Slashdot Mirror


Apple Requires Three-Button Mouse for Shake 2.5

SpillerC writes "The requirements for the newest version of Shake (cross-platform: Mac OS X, Linux, Windows, Irix) will require a three-button mouse on the Mac. Are there any other Apple-produced applications (Apple owns Shake) that require a three-button mouse? Will Apple release its own three-button mouse now?"

54 of 116 comments (clear)

  1. It is too early for this crap by blueroo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One specialized application that Apple sells requires a 3 button mouse, and you think this is going to cause them to ship 3 button mice standard?

    Does Dell ship cad/cam tablets standard because AutoCad suggests using them?

    What kind of nonsense news is this anyway? Can't the Slashdot editors tell a troll when they see one?

    1. Re:It is too early for this crap by Thenomain · · Score: 2, Informative

      The poster didn't suggest "standard". He (or she; I admit not knowing) suggested it might be done "at all".

      Does Dell ship cad/cam tablets standard because AutoCad suggests using them?

      No, but they might sell cad/cam tablets if they had the idea that more people might want them, which is what the poster was probably suggesting.

      I, personally, would be very interested to see what the Apple Design Group would do for a 3-button mouse, but I'm so hooked on my lasermouse-with-mousewheel (that acts like a 3rd mouse button, in a pinch) that even snazzy design and the "Jobs Reality Field" probably couldn't pull me away from it. I'd rather see the ADG work on more important tasks.

      --
      This now concludes our broadcast day.
    2. Re:It is too early for this crap by MrResistor · · Score: 2

      Does Dell own AutoCAD? No, it's just something they offer in a particular bundle on particular workstations.

      Does AutoCAD require a cad/cam tablet? No, and in my opinion they aren't particularly useful, especially considering AutoCAD's powerful and flexible command line system.

      In contrast, Apple does own Shake, and Shake does require a 3-button mouse.

      Personally, Apple would only have to add one button to the iBook to get me to buy one...

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    3. Re:It is too early for this crap by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      One specialized application that Apple sells requires a 3 button mouse, and you think this is going to cause them to ship 3 button mice standard?

      Maya also requires a three button mouse.

      And programs like Photoshop are a lot easier to use with a two button mouse.

      I think Apple might come out with an optional multibutton mouse... but then again there are a few compnaies making USB mice that work in OS X...

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
    4. Re:It is too early for this crap by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      While it would be cool to have my mac glowing blue neon from the inside, I have to wonder: what's the point? And the answer: Because it's cool.

      I saw a G4 tower at MacWorld Expo set up this way... they had one side with openings cut in the sheet metal and they removed the silver paper behind the clear plastic shell.

      They had blue neon inside. It was pretty cool!

      I think it was at the OtherWorld Computing booth.

      I bought one of those red LED gooseneck USB lights that plug into the keyboard... that's pretty cool too.. matches the tail light on the MS mouse...

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
  2. Temporary by Aram+Fingal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My understanding of Apple's position on multi-button mice is that they unnecessarily complicate the user interface. They give the user one more place to have to look to figure out how to do something. OS X supports multi button mice if you want an alternate way of doing things but Apple ships one button mice to keep programmers from writing stuff that depends on the additional buttons.

    Shake is something which Apple acquired from another company. I suspect it will only require a three button mouse until Apple has a chance to rewrite it.

    Having said that, one other Apple product which used a three button mouse was, the now long gone, A/UX (Apple UNIX).

    1. Re:Temporary by Orblivion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Where I work, we recently purchased a new Mac so we'd have something we could separately test OS X with reasonable performance. I tried plugged a usb wheel mouse in and it worked. Now having that extra button was great because it actually pulled a menu like I've grown accustomed to on other OS's and desktop environments. Having rarely used a Mac, it wasn't common sense to hold down the Control key and click (2 steps). Seems easier to right click (1 step).

    2. Re:Temporary by Aram+Fingal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ... and it was also not common sense to do it the more traditional Mac way and use the top menu which changes as you move around select things to include the stuff which you might otherwise get by right-clicking, etc.

      Nothing that I can think of on the Mac actually requires control-clicking except for situations where you are emulating some other machine. A basic part of the HIG, which others have referred to, is that you can find every function of a program in the top pulldown menu. That way, everything is in one place and you don't have to search.

      I take your point that it may be easier for occasional users coming from another OS who regularly use a mouse with more than one button. You want to be able to do things without having to think.

  3. Who cares, really? by webToy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I use Apple's ONE button mouse and works just fine. Control-click is not that hard, and if I wanted a two or three button mouse I would probably just buy one from Kensington...
    Is it really that big of a deal that Apple doesn't produce one of their own?

    1. Re:Who cares, really? by great+om · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've just got a Tibook. Held off from getting one for a while beacuse of fears about the uni-button mouse. Its not that hard to adapt to it, especially since (most of) the places I'd want to press a 2nd mouse button --if there was one-- allow me to emulate control+click by simply holding the mouse button down for 2 or 3 sec. With Games, I'll admit that I use a logictech USB 3 button mouse. But I'd probably use a mouse anyway --ever try to aim with a trackpad?

      I would, however,like Apple to allow the trackpad tap to emulate a second mouse button

      -

      --
      ------- Oh damn.... the Sigfile escaped... -Great OM
    2. Re:Who cares, really? by BitGeek · · Score: 4, Informative



      This is the silliest reason not to buy a TiBook I've ever heard.

      You should buy it. you'll quickly discover that you don't need the extra buttons and the machine works fine without them.

      The idea that you need more than one button is a false one, it simply isn't true, and you only think you do because you've been using poorly designed operating systems that make you use absurdly complicated controls (like three button mice when only one is *necessary*.)

      Something tells me that TiBook would have to be an X86 running at 1/4 speed under battery too, and THEN you'd really buy it.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    3. Re:Who cares, really? by snafu · · Score: 4, Interesting
      (preface: I'm a Windows *, Linux, Solaris, and OS X user.)

      I have come to realize that on a laptop (like my iBook) with a touch-pad or a pointy-stick, one button is much easier to use than two buttons. Using the pointer devices on laptops requires you to contort your hand to use the other button (to right drag or get a menu, usually what I'm doing with it).

      However, with OS X and one button, I simply use 'ctrl' with my left. Both hands stay in a natural position and (IMO) this is much faster than right clicking in windows (on one of my pc laptops).

      When using a mouse, however, I like the convenience of having two buttons and a scroll wheel, so that's what I plug in (right clicking yields a context-menu, even in "classic" which I don't use).

    4. Re:Who cares, really? by BitGeek · · Score: 2



      My point was that x86s don't run at full speed and most people ignore that fact when comparing them to powerbooks-- its yet another reason that the powerbooks are much much MUCH faster computers and better deals since the prices are the same.

      You want to us a 5 button mouse iwht your powerbook? Feel free-- you can use the one you already have if its USB.

      On the road, however, you can't carry a mouse on any laptop, and so you're going to change your formfactor... and the tibook pad works very well. (Better than the pds on some pc laptops I've tried)

      I just think its a silly thing to say you're not buying one because of the mouse button. If its price then you're not buying a laptop at all because of price, cause the Macs are the same price as PCs.

      Oh, and you can get used powerbooks, even used tibooks, for less than a grand. They hold their value well.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    5. Re:Who cares, really? by blukens · · Score: 3, Insightful
      But with macs. You have to CTRL + click.

      I think you, and others, are making a inaccurate assumption here. Unlike Unix or Windows, in a properly designed Mac application there should never be a time where an operation is accessable only through a context-menu. This is, you should never have to ctrl-click (or right-click) on anything.

      One of the core interface elements to the Mac environment is the unified menu bar. In many ways, it behaves like an omnipresent contextual menu. Switch from one app to another, it changes to reflect the new context. Within an application, items will enable/disable as they pertain to the currently selected object.

      For instance, in Windows it is very common to have a window without menu bar - like in an installer perhaps. If that window contains a text input element, and you want to access Copy and Paste commands (ignoring ctrl-key shortcuts) you have to get them from the context-menu. On a Mac, there will always be an Edit menu in the top menu bar, with those commands ready and waiting.

      The fact that Shake requires a 3 button mouse says to me that it is not a properly designed Mac app. That can be okay in some instances. Here, time to market was obviously an issue. And these types of professional apps tend to be an environment unto itself. You'll start the app at the beginning of the day and quit it when you go home, rarely switching between other programs. In such a case, having its own set of rules isn't quite as unforgivable. But I expect Apple to clean it up in time.

    6. Re:Who cares, really? by BitGeek · · Score: 2


      I didn't say $3,000 powerbooks could be had for less than a grand.

      Remember, some TiBooks cost $2,000 or so.

      And they've been out for a year and a half.

      iBooks even longer.

      Sheesh.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    7. Re:Who cares, really? by Golias · · Score: 4, Informative
      My only real problem with Apple (yes, I am currently drooling over 700MHz 12" iBook), is that they upgrade the OS to force people to buy more of their hardware. It is not a easy thing to upgrade a CPU in a Mac and get much more than 10 or 20% gain in performance.

      But that's changing the subject, isn't it? Pretty much nobody upgrades the CPU in their laptop computer, Mac or PC, so it has nothing to do with it.

      I could get into the "desktop Macs are too hard to upgrade" debate with you, but it's way off the topic of the thread.

      Getting back on topic, you simply will not get more ! for your $ in a laptop than buying a Mac. Their CPU's run cooler (and on less power) than either AMD or Intel chips, which allows them to run full-speed and fanless for hours on a single battery. They've got pretty much every feature you need already built in (modem, Ethernet, external video, USB, firewire) and an antenna for adding 802.11b wireless networking for a mere C-note. They are built rugged, have nice screens, and are reasonably priced.

      Apple may never be able to compete on raw cost-for-hardware in the destop arena, where a home-built PC remains the ideal choice for penny pinchers (unless a Mac OS machine is worth the slight premium to you)... But their laptops take a back seat to nobody.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    8. Re:Who cares, really? by skotte · · Score: 2

      Control-click is not that hard.

      you're right. it's not. but if i have to exert any more effort than moving a hand a little bit, i's too much. isnt the macintosh idea to be a computer which a ham snadwich can run? so if i have to use TWO HANDS to do any operation, it's outrageous. right?

      it's like this -- what is easier? click this way or that way; or press some button and click with that at the same time; know what i mean?

      i'm surprised more people dont have a problem with this. really. i mean, maybe i'm off base here. but isnt a mac supposed to all the work, so i dont have to? which means i shouldnt ever have to do a two-handed action. right?

    9. Re:Who cares, really? by blukens · · Score: 2
      Well, holding the command key down and clicking the link works pretty well - much faster than pulling up a context-menu. I'll not argue that middle-clicking is faster still, but that's not the point. You never need to open a link in a new window. One can surf the web just fine in a single window - and, in fact, most people do just that. (As an aside, Mozilla allows you drag a link to an empty spot on the tab bar to create a new tab. I find this approach very appealing from a UI standpoint. But maybe that's just me...)

      I think we're arguing two different things here. Contextual menus and multi-button mice are not bad ideas. Apple isn't ignoring them, either. If you plug a multi-button mouse into an OS X box, you'll find that the scroll wheel scrolls, the middle button opens a link in a new window, and the right button brings up context-menus all over the place.

      The only different is that multi-button mice are not required, or even expected. This forces the application and os designers to consider single-button access first and foremost. I would argue that this approach almost always leads to a better overall user interface. Of course, my "better" isn't necessarily the same as yours. But, you're more than welcome to use any mouse you like, and open a link in a new window any way you choose.

    10. Re:Who cares, really? by donglekey · · Score: 2

      Only one is necessary for the OS but for programs like Shake, Maya, and Softimage|XSI (best use of the three button mouse ever) it really a very elegant solution, and the simplicity of a one button mouse gets in your way, there needs to be more control.

    11. Re:Who cares, really? by Lars+T. · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, I'm not surprized that using the Shift key is also too much work for you.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    12. Re:Who cares, really? by skotte · · Score: 2

      hm. pretty sound argument. yes, i suppose it does come to a matter of software design. i still argue moving a fFinger is easier than moving a hand or ant entire arm. but you make a good point. if the software is designed entirely to be used in a given way, that way -- no matter how odd it may seem to others -- will always be the best way to use that software.

      moral: use the right tool to do the right job.

    13. Re:Who cares, really? by Lars+T. · · Score: 2
      Middle-click - on a two-button-mouse?

      Anyway, how do you open a link in a new window behind the other windows? In iCab it's just Command-Shift-click on the URL. While you need four buttons.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    14. Re:Who cares, really? by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      Personally, on Windows (rarely used), I use an MS Explorer mouse with 5 buttons. I _really_ like the forward and back buttons for browsing on the mouse. That doesn't work in Linux however (not by default anyways, someday I'll figure it out if I get bored).

      That's the same mouse I use in Mac OS X. On my PowerComputing Mac clone I use a three button ADB Mouse Works mouse for Linux.

      OS X naturally uses the right button, and I use USB Overdrive to control the rest of the buttons. The MS software is an OEM version of USB Overdrive, but has fewer features. The cool thing is assigning different button functions for different applications. So I use the forward and back buttons in Mozilla, and then use them as copy and paste in everything else.

      I haven't seen anyone mention it yet, but Maya on OS X also requires a three button mouse.

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
    15. Re:Who cares, really? by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      ok. how can "command-Shift-Click" be an easy thing to do? you are using two hands, and one of those hands is pushing more than one button. to me, any command which requires a compliment of 3 buttons being pressed at one time is *not* intuitive.

      Think of it this way. It's like playing chords on a guitar. Sure, pressing single strings down is easier, but after a while you don't even think about having to press down six of them, with your LEFT hand, on different frets, and have to navigate your right picking hand to strike the correct string. And after a while you dont even have to look at your hand. Same as on a Mac.

      I use the keyboard as much as I can, and after many years I know where to rest my fingers to press the left modifier keys, and the arrow buttons, and page up/down etc. People who type know where the keys are without looking (even me using two fingers), so how is pressing command-Shift any harder than shift W?

      While I agree that a multi button mouse it faster for many (including my self), anyone can learn anything, if they do it often enough.

      And on the Mac some things still need modifier keys, even if you have a five button mouse.

      I do love middle clicking a link in Mozilla to make it open in a new tab though. :)

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
    16. Re:Who cares, really? by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Geez, you must have a hard time resetting your computer. Or using the Shift key - hey, you do.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  4. Not a Chance by dman123 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Apple went from a one-button mouse to a zero-button mouse. If anything, the next interface device will be some sort of device that depends on telepathy or eye movement.

    But seriously, Apple will design new hardware for a single piece of software that very few use? If anyone can afford a third-party mouse, it's a Shake user.

    Count on Apple simply rewriting the necessary code for version 2.6.

    --

    --
    dman123 forever!
    Filtering out the -1s and 0s since 1999.
    1. Re:Not a Chance by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 2, Informative

      dman123 writes:

      > Apple went from a one-button mouse to a
      > zero-button mouse. If anything, the next interface
      > device will be some sort of device that depends on
      > telepathy or eye movement.

      An early model of the Mac telepathic interface was lent to Toho in 1996. You can see it, in operation, in the 1997 movie released in the US as "Rebirth of Mothra 2". The same movie also featured Rainbow and Aqua Mothra, and was released five months before OS X and the rainbow hued iMacs were announced.

      The number of buttons on mice are platform specific:

      The Macintosh is one button,
      Windows is two buttons,
      The X Window GUI, used on many flavors of UNIX, is three buttons.

      How do you get a program requiring three buttons on a one button platform like the Mac? Simple, it was most likely first written for UNIX/X and ported.

      Mac being a minority platform that is ported to alot, has to support multiple buttons, while retaining its native one button preference.

      The reason why this comes up on Slashdot so often: Slashdotters are more likely to want to run X under OS X so they can run ported UNIX apps. X requires 3 buttons, and a new mouse is a lot pricier to many Slashdotters than it would be to a Shake user.

      Though I wonder why someone doesn't just modify their open source X server to simulate the three (seven counting chords) buttons with the same modifiers used by the Mac on its single button. Unless you need to be able to press the middle button in concert with the Control key for some other purpose?

      "What I'm thinking is different from what you are."
      Belabera, "Mothra 3" 1998

  5. Why don't they by Evro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    just bundle a $20 3-button mouse with this $5000 app? Problem solved.

    --
    rooooar
  6. that explains the price cut... by anothy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apple computer today announced that Shake, a recently-aquired software product, will sell for half price on Apple's own computer systems. The savings is approximatly $5,000.
    In a seperate, unrelated announcement, Apple announced it would be releasing a new, multi-button mouse for use with Shake. The new mouse, initially available in a three-button model, will sell for $5,000.

    --

    i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
  7. Not LIkely by Sentry21 · · Score: 2

    More probable is that Apple will require people buying the $5000 package, and possibly a $5000 G4, to also go out and buy a $25 mouse.

    That being said, I'd probably buy an Apple wheel mouse if they made one. Doubt it'd happen, but a guy can hope.

    --Dan

  8. It's official by alernon · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Rumormongoring about a mouse? Man MWNY must of really dissappointed alot of people if they need to speculate about a new mouse just to make them feel better.

    (Posted with a five button Microsoft Intellimouse on a g3 pismo.

  9. Nice theory, but... by fm6 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Shipping one-button mice is not much of a safeguard -- half the Mac people I know use aftermarket mice. The real safeguard is the Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines. Alas, Apple itself no longer seems interested in enforcing these guidelines, even for their own products. I've never used OS X, but I've heard complaints that it violates the MHIG right and left.

    1. Re:Nice theory, but... by BitGeek · · Score: 5, Informative


      This is because OS X apps are not supposed to conform to the MHIG. There is a new set of Human Interface guildines called the Aqua HIG.

      These aren't guildines that are "Enforced" -- you can make your app look and work like windows if you want. But Apple certainly does encourage it.

      The interface builder has the guildlines built in and will tell you where to place your controls in relation to each other, comes with a default menu layout and the default hotkeys set up. etc.

      As to 3 button mice, Apple is correct in not shipping them out of the box. It breaks the paradigm and actually slows people down. I use a three button mouse, though, I got it because its a trackball, the scroll wheel and other button are useful, and I like them.

      But for most users, a one button mouse is the correct choice to ship. Billions in productivity have been wasted by microsoft choosing to ship the 2 button mouse (not to mention the billions lost wasting time reinstalling your os, etc. on windows.)

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    2. Re:Nice theory, but... by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      "Billions in productivity have been wasted by microsoft choosing to ship the 2 button mouse (not to mention the billions lost wasting time reinstalling your os, etc. on windows.)"

      Holy shit! I've got five (5) buttons on my mouse, that must translate into trillions, no, quadrillions, no -- THE UNIVERSE IS ABOUT TO IMPLODE!

      Sorry dude, just joking around.

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
  10. No $5,0000 G4 by BitGeek · · Score: 2


    Apple doesn't sell a $5,000 G4. The most expensive stock model at the Apple store is $3,000.

    Sure you can add stuff to get a G4 up to $5,000 in cost, but you can do that with any computer.

    I'm tired of hearing people misrepresent the prices of Macs to make them look expensive. These lies to justify your own prejudice are annoying.

    ESPECIALLY in the context of pointing out that Apple is giving its customers a $5,0000 discount.

    Once again (Final Cut Pro, Cinema Tools, iMovie, iTunes, iDVD, DVD Studio Pro) apple releases software that used to cost $50-$5,000 more at a great price, saving their customers %100-%50 of the cost and you guys try to use it to claim that Apple's products are overpriced.

    How desperate are you?

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    1. Re:No $5,0000 G4 by paradesign · · Score: 2
      you obviously havent been to the Apple Store lately.

      the ultimate model of the G4 sells for $4,099.00. youd know that if you checked your facts every third millenia or so. and btw if your going to be using shake, your probably going to need the ultimate model plus some scsi drives, lets say 2@72gb. thus bringing our total to $6,049.00, before tax. remember, this is quite cheap compared to what SGI or SUN would charge you. hell the SGI Fuel begins at $11,000. and dont even get me started on the cost of an Octane. real machines cost real money.

      now go crawl back into your pc using hole and shut up, you dont know what your talking about.

      --
      I want 2D games back.
    2. Re:No $5,0000 G4 by BitGeek · · Score: 2



      You're an idiot. What I said was that the standard configuration G4 is $3,000. Ok, its $2,999. Quote from the Apple store this morning.
      Yes, you can get a $4,000 BTO machine. You can get at $5,000 BTO machine if you want.

      But the idea that the standard Mac is a $5,000 computer is absurd, and just a continuation of the myth that macs are overpriced.

      They aren't, you PC loving zeolot.

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    3. Re:No $5,0000 G4 by Sentry21 · · Score: 2

      Uhh, someone needs to be a little less sensitive.

      If you're spending $5000 on a software package, you're NOT going to get it stock, with 128 megs of ram and a shitty monitor. You're going to need to crank up all the stats and get a kickass display. The display doesn't factor into my five grand, but I've been building a dream system and even mine comes out to about $8000 USD, so you'd better believe a production film studio is going to drop more than I am on their system.

      Stop freaking out dude. I never said macs were overpriced. Hell, I have one in my living room, G4/533, bought it brand new, with a monitor that can do 1900x1440 or some shit like that, and it only came to like three grand total. Oh, and a laser printer too. Maybe it was five grand actually, but that's $CDN, so oh well.

      Let people say macs are overpriced, it just means you wont' have idiots buying them and bitching because they're too stupid to go out and buy their own two-button mouse instead of bitching about how one isn't included.

      --Dan

    4. Re:No $5,0000 G4 by BitGeek · · Score: 2

      Let people say macs are overpriced, it just means you wont' have idiots buying them and bitching because they're too stupid to go out and buy their own two-button mouse instead of bitching about how one isn't included.

      Well you got me there! :-)

      --
      Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
  11. Re:/me crosses finges by BitGeek · · Score: 2


    You're being silly.

    You ahve the option-- go buy an external mouse if you want to slow yourself down.

    But to say you're not seriously looking at an ibook because it has only has one mouse button is silly. It doesn't even need that mouse button.

    default mapping would not solve the problem-- you'd still be slowed down when you have to stop and think about which mouse button to use. Course you don't think you stop and think, but you do- your mind just ignores that it had to stop .

    Its unfortunate that so many people are ignorant about basic CHI science.

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
  12. article about apple mice by trianglecat · · Score: 3, Informative

    an article on the subject of apple and mice at
    macobserver

  13. Re:/me crosses fingers by foobar104 · · Score: 2

    well, i think anyone paying all that money for an iBook deserves more than that

    All what money? You can get a very nice iBook for $1200. That's right in line with what other laptops cost. The iBook isn't particularly expensive at all.

  14. Re:/me crosses fingers by BitGeek · · Score: 2



    If you think an iBook is too expensive, don't buy a new one. There are great macs out there for $500 that are still better than the new PCs you can get for the same price (Remember you don't get something for nothin.)

    And as to being intolerant- -the "two button mouse" issue was laid to rest in, what, 1983? Its a scientific question and it has been asnwered. That you flamed for apple not including a two button mouse shows either your ignorance or your bullheadedness at defying the *FACT* that second mice buttons slow people down.

    Sorry, if you didn't know that-- its one of the standard issue, mac Myths that pc zeolots trot out, and so I gave the standard issue response.

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
  15. Re:$30 by skotte · · Score: 2

    now this is a good point. perhaps this is really worth dwelling on a moment.

    oh, i should mention, i'm a PC person.

    so when i buy a PC, i almost as a rule buy a new mouse too. because most pre-packed PC mice just dont cut it. i need an optical mouse with several buttons. all there is to it. and standard pre-packed mice usually are not optical, and often wont have more than 2 buttons.

    so. perhaps that's an interesting lesson here: the cost of a nice new mouse should just sort of be tacked on to the price of a whole new machine.

  16. Re:I hate to say this, but... by PythonOrRuby · · Score: 2

    "iMouse"?

    I see it rather the opposite way. If such a thing were to happen at all, the 3 button mouse would more likely take the "Pro" name and the one button(realy in a way "no button") mouse would fall into the consumer arena.

    That said, a multi-button mouse would take a lot of design work, given Apple's clear design goal of not exposing moving parts. To this end, a solid-state scroll wheel inspired by the new iPod would probably be quite a nice addition. Perhaps a side to side rocing motion could complement the forward wrist motion to produce three "clicks".

  17. Mousebuttons are overrated by Corporate+Troll · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The second and third mouse button are largly overrated. Look, up until last december I was a fervent x86 user and never had any mouse with less than 2 buttons. I laughed at Mac because I found it very limited.
    Last december however I bought an iBook (impulse buy...mainly due to OS X), and after about one week you are completely used to it. Your second hand just rests near the "Option" key. I've become that used to it that now when I'm on a PC, I tend to push "Control"-click accidentally. Needless to say that doesn't work ;-) Honestly, don't diss the iBook just because it only has one button. Oh, and the touchpad is the best I ever used. On PC laptops I never found any touchpad that was as accurate and responsive... never... *sigh* Actually with PC's I give up the touchpad after 2 hours and connect a mouse because I'm sick of it.

    One thing that is great about the Mac is the pr0n surfing with Internet Explorer. Press Alt-Mousclick on a thumbnail and the link will be saved using the download manager. This is the only reason I still use IE for Mac, because mozilla does not have this function.

    I probably sound like a "Apple convert", but really the second mouse button is not needed. And on intel machines I never use the third mousebutton unless running Linux where it's copy paste.

  18. shakin' mouse by Triv · · Score: 2

    ((takes deep breath))

    shake is not for the first time computer user.

    As has been said thousands of times, Apple ships their computers with a single button mouse because it's less confusing. They aren't stopping you from buying another one (although persnally I'd LOVE an Apple-branded two button optical mouse. rock mouse body left / right for different buttons, but that's just me). No new mac user is going to spend a huge chunk of change on a new computer and then throw down $5000 for a program they've never used.

    Think of it this way - would you edit professional level digital video on a computer without a jog wheel? Same idea - it's the right tool for the job.

    Triv

  19. 2-button mice not the answer; need a new design by mikeloader · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "you sir, are wrong. as are the rest of the apple community. more buttons really does mean more options."

    I hate to defend this person's post, especially since I strongly prefer my 2-button Microsoft mouse to Apple's 1-button mouse, but there is one thread of truth here.

    For expert users, 2-button mice allow faster access to commands in context menus than either 1-button mice with the Ctrl key or the use of the main menus. Duh. The speed of 2 buttons on laptops is debatable. For novice users, it's not that using 2 buttons is slower, it's that the 2nd button confuses them. Since Apple sells a lot of computers to schools with young children, they should probably keep 1-button mice as standard on iMacs and eMacs but sell 2-button mice for expert PowerMac users.

    The real issue isn't that Apple doesn't offer a 2-button mouse, but that a 2-button mouse isn't ideal anyway. There are other gestures that could be supported by a new mouse such as squeezing, rubbing, etc. There's lots of room for innovation. A limited set of unique gestures is faster than context menus because there is no time to acquire the target. Context menus are modal and they require you to move the mouse and then choose a command.

    The only reason we need context menus is that programs have so many menu options that it's hard to find the relevant commands. Over the years, toolbars and palettes were invented to let us avoid the menus but then they got so cluttered that we needed context menus. Now context menus are so cluttered in programs like MS Word that MS has to drop some commands in some situations, ruining the predicitability of what's going to be in the menu. A better interface would be to design programs and computers so that you didn't really need context menus.

  20. Re:I hate to say this, but... by PythonOrRuby · · Score: 2

    Well, that was just a thought. And this explains why I am not a highly paid hardware designer.

  21. Multiple buttons in PC land... by rakslice · · Score: 2

    If you ask me, the second-button context menus omnipresent in post-3.x Windows releases are really handy; the saved cursor travel time and convenience really add up. AFAIK, virtually all Mac apps that implement context menus (usually because of a port from Windows) make you hold down the button longer than a normal click length to invoke the menu. Does the amount of time spent by new users on differentiating the buttons really outweigh these?
    What is the paradigm being broken? I had always thought that the cursor was a hand metaphor; and a hand is more of a multi-purpose tool than a single button mouse would seem to allow for.

    Not that anyone one asked me. =)

    1. Re:Multiple buttons in PC land... by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      AFAIK, virtually all Mac apps that implement context menus (usually because of a port from Windows) make you hold down the button longer than a normal click length to invoke the menu. Does the amount of time spent by new users on differentiating the buttons really outweigh these?

      Only web browsers do that click and hold thing. Everything else makes you press the Control key when you click. BTW Mac OS has contextual menus, and it's not a port from Windows! ;-) Applications like Photoshop and Illustrator also have them, and they are also not ports of Windows apps, but alas, Quark does not.

      I agree that a two button mouse is faster on a Mac.

      But I know a LOT of Windows users that have no clue what the right button does, even though they use a PC everyday.

      But the paradigm on Mac OS is the modifier key. Holding either Option (alt), Command or Control, or a combination of them changes what a mouse click or drag does. Option drag copies a file, while Command-Option drag makes an alias (shortcut). Different programs, like Photoshop, use modifier-click for different functions too.

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
  22. Re:/me crosses fingers by BitGeek · · Score: 2



    Sure, if you cook your figures and find people who are speedy on two button mice and slow on one button mice you can produce a study that says what you want.

    But the fact still remains that even "proficient" three and two button mice users are slower than they would be using a one button mouse.

    You just assume the study is flawed and take that as a fact-- I'm sorry, you're going to have to SHOW the flaw in the study.

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
  23. Re:Crap! by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
    In any case, I'm one of those who've wondered where the right mouse click is on my mac(I work on a PC).

    On a one button mouse Mac, you press the Control key when you click the mouse button, and this gives you the right click.

    In Mac OS 9, there is a wonderful free control panel called FinderPop that gave you a right click just by clicking and holding the mouse button.

    It also added a bunch of contextual menu features. That's the nice thing about Mac OS, you can add menu items to the contextual menus.

    Back when I ran BeOS on my Mac clone I got tired of clicking on modifier keys for the other two buttons so I bought a three button mouse.

    Now I use that Mac as a dual boot into OS 9 for my son, and LinuxPPC for me. The mouse comes in handy, but my son prefers to use the one button optical mouse from my G4, since I use an MS Intellimouse Optical.

    People need to realize you can plug any USB mouse into a Mac, doesn't matter how many buttons it has. If the company doesn't make drivers for OS X, you can use USB Overdrive to program the extra buttons.

    --
    -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
  24. Re:apple needs to improve their mice anyways by Phroggy · · Score: 2

    I haven't noticed a problem with the tracking, but maybe that's just me. The cord is only too short if you're not plugging it into the USB port on the side of your keyboard.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;