus all the innards which are pretty good.
Recently, however, the price of a Mac has dropped to the point where I thought the price / performance threshold had been mentally reached in my mind to justify a purchase. Now I'm the proud owner of an eMac (for about two weeks now) and we're all loving it. I wasn't sure for the first couple of days but that was just the shock of something new and very cool. I'm now at the point where I'll happily use both, but I did have to change a couple of things.
Firstly, I upped the RAM from 128Mb to 640Mb with a memory chip bought from my local Wintel store. Then I swapped out the mouse for the same one that is on my Windows machine. The one button / no scroll wheel was not well accepted, including the speed of the original mouse, which felt like it was on acid even when turned up to high. Then the keyboard was swapped to that mentioned above, because we like the feel of it. Then we added some Altec Lansing AVS300 speakers for a bit more oomph.
So what's the point of this long rant? I'm not even sure myself, but I went into the deal knowing that I would probably have to upgrade all of the above and even knowing that this pushed the price up significantly, I went ahead anyway. For my family and I, we have a great OS in a great machine with a great monitor, keyboard, mouse and speakers, even if we did have to option some of these. My only two criticisms would be that the internal fan(s) is/are fairly loud and that the power button is a bit of a reach (I prefer to have them within easy arm reach for me and the smaller people)
You will never please everyone, but ergonomics aside, I think a scroll wheel is a must. Myself, I use all four buttons + scroll wheel (plus the scroll wheel on the keyboard and the application switching buttons on the keyboard), but many wouldn't. I love the fact that I can go backward and forward in my browser (go Safari!!! - bleah Explorer for Mac) by using my mouse thumb and index finger. Speaking of Explorer for Mac, this is one of the things which turned me off buying a Mac a year ago (it just reeked of bleah). I lllooovvveee Safari.
So, you won't please everyone - it's just a matter of Apple deciding who they want to please most.
BTW, I love OS X. I'm glad Apple dropped the price $1500 (Australian) to a point where I could mentally make the leap again. My eMac OS X It ain't my Mum's old OS9 LC - and thank goodness for that!
And to think - we probably still wouldn't have one if we didn't buy an iPod - the seemless iTunes (yeah!) / iPod integration was a great selling point.
Originally posted by Amorph
According to the number of times I've seen the people in my (all Win
[snip: excellent post]
That's exactly what the DOS wizards said about Macintoshes in 1984. It is not the user's responsibility to adapt to the tool. It is the tool's responsibility to be adapted to the user. Any consumer appliance whose utility is not self-evident right out of the box is broken.
Yes, yes and thrice yes.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Windows machine needs is 2.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Macintosh machine needs is 1.
Ship the mouse that your OS was designed for and forget about the critics that are on other OS's. If they have never used a Mac with one mouse button how do they know the mouse is missing anything?
If anything Apple should perhaps include a scroll wheel or other scrolling device on the keyboard. You can then design it so it doesn't cause any RSI issues.
Originally posted by Outsider
The minimum number of mouse buttons a UNIX machine needs is 3.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Macintosh machine needs is 1.
Macintosh is UNIX, chief.
If same technology as the ipod scrolling wheel was used (just in a linear way instead of circular) it would be possible to design a very sleek mouse with the same simplicity as the existing one.
Two buttons or more is only usefull for hardcore gamers or 3D pros (In maya for instance its a small advantage when rotating or panning). Wireless mice are hopeless as you have 2 devices (transmitter and mouse) instead of one. They run out of battery. And they have terrible refresh rates making them barely useable.
For most tasks its better to be forced to learn the 'real' way of doing it (short cut, drag n drop etc). Being used to use the contextual menus for everything is slow and time consuming. The contextual menus works more as a kind of instant help menu. You are always able to do the same thing with fewer mouse clicks in another way.
The scroll wheel on contrary is a brilliant invention for scrolling and zooming.
THIS is why apple should stick with one button, but add the scroll device.
(I mainly use windows myself, but never use the 2. button)
ap
Originally posted by svin
(I mainly use windows myself, but never use the 2. button)
Perfect argument for why Apple should release a two button mouse: No one forces you to use the second button provided by the OEM, but for all Mac users who want to use two buttons they are forced into only using one button or forced into purchasing another mouse.
Originally posted by X X
Macintosh is UNIX, chief.
ah, but it is also a mac... therefore the minimum should be 1, as it is...
Originally posted by X X
Perfect argument for why Apple should release a two button mouse: No one forces you to use the second button provided by the OEM, but for all Mac users who want to use two buttons they are forced into only using one button or forced into purchasing another mouse.
on the contrary, if a 2 button mouse became standard, more apps would REQUIRE the use of it...
Right clicking is counter-intuitive.
I like Apple's hand-press mouse.
I can't wait to drop this Athlon rig and go back to Apple elegance and simplicity.
Wanna extra button? Use the keyboard...it's got loads of extra buttons...how many do you want?
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Paul
ah, but it is also a mac... therefore the minimum should be 1, as it is...
There needs to be parallelism in arguments, i.e. if he uses an OS in one argument he needs to continue that trend in the remaining examples. Perhaps you learned that when you took English in school. Unix is an OS, Windows in an OS, Macintosh is a computer. Macintosh is a computer that uses a Unix OS.
Another note: as I've used all three OS's...
The minimum number of mouse buttons a UNIX machine needs is 1.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Windows machine needs is 1.
The minimum number of mouse buttons a Macintosh machine needs is 1.
The preferred number of buttons is 3, 2, and 2, respectively.
Regards,
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Two buttons mouse suck.
Right clicking is counter-intuitive.
I like Apple's hand-press mouse.
Hand-press mice are counter-intuitive. As how many times do you press something with your whole hand? Go to an elevator, you press the floor level with your finger. Go to a computer keyboard, you press the keys with your finger. Turn the power on in your computer, you press the button with your finger. Change the channel on your TV, done with the finger, etc.
Keyboards are also counter-intuitive as the most prevalent form of communicating, prior to the computer, was done with pencil and paper. Yet, I don't think you'll make the argument we should abandon the keyboard because a person has to learn the QWERTY system. QWERTY, itself, is counterintuitve. Driving is counterintuitive, but I don't think anyone wants to change the way it's done.
Originally posted by zoozx27
Besides, we are talking about a 2 button mouse with a G5, a professional working machine. Why would ANYONE that can't handle a 2 button mouse want or buy a G5 ?????????
Buy a friggin Imac.
I second this. There is absolutely no reason in the world why a G5 shouldn't ship with a two button mouse. Apple is even marketing this machine as a workstation (Xeon bake-off). I first used a workstation (running HP-UX) 9 years ago and it *gasp* came with a 3 button mouse. After that, my Mac mouse seemed like a cute toy. Let's face it people. The crowd the G5 is marketed to demands the use of a 2+ button mouse. Why in the hell wouldn't you give them one?