csma gets worser and worser
Richard Revis
> The thing is that Apple continues to do new things, iPod, Mac OS X, the
> new iMac, iPhoto, etc., so there are new things for the Mac users and
> things to attract the non-mac users to the platform, including the Apple
> Stores which are "experience retailing" so to speak.
It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
(with the one button mouse) and Microsoft (with the XP interface) and you
will see exactly what they think of the intelligence of their users.
The sad part is, they seem to be right.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
11:14pm up 22 days, 10:22, 1 user, load average: 0.17, 0.13, 0.07
The current MP3 is Fun Lovin' Criminals - Scooby Snacks
E-mail address munged to prevent spam.
tom keyes
<ne...@spamtrap.bottest.com> wrote:
> It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
> (with the one button mouse) and Microsoft (with the XP interface) and you
> will see exactly what they think of the intelligence of their users.
I don't think equating the 1 button mouse with the horrors of the msft
UI indicates a good grasp of priorities
Richard Revis
> Then perhaps you'd care to explain the similarities of the MSFT UI to
> the come-lately KDE and Gnome UI's? Are they horrible too? Or is the
> very fact that they're not MSFT-made allow them to evade this
> distinction?
KDE and Gnome are a good deal less insulting than the XP UI.
> Personally, I don't care for any of them.
That is what choice is all about :o) You can pick from one of many WMs or
use the CLI if that is what floats your boat.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
1:21am up 22 days, 12:30, 1 user, load average: 0.18, 0.17, 0.13
Jim Polaski
Richard Revis <ne...@spamtrap.bottest.com> wrote:
> Jim Polaski wrote:
>
> > The thing is that Apple continues to do new things, iPod, Mac OS X, the
> > new iMac, iPhoto, etc., so there are new things for the Mac users and
> > things to attract the non-mac users to the platform, including the Apple
> > Stores which are "experience retailing" so to speak.
>
> It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
> (with the one button mouse) and Microsoft (with the XP interface) and you
> will see exactly what they think of the intelligence of their users.
>
> The sad part is, they seem to be right.
No, Obviously you don't know the history. Apple did research into the
mouse before going to the one-button model.
--
Regards,
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do knowing he will
get nothing in return!"
Palm for mobility, Linux for servers, Mac for productivity,
Windows for the black hole in your IT budget.
"Windows the computer you need, Macintosh the computer you want!"
Rob Enderle
Donn Miller
> Then perhaps you'd care to explain the similarities of the MSFT UI to
> the come-lately KDE and Gnome UI's? Are they horrible too? Or is the
> very fact that they're not MSFT-made allow them to evade this
> distinction? Personally, I don't care for any of them.
Yup. That's why I usually run WindowMaker.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Tim Smith
wrote:
> No, Obviously you don't know the history. Apple did research into the
> mouse before going to the one-button model.
Yeah, and then did subsequent research that found that the first research
was wrong, but it was too late to change. However, that's irrelevant,
because even if the original research had held up, a one button mouse was a
bad design...the correct design would be to put two buttons on the mouse,
and make the software default to treating the two buttons as one. That
gives them a one button mouse, for those whom it is better, but allows those
for whom two buttons is better to have two buttons without having to get a
new mouse.
Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
was wrong.
--Tim Smith
Cyclical
----------
In article <slrnagqtfe.flf...@tzs.net>, Tim Smith
<reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> ...the correct design would be to put two buttons on the mouse,
> and make the software default to treating the two buttons as one. That
> gives them a one button mouse, for those whom it is better, but allows those
> for whom two buttons is better to have two buttons without having to get a
> new mouse.
>
>
> --Tim Smith
Ok, I get it, we start with a mouse..put two buttons on it, the software
treats BOTH buttons as one, so we now end up with a two button mouse that
acts as a one button mouse, the beauty of that is we don't have to remember
which finger to use on the button, because we have a choice of two, But wait
I knew there was a catch, what happens if we forget which TWO fingers to
use, ..arrrgh I know we use a mouse with FIVE buttons that default to
one...fixed, mmmmmm but I'm left handed, and my wife is right handed, easy,
we need TWO mice, five buttons on each, that ALL default to ONE button!!!!!
> Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
> was wrong.
YER RIGHT!!!!
Richard K. McPike
Bob Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> wrote in news:jpolaski-
> 67FB21.225...@netnews.attbi.com:
>
> > No, Obviously you don't know the history. Apple did research into the
> > mouse before going to the one-button model.
> >
>
> Actually, Xerox did the research and prototyped the singel button mouse
> after first trying a roller ball and button. At the time a two button mouse
> was not thought of. Drag and drop and selection were the only functions
> then...
The Xerox mouse had more than one button. It was Apple that dropped the
number of buttons down to one, after doing research on incoming Apple
employees, and finding that when told to "click" on something they found
multiple buttons confusing. Apple realizes that, at least in the
beginning, the paradigm for using the mouse was pointing, and people
were used to pointing with one finger, thus one button.
Kirk
Mayor of R'lyeh
Many PC apps used the right button before Windows did. It wasn't
useless.
>
>> Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
>> was wrong.
>
>
>YER RIGHT!!!!
--
"We in the Green movement, aspire to a cultural model
in which the killing of a forest will be considered
more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of
6-year-old children to Asian brothels."
Carl Amery, German Green Party.
C Lund
>Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
>was wrong.
Oh? Then why does the mac support multi-button mice? And if SJ doesn't
want to admit he was wrong, how do you explain the eMac?
>--Tim Smith
--
C Lund, Oslo
http://www.notam02.no/~clund/
John Jensen
: In article <aej2q3$7ei28$2...@ID-126341.news.dfncis.de>,
: Richard Revis <ne...@spamtrap.bottest.com> wrote:
: > Jim Polaski wrote:
: >
: > > The thing is that Apple continues to do new things, iPod, Mac OS X, the
: > > new iMac, iPhoto, etc., so there are new things for the Mac users and
: > > things to attract the non-mac users to the platform, including the Apple
: > > Stores which are "experience retailing" so to speak.
: >
: > It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
: > (with the one button mouse) and Microsoft (with the XP interface) and you
: > will see exactly what they think of the intelligence of their users.
: >
: > The sad part is, they seem to be right.
: No, Obviously you don't know the history. Apple did research into the
: mouse before going to the one-button model.
They researched the ability of people who had never used a mouse before to
use one-button and multi-button mice, IIRC.
Not the same thing as the abilities of people (including many of us here)
with 10yrs+ mouse experience.
John
--
33° 39' 43N 117° 45' 06W
Matthias Warkus
...and Richard Revis <ne...@spamtrap.bottest.com> wrote:
> Jim Polaski wrote:
>
> > The thing is that Apple continues to do new things, iPod, Mac OS X, the
> > new iMac, iPhoto, etc., so there are new things for the Mac users and
> > things to attract the non-mac users to the platform, including the Apple
> > Stores which are "experience retailing" so to speak.
>
> It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
> (with the one button mouse)
The one-button mouse is not a bad idea, actually.
The concept of the mouse is pointing and clicking. Having more than
one button undermines the concept by giving you two ways to click.
mawa
--
It sounds like all you windows losers are just jealous. You are
ashamed that you cannot endure the pain of freedom, so you chide us for
"not having a life". Oh, that is so easy, you're so transparent.
-- Tim Kelley on c.o.l.advocacy
Cyclical
----------
>In article <10243169...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
>jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
> They researched the ability of people who had never used a mouse before to
> use one-button and multi-button mice, IIRC.
So they listened to these "new" users, and provided them a one button mouse
for ease of use, because that is what they wanted.
> Not the same thing as the abilities of people (including many of us here)
> with 10yrs+ mouse experience.
And they made the OS so flexible , that as a user gain's experience, and
they find the need for a multi button mouse, they can have that too.
Best of both world's, what's wrong with that?.
John Jensen
: >In article <10243169...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
: >jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
The only thing "wrong" is when people simplify it all to mean "one mouse
is better".
Hey, if we agree the choice is good, do you think the Apple online store
should have a checkbox to let you choose one button or three?
After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
"switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's sense)
has changed.
tom keyes
Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> Having switched from MAC to PC, I wonder why it took me so long...
how 20'th century!
Uranus "The Mannequin Fucker" Brownstain
little stores.
--
Pats: Winners of 1 NFL championship and 3 AFC Championships
Jets: Winners of 1 exhibition game in the last millennium, and no NFL
championships of any kind!
"The Jets are ignoring what the Patriots have proven and are signing free
agents for much too much money." - Peter King, Sports Illustrated
"C Lund" <christop...@NOSPAMchello.no> wrote in message
news:christopher.lund-D5...@news01.chello.no...
Uranus "The Mannequin Fucker" Brownstain
This people have a desperate desire to be different. No matter how bad a Mac
is they will stick with it.
--
Pats: Winners of 1 NFL championship and 3 AFC Championships
Jets: Winners of 1 exhibition game in the last millennium, and no NFL
championships of any kind!
"The Jets are ignoring what the Patriots have proven and are signing free
agents for much too much money." - Peter King, Sports Illustrated
"Bob Zwarick" <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92304FDFBCBA5br...@216.148.227.77...
> John Jensen <jj...@primenet.com> wrote in news:1024322788.517062
> @nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net:
>
> > After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> > used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> > "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's
sense)
> > has changed.
> >
>
> Having switched from MAC to PC, I wonder why it took me so long...
>
> -
> Bob
Cyclical
----------
In article <10243227...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
<jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
> Cyclical <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> writes:
>
> : >In article <10243169...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
> : >jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
>
> : > They researched the ability of people who had never used a mouse before to
> : > use one-button and multi-button mice, IIRC.
>
> : So they listened to these "new" users, and provided them a one button mouse
> : for ease of use, because that is what they wanted.
>
> : > Not the same thing as the abilities of people (including many of us here)
> : > with 10yrs+ mouse experience.
>
> : And they made the OS so flexible , that as a user gain's experience, and
> : they find the need for a multi button mouse, they can have that too.
>
> : Best of both world's, what's wrong with that?.
>
>
> The only thing "wrong" is when people simplify it all to mean "one mouse
> is better".
Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice then
as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is that
the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
> Hey, if we agree the choice is good, do you think the Apple online store
> should have a checkbox to let you choose one button or three?
I personally don't see me ever using the online store, but to answer your
question....
Absolutely, the more choice the better, but I would want any mouse supplied
by Apple, to be made by Apple, as is the case now.
But frankly the Apple mouse is fine as a supplied item, have you ever
watched an 5yr old trying to use a multi button, whereas the original mouse
is perfect for size, (On my G4 I have both connected all the time, the
original one button for my kids, and a Intellimouse that I use most of the
time, now that is REAL flexibility).
> After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's sense)
> has changed.
Not convinced by your argument here, how many Primary schools had computers
in the 80's , as opposed to today, these children are all potential "new
users".
I didn't even consider "switchers" as I dont consider these people to be new
users.
Cyclical
----------
In article <Xns92304FDFBCBA5br...@216.148.227.77>, Bob
Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> John Jensen <jj...@primenet.com> wrote in news:1024322788.517062
> @nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net:
>
>> After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
>> used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
>> "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's sense)
>> has changed.
>>
>
> Having switched from MAC to PC, I wonder why it took me so long...
>
> -
> Bob
Latent masochism perhaps ? 8-O
tom keyes
Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> Yep. No longer am I a victim of abandoned, closed architecture. The
> improved graphic abilities more than make up for the changeover.
What? how is a unix based open source system abandoned and closed?
closed is having everything owned by msft.
So you stuck with mac OS through the trials of system 7.5.x (which was
still infinitely better than win 95) and bail when things get really
good? seems like bad timing.
Paul Cooke
> Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
> buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice
> then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out
> is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
flexibility.
ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
trackballs and plug it in???
or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
--
Paul Cooke
Registered Linux user 273897 Machine registration number 156819
Linux Counter: Home Page = http://counter.li.org/
Josiah Fizer
<pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:40:13 +0100, Cyclical wrote:
>
>> Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
>> buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice
>> then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out
>> is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
>flexibility.
>
>ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
>trackballs and plug it in???
>
Yes
>or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
Yes
In fact I have a MS Optical Wheel Mouse hooked up to my Franken iMac
right now. Works like a charm.
It should also be pointed out htat Windows works just fine with one
mouse button.
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Ulimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Alan Baker
Paul Cooke <pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:40:13 +0100, Cyclical wrote:
>
>> Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
>> buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice
>> then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out
>> is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
>flexibility.
>
>ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
>trackballs and plug it in???
Is it USB? Then I'd say the answer is: Yes.
>
>or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
Definitely.
Next!
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
Matthias Warkus
...and Bob Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> > The concept of the mouse is pointing and clicking. Having more than
> > one button undermines the concept by giving you two ways to click.
>
The switch under a mouse button does not represent a binary state. It
triggers an action. Your point is moot.
mawa
--
Knockemstiff, Ohio | Bowlegs, Oklahoma | Bugscuffle,
Pee Pee, Ohio | East Due West, South Carolina | Tennessee
Lickskillet, Ohio | Yell, Tennessee |
-- U.S. placenames
Oxford
> Yeah, and then did subsequent research that found that the first research
> was wrong, but it was too late to change. However, that's irrelevant,
> because even if the original research had held up, a one button mouse was a
> bad design...the correct design would be to put two buttons on the mouse,
> and make the software default to treating the two buttons as one. That
> gives them a one button mouse, for those whom it is better, but allows those
> for whom two buttons is better to have two buttons without having to get a
> new mouse.
>
> Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
> was wrong.
>
But TECHNICALLY, the 1 Button Mouse Approach is the better way to
perform tasks... I have a 101 Button "mouse" sitting right next to my
"pointy" finger mouse... so if a program wasn't smart enough to deal
with 1 command, I have options. (And curse the program until it gets
updated and sets things correctly)
The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
"Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
ONE command. What if a car had two steering wheels, what if people
pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go? The list goes
on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
right".
YES, some of it is because, there is NO consistent MENU BAR in Windows.
Apple won that round in the Lawsuit... so Windows Machines are always
crippled. It's like Windows users need "training wheels" to ride a bike.
Oxford
-
Edwin
"Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in message
news:1apP8.119265$av2.1...@news.easynews.com...
Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you the
greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using no
mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
> > Hey, if we agree the choice is good, do you think the Apple online store
> > should have a checkbox to let you choose one button or three?
>
> I personally don't see me ever using the online store, but to answer your
> question....
> Absolutely, the more choice the better, but I would want any mouse
supplied
> by Apple, to be made by Apple, as is the case now.
> But frankly the Apple mouse is fine as a supplied item, have you ever
> watched an 5yr old trying to use a multi button, whereas the original
mouse
> is perfect for size, (On my G4 I have both connected all the time, the
> original one button for my kids, and a Intellimouse that I use most of the
> time, now that is REAL flexibility).
The Mac is the computer of choice for five-year-olds?
>
> > After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> > used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> > "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's
sense)
> > has changed.
>
>
> Not convinced by your argument here, how many Primary schools had
computers
> in the 80's , as opposed to today, these children are all potential "new
> users".
No, in the "80's sense" "new users" means those who have never used a
computer, not those who used it in primary school.
> I didn't even consider "switchers" as I dont consider these people to be
new
> users.
That's John's point.
Edwin
Edwin
"Mayor of R'lyeh" <ev5...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d0d9a9c$0$1421$272e...@news.execpc.com...
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 07:02:14 GMT, "Cyclical"
> <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >----------
> >In article <slrnagqtfe.flf...@tzs.net>, Tim Smith
> ><reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> Many PC apps used the right button before Windows did. It wasn't
> useless.
So application writers were using the right button while Windows was still
using the wrong button?
[snip]
Edwin
Richard Revis
> The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
> "Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
> ONE command. What if a car had two steering wheels, what if people
> pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go? The list goes
> on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
> right".
I agree that Windows is a great example of bad programming, but having
multiple buttongs allows more functions without having to remove your hand
from the mouse - very sensible from an ergonomic point of view.
I have 4 buttons and a wheel on my mouse, which I like a lot, its great as
long as you are smart enough to remember what you assigned the functions to
be.
> YES, some of it is because, there is NO consistent MENU BAR in Windows.
> Apple won that round in the Lawsuit... so Windows Machines are always
> crippled. It's like Windows users need "training wheels" to ride a bike.
There is no consistent interface in Linux (even the shell you use is
optional, although bash seems to have the biggest share of users by virtue
of being the default in most distros) yet that is the reason that there is
so much flexability and choice. Consistency is not always a good thing,
unless you have the mental development of a two year old and need your hand
holding all the time.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
7:50pm up 23 days, 6:58, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.07, 0.01
Richard Revis
> All I would point out is that
> the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
Not really. The most flexible would be Linux, on the grounds that you can
tell it to behave like a Mac if that is what you like (it even supports one
button mice, certainly for the PPC and IIRC for the v86 as well) or
Windows, or Unix, or anything else you feel like. You can even emulate an
Acorn or a Comadore 64, but without having to put up with the lack of
functionality all non-POSIX platforms offer :o)
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
7:56pm up 23 days, 7:05, 1 user, load average: 0.63, 0.46, 0.18
Quantum Leaper
"Oxford" <mai...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:O1qP8.24921$9b.12...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
> > Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit
he
> > was wrong.
> >
>
> But TECHNICALLY, the 1 Button Mouse Approach is the better way to
> perform tasks... I have a 101 Button "mouse" sitting right next to my
> "pointy" finger mouse... so if a program wasn't smart enough to deal
> with 1 command, I have options. (And curse the program until it gets
> updated and sets things correctly)
>
the time gets in my way. I guess Mac uses can only do one thing at a time,
or atleast thats what you imply.
> The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
> "Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
> ONE command. What if a car had two steering wheels, what if people
> pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go? The list goes
> on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
> right".
>
The lazy way is to use a secondary device (keyboard), because your primary
device (mouse) is lacking in function.
I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to get into
the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car? The list is
endless....
Nigel Feltham
> useless.
Even the Acorn Mouse on the old BBC Micro had 2 buttons back in 1987, The
AMX BBC Mouse from same time had 3 buttons - and most of their apps used
all 3, making the Acorn mouse incompatible without adding extra command
(already built-in to AMX driver ROM) to bootup script to emulate 3rd button
with keyboard.
Didn't the commodore C64 / GEOS Mouse also have 2 buttons?
---------------------------------------------------------
begin sig
If you can't read this then get a real newsreader
---------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Feltham
> tom keyes <ke...@chem.bu.edu> wrote in news:160620021942488204%
> ke...@chem.bu.edu:
>
>> I don't think equating the 1 button mouse with the horrors of the msft
>> UI indicates a good grasp of priorities
>>
>
> I think its quite the same. Very limiting albeit simpler for the neophyte.
But it's easier for anyone to swap the mouse than the UI.
Bruce Baugh
Paul Cooke <pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
> trackballs and plug it in???
>
> or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
Let's see. My iMac here has a Microsoft Intellimouse trackball plugged
into it, and the iBook over there in the corner has a Logitech wheel
mouse hooked up to it. The right buttons and wheel all worked fine out
of the box, as of OS X 10.1.somethingorother, without extra software.
(I do use the Intellimouse utility for some finessing of options, but
that's taste, not necessity.)
--
Bruce Baugh <*> bruce...@sff.net
Personal ramblings at http://fortunewriter.blogspot.com/
Longer-lived items at http://www.tkau.org/
"Everything possible to be believ'd is an image of truth."
Bob Hauck
<pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:40:13 +0100, Cyclical wrote:
>> then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out
>> is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
>> flexibility.
>
> ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
> trackballs and plug it in???
I've got a G3 happily running with a Logitech wheel mouse plugged into a
USB port on an add-in card. It is running Linux though.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
Paul Cooke
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 19:05:46 +0100, Paul Cooke
> <pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:40:13 +0100, Cyclical wrote:
>
>>> then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point
>>> out is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
>>> flexibility.
>>
>> ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
>> trackballs and plug it in???
>
> I've got a G3 happily running with a Logitech wheel mouse plugged into a
> USB port on an add-in card. It is running Linux though.
good... now that's that question well and truly answered... Thanx all who
chipped in :)
GreyCloud
>
> I don't hate the Maccies. I hate the Mac. It's a disease more than anything.
> This people have a desperate desire to be different. No matter how bad a Mac
> is they will stick with it.
>
> --
> Pats: Winners of 1 NFL championship and 3 AFC Championships
> Jets: Winners of 1 exhibition game in the last millennium, and no NFL
> championships of any kind!
>
I find the timing rather odd. As soon as the Apple ads that
have started appearing on TV, I notice all the wintrolls
coming out of the woodworks in defense of M$.
Guffaw!! Happy trolling.
M$ is going to be ground into the dust.
Seeker1
We hope so.
Seeker1
We hope so.
GreyCloud
>
> > M$ is going to be ground into the dust.
>
> We hope so.
M$ can't compete if the PC hardware price goes below $350.
It already has.
Charlie Ebert
No they can't.
It still baffles me why people would want a Windows XP
equipped PC?
The authentication would be enough to drive most commercial
customers away in fright and the typical desktop home user
into anger.
XP is the slowest operating system available. There's
probably not one single other OS which is slower.
I challenge anybody to show me an OS which is slower than
Windows XP on the same PC.
Microsoft is busily working on promoting .NET in an effort
to apply another global *TAX* on the world to help keep
them a-float.
Wonder what ever happened to their idea of leasing MS Office?
Can you imagine leasing MS Office?
There are signs all over, even for the completely and utterly
ignorant, that MS's has fewer years left of life than you have
fingers on your hands.
And there's nothing that can change that for them now.
Hell! They even had a notion of selling MS Windows only
available on the X-box and doing away with the PC market
all together.
Charlie
Mayor of R'lyeh
ALL the buttons are the right button! 8)
--
"We in the Green movement, aspire to a cultural model
in which the killing of a forest will be considered
more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of
6-year-old children to Asian brothels."
Carl Amery, German Green Party.
Mayor of R'lyeh
>Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, and then did subsequent research that found that the first research
>> was wrong, but it was too late to change. However, that's irrelevant,
>> because even if the original research had held up, a one button mouse was a
>> bad design...the correct design would be to put two buttons on the mouse,
>> and make the software default to treating the two buttons as one. That
>> gives them a one button mouse, for those whom it is better, but allows those
>> for whom two buttons is better to have two buttons without having to get a
>> new mouse.
>>
>> Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
>> was wrong.
>>
>
>But TECHNICALLY, the 1 Button Mouse Approach is the better way to
>perform tasks... I have a 101 Button "mouse" sitting right next to my
>"pointy" finger mouse... so if a program wasn't smart enough to deal
>with 1 command, I have options. (And curse the program until it gets
>updated and sets things correctly)
>
>The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
>"Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
>ONE command.
That's one of the dumbest things ever said in here...and that's saying
a lot. In ACAD 11 the right button functioned as 'Enter" and the
middle button brought up the OSNAP menu. That was smart design and it
greatly simplified life for drafters.
> What if a car had two steering wheels,
What if Oxford had a clue?
>
> what if people pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go?
Why do I suspect that most people you encounter use two fingers while
they're telling you where to go? 8)
> The list goes on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
>right".
You missplelled 'points to Oxford nor knowing what he's talking
about...again'.
>YES, some of it is because, there is NO consistent MENU BAR in Windows.
>Apple won that round in the Lawsuit... so Windows Machines are always
>crippled. It's like Windows users need "training wheels" to ride a bike.
>
>Oxford
Actually Apple got their ass handed to them in there 'look and feel'
lawsuits. I thank God that Windows doesn't have that stupid menu bar
across the top of the screen. It makes much more sense to have one for
each window. That Maccies can't recognize this simple fact continues
to astound thinking people the world over.
Donn Miller
> XP is the slowest operating system available. There's
> probably not one single other OS which is slower.
Hm, Erik says XP runs "just fine" with just 64 MB ram. Right.
> Can you imagine leasing MS Office?
Hell, most smaller businesses were struggling just to license MS Office even
before they started leasing.
> There are signs all over, even for the completely and utterly
> ignorant, that MS's has fewer years left of life than you have
> fingers on your hands.
What will Erik do? I predict he'll jump into the Grand Canyon. I think he
might become a Solaris or a Mac troll.
> Hell! They even had a notion of selling MS Windows only
> available on the X-box and doing away with the PC market
> all together.
Yup, and hence a common nickname for Windows: Wintendo. Did you see that
god-aweful UI on WinXP? Looks like a Fisher Price toy, except Fisher Price
toys don't normally cause sensory overload.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Donn Miller
>> M$ is going to be ground into the dust.
>
> We hope so.
Actually, I believe MS is going to shoot themselves in the foot and die of
blood loss and tetanis.
Cyclical
----------
In article <pan.2002.06.17.18...@cooke-one.madhouse>, Paul
Cooke <pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
> trackballs and plug it in???
>
> or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
>
> --
> Paul Cooke
> Registered Linux user 273897 Machine registration number 156819
> Linux Counter: Home Page = http://counter.li.org/
ahhh, but did you check Logitech's web site before asking?........mmmmmmm
thought not.
Cyclical
----------
In article <Xns92307770B952Bbr...@216.148.227.77>, Bob
Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> "Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in news:1apP8.119265
> $av2.1...@news.easynews.com:
>
>> the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
>>
>>
>
> haha rolf!!!
>
> -
> Bob
you seem to have a laughing floor?, yukyukyukyukyukyuk!!!!
Tim Smith
> The one-button mouse is not a bad idea, actually.
>
> The concept of the mouse is pointing and clicking. Having more than
> one button undermines the concept by giving you two ways to click.
The one button mouse gives you at least six ways to click:
1. Single click.
2. Double click.
3. Command click.
4. Option click.
5. Control click.
6. Shift click.
--Tim Smith
nu...@null.org
Mac bashing again are we?
Tim Smith
Zwarick wrote:
> I think its quite the same. Very limiting albeit simpler for the neophyte.
The worst thing is when something is limited to help the neophyte, without
taking into account how long the person will be a neophyte. The classic
example of this is avoiding scrolling.
There are web designers who try to cram way too much on the top of a web
page, to avoid scrolling, because there are UI studies that have shown that
beginners don't know how to scroll.
However, what those web designers overlook is the fact that those beginners
that don't know how to scroll *learn* that skill and become comfortable with
it in about 20 seconds, and then are just as annoyed as the rest of us at
web pages that throw away clarity in the interest of cramming everything
into the top of the first page.
Another example might be handwriting recognition on certain early PDAs. To
avoid making the user learn some kind of special alphabet or a different way
of writing, at least one early PDA tried to do recognition of normal
handwriting. That helped the neophyte, in the sense that they didn't have
to learn anything. However, it was limiting, because the technology at the
time just couldn't handle handwriting recognition, and the results were very
poor. The Palm people realized that neophytes were willing to put up with
the hassle of learning an alternate handwriting system, if it overcame the
limitation of poor recognition, and that was one of the reasons Palms came
to dominate. The funny thing is, learning Palm's system well enough to do
letters and numbers and the most common punctuation only takes about 10
minutes. That first PDA company's device became the butt of jokes because
of its poor handwriting recognition...all to save the neophyte 10 minutes of
simple learning.
Neophytes don't stay neophytes.
--Tim Smith
Cyclical
----------
In article <aelas9$7tj4h$1...@ID-56786.news.dfncis.de>, "Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org>
wrote:
> Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you the
> greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using no
> mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
Have you ever used Mac os, I doubt it, otherwise you would know how easy it
is to operate without a mouse, or 1, or 2 etc etc, all within the GUI we
know and love.
Peter Hillerström
> > as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is that
> > the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
>
> Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you the
> greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using no
> mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
Wrong again, a Mac user have *exctly* the same options.
BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
--
peter hillerström // pete...@despammed.com
<http://www.apple.com/switch/>
Richard Revis
> The one button mouse gives you at least six ways to click:
The 5 button mouse gives you 32 ways to click, even before you start to
consider things like double clicking and the scroll.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
1:12pm up 24 days, 20 min, 1 user, load average: 0.10, 0.09, 0.07
Richard Revis
<followups resoted so that cola can see the utter bollocks you have been
spouting>
>> XP is the slowest operating system available.
>
> There's a broad statement. XP users! Is your computer slow? Speak up
> NOW!
When I tried it, it was certainly a step backwards from Win2k speed wise.
>> There's probably not one single other OS which is slower.
>
> Really? Probabilty is an interesting mathematical concept. It's related
> very closely with statistics. Statistics indicate that most people prefer
> Windows. And as such the current Windows, Windows XP will be a
> statistical
> superior. So it's probable that the average system preoaded with Windows
> XP
> will be faster than most other systems. Even those running linux.
That statement makes no sense, it is complete and uter bolloks. Perhaps you
should have another go at explaining yourself? Either that or go back and
finish your 3rd year education.
> It's not about numbers though. It's about experience. If XP is fast for
> you (the common computer user), who (other than geeks) cares if XP is
> slower
> on a 486 that they haven't owned in a decade? Perhaps more efficient
> (without the Linux X-Window System) but it ends up being all marketing.
> Don't think that Linux has no marketing force, folks. Witness the
> marketeers that frequent this forum bashing Windows and Microsoft. Dial
> is better than Ivory, right?
So that it is ok for XP to be slow because its users don't know that they
can have it better? That is not a good thing.
>> I challenge anybody to show me an OS which is slower than
>> Windows XP on the same PC.
>
> And I suppose you get to choose the PC, right? Most linuxs (we used to
> talk about UNIXs -- so fragmented and lost) are not even compiled for
> modern
> processors. You get only the MHz advantage. Those that know about
> Windows know that the sophisticated installer CHECKS what CPU you have and
> optimizes
> the OS for it. With linux you better know how to tweak and compile and
> deploy your OS to do it. Even then there are bugs in the port and you get
> no support -- like you really ever get any anyway. Surly folks on
> newsgroups are not paid to be nice or helpful to you.
Mandrake is optimised for 686 systems, Gentoo is optimised for exactly what
hardware you have. The whole point about compiling software is that it
gives you faster and more stable *optimised* code than the Windows binary
system.
Of course GNU/Linux offers you the choice to use binaries, as choice is the
most important feature of the OS.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
1:16pm up 24 days, 24 min, 1 user, load average: 0.12, 0.09, 0.07
Donn Miller
>>And I suppose you get to choose the PC, right? Most linuxs (we used to
>>talk about UNIXs -- so fragmented and lost) are not even compiled for
>>modern
>>processors. You get only the MHz advantage.
Um, FreeBSD and Gentoo Linux allow one to build not only ports, but the
base system and kernel with optimizations to gcc that one chooses. For
example: -march=i686 -O2. As far as fragmented, well, a symlink and a
shell script on one unix is a symlink and a shell script on any other
unix system.
Bob B.
> Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
>
>
>>>as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is that
>>>the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
>>
>>Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you the
>>greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using no
>>mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
>>scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
Yes, OS X supports multi-button mice and scroll wheels, but I wish they
would advertise the fact more. And maybe include a two button mouse
and/or scroll wheel mouse instead of the usual one button (actually, no
button) version.
>
>
> Wrong again, a Mac user have *exctly* the same options.
> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
OK, I'll bite.. what can't you do in Windows if you don't use the right
mouse button?
Bob B.
>
GreyCloud
>
>
> Hm, Erik says XP runs "just fine" with just 64 MB ram. Right.
>
I found that it is recommended to have at least 512MB to do
it right.
> > Can you imagine leasing MS Office?
>
> Hell, most smaller businesses were struggling just to license MS Office even
> before they started leasing.
>
> > There are signs all over, even for the completely and utterly
> > ignorant, that MS's has fewer years left of life than you have
> > fingers on your hands.
>
> What will Erik do? I predict he'll jump into the Grand Canyon. I think he
> might become a Solaris or a Mac troll.
>
He can't have the Solaris troll position. I think he's
already burned that bridge.
GreyCloud
> immediately know something's up and go check the news sites to see
> what's happening. It's never failed me yet.
>
> >M$ is going to be ground into the dust.
>
> soon they're going to be a collector's item.
LOL!! I'd have to go over to Redmond and get one while they
last. Maybe get a pair from somebody getting a pink slip
for screwing up... like the one responsible for the Korean
Visual Studio pak. Probably have to wipe the blood stains
off tho.
Donn Miller
> Donn Miller wrote:
>>What will Erik do? I predict he'll jump into the Grand Canyon. I think he
>>might become a Solaris or a Mac troll.
> He can't have the Solaris troll position. I think he's
> already burned that bridge.
I think that position's reserved for Rev. Don "Kool". He's back
trolling the FreeBSD NG again...
J. Tim
>
> "Oxford" <mai...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:O1qP8.24921$9b.12...@typhoon.austin.rr.com...
> > Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit
> he
> > > was wrong.
> > >
> >
> > But TECHNICALLY, the 1 Button Mouse Approach is the better way to
> > perform tasks... I have a 101 Button "mouse" sitting right next to my
> > "pointy" finger mouse... so if a program wasn't smart enough to deal
> > with 1 command, I have options. (And curse the program until it gets
> > updated and sets things correctly)
> >
> the time gets in my way. I guess Mac uses can only do one thing at a time,
> or atleast thats what you imply.
>
> > The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
> > "Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
> > pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go? The list goes
> > on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
> > right".
> >
> device (mouse) is lacking in function.
>
> I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to get into
> the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car? The list is
> endless....
By your own analogy, how many steering wheels does your car have? You
know, the car's pointing device? One. Unless of course, you're driving
something so cumbersome as to require a tiller wheel... this would
describe windoze quite nicely, I suppose...
Jan
>> The lazy way is to use a secondary device (keyboard), because your
>> primary device (mouse) is lacking in function.
>>
>> I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to get
>> into the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car? The
>> list is endless....
>
> By your own analogy, how many steering wheels does your car have? You
> know, the car's pointing device? One. Unless of course, you're driving
> something so cumbersome as to require a tiller wheel... this would
> describe windoze quite nicely, I suppose...
And how many buttons do you have on your steering wheel. Most of them
have nice buttons to control your carstereo, switch on your
headlights,... So you don't have to take your hands of the wheel...
J. Tim
>
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 20:07:11 +0200, J. Tim wrote:
> >> The lazy way is to use a secondary device (keyboard), because your
> >> primary device (mouse) is lacking in function.
> >>
> >> I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to get
> >> into the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car? The
> >> list is endless....
> >
> > By your own analogy, how many steering wheels does your car have? You
> > know, the car's pointing device? One. Unless of course, you're driving
> > something so cumbersome as to require a tiller wheel... this would
> > describe windoze quite nicely, I suppose...
>
> And how many buttons do you have on your steering wheel.
One.
Nice try... ;)
Johan Lindquist
J. Tim <j...@noplaceinparticu.lar> suddenly blurted:
> Quantum Leaper wrote:
>> I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to
>> get into the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car?
>> The list is endless....
>
> By your own analogy, how many steering wheels does your car have?
> You know, the car's pointing device? One. Unless of course, you're
> driving something so cumbersome as to require a tiller wheel... this
> would describe windoze quite nicely, I suppose...
Not to actually argue for any number of mice or buttons on them (I
do prefer one (trackball) with three buttons and a scroll wheel as I
use an os capable of handling all of that with grace), but I have to
point out that not many (if any) of the multi-button proponents in
this thread have a preference towards ms windows.
That is, in short, your "windoze" quip is aimed at the wrong audience.
hth.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
9:06pm up 30 min, 4 users, load average: 1.23, 1.12, 0.64
$ cat /dev/bollocks Registered Linux user #261729
J. Tim
>
> Tue, 18 Jun 2002 at 20:07 GMT, peering quizzically at his shoes,
> J. Tim <j...@noplaceinparticu.lar> suddenly blurted:
> > Quantum Leaper wrote:
> >> I guess you drive a car with one gear or one door for everyone to
> >> get into the car, or one window in the car or one tire on the car?
> >> The list is endless....
> >
> > By your own analogy, how many steering wheels does your car have?
> > You know, the car's pointing device? One. Unless of course, you're
> > driving something so cumbersome as to require a tiller wheel... this
> > would describe windoze quite nicely, I suppose...
>
> Not to actually argue for any number of mice or buttons on them (I
> do prefer one (trackball) with three buttons and a scroll wheel as I
> use an os capable of handling all of that with grace), but I have to
> point out that not many (if any) of the multi-button proponents in
> this thread have a preference towards ms windows.
>
> That is, in short, your "windoze" quip is aimed at the wrong audience.
>
> hth.
Fine, insert your OS here _____ .
Sandman
Mayor of R'lyeh <ev5...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >YES, some of it is because, there is NO consistent MENU BAR in Windows.
> >Apple won that round in the Lawsuit... so Windows Machines are always
> >crippled. It's like Windows users need "training wheels" to ride a bike.
>
> Actually Apple got their ass handed to them in there 'look and feel'
> lawsuits. I thank God that Windows doesn't have that stupid menu bar
> across the top of the screen. It makes much more sense to have one for
> each window. That Maccies can't recognize this simple fact continues
> to astound thinking people the world over.
Did you ask any?
--
Sandman[.net]
Richard Revis
> Not to actually argue for any number of mice or buttons on them (I
> do prefer one (trackball) with three buttons and a scroll wheel as I
> use an os capable of handling all of that with grace), but I have to
> point out that not many (if any) of the multi-button proponents in
> this thread have a preference towards ms windows.
The number of buttons that are best for the task depend a lot on the window
manager too - I doubt that some of the very cut down superbly efficient
Linux desktops would run well with one button mice.
> That is, in short, your "windoze" quip is aimed at the wrong audience.
Damn right, stop insulting us please. Why would anyone want to use a
fundamentally unreliable operating system which offers little choice?
Mind you, the best use for a Mac is as a pretty Linux box :o) To aid
transition problems for experienced Mac users you can even tell KDE to look
and act exactly like OS/X.
--
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else.
10:29pm up 24 days, 9:37, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.08, 0.12
Edwin
"Jan" <jan....@yucom.be> wrote in message
news:pan.2002.06.19.21....@yucom.be...
If Apple made cars, they would have one pedal and some dashboard qualifier
keys...
Pedal for gas... Shift + Pedal for break... Command + Pedal for clutch..
Shift + Command + Pedal for reverse... Apple advocates will tell us this is
"easier" than cars with more separate controls...
Edwin
Edwin
"Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in message
news:oQBP8.155831$av2.1...@news.easynews.com...
>
>
> ----------
> In article <aelas9$7tj4h$1...@ID-56786.news.dfncis.de>, "Edwin"
<ze...@aiur.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you
the
> > greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using
no
> > mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> > scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
>
>
> Have you ever used Mac os,
Does Mac OS 7.5.3 through Mac OS 9.1 count as "Mac os?"
>I doubt it, otherwise you would know how easy it
> is to operate without a mouse,
When I started with Mac OS, there were things that couldn't be done at all
without a mouse. I doubt they've all been modified.
>or 1, or 2 etc etc, all within the GUI weknow and love.
Since the Mac mouse only has one button, you won't be using two or three, or
a scroll wheel either, unless you pony up extra cash.
Edwin
Matthias Warkus
Don't get me started. The double click is a thoroughly broken concept.
Using the mouse with a keyboard modifier makes limited sense, but only
as a shortcut for actions that can be done in more obvious ways.
mawa
--
I have no capslock and I must scream
-- User Friendly
Edwin
"Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
> Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
>
> > > as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is
that
> > > the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
> >
> > Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you
the
> > greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using
no
> > mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> > scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
>
> Wrong again, a Mac user have *exctly* the same options.
Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no right
button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no scroll
wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
Windows users.
> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
Why not?
> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
What things?
Edwin
J. Tim
>
> Johan Lindquist wrote:
>
> > Not to actually argue for any number of mice or buttons on them (I
> > do prefer one (trackball) with three buttons and a scroll wheel as I
> > use an os capable of handling all of that with grace), but I have to
> > point out that not many (if any) of the multi-button proponents in
> > this thread have a preference towards ms windows.
>
> The number of buttons that are best for the task depend a lot on the window
> manager too - I doubt that some of the very cut down superbly efficient
> Linux desktops would run well with one button mice.
>
> > That is, in short, your "windoze" quip is aimed at the wrong audience.
>
> Damn right, stop insulting us please. Why would anyone want to use a
> fundamentally unreliable operating system which offers little choice?
Um yeah, you can all take notice now that the person I responded
*directly* to is posting with microsloth outlook express. I don't know
who turned this thread into a crosspost from CSMA. I could give a rip,
but it's going to show up in comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy, so there you
have it... the windoze quip stands.
Have a nice day.
Josiah Fizer
>
>"Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
>news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
>> Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
>>
>> > > as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is
>that
>> > > the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
>> >
>> > Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you
>the
>> > greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using
>no
>> > mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
>> > scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
>>
>> Wrong again, a Mac user have *exctly* the same options.
>
>Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no right
>button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no scroll
>wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
>Windows users.
>
And yet this Logitech optical wheel mouse hooked up to my Mac has both
a right mouse button and a scroll wheel.
>> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
>
>Why not?
No reason, it works fine for me.
>
>> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
>
>What things?
>
>Edwin
>
Click the right mouse button?
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Ulimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----
Quantum Leaper
"J. Tim" <j...@noplaceinparticu.lar> wrote in message
news:3D0F76B6...@noplaceinparticu.lar...
Not my analogy, it was Oxford's analogy. It not the pointing of the mouse
it the control of what you do with the pointing of the mouse. How about
this do you have one pedal (button) to control speed? (acceleration and
deceleration)
Jim Richardson
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:39:42 GMT,
Oxford <mai...@mac.com> wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_i...@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, and then did subsequent research that found that the first research
>> was wrong, but it was too late to change. However, that's irrelevant,
>> because even if the original research had held up, a one button mouse was a
>> bad design...the correct design would be to put two buttons on the mouse,
>> and make the software default to treating the two buttons as one. That
>> gives them a one button mouse, for those whom it is better, but allows those
>> for whom two buttons is better to have two buttons without having to get a
>> new mouse.
>>
>> Macs have one button mice now for one reason--Jobs doesn't like to admit he
>> was wrong.
>>
>
> But TECHNICALLY, the 1 Button Mouse Approach is the better way to
> perform tasks... I have a 101 Button "mouse" sitting right next to my
> "pointy" finger mouse... so if a program wasn't smart enough to deal
> with 1 command, I have options. (And curse the program until it gets
> updated and sets things correctly)
>
You don't move that 101 button "mouse" around as a pointing device.
> The need for most ALL 2 button mouses are caused by BAD programming. The
> "Programmer" was LAZY... Again... LAZY! Smart design needs no more than
> ONE command. What if a car had two steering wheels, what if people
> pointed with TWO fingers explaining which direction to go? The list goes
> on and on, and always "points" to Windows screwing their users "left and
> right".
>
If computers were like cars, and functioned similarly, then metaphors
between them would make sense.
For example, what if cars only had one pedal...
> YES, some of it is because, there is NO consistent MENU BAR in Windows.
> Apple won that round in the Lawsuit... so Windows Machines are always
> crippled. It's like Windows users need "training wheels" to ride a bike.
>
> Oxford
>
> -
One who extols Mac as a paradigm of UI near perfection, has little room
to talk of "training wheels."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9D3KCd90bcYOAWPYRAu7BAKDdUHna/bIAnbwGGx7zcwZUuvGgLwCfXjkX
khn1lwxrdITNpCVHyzWviyA=
=61Gg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, from watches to supercomputers, for grandmas and geeks.
Cyclical
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> "Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in message
> news:oQBP8.155831$av2.1...@news.easynews.com...
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > In article <aelas9$7tj4h$1...@ID-56786.news.dfncis.de>, "Edwin"
> <ze...@aiur.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> When I started with Mac OS, there were things that couldn't be done at all
> without a mouse. I doubt they've all been modified.
Of course Example's would be out of the question?.
> Since the Mac mouse only has one button, you won't be using two or three, or
> a scroll wheel either, unless you pony up extra cash.
>
> Edwin
It's more a case of only NEED'S one button, But as I wanted to use my
Mac as a teaching aid for my children as much as anything, I decided to
purchase an extra multi button mouse and a macally extended keyboard and
a second monitor, Which gave me a perfect set up, BOTH mice, Both
keyboards, and Both monitors (soon will add a third for PS pallette's)
work together nicely and at the same time, now instead of being hudled
round one table, we can spread over two, which makes a much nicer
working environment, did I have to "pony up extra cash"? of course, but
the the ability of the Mac OS to support such a setup came free.
as far as I understand window's finally supports multi monitor's is that
right?, but how about multi mice and keyboard's?.
Mayor of R'lyeh
wrote:
J Tim Goes To A Restaurant:
Hostess - Right this way, sir.
J Tim - You've got a lot of tables in here.
H - About 30 of them, sir. It gives people a choice on where to sit.
JT- I don't see why you need more than one
Waiter- How are you doing tonight, sir?
JT- Who are those other guys running around in here?
W- You mean those guys? Those are the other waiters.
JT- I don't see why you have more than one.
W- Have you had a chance to look at our menu, sir?
JT- I sure did. There must be 1,000 things on there! That's
ridiculous! You should only have one thing! Don't you people know that
it only confuese people to have more than one thing to pick from! You
people are a bunch of Windroids!!! WAAAAAHH!
At this point J Tim flings down the menu and runs from the restaraunt
screaming like a little girl all the way!
--
"We in the Green movement, aspire to a cultural model
in which the killing of a forest will be considered
more contemptible and more criminal than the sale of
6-year-old children to Asian brothels."
Carl Amery, German Green Party.
GreyCloud
>
> >
> >LOL!! I'd have to go over to Redmond and get one while they
> >last. Maybe get a pair from somebody getting a pink slip
> >for screwing up... like the one responsible for the Korean
> >Visual Studio pak. Probably have to wipe the blood stains
> >off tho.
>
> insecure code?
I don't think Gates would like the competition by using the
Peter principle for subordinates.
Edwin
"Josiah Fizer" <jfi...@klassy.com> wrote in message
news:19cvgu0mlcnn7fb23...@4ax.com...
Apple goofed up and included a Logitech mouse with your Mac for no extra
charge? You may be shocked to learn this, but all of their other customers
are getting a one button mouse with their Macs.
> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> >
> >Why not?
>
> No reason, it works fine for me.
So you disagree with Peter.
> >
> >> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
> >
> >What things?
> >
> >Edwin
> >
>
> Click the right mouse button?
Is that your list of things that you "can't do" if you don't use the right
mouse button?
Edwin
Josiah Fizer
And you may be shocked to learn that most PC systems come with crap
mice. You see there is this large market for input devices. Go look in
CompUSA or any other computer store and you will see many mice selling
for as little as 10$.
>> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
>> >
>> >Why not?
>>
>> No reason, it works fine for me.
>
>So you disagree with Peter.
>
Lets just say that I think you're both nuts.
>> >
>> >> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
>> >
>> >What things?
>> >
>> >Edwin
>> >
>>
>> Click the right mouse button?
>
>Is that your list of things that you "can't do" if you don't use the right
>mouse button?
>
>Edwin
>
Just about since there is a button on my keyboard that does the same
stuff as the right mouse button. The only place where I realy feel the
loss of hte extra mouse button is in games.
Edwin
I can't learn anything from Mac advocate B.S.
Here's the point that flew over your head: Macs don't have the same mouse
options as PCs do, unless you pay extra to replace your Apple-supplied
mouse.
>You see there is this large market for input devices.
There's a large replacement market of worn-out mechanical mice for optical
mice? Geez, are you sure about that? I'm shocked!
>Go look in
> CompUSA or any other computer store and you will see many mice selling
> for as little as 10$.
Geez, it make us wonder why Apple is screwing their customers by selling a
one button mouse for $60.
> >> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> >> >
> >> >Why not?
> >>
> >> No reason, it works fine for me.
> >
> >So you disagree with Peter.
> >
>
> Lets just say that I think you're both nuts.
So he's "nuts" for saying you can't operating Windows with only the left
mouse button, and I"m "nuts" for agreeing with you that it can be operated
that way?
> >> >
> >> >> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse
button.
> >> >
> >> >What things?
> >> >
> >> >Edwin
> >> >
> >>
> >> Click the right mouse button?
> >
> >Is that your list of things that you "can't do" if you don't use the
right
> >mouse button?
> >
> >Edwin
> >
>
> Just about since there is a button on my keyboard that does the same
> stuff as the right mouse button. The only place where I realy feel the
> loss of hte extra mouse button is in games.
So you seem to realize the point my question (what things?) was trying to
bring out.
Edwin
Josiah Fizer
And? PCs dont have the same mouse options Macs do, unless you pay to
replace your vendor supplied mouse.
What's your point?
>>You see there is this large market for input devices.
>
>There's a large replacement market of worn-out mechanical mice for optical
>mice? Geez, are you sure about that? I'm shocked!
>
>>Go look in
>> CompUSA or any other computer store and you will see many mice selling
>> for as little as 10$.
>
>Geez, it make us wonder why Apple is screwing their customers by selling a
>one button mouse for $60.
>
>> >> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
>> >> >
>> >> >Why not?
>> >>
>> >> No reason, it works fine for me.
>> >
>> >So you disagree with Peter.
>> >
>>
>> Lets just say that I think you're both nuts.
>
>So he's "nuts" for saying you can't operating Windows with only the left
>mouse button, and I"m "nuts" for agreeing with you that it can be operated
>that way?
>
He's nuts for the reasons you stated. Your nuts for insisting that
Macs cant use more then one mouse button. Since buying a 14$ Logitech
optical wheel mouse must be just too hard for those simple Mac users.
>> >> >
>> >> >> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse
>button.
>> >> >
>> >> >What things?
>> >> >
>> >> >Edwin
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Click the right mouse button?
>> >
>> >Is that your list of things that you "can't do" if you don't use the
>right
>> >mouse button?
>> >
>> >Edwin
>> >
>>
>> Just about since there is a button on my keyboard that does the same
>> stuff as the right mouse button. The only place where I realy feel the
>> loss of hte extra mouse button is in games.
>
>So you seem to realize the point my question (what things?) was trying to
>bring out.
>
>Edwin
>
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
Peter Hillerström
> "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
> Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no right
> button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no scroll
> wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
> Windows users.
The options are available, but the extra buttons or scroll wheel doesn't
just come "out of the box", because many people do not need them in Mac
OS.
Actually I prefer one button mouse because I do mostly graphical work
and IMO drawing with the Mac mice is more comfortable than with a
multi-button mice, your mileage may vary of course...
> > BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
>
> Why not?
Many "power user" features in Windows and its programs are most
effectively accessed by using the right click contextual menu.
(Other fast and easy spots to access by mouse are the corners and edges
os the screen, which are used more in the Mac OS GUI than in Windows)
That is *the reason* why so many Windows users brag about Macs only
having one mouse button by default. There are other ways to do things
fast in the Macintosh GUI...
> > You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
>
> What things?
I should have been more precise. I have encountered couple of Windows
programs, which had features that could only be accessed through right
clicking. I can't remember what programs they were though, because it
was about 4 years ago... but my point was that many things are much
harder (=slower) or even impossible to do in Windows if you only have
one mouse button.
In Mac OS it isn't so, because the GUI is designed to be
used with a one button mouse.
--
peter hillerström // pete...@despammed.com
<http://www.apple.com/switch/>
Peter Hillerström
> Actually I prefer one button mouse because I do mostly graphical work
> and IMO drawing with the Mac mice is more comfortable than with a
> multi-button mice, your mileage may vary of course...
Excluding the round puck mouse of course... that was horrible! ;-)
Edwin
Nonsense. You can use only one mouse button on a three button PC mouse, if
you only want to use one. Only a MacIdiot would replace a three button
mouse with a one button mouse.
> What's your point?
If you look up quickly, you may catch a glimpse of it, as it sails high over
your head.
> >>You see there is this large market for input devices.
> >
> >There's a large replacement market of worn-out mechanical mice for
optical
> >mice? Geez, are you sure about that? I'm shocked!
> >
> >>Go look in
> >> CompUSA or any other computer store and you will see many mice selling
> >> for as little as 10$.
> >
> >Geez, it make us wonder why Apple is screwing their customers by selling
a
> >one button mouse for $60.
> >
> >> >> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse
button.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Why not?
> >> >>
> >> >> No reason, it works fine for me.
> >> >
> >> >So you disagree with Peter.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Lets just say that I think you're both nuts.
> >
> >So he's "nuts" for saying you can't operating Windows with only the left
> >mouse button, and I"m "nuts" for agreeing with you that it can be
operated
> >that way?
> >
>
> He's nuts for the reasons you stated. Your nuts for insisting that
> Macs cant use more then one mouse button.
Then I"m not "nuts" as I never "insisted" any such thing.
>Since buying a 14$ Logitech
> optical wheel mouse must be just too hard for those simple Mac users.
Has the price of Logitech optical mice dropped? Last time I looked they
cost ~$30. I think you're just trying to reduce the extra charge Mac
owners have to pay to match PC mouse features.
[snip]
Edwin
Edwin
> Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
>
> > "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> > news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
>
> > Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no
right
> > button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no
scroll
> > wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
> > Windows users.
>
> The options are available, but the extra buttons or scroll wheel doesn't
> just come "out of the box",
So the options are not available in the Mac as it is sold by Apple. You
have to pay extra to get them, on top of the extra you paid to have a Mac.
> because many people do not need them in Mac
> OS.
If that were so, Apple would not have added mouse button qualifiers to the
keyboard. Macs come with multibutton mice, they just put the extra buttons
on the keyboard instead of on the mouse.
> Actually I prefer one button mouse because I do mostly graphical work
> and IMO drawing with the Mac mice is more comfortable than with a
> multi-button mice, your mileage may vary of course...
>
> > > BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> Many "power user" features in Windows and its programs are most
> effectively accessed by using the right click contextual menu.
While I agree that right-clicking does make things faster and easier, I'm
still waiting for a specific example from you where left-clicking is
"ineffective."
> (Other fast and easy spots to access by mouse are the corners and edges
> os the screen, which are used more in the Mac OS GUI than in Windows)
The corners and edges of the screen are no less accessible in Windows than
they are in the Mac.
> That is *the reason* why so many Windows users brag about Macs only
> having one mouse button by default. There are other ways to do things
> fast in the Macintosh GUI...
Give an example of what you can do just as fast with one mouse button in the
Mac as you can by right-clicking in Windows.
> > > You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
> >
> > What things?
>
> I should have been more precise. I have encountered couple of Windows
> programs, which had features that could only be accessed through right
> clicking.
So you had an issue with applications, but blamed Windows instead?
>I can't remember what programs they were though, because it
> was about 4 years ago... but my point was that many things are much
> harder (=slower) or even impossible to do in Windows if you only have
> one mouse button.
Yet you can not name any of these "things."
> In Mac OS it isn't so, because the GUI is designed to be
> used with a one button mouse.
When the Mac GUI was designed, you had to drag things to the Trash to delete
them. Are you telling me that's faster and easier than a right-click
delete?
Edwin
J. Tim
The R'lyeh Bar & Bar
> Hostess - Right this way, sir.
> J Tim - You've got a lot of tables in here.
> H - About 30 of them, sir. It gives people a choice on where to sit.
> JT- I don't see why you need more than one
> Waiter- How are you doing tonight, sir?
> JT- Who are those other guys running around in here?
> W- You mean those guys? Those are the other waiters.
> JT- I don't see why you have more than one.
> W- Have you had a chance to look at our menu, sir?
----------------edit
you need to have one of each thing on the menu...
JT- but I'm not that hungry... I just need this one meal, it will fill
me up just fine.
W- Oh no, you can't do that. EVERYBODY who comes in has at least two
meals. I mean, they're on the menu, so... Now, what I'll need you to do
next, is scoot over to this table.
H2- Right this way, sir.
JT-What?
W- well, as you noticed when you came in, we have many tables, we're
going to need you to sit at each one while you're here.
JT- I understand they are available. But I just want to sit and be
comfortable at this table. Why do I need to move?
H2- (puzzled) Well EVERYBODY sits at more than one table when they come
in. THIS restaurant was originally furnished with more than one table,
so, you have to sit at more than one table during your visit. There's
more tables to choose from.
JT- but I PREFER to sit and eat one meal at ONE table!
W- Well, you do have a choice, and sitting at more tables is better than
sitting at one table. You see, the restaurant accomodates many tables.
W2- Have you had a chance to look at our menu, sir?
Alan Baker
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
>> >> Wrong again, a Mac user have *exctly* the same options.
>> >
>> >Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no
>right
>> >button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no
>scroll
>> >wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
>> >Windows users.
>> >
>>
>> And yet this Logitech optical wheel mouse hooked up to my Mac has both
>> a right mouse button and a scroll wheel.
>
>Apple goofed up and included a Logitech mouse with your Mac for no extra
>charge? You may be shocked to learn this, but all of their other customers
>are getting a one button mouse with their Macs.
You did say "options", right Eddie? <g>
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
Jim Polaski
John Jensen <jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
> Jim Polaski <jpol...@NOync.net> writes:
> : In article <aej2q3$7ei28$2...@ID-126341.news.dfncis.de>,
> : Richard Revis <ne...@spamtrap.bottest.com> wrote:
>
> : > Jim Polaski wrote:
> : >
> : > > The thing is that Apple continues to do new things, iPod, Mac OS X, the
> : > > new iMac, iPhoto, etc., so there are new things for the Mac users and
> : > > things to attract the non-mac users to the platform, including the Apple
> : > > Stores which are "experience retailing" so to speak.
> : >
> : > It is amazing how comting firms underestimate their users. Look at Apple
> : > (with the one button mouse) and Microsoft (with the XP interface) and you
> : > will see exactly what they think of the intelligence of their users.
> : >
> : > The sad part is, they seem to be right.
>
> : No, Obviously you don't know the history. Apple did research into the
> : mouse before going to the one-button model.
>
> They researched the ability of people who had never used a mouse before to
> use one-button and multi-button mice, IIRC.
>
> Not the same thing as the abilities of people (including many of us here)
> with 10yrs+ mouse experience.
>
> John
John, Apple did that in pre 1984. No one in the desktop world used a
Mouse then. I hope that provides some insight!!!
But Apple didn't *limit* anyone to a single-button mouse. For a long
time you could add multi-button mice to the Mac. What is the problem?
And if you wanted to stay with the single-button mouse, there were KB
commands that extended the functionality of the single button mouse.
What is the problem? You have your choice.
--
Regards,
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do knowing he will
get nothing in return!"
Palm for mobility, Linux for servers, Mac for productivity,
Windows for the black hole in your IT budget.
"Windows the computer you need, Macintosh the computer you want!"
Rob Enderle
Jim Polaski
> "Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in message
> news:1apP8.119265$av2.1...@news.easynews.com...
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > In article <10243227...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
> > <jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Cyclical <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> writes:
> > >
> > > : >In article <10243169...@nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net>, John Jensen
> > > : >jj...@primenet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > : > They researched the ability of people who had never used a mouse
> before to
> > > : > use one-button and multi-button mice, IIRC.
> > >
> > > : So they listened to these "new" users, and provided them a one button
> mouse
> > > : for ease of use, because that is what they wanted.
> > >
> > > : > Not the same thing as the abilities of people (including many of us
> here)
> > > : > with 10yrs+ mouse experience.
> > >
> > > : And they made the OS so flexible , that as a user gain's experience,
> and
> > > : they find the need for a multi button mouse, they can have that too.
> > >
> > > : Best of both world's, what's wrong with that?.
> > >
> > >
> > > The only thing "wrong" is when people simplify it all to mean "one mouse
> > > is better".
> >
> > Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
> > buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice
> then
> > as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out is that
> > the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
>
> Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you the
> greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using no
> mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
Are you so lost as to make this statment? why is it that M$ intellimouse
works fine on Macs with its scroll wheel? Why is it that kensington
multibutton mice work fine on Macs. And you say one can only get a
"single-button" mouse on a Mac?
Do we see a problem here? Yes, once again edlost is uninformed or
perhaps just blind to what the true realitites are. Of course, now he'll
come back and say the problem is Macs don't come with multibutton mice
out of the box.
>
> > > Hey, if we agree the choice is good, do you think the Apple online store
> > > should have a checkbox to let you choose one button or three?
> >
> > I personally don't see me ever using the online store, but to answer your
> > question....
> > Absolutely, the more choice the better, but I would want any mouse
> supplied
> > by Apple, to be made by Apple, as is the case now.
> > But frankly the Apple mouse is fine as a supplied item, have you ever
> > watched an 5yr old trying to use a multi button, whereas the original
> mouse
> > is perfect for size, (On my G4 I have both connected all the time, the
> > original one button for my kids, and a Intellimouse that I use most of the
> > time, now that is REAL flexibility).
>
> The Mac is the computer of choice for five-year-olds?
Yes, for k-12 education.
>
> >
> > > After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> > > used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> > > "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's
> sense)
> > > has changed.
> >
> >
> > Not convinced by your argument here, how many Primary schools had
> computers
> > in the 80's , as opposed to today, these children are all potential "new
> > users".
>
> No, in the "80's sense" "new users" means those who have never used a
> computer, not those who used it in primary school.
>
> > I didn't even consider "switchers" as I dont consider these people to be
> new
> > users.
>
> That's John's point.
>
> Edwin
Matthias Warkus
...and Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> If that were so, Apple would not have added mouse button qualifiers to the
> keyboard. Macs come with multibutton mice, they just put the extra buttons
> on the keyboard instead of on the mouse.
No. Are you trying to claim that a key and a modifier key are
conceptually the same?
IMHO Apple have done the sensible thing.
BTW, don't get me started on scroll wheels. The scroll wheel is bogus,
it',s just two buttons masquerading as a wheel. It would be more
ergonomic to make those two buttons a long, narrow two-way button that
fits under your middle finger so you can scroll without having to
wiggle your finger around unnecessarily.
Try spinning your scroll wheel twenty times. Fast. It's silly -- the
same thing could be done by just holding down a pressure-sensitive
switch instead of spinning a toy wheel like crazy.
(Then, for scrolling, the ideal solution would be a tiny analog
joystick, maybe like those "mousepins" built into IBM notebook
keyboards, built somewhere into the outer frame of your keyboard where
it's easy to reach yet doesn't get in the way. I'm not reinventing
cursor keys -- these are for step motions.)
> When the Mac GUI was designed, you had to drag things to the Trash to delete
> them. Are you telling me that's faster and easier than a right-click
> delete?
If your mouse acceleration and threshold are adjusted correctly, you
can send your mouse across the screen with a single flick of the
wrist. For a delete action, dragging to the litter bin and a context
menu action, especially if implemented with a horrible on-release
context menu such as the Windows menu used to be, may well be
equivalent on a system with a well-working mouse.
mawa
--
Spätestens, wenn man an einen Elektrozaun pinkelt, wird man feststellen,
dass Strom gelb ist.
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1fe1g2e.17qu07sq11jf8N%pete...@despammed.com...
> > Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> >
> > > "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
> >
> > > Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no
> right
> > > button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no
> scroll
> > > wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
> > > Windows users.
> >
> > The options are available, but the extra buttons or scroll wheel doesn't
> > just come "out of the box",
>
> So the options are not available in the Mac as it is sold by Apple. You
> have to pay extra to get them, on top of the extra you paid to have a Mac.
>
And often there are features that were on Macs that were left out of
PC's, things like a Nic that you had to pay extra for. how is that
different?
You use the same logic to blame the Mac OS for various issues? Not
different at all.
> >I can't remember what programs they were though, because it
> > was about 4 years ago... but my point was that many things are much
> > harder (=slower) or even impossible to do in Windows if you only have
> > one mouse button.
>
> Yet you can not name any of these "things."
>
> > In Mac OS it isn't so, because the GUI is designed to be
> > used with a one button mouse.
>
> When the Mac GUI was designed, you had to drag things to the Trash to delete
> them. Are you telling me that's faster and easier than a right-click
> delete?
>
> Edwin
>
>
--
Jim Polaski
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
Apple's mouse cost me $42. It is not a regular mouse, but an optical
mouse with a laser diode tech that works on any surface and with higher
resolution than the average mouse. I doubt that a $10 mouse has that
precision.
>
> > >> >> BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> > >> >
> > >> >Why not?
> > >>
> > >> No reason, it works fine for me.
> > >
> > >So you disagree with Peter.
> > >
> >
> > Lets just say that I think you're both nuts.
>
> So he's "nuts" for saying you can't operating Windows with only the left
> mouse button, and I"m "nuts" for agreeing with you that it can be operated
> that way?
>
> > >> >
> > >> >> You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse
> button.
> > >> >
> > >> >What things?
> > >> >
> > >> >Edwin
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Click the right mouse button?
> > >
> > >Is that your list of things that you "can't do" if you don't use the
> right
> > >mouse button?
> > >
> > >Edwin
> > >
> >
> > Just about since there is a button on my keyboard that does the same
> > stuff as the right mouse button. The only place where I realy feel the
> > loss of hte extra mouse button is in games.
>
> So you seem to realize the point my question (what things?) was trying to
> bring out.
>
> Edwin
>
>
--
Jim Polaski
> "Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in message
> news:oQBP8.155831$av2.1...@news.easynews.com...
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > In article <aelas9$7tj4h$1...@ID-56786.news.dfncis.de>, "Edwin"
> <ze...@aiur.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Wrong. The Mac only gives you one mouse button. The PC gives you
> the
> > > greatest flexibility, because with the PC you have the choice of using
> no
> > > mouse buttons, or one mouse button, or two or three mouse buttons, and a
> > > scroll wheel or no scroll wheel.
> >
> >
> > Have you ever used Mac os,
>
> Does Mac OS 7.5.3 through Mac OS 9.1 count as "Mac os?"
>
> >I doubt it, otherwise you would know how easy it
> > is to operate without a mouse,
>
> When I started with Mac OS, there were things that couldn't be done at all
> without a mouse. I doubt they've all been modified.
So IOW, you don't really know. IF you had indeed used Mac OS 7.5.3 -->
9.1 you would know what has evolved. We can all see what you haven't
used and are not familiar with in the Mac OS.
>
> >or 1, or 2 etc etc, all within the GUI weknow and love.
>
> Since the Mac mouse only has one button, you won't be using two or three, or
> a scroll wheel either, unless you pony up extra cash.
>
> Edwin
>
>
And you won't be using firewire unless you buy a new PC or put a card in
and old one. Same for USB...
Jim Polaski
Bob Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> "Cyclical" <Cycl...@yourservice.net.au> wrote in news:1apP8.119265
> $av2.1...@news.easynews.com:
>
> > the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest flexibility.
> >
> >
>
> haha rolf!!!
>
> -
> Bob
Nice to see that you are able to laugh at yourself Bob.
Jim Polaski
Paul Cooke <pa...@cooke100.freeserve-nospam.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 18:40:13 +0100, Cyclical wrote:
>
> > Perhaps some people will say one button is best, others will say multi
> > buttons are best, as long as its kept in the context of personal choice
> > then as far as I am concerned neither is "WRONG", All I would point out
> > is that the Mac is the one that gives the user the greatest
> flexibility.
>
> ahhh, but can you take one of those nice Logitech Trackman Marble FX
> trackballs and plug it in???
>
> or get a wheelmouse for Mac???
The short answer is yes.
Jim Polaski
Bob Zwarick <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote:
> John Jensen <jj...@primenet.com> wrote in news:1024322788.517062
> @nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net:
>
> > After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> > used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> > "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's sense)
> > has changed.
> >
>
> Having switched from MAC to PC, I wonder why it took me so long...
>
> -
> Bob
Dumbing down takes a while.
Jim Polaski
"Uranus \"The Mannequin Fucker\" Brownstain" <mua...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I don't hate the Maccies. I hate the Mac. It's a disease more than anything.
> This people have a desperate desire to be different. No matter how bad a Mac
> is they will stick with it.
>
So because YOU hate the Mac, no one can choose it as their platform of
choice and like it for their reasons and of course no one can have a
choice or opinion different than yours.
That is right, isn't it?
> --
> Pats: Winners of 1 NFL championship and 3 AFC Championships
> Jets: Winners of 1 exhibition game in the last millennium, and no NFL
> championships of any kind!
>
> "The Jets are ignoring what the Patriots have proven and are signing free
> agents for much too much money." - Peter King, Sports Illustrated
> "Bob Zwarick" <bravet...@remove.attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns92304FDFBCBA5br...@216.148.227.77...
> > John Jensen <jj...@primenet.com> wrote in news:1024322788.517062
> > @nnrp1.phx1.gblx.net:
> >
> > > After all, there aren't as many "new" users (in the 80's sense) as there
> > > used to be. Heck, if Apple's marketing is now centered on people who
> > > "switch" from Windows, the expectation of "new" users (in the 00's
> sense)
> > > has changed.
> > >
> >
> > Having switched from MAC to PC, I wonder why it took me so long...
> >
> > -
> > Bob
>
>
>
--
Peter Hillerström
> "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1fe1g2e.17qu07sq11jf8N%pete...@despammed.com...
> > Many "power user" features in Windows and its programs are most
> > effectively accessed by using the right click contextual menu.
>
> While I agree that right-clicking does make things faster and easier, I'm
> still waiting for a specific example from you where left-clicking is
> "ineffective."
It is not "ineffective", but not so quick either. It is much slower to
point and click everything than it is to use shortcuts like the right
clicking, modifier clicking or keyboard shortcuts.
> > (Other fast and easy spots to access by mouse are the corners and edges
> > os the screen, which are used more in the Mac OS GUI than in Windows)
>
> The corners and edges of the screen are no less accessible in Windows than
> they are in the Mac.
No, they obviously are not, but not so much used either. :-)
I was just pointing out that while Windows relies on the spot where
cursor already is (right clicking), the Mac OS relies more on the use of
corners and edges of the screen for fast acces to often needed items
(Menu bar starting immediately at the edge of screen, control strip,
pop-up windows at the bottom of the screen, maximized windows leaving
two pixels at the edge of the screen for fast access to the desktop and
for hiding the application, when pressing alt).
I don't know about WinXP, but every Windows up to W2000 have had couple
of "dead" pixels at the edge of the screen in the taskbar. And the
toolbar buttons and menus inside windows are hard to hit quickly,
because I can't just "throw" the cursor against the edge of the screen
and immediately select the menu.
> > That is *the reason* why so many Windows users brag about Macs only
> > having one mouse button by default. There are other ways to do things
> > fast in the Macintosh GUI...
>
> Give an example of what you can do just as fast with one mouse button in the
> Mac as you can by right-clicking in Windows.
Renaming a file is the first thing that comes to my mind:
Mac OS = just click the file name, enter new name, press return
Windows = right click, select "rename", enter new name, press return
Another is accessing and changing the settings - Time & Date settings:
Mac OS = alt-click on the clock
Windows = right click on the clock, select change settings
Open an URL in your browser/e-mail client/newsreader/ftp-program etc...
Mac OS = command click the URL
Windows = right click, select open URL (if there is such an option in
every program, which I very much doubt...) *OR*
carefully select the URL, ctrl-c, change to browser,
double click the address line (or ctrl-l), ctrl-v, return
Save an image/text/whatever from a web page:
Mac OS = drag the object to the Finder
Windows = right click the object, select save image, browse to the
location where you want to save the file, name the file,
hit save
Open a document in a different program than
is associated with that kind of file:
Mac OS = drag the file into the program icon (the icon or alias goes
dark to show the program can read the file)
Windows = right click, select open with -> application (how do you
define which prgrams are shown in the menu BTW?)
> > > > You can't even do some things if you don't use the right mouse button.
> > >
> > > What things?
> >
> > I should have been more precise. I have encountered couple of Windows
> > programs, which had features that could only be accessed through right
> > clicking.
>
> So you had an issue with applications, but blamed Windows instead?
I didn't blame Windows, I forgot to add "of course it wasn't Windows'
fault the application was badly designed"...
> >I can't remember what programs they were though, because it
> > was about 4 years ago... but my point was that many things are much
> > harder (=slower) or even impossible to do in Windows if you only have
> > one mouse button.
>
> Yet you can not name any of these "things."
Look above for the examples I gave.
Many things are as easily done in Windows with *the right mouse* button
as they can be done on a Mac, but if you have to use other methods to
accomplish the task in Windows the path to doing it is often much more
complicated.
> > In Mac OS it isn't so, because the GUI is designed to be
> > used with a one button mouse.
>
> When the Mac GUI was designed, you had to drag things to the Trash to delete
> them. Are you telling me that's faster and easier than a right-click
> delete?
Definitely not.
Now I couldn't use even Mac OS 8, because while there is a shortcut for
moving an item to the trash there is not a shortcut for emptying the
trash.
Steve Carroll
"Edwin" <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:1fe1g2e.17qu07sq11jf8N%pete...@despammed.com...
> > Edwin <ze...@aiur.org> wrote:
> >
> > > "Peter Hillerström" <pete...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1fdza3t.h2l85n1xty1d2N%pete...@despammed.com...
> >
> > > Okay, let's use the right mouse button option on the Mac... oops... no
> right
> > > button... let's use the scroll wheel option on the Mac... oops... no
> scroll
> > > wheel... only one mouse button.. not the same options as available to
> > > Windows users.
> >
> > The options are available, but the extra buttons or scroll wheel doesn't
> > just come "out of the box",
>
> So the options are not available in the Mac as it is sold by Apple. You
> have to pay extra to get them, on top of the extra you paid to have a Mac.
>
> > because many people do not need them in Mac
> > OS.
>
> If that were so, Apple would not have added mouse button qualifiers to the
> keyboard. Macs come with multibutton mice, they just put the extra buttons
> on the keyboard instead of on the mouse.
>
> > Actually I prefer one button mouse because I do mostly graphical work
> > and IMO drawing with the Mac mice is more comfortable than with a
> > multi-button mice, your mileage may vary of course..
> >
> > > > BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button.
> > >
> > > Why not?
> >
> > Many "power user" features in Windows and its programs are most
> > effectively accessed by using the right click contextual menu.
>
> While I agree that right-clicking does make things faster and easier, I'm
> still waiting for a specific example from you where left-clicking is
> "ineffective."
You're omnly waiting because you've injected your patented 'Lumpit
logic' into the discussion. Where did he ever write it was
'ineffective'? I did see the words:
"BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button."
Now feel free to show us what you insinuated he wrote.
Steve
Edwin
"Steve Carroll" <fret...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:fretwizz-73BEBA...@netnews.attbi.com...
"Lumpit logic" is exclusive to yourself.
>Where did he ever write it was
> 'ineffective'? I did see the words:
The exact words or other words that mean the same thing? Get your seeing
dog to help you find them.
> "BTW, you can't use Windows effectively with only one mouse button."
>
> Now feel free to show us what you insinuated he wrote.
Feel free to read the post with your eyes open.
Edwin
Richard Revis
> Renaming a file is the first thing that comes to my mind:
> Mac OS = just click the file name, enter new name, press return
> Windows = right click, select "rename", enter new name, press return
Can also be done by clicking on the file name and waiting 2 seconds in
Windows. In Linux you can set it to be anything you like, or if you prefer
type rm nameold namenew.
> Another is accessing and changing the settings - Time & Date settings:
> Mac OS = alt-click on the clock
> Windows = right click on the clock, select change settings
Or in Linux just click once on the clock.
> Open an URL in your browser/e-mail client/newsreader/ftp-program etc...
> Mac OS = command click the URL
> Windows = right click, select open URL (if there is such an option in
> every program, which I very much doubt...) *OR*
> carefully select the URL, ctrl-c, change to browser,
> double click the address line (or ctrl-l), ctrl-v, return
In Linux just highlight the URL and then select send to (application you
want it to go to). The 'best guess' will appear first on the list.
To be fair most applications in Windows can spot common command handlers, so
you can just double click on a hyperlink to follow it.
> Save an image/text/whatever from a web page:
> Mac OS = drag the object to the Finder
> Windows = right click the object, select save image, browse to the
> location where you want to save the file, name the file,
> hit save
Linux - varies by browser. In the one I prefer all it requires is ctrl-i to
save all images from the page you are currently viewing.
> Open a document in a different program than
> is associated with that kind of file:
> Mac OS = drag the file into the program icon (the icon or alias goes
> dark to show the program can read the file)
> Windows = right click, select open with -> application (how do you
> define which prgrams are shown in the menu BTW?)
Windows supports dragging files to a different application than the default,
either to the application window or to the icon. So does Linux.
>> When the Mac GUI was designed, you had to drag things to the Trash to
>> delete
>> them. Are you telling me that's faster and easier than a right-click
>> delete?
>
> Definitely not.
>
> Now I couldn't use even Mac OS 8, because while there is a shortcut for
> moving an item to the trash there is not a shortcut for emptying the
> trash.
I like the fact that when I hit 'delete' with a file selected, it deletes,
none of this farting around with a trash can. I tell my PC what to do, not
the other way around, something that both the Mac OS and Windows seem to
have lost sight of.