Why does apple feel the need to dump a bunch of engineering and research into a periphal that ends up in the closet as soon as its opened?
Non-2 button mice are worthless with os x. The only way to use them is to constantly have your left hand on the kb to hold down control when you need it. WHY NOT PUT A 2ND BUTTON ON!?
Its a cool idea but come on, everyone knows how to use a 2 button mouse in todays world. The 1-button trend is gone.
It's for good reason - to force developers to make *every* feature accessible through left-click only. Right-click, middle-click, top-left-scroll-with-a-twist should only be shortcuts to functionality that the new user (new to the application) can find by simply pointing and clicking on visible objects and choices. Contextual menus are hidden and modal. Extremely bad for discovery.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
It's for good reason - to force developers to make *every* feature accessible through left-click only. Right-click, middle-click, top-left-scroll-with-a-twist should only be shortcuts to functionality that the new user (new to the application) can find by simply pointing and clicking on visible objects and choices. Contextual menus are hidden and modal. Extremely bad for discovery.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
True... a developer doesn't want functionality to only be reached in a contextual menu. It should also be able to be accessed through menus on top. But one of the first things people are taught is one can get information on something by right clicking on it. Everyone knows this. Why not keep it going this way instead of trying to fight it.
I'm not saying focusing on the left click is bad. But Right-Click today is needed for productivity. Nothing pisses me off more than when I have to go to the top of the application 100 times to do something. Why not be able to access that wherever your mouse is? Almost all OS X apps already support it. It isn't going away.
This Apple patent and design has been around for at least 2 or 3 years. There was a lot of speculation then about Apple releasing a product. So far, it seems we are stuck with the "pill-mouse."
True... a developer doesn't want functionality to only be reached in a contextual menu. It should also be able to be accessed through menus on top. But one of the first things people are taught is one can get information on something by right clicking on it. Everyone knows this. Why not keep it going this way instead of trying to fight it.
It is far from true that "everyone knows it." I've gone through the "right-click... no, right - no, the other right" routine one too many times to buy that.
Quote:
I'm not saying focusing on the left click is bad. But Right-Click today is needed for productivity. Nothing pisses me off more than when I have to go to the top of the application 100 times to do something. Why not be able to access that wherever your mouse is? Almost all OS X apps already support it. It isn't going away.
The assertion that it's needed is absurd. It's needed on Windows, sure. Contextual menus are useful shortcuts, sure. But if you want right-clicking so much, plug in a two button mouse and be done with it.
It's for good reason - to force developers to make *every* feature accessible through left-click only. Right-click, middle-click, top-left-scroll-with-a-twist should only be shortcuts to functionality that the new user (new to the application) can find by simply pointing and clicking on visible objects and choices. Contextual menus are hidden and modal. Extremely bad for discovery.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
What he said X2!
Apple is all about simplicity combined with power. I turned to Macs because they were the first computer I could understand. People are still learning how to use computers every day. The entire planet has not been trained on windows. If your past the intial phases of learning, you can either use the kb (I do that all the time-no problems or complaints) or spend a few bucks on a two-button mouse.
edit, PS what does that site in French actually say?
Make the two/three button mouse a BTO option - developers will therefore need to cater for one button as far as development is concerned (keeping the UI intact), but users can select something else if they want the benefits of a two/three button version. Personally, I bet Apple could design an amazing two/three button mouse.
Make the two/three button mouse a BTO option - developers will therefore need to cater for one button as far as development is concerned (keeping the UI intact), but users can select something else if they want the benefits of a two/three button version. Personally, I bet Apple could design an amazing two/three button mouse.
AGREED 100%!!
Someone who has been on computers more than a year... they need something more than a 1 button mouse. I mean come on... even XCode and Interface builder need a right mouse button!
If it were BTO I'd be happy. While we're on the subject ... they newest mac kb needs to be redesigned too! I don't mean to rant but I'll have to throw that guy in the closet when I get my new g5 too. I spend a lot of my time typing special characters while programming... a NON-ADJUSTABLE kb is definitely my enemy. The keyboards on all the g4's that were adjustable were 100 times better. Why did apple feel the need to take a step backwards?
The newest Apple keyboard and mouse are really a significant step backwards. With the eMac, theyre one thing. But why the Apple Keyboard and Mouse have infiltrated to the rest of the product line has been beyond me. Its especially bad with the G5. It is sad to say that the keyboard that shipped with the G4 is better than the keyboard that ships with the G5. And at least the Pro Keyboard matches the G4, too. Theres nothing that could contrast more with the G5 than the new, stark-white Apple keyboard.
Yeah, someone needs to write a nasty letter to whoever is in charge of Apple peripherals. Seriously, the puck was enough. (actually, the innovation of taking the ability to reset the computer and moving it from a simple key combo on the keyboard to a little hole on the side of the computer that requires a paper clip to press was enough). But then they went and replaced the Pro keyboard with an inferior, uglier one.
Turning to the omnipresent and ever popular issue of two-button mice . . .
I dislike them. They do nothing for me. The Mac GUI was designed to work efficiently and effectively with a single-button mouse, and control-clicking really isnt that big of a deal, especially when considering that any application that could use a two-button mice for functionality is probably an application that you need the keyboard constantly for anyway.
*however*
In the hundreds (God, at least 100 . . . probably not too much more than that, though . . . hehe) of people that Ive talked and lectured to about Mac vs. PC, one gripe stands out over them all . . . by a sizeable margin: no two-button mouse. Its a fact . . . In the mind of thousands of PC users, the one-button mouse is probably the only thing standing in their way when it comes to buying a Mac. It is sad, but I have long been confirmed of its truth.
Umm . . . what should Apple do? Im not sure . . . frankly, nor could I care. If Apple released a two-button mouse, Im sure it would be best and most beautiful one ever. Good. And if its one-button mice from here until the Millenium . . . thats cool too.
Anyway, Apple peripherals have a bad habit of skiping: they go from bad, horrible accident/mistake to world-class . . . then back again . . then back again again. Now that were in our horrible Apple Keyboard/Mouse phase . . . the next peripheral innovation should be world-class.
Make the two/three button mouse a BTO option - developers will therefore need to cater for one button as far as development is concerned (keeping the UI intact), but users can select something else if they want the benefits of a two/three button version. Personally, I bet Apple could design an amazing two/three button mouse.
How is this so much different from right now, except that you have your choice of two-button mice right there at the Apple Store?
There are design limits to multi-button mice that prevent them from being anywhere near as ergonomic or child-friendly as the current Apple Mouse: Your fingers simply aren't designed to be used that way. The current two button designs are about as good as they can possibly be.
As for the whole switcher thing, just tell them (or better yet, show them - this is amazing to Windows users) how you can plug in any old USB Windows mouse and it just works.
How is this so much different from right now, except that you have your choice of two-button mice right there at the Apple Store?
There are design limits to multi-button mice that prevent them from being anywhere near as ergonomic or child-friendly as the current Apple Mouse: Your fingers simply aren't designed to be used that way. The current two button designs are about as good as they can possibly be.
As for the whole switcher thing, just tell them (or better yet, show them - this is amazing to Windows users) how you can plug in any old USB Windows mouse and it just works.
Hey Amorph,
No disrespect.. but to say the designs are as good as they can get... come on now. There are a lot of things that can be done to help proper use of a mouse. There are so many theories from ditching the mouse to a large touchpad to using a mouse on its side. Actually there is a mouse like that I forgot who made it. But to have your hand turned with your thumb pointing up is about the best position out there. It is really weird though.
I'll get off the apple 2 button mouse... because I can buy a nice logitech optical for 20 bucks. But the keyboard is a different issue... it sucks...
I'm gonna hafta come down in support of the one button mouse. As is famously known around here, I come from the windows world, but "switched" about a year ago. I support ergonomics. Two button mice aren't horrible, but they aren't as comfortable as one button either. The worst, truly the worst most dangerous innovation that could be added to the mouse is the current index finger operated scroll wheel.
And the reason it's so bad, is that it's so damned convenient. It punishes the lazy. "Hey, my hand's already on the mouse, might as well scroll myself into severe carpal tunel syndrome."
On a laptop, the lack of a second button makes no difference whatsoever, because the trackpad button and CTRL key all fall readily to hand. On the desktop, the one button mouse is more comfortable, and the use of the keyboard for scrolling encourages you to get your fricking hand off the mouse and back to a good typing posture. The single button makes sure tht software UI retains a consistent structure.
I think Apple should stick with one button. If they can fix the scroll wheel, that might be a nice convenience, but it won't be easy. A scruber style wheel like the iPods would work, but how would you make it work on a mouse? If I try to scroll, won't the mouse move unless I hold it down thumb and middle finger and scroll with my index? That's no better than the M$ style scroll.
What if a heavier puck style mouse came out? It actually does encourage a proper grip. Except now, it's very geometric, almost a perfect circle when view from the top. Instead of a button, the whole top is a clicky touch wheel like the iPod mini's (but larger). No limp wrists. A scroll system that doesn't destroy your tendons, and 1-4 buttons. That UI thing creeps up though. They could reduce it to one button, click anywhere on the mouse .
In the end the best bet may be to keep the current one button and enhance scrolling and UI control through gestural recognition.
"In the patent of March 11, 2004 and in question today, it acts of an optical device, using the reflexion of the light to detect inflectings of the finger, in the same way that the current optical mouse detects the movements on the surface of contact, office or carpet of mouse. It acts to some extent of an inversion figure/fond, as for the cubism compared to the usual successive plans such as they are presented: in fact any more the index is used to click and the unit of the mouse to move the pointer with the screen: it is a negligible movement of the index which moves the pointer and the whole of the body of the mouse which produces the click..."
Most all of the arguments against the two button mouse seem to center around the idea that people are just too stupid to learn how to use them. This argument does not serve the Mac community well. What does child friendly have to do with a $3,000 notebook? If Grandma can't figure out how to use the mouse, she would not be able to do much on her own.
The people who are too stupid to figure it out, do you really want your platform defined by them? It is like permanently affixing training wheels to a bicycle and wondering why people think you are selling a kids product, or one that shouldn't be taken seriously by real riders. Some of you who make this 'one button' argument also believe that Mac users are some of the more technically savvy users out there. These two beliefs are not compatible. A two button mouse should be no problem for the "smarter than average" Mac user.
Third party vendors don't agree with the one button philosophy. Where are the competing one button mice on the market? Why do Mac users not buy third party one button mice? There are none and Mac users don't want them. Only a minority will use them.
Let's look at the Market for a one button mouse. The pros? I don't think so. Apple's bread and butter is the content creators. No body who spends their day neck deep in FCP, DVDSP, FS, AE, PT, Shake, etc, needs or wants a one button mouse. Schools? Do you really want your kids to grow up not knowing how to use a two button mouse? If the schools with computer classes can't teach the function of the second button in five minutes, then their not doing their job. Business? They are already trained on two button mice. They use them to great affect in the Office programs. Therefore, no xServe purchaser will require or want a one button mouse. Who's left? First time users. Apple does not get enough of them to warrant designing the whole product line to something that might be useful to them for all of a month while they are learning the basic functionality of a computer. If anything, they are the ones who should have the BTO option of a one button mouse. They are the ones with the special needs. They are the minority. If Apple is so worried about kids, why not use a Fisher Price keyboard standard?
The solution is simple. Make a mouse with two button functionality. But design it so that it looks and feels like a one button mouse. Include a switch or lever, or some type of software option that enables two button functionality. It might work something like the iPm click wheel. In one button mode, it doesn't matter where you press it. In two button mode, pressing it in certain places gives you different functionality. One mouse, multiple levels of usability. Throw in a five minute tutorial CD into the package and everyone will be up to speed. With this approach, PC users will throw down their Logitech and Microsoft rodents in favor of the wildly innovative Apple option. Not only is the mouse no longer a barrier to potential switchers, it becomes a lure for potential switchers. Everyone wins.
What if a heavier puck style mouse came out? It actually does encourage a proper grip. Except now, it's very geometric, almost a perfect circle when view from the top. Instead of a button, the whole top is a clicky touch wheel like the iPod mini's (but larger). No limp wrists. A scroll system that doesn't destroy your tendons, and 1-4 buttons. That UI thing creeps up though. They could reduce it to one button, click anywhere on the mouse .
I
I promise I didn't see this suggestion before I wrote my post.
Someone who has been on computers more than a year... they need something more than a 1 button mouse. I mean come on... even XCode and Interface builder need a right mouse button!
Disagreed. 100%
I'm sure many people would buy one - I'm sure *EVERY* switcher would (because they'd be *SURE* that it's be required for *SOMETHING*).
And those sales would do nothing but foster the concept in the developer's heads of "Oh, well, a *lot* of people buy two button mice, so we can *assume* that most of our client's will, and hey, those that don't can just go get one."
Right now, they can't assume that *any* customers have a two-button mouse, and godammit, that's the way it should be.
Programmers are a slovenly and lazy lot (and being one, I should know). Documentation is ignored, guidelines are broken, all because someone thinks that another way of doing something is cool or easier. Bollocks.
This way, they are *forced* to provide single-button functionality, and that is the *ONLY* way that it will continue to be consistent, through outright enforcement.
You want a two-button mouse? Go buy one. They're cheap, and the OS supports them out of the box.
Most all of the arguments against the two button mouse seem to center around the idea that people are just too stupid to learn how to use them.
Actually, while some people take this viewpoint, (and there are good anecdotal and serious studies to back up the observation that it can be confusing due to bad system and application design) it's much more relevant to point out that *DEVELOPERS* are stupid. Or rather, lazy. And sloppy. And prone to taking shortcuts. Or doing stuff because it's k3wl.
A single button mouse gets around all that.
Quote:
The solution is simple. Make a mouse with two button functionality. But design it so that it looks and feels like a one button mouse. Include a switch or lever, or some type of software option that enables two button functionality. It might work something like the iPm click wheel. In one button mode, it doesn't matter where you press it. In two button mode, pressing it in certain places gives you different functionality. One mouse, multiple levels of usability. Throw in a five minute tutorial CD into the package and everyone will be up to speed. With this approach, PC users will throw down their Logitech and Microsoft rodents in favor of the wildly innovative Apple option. Not only is the mouse no longer a barrier to potential switchers, it becomes a lure for potential switchers. Everyone wins.
I must disagree with the pro's need more mouse buttons sentiment.
They don't.
Applications with really complex input need so many buttons that even multibutton mice are ruled out. They either use specialized keyboards, like all those FCP keyboards, or specialized control surfaces like those employed in music production, or even graphics tablets in the case of visual artists. If the one button mouse is a limitation, your next step up should be one of these, even something as simple as a shuttle pro.
It's all about ergos and UI design, NOT idiot proofing, though a degree of idiot proofing comes about as a result.
GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE MOUSE! It's bad both for you, and the way you think about your apps.
I'm sure many people would buy one - I'm sure *EVERY* switcher would (because they'd be *SURE* that it's be required for *SOMETHING*).
And those sales would do nothing but foster the concept in the developer's heads of "Oh, well, a *lot* of people buy two button mice, so we can *assume* that most of our client's will, and hey, those that don't can just go get one."
Right now, they can't assume that *any* customers have a two-button mouse, and godammit, that's the way it should be.
Programmers are a slovenly and lazy lot (and being one, I should know). Documentation is ignored, guidelines are broken, all because someone thinks that another way of doing something is cool or easier. Bollocks.
This way, they are *forced* to provide single-button functionality, and that is the *ONLY* way that it will continue to be consistent, through outright enforcement.
You want a two-button mouse? Go buy one. They're cheap, and the OS supports them out of the box. [/B]
WOW what is the big deal about 2 button mice!? Just because macs ship with 1 button mice does NOT mean that devs follow that guideline. At the moment I can't think of one program that doesn't support the 2nd mouse button. Jesus... what is the big deal?!
Comments
Originally posted by nevoz
www.macplus.org
http://216.239.37.104/translate_c?hl...language_tools
If this is true...
Why does apple feel the need to dump a bunch of engineering and research into a periphal that ends up in the closet as soon as its opened?
Non-2 button mice are worthless with os x. The only way to use them is to constantly have your left hand on the kb to hold down control when you need it. WHY NOT PUT A 2ND BUTTON ON!?
Its a cool idea but come on, everyone knows how to use a 2 button mouse in todays world. The 1-button trend is gone.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
Originally posted by Kickaha
It's for good reason - to force developers to make *every* feature accessible through left-click only. Right-click, middle-click, top-left-scroll-with-a-twist should only be shortcuts to functionality that the new user (new to the application) can find by simply pointing and clicking on visible objects and choices. Contextual menus are hidden and modal. Extremely bad for discovery.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
True... a developer doesn't want functionality to only be reached in a contextual menu. It should also be able to be accessed through menus on top. But one of the first things people are taught is one can get information on something by right clicking on it. Everyone knows this. Why not keep it going this way instead of trying to fight it.
I'm not saying focusing on the left click is bad. But Right-Click today is needed for productivity. Nothing pisses me off more than when I have to go to the top of the application 100 times to do something. Why not be able to access that wherever your mouse is? Almost all OS X apps already support it. It isn't going away.
Originally posted by nevoz
www.macplus.org
http://216.239.37.104/translate_c?hl...language_tools
This Apple patent and design has been around for at least 2 or 3 years. There was a lot of speculation then about Apple releasing a product. So far, it seems we are stuck with the "pill-mouse."
Originally posted by emig647
True... a developer doesn't want functionality to only be reached in a contextual menu. It should also be able to be accessed through menus on top. But one of the first things people are taught is one can get information on something by right clicking on it. Everyone knows this. Why not keep it going this way instead of trying to fight it.
It is far from true that "everyone knows it." I've gone through the "right-click... no, right - no, the other right" routine one too many times to buy that.
I'm not saying focusing on the left click is bad. But Right-Click today is needed for productivity. Nothing pisses me off more than when I have to go to the top of the application 100 times to do something. Why not be able to access that wherever your mouse is? Almost all OS X apps already support it. It isn't going away.
The assertion that it's needed is absurd. It's needed on Windows, sure. Contextual menus are useful shortcuts, sure. But if you want right-clicking so much, plug in a two button mouse and be done with it.
I, for one, don't. I value my wrists.
Originally posted by Amorph
...I value my wrists...
I'm sure you do...
[SOS gets b!tch-slapped]
Originally posted by Kickaha
It's for good reason - to force developers to make *every* feature accessible through left-click only. Right-click, middle-click, top-left-scroll-with-a-twist should only be shortcuts to functionality that the new user (new to the application) can find by simply pointing and clicking on visible objects and choices. Contextual menus are hidden and modal. Extremely bad for discovery.
Witness Windows, were often functionality is *only* available through right-click. Oh sure, the UI suggestions say you shouldn't do that, but because they *can*, it happens.
MacOS X developers can make no such assumptions, and the UI overall is the better for it.
What he said X2!
Apple is all about simplicity combined with power. I turned to Macs because they were the first computer I could understand. People are still learning how to use computers every day. The entire planet has not been trained on windows. If your past the intial phases of learning, you can either use the kb (I do that all the time-no problems or complaints) or spend a few bucks on a two-button mouse.
edit, PS what does that site in French actually say?
Originally posted by McCrab
Make the two/three button mouse a BTO option - developers will therefore need to cater for one button as far as development is concerned (keeping the UI intact), but users can select something else if they want the benefits of a two/three button version. Personally, I bet Apple could design an amazing two/three button mouse.
AGREED 100%!!
Someone who has been on computers more than a year... they need something more than a 1 button mouse. I mean come on... even XCode and Interface builder need a right mouse button!
If it were BTO I'd be happy. While we're on the subject ... they newest mac kb needs to be redesigned too! I don't mean to rant but I'll have to throw that guy in the closet when I get my new g5 too. I spend a lot of my time typing special characters while programming... a NON-ADJUSTABLE kb is definitely my enemy. The keyboards on all the g4's that were adjustable were 100 times better. Why did apple feel the need to take a step backwards?
Yeah, someone needs to write a nasty letter to whoever is in charge of Apple peripherals. Seriously, the puck was enough. (actually, the innovation of taking the ability to reset the computer and moving it from a simple key combo on the keyboard to a little hole on the side of the computer that requires a paper clip to press was enough). But then they went and replaced the Pro keyboard with an inferior, uglier one.
Turning to the omnipresent and ever popular issue of two-button mice . . .
I dislike them. They do nothing for me. The Mac GUI was designed to work efficiently and effectively with a single-button mouse, and control-clicking really isnt that big of a deal, especially when considering that any application that could use a two-button mice for functionality is probably an application that you need the keyboard constantly for anyway.
*however*
In the hundreds (God, at least 100 . . . probably not too much more than that, though . . . hehe) of people that Ive talked and lectured to about Mac vs. PC, one gripe stands out over them all . . . by a sizeable margin: no two-button mouse. Its a fact . . . In the mind of thousands of PC users, the one-button mouse is probably the only thing standing in their way when it comes to buying a Mac. It is sad, but I have long been confirmed of its truth.
Umm . . . what should Apple do? Im not sure . . . frankly, nor could I care. If Apple released a two-button mouse, Im sure it would be best and most beautiful one ever. Good. And if its one-button mice from here until the Millenium . . . thats cool too.
Anyway, Apple peripherals have a bad habit of skiping: they go from bad, horrible accident/mistake to world-class . . . then back again . . then back again again. Now that were in our horrible Apple Keyboard/Mouse phase . . . the next peripheral innovation should be world-class.
Originally posted by McCrab
Make the two/three button mouse a BTO option - developers will therefore need to cater for one button as far as development is concerned (keeping the UI intact), but users can select something else if they want the benefits of a two/three button version. Personally, I bet Apple could design an amazing two/three button mouse.
How is this so much different from right now, except that you have your choice of two-button mice right there at the Apple Store?
There are design limits to multi-button mice that prevent them from being anywhere near as ergonomic or child-friendly as the current Apple Mouse: Your fingers simply aren't designed to be used that way. The current two button designs are about as good as they can possibly be.
As for the whole switcher thing, just tell them (or better yet, show them - this is amazing to Windows users) how you can plug in any old USB Windows mouse and it just works.
Originally posted by Amorph
How is this so much different from right now, except that you have your choice of two-button mice right there at the Apple Store?
There are design limits to multi-button mice that prevent them from being anywhere near as ergonomic or child-friendly as the current Apple Mouse: Your fingers simply aren't designed to be used that way. The current two button designs are about as good as they can possibly be.
As for the whole switcher thing, just tell them (or better yet, show them - this is amazing to Windows users) how you can plug in any old USB Windows mouse and it just works.
Hey Amorph,
No disrespect.. but to say the designs are as good as they can get... come on now. There are a lot of things that can be done to help proper use of a mouse. There are so many theories from ditching the mouse to a large touchpad to using a mouse on its side. Actually there is a mouse like that I forgot who made it. But to have your hand turned with your thumb pointing up is about the best position out there. It is really weird though.
I'll get off the apple 2 button mouse... because I can buy a nice logitech optical for 20 bucks. But the keyboard is a different issue... it sucks...
But I didn't mean tot bring that.
And the reason it's so bad, is that it's so damned convenient. It punishes the lazy. "Hey, my hand's already on the mouse, might as well scroll myself into severe carpal tunel syndrome."
On a laptop, the lack of a second button makes no difference whatsoever, because the trackpad button and CTRL key all fall readily to hand. On the desktop, the one button mouse is more comfortable, and the use of the keyboard for scrolling encourages you to get your fricking hand off the mouse and back to a good typing posture. The single button makes sure tht software UI retains a consistent structure.
I think Apple should stick with one button. If they can fix the scroll wheel, that might be a nice convenience, but it won't be easy. A scruber style wheel like the iPods would work, but how would you make it work on a mouse? If I try to scroll, won't the mouse move unless I hold it down thumb and middle finger and scroll with my index? That's no better than the M$ style scroll.
What if a heavier puck style mouse came out? It actually does encourage a proper grip. Except now, it's very geometric, almost a perfect circle when view from the top. Instead of a button, the whole top is a clicky touch wheel like the iPod mini's (but larger). No limp wrists. A scroll system that doesn't destroy your tendons, and 1-4 buttons. That UI thing creeps up though. They could reduce it to one button, click anywhere on the mouse .
In the end the best bet may be to keep the current one button and enhance scrolling and UI control through gestural recognition.
Whaddayall think?
"In the patent of March 11, 2004 and in question today, it acts of an optical device, using the reflexion of the light to detect inflectings of the finger, in the same way that the current optical mouse detects the movements on the surface of contact, office or carpet of mouse. It acts to some extent of an inversion figure/fond, as for the cubism compared to the usual successive plans such as they are presented: in fact any more the index is used to click and the unit of the mouse to move the pointer with the screen: it is a negligible movement of the index which moves the pointer and the whole of the body of the mouse which produces the click..."
The people who are too stupid to figure it out, do you really want your platform defined by them? It is like permanently affixing training wheels to a bicycle and wondering why people think you are selling a kids product, or one that shouldn't be taken seriously by real riders. Some of you who make this 'one button' argument also believe that Mac users are some of the more technically savvy users out there. These two beliefs are not compatible. A two button mouse should be no problem for the "smarter than average" Mac user.
Third party vendors don't agree with the one button philosophy. Where are the competing one button mice on the market? Why do Mac users not buy third party one button mice? There are none and Mac users don't want them. Only a minority will use them.
Let's look at the Market for a one button mouse. The pros? I don't think so. Apple's bread and butter is the content creators. No body who spends their day neck deep in FCP, DVDSP, FS, AE, PT, Shake, etc, needs or wants a one button mouse. Schools? Do you really want your kids to grow up not knowing how to use a two button mouse? If the schools with computer classes can't teach the function of the second button in five minutes, then their not doing their job. Business? They are already trained on two button mice. They use them to great affect in the Office programs. Therefore, no xServe purchaser will require or want a one button mouse. Who's left? First time users. Apple does not get enough of them to warrant designing the whole product line to something that might be useful to them for all of a month while they are learning the basic functionality of a computer. If anything, they are the ones who should have the BTO option of a one button mouse. They are the ones with the special needs. They are the minority. If Apple is so worried about kids, why not use a Fisher Price keyboard standard?
The solution is simple. Make a mouse with two button functionality. But design it so that it looks and feels like a one button mouse. Include a switch or lever, or some type of software option that enables two button functionality. It might work something like the iPm click wheel. In one button mode, it doesn't matter where you press it. In two button mode, pressing it in certain places gives you different functionality. One mouse, multiple levels of usability. Throw in a five minute tutorial CD into the package and everyone will be up to speed. With this approach, PC users will throw down their Logitech and Microsoft rodents in favor of the wildly innovative Apple option. Not only is the mouse no longer a barrier to potential switchers, it becomes a lure for potential switchers. Everyone wins.
Originally posted by Matsu
What if a heavier puck style mouse came out? It actually does encourage a proper grip. Except now, it's very geometric, almost a perfect circle when view from the top. Instead of a button, the whole top is a clicky touch wheel like the iPod mini's (but larger). No limp wrists. A scroll system that doesn't destroy your tendons, and 1-4 buttons. That UI thing creeps up though. They could reduce it to one button, click anywhere on the mouse .
I
I promise I didn't see this suggestion before I wrote my post.
Originally posted by emig647
AGREED 100%!!
Someone who has been on computers more than a year... they need something more than a 1 button mouse. I mean come on... even XCode and Interface builder need a right mouse button!
Disagreed. 100%
I'm sure many people would buy one - I'm sure *EVERY* switcher would (because they'd be *SURE* that it's be required for *SOMETHING*).
And those sales would do nothing but foster the concept in the developer's heads of "Oh, well, a *lot* of people buy two button mice, so we can *assume* that most of our client's will, and hey, those that don't can just go get one."
Right now, they can't assume that *any* customers have a two-button mouse, and godammit, that's the way it should be.
Programmers are a slovenly and lazy lot (and being one, I should know). Documentation is ignored, guidelines are broken, all because someone thinks that another way of doing something is cool or easier. Bollocks.
This way, they are *forced* to provide single-button functionality, and that is the *ONLY* way that it will continue to be consistent, through outright enforcement.
You want a two-button mouse? Go buy one. They're cheap, and the OS supports them out of the box.
Originally posted by Mac Voyer
Most all of the arguments against the two button mouse seem to center around the idea that people are just too stupid to learn how to use them.
Actually, while some people take this viewpoint, (and there are good anecdotal and serious studies to back up the observation that it can be confusing due to bad system and application design) it's much more relevant to point out that *DEVELOPERS* are stupid. Or rather, lazy. And sloppy. And prone to taking shortcuts. Or doing stuff because it's k3wl.
A single button mouse gets around all that.
The solution is simple. Make a mouse with two button functionality. But design it so that it looks and feels like a one button mouse. Include a switch or lever, or some type of software option that enables two button functionality. It might work something like the iPm click wheel. In one button mode, it doesn't matter where you press it. In two button mode, pressing it in certain places gives you different functionality. One mouse, multiple levels of usability. Throw in a five minute tutorial CD into the package and everyone will be up to speed. With this approach, PC users will throw down their Logitech and Microsoft rodents in favor of the wildly innovative Apple option. Not only is the mouse no longer a barrier to potential switchers, it becomes a lure for potential switchers. Everyone wins.
Now that's interesting.
They don't.
Applications with really complex input need so many buttons that even multibutton mice are ruled out. They either use specialized keyboards, like all those FCP keyboards, or specialized control surfaces like those employed in music production, or even graphics tablets in the case of visual artists. If the one button mouse is a limitation, your next step up should be one of these, even something as simple as a shuttle pro.
It's all about ergos and UI design, NOT idiot proofing, though a degree of idiot proofing comes about as a result.
GET YOUR HANDS OFF THE MOUSE! It's bad both for you, and the way you think about your apps.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Disagreed. 100%
I'm sure many people would buy one - I'm sure *EVERY* switcher would (because they'd be *SURE* that it's be required for *SOMETHING*).
And those sales would do nothing but foster the concept in the developer's heads of "Oh, well, a *lot* of people buy two button mice, so we can *assume* that most of our client's will, and hey, those that don't can just go get one."
Right now, they can't assume that *any* customers have a two-button mouse, and godammit, that's the way it should be.
Programmers are a slovenly and lazy lot (and being one, I should know). Documentation is ignored, guidelines are broken, all because someone thinks that another way of doing something is cool or easier. Bollocks.
This way, they are *forced* to provide single-button functionality, and that is the *ONLY* way that it will continue to be consistent, through outright enforcement.
You want a two-button mouse? Go buy one. They're cheap, and the OS supports them out of the box. [/B]
WOW what is the big deal about 2 button mice!? Just because macs ship with 1 button mice does NOT mean that devs follow that guideline. At the moment I can't think of one program that doesn't support the 2nd mouse button. Jesus... what is the big deal?!