Possible Pics Of The New Apple Mouse

The Wookie writes: "Appleinsider have some pictures of the rumoured Apple buttonless, cordless mouse here." That is one weirdass looking little device. No clue if it's legit or not, but if it's for real, it'll be one billion times better than the horrible hockey puck.

Comments

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[theancient1]

Back in the days of Windows 3.0, I read an article in some magazine (PC World, I'm pretty sure), that said it takes an average of 8 minutes for a newbie to figure out how to start Write with the mouse, without assistance. This was attributed to the double-click -- one of the least intuitive user interface designs ever invented. Offhand, I can't think of any non-computer application that requires one to quickly press a button twice in order to get a response.

Hmmm...

[BJH]

Ther's a different take on this topic at ZDNet here. Personally, I think the artist's rendition in the ZDNet article is more likely than the rendering in the article linked above. Apple's never produced a right-hand-only peripheral, and I'd like to think they never would - in fact, they've been very careful in allowing both left- and right-handed use of their mice until now, by providing ADB ports on both sides of their keyboards (same for USB, I guess).

Re:Corded is a +

[jfunk]

Knowing when to change batteries, or even HOW to change batteries is often well outside their abilities.

Oh come now, changing batteries in a remote control takes as much effort. Knowing when to is the same: "Hmmm, not working... I haven't changed batteries in a year... There, it works again."

The battery is not a "geek" concept. If you think you're oh-so-smart for knowing about batteries, then you're friggin' deluded.

Then again, my mom prefers Linux :-)*

Tell me...

[Dr Caleb]

Does it have the microchip in it like other US Hockey pucks?

The Yo.

[DustyHodges]

As a Macintosh Tech, I am more than happy t use anything that isn't the fucking yo (Half yo-yo). I have long dreamed of taking the ball out of two of them, attaching a dowel between them, and making a real yo-yo out of them. The it might have a use. I love Macs, but I hate that fucking thing.

Other apple failed pointing devices

[eyeball]

Other failed Apple pointing devices:

• The iThighMouser - control the position of the cursor on the screen by squeezing your knees together.
• The iHeadMouse - attached to a little beenie, this pointing device uses mercury switches to track movements as you look around the screen (as long as you keep your eyes fixed forwards and move your head to point). Not to be confused with the very popular iNosePen.
• The iGrapefruitRoller - sensors track a grapefruit's position on your desk as you roll it around. Cover the grapefruit with both hands to 'click'
• The iEtch-A-Sketch (tm) - use the two wheels to move horizontally, vertically, and (psuedo) diagonally. Shake upside down to click.
• The iChopsticks - hold the chopsticks in your hand (instructions included) and click
• The iLightSaber - no description necessary

I should actually put up a web site with these parodies (on HavenCo of course, since I don't want the Apple iCops and iLawyers pounding on my door).

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[bgarcia]

Apple did a bag o' research that showed that mis-hits were common amongst users learning new tasks. The solution? The double click. Imagine life without the double-click...

Imagine it? I live it! My linux box requires absolutely no double-clicking whatsoever.

Double-clicking has to be the dumbest thing ever invented. Every time I try to teach someone who is new to computers (as in, has never used one before), the one thing that they find impossible to do is double-click.

"Now click twice on the picture there. Yes, move the mouse over top of it, then click the mouse button twice. No, your clicks have to be a little faster than that. Ok, that was better, but you have to try really hard not to move the mouse at all while you're double-clicking or it won't register. I know you tried to hold it still, but it moved a little."

Once people have acquired the ability to double-click, the next big problem is that they have no idea when to double-click and when to single-click! I can't tell you the number of times they've opened two windows, or started two copies of some application, because they double-clicked when they only had to click once. This is a problem that would not happen if two mouse buttons were used instead.

I didn't realize that double-click was invented for Macs. I guess if you only have one button, its a way to keep the user from having to use the keyboard, but it's not as easy as simply having a second button on the mouse.

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[Frymaster]

Will Apple finally understand that a second button can be really useful for a whole range of tasks

Like what? I use a mac, a sparc10(solaris) and a winders machine (for solitaire... no, really) and I've come to the conclusion that extra buttons are only there to make up for bad UI design. Let's "do the numbers":

1. The original mice concept as envisioned by Xerox had 3 buttons all doing a vairety of tasks. Apple did a bag o' research that showed that mis-hits were common amongst users learning new tasks. The solution? The double click. Imagine life without the double-click...
2. Two button mice were "developed" (note the quotes) to give users contextual menues. Contextual menues were developed to make up for the fact that a particular OS that shall remained unnamed (ok, windows) had such a terrible set of rules for system menues that it was almost impossible to get stuff done. Menues attached to application windows, menues attached document windows, menues attached to folder windows.... where the $@#%! is "copy" or "paste"? Hence, the second button.
3. Contextual menues were also the saviour to the crisis of badly designed hot keys. I want to close a window... is it ctrl-w, alt-w or alt-F4 (nobel prize for counter-intuitive design to whoever came up with that one). Quitting an application? Could be q, could be x. On the mac, quit is always cmd-Q, close is always cmd-W, undo is always Z. Always. With these commands standardized across all apps, contextual menues are unneccessary...
4. In order to get some mindshare off the Winders flock, Apple caved in and offered contextual menues. Just hold down the control key. No second mouse button required.

The current state of the multi-button-mouse is alarming. First it was two buttons, then three, then a lever, later a wheel. What's next? A second keyboard on wheels? Foot pedals?

...and for the record, I do use the middle button on the sparc mouse (which, incidentally is shaped like a paperback and has a must-use-our-mousepad-and-not-rotate-it-more-than- 45degrees optical design) but only because the keyboard commands are so hoplessly fragmented, counterintuitive and arcane that the alternative is to use the thing as a door stop.

End Rant.

"Why should we limit computers to the lies we tell them with that second mouse button?"
Frymaster, 2000, my basement

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[Perdo]

Let's say you are a lefty like me and 11% of the planet (more of us than all non windows OS users combined). Let's say I use my mouse in my left hand. Now hit CMD Q, CMD W and CMD Z with your right hand. Universal? Hardly. Now double click the mouse icon in the control panel. Select "use left handed mouse". Windows is trash but Linux and Mac OS could take some lessons on ease of use and accessibility features.

One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[Ma�djeurtam]

True to previous rumors, the mouse does not sport a traditional mouse button. Instead, sources said, the user simply applies pressure to to front of the unit, at which time resistance will give way allowing the mouse, as a whole, to tilt closer to the underlying surface, producing what is currently known as a mouse click.

Will Apple finally understand that a second button can be really useful for a whole range of tasks, and send a different signal to the computer whether the right and the left 'non-button' is pressed ?

And, even better... A 'non-wheel' support sure would be could too.

Stéphane

Have you checked out Badtech The daily online cartoon?

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[gdr]

1. The original mice concept as envisioned by Xerox had 3 buttons all doing a vairety of tasks. Apple did a bag o' research that showed that mis-hits were common amongst users learning new tasks. The solution? The double click. Imagine life without the double-click...

I heard apple are about to release a new keyboard with only one key. "New users are endlessly pressing the wrong key on current keyboards." An Apple spokesman said. "With our new design you no longer have this problem."

The keyboard will be available soon in a variety of garish colours (Morse code table sold separately).

Re:One or two (or three) non-buttons ?

[Fred Ferrigno]

I'm sorry there, but that's just insane.

Windows has a poor UI, so they give us contextual menus. Right, I'm still with you. Without universal application specifications, hot keys are a nightmare. Ok, that's understandable.

So, what does Apple do? "Compromise" and take the ever-so horrid contextual menus and combine them with a two-handed hot key that is neither convient nor intuitive. That obvious and understandable mouse button is replaced by an awkward key combo that isn't universally applicable (as I understand it, most of the programs that support it are ports from Windows).

Sure, it makes some sense that new users won't understand the second mouse button, but they certainly won't understand the key-click either. If Apple really wants to maintain a consistant and simplified design, they need to get rid of contextual menus all together and aide true UI design, rather than merely emulate a second mouse button.

Some thoughts

[iotaborg]

First off I would like to say... has anyone noticed that, well, the mouse ONLY fits right-handed people? The renditions, I mean, look at them, the hand that fits the mouse is only the right hand. And so the 10% of the population gets ripped off, for the mouse doesnt fit them! I really hope Apple isn't making a mouse according to these rendition specifications, rather something ambidexterous (or maybe include two mice, left and right :)..)... Well, I hope Apple can do better than this.

Second off, the Puck. Many people have complained about the puck, and I frankly don't see why. The puck is designed for use in a certain position, where your palm does _not_ rest on the mouse, merely the fingers. This position is somewhat comfortable, so I really don't know why their mice (mouses?) are uncomfortable, for they are. The only fault I see is that there is only one button, but then again, the Mac OS only needs one.

Third, about the squeezing part... I really don't think it will be a pain to squeeze or push what appears to be five?! "pressure spots"? and a pseudo scroll wheel... I mean, think about it, everyone exerts some kind of force on your pointing device, and well, it requires force! The sensitivity of these mice would probably be adjustable to what a user needs, from a mere touch to a powerful blow.

It is cool that Apple is innovating... cordless mouse with an optical sensor, and the most shocking part, _no_ buttons, all *standard* with their new macs (hopefully). Well, this is certainly a good start for Apple to pump great hardware that we desire...

Stupid

[Reality Master 101]

How did a buttonless mouse ever get out of the "is this gonna fly" meeting? First of all, what does Apple have against tactile feedback? A click is good so you know when the button was really pressed.

Hey Apple: Compare the number of muscles and effort required to push your index finger. Now compare how many muscles are involved in tilting the whole mouse.

Not to mention that when I do some fine marking on a photoshop doc or something, I'm supposed to jiggle the mouse to make a click?

Then there's the training issue. Can you imagine a newbie user just sitting there looking at the mouse, wondering what the heck you're supposed to do with it? "OK, grandma, now tilt the mouse. No, tilt it the other way." Good god.

A hint to Apple: Change for the sake of change is not "innovation". Eliminating the mouse ball (e.g. MS's optical mouse) was a great thing -- because it dramatically improved it while still keeping it simple. This removes tactile feedback and makes it more complicated.

Just license MS's intellimouse and be done with it. As far as I'm concerned, that's the perfect mouse.

--

Shake the mouse?

[antdude]

Is this the same cordless mouse? If so, then how the heck are you supposed to play games that require mouse buttons? I can't picture myself using one in Quake 3 Arena game :).

brilliant.. these things are scanners?

[SethJohnson]

Ok. So these things are sweeping across desks around the world scanning the documents that might be scattered on the tops of those desks and sending the images to Redmond. Microsoft's quick embrace of USB makes a whole lot more sense now... it provides the throughput they needed to build the biggest industrial espianage network known to humankind.

And to think people were upset over the whole privacy violation of that doubleclick thing....

Seth

Intellimouse Technology

[Reality Master 101]

By the way, can I head off an inevitable discussion? Whenever the subject of mice comes up, people (rightly) point out that the MS optical mouse rocks. After that, people feel the need to post that optical mice are nothing new, Sun had them ten years ago, etc, etc.

Just for the record: The old optical mice required a special pad with alternating mirror/dark squares. The mouse picked up light bouncing off the squares.

The MS mouse is much more sophisticated. It actually takes an image of the surface, and digitally compares frames to determine the mouse movement. That's why you can use it on any surface, including your leg (nice for those legs-on-the-desk surfing sessions).

The Intellimouse really is pretty cool technology.

--