Slashdot Mirror
Why Apple Makes a One-Button Mouse
IdiotOnMyLeft writes "There is a short article at Gear Live that tries to explain why Apple still sticks with a one-button mouse. It points out the fact that although it is perfectly possible to use a two-button mouse on a Mac for 7 years now, developers are forced to rethink their design approach and can't flood the right-click menu. No article of this kind would be complete without mentioning that users get confused with two buttons. There's a rumor that John Carmack once asked Steve Jobs what would happen if they'd put one more key on the keyboard."
Because when your grandmother uses Windows, she clicks the left and the right button at the same time. Watch her the next time she's using the computer-- really, she does this. She doesn't understand there's a difference.
You, you are smart enough to understand the left and right buttons do different things. You aren't apparently smart enough to understand control-clicking, but that's ok. However, since you are smart enough to understand the right mouse button, you are also smart enough to understand that you can buy a two-button mouse. So if your computer comes with a one button mouse, this is not a problem for you. Your grandmother however does not even understand the right mouse button is a button, so if her computer came with a three button mouse she does not have the option of going and getting a one button mouse.
Apple wants to sell computers that are usable by both you and your grandmother.
Isn't it pretty common to have buttons that do one thing when clicked and do a different thing whe clicked and held down for a short duration? I seem to remember Photoshop on Macs working like that for most of the tools. Honestly I went years using Photoshop before I realized there were more options hidden there. The same menus could be found by right-clicking in the Windows version.
Morphing Software
An article completely unrelated with Apple or anyone who works for Apple in any way writes its own justification for Apple shipping a one-button mouse standard, and this article gets flooded with comments essentially along the lines of "Apple sucks" because they ship a one-button mouse, even though you can use ANY USB or Bluetooth multi-button/scroll mouse/trackpad/trackball on earth, and they all function by default with no drivers for left/right/scroll (and center where applicable, e.g., X11), and Apple even sells NUMEROUS multi-button mice and speciality input devices right on the Apple online store and in all of its retail stores, and Apple just announced what will likely be their highest volume computer ever, which does NOT ship with a mouse, meaning you're free to choose any mouse you please, and the right button functionality will instantly work across the whole OS and all applications, which has supported this for years?
With the introduction of the Mac mini, Apple is implicitly getting AWAY from shipping a one-button mouse, since the computer comes with no mouse at all!
So, is there a problem because Apple doesn't make its own branded two button mouse? Maybe we should bash Dell for Logitech making its mice, then! Or is this simply just another opportunity to bash Apple? Frankly, the assertion that it forces developers to actually THINK about shit they're butting into contextual menus instead of just flooding them with crap is a perfectly reasonable one.
...that you can use any USB or Bluetooth (if your computer is equipped) mouse or input device on earth, for as little as $5, and they will instantly work for left/right/center/scroll without any additional drivers or configuration of any kind, or even any requirement that you have any kind of administrative privileges. Sounds like your employer sucks if they won't get you a mouse...(not to mention you could use that same three-button mouse with scroll wheel with WoW on a Mac, too, or any other application).
The rest of your message is a nice anti-Mac troll, though. D- for effort, F for creativity.
Using a touchscreen is easy on a UI designed for a single button. Using one on a UI designed for 2-3 button mice is painful.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Because certain people are purposefully ignorant about computers. It doesn't matter how simple it is. My mother cannot handle a two button mouse. She's convinced "oh, I can't use computers", and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. Anything that I have to explain to her, is not retained. She just instantly forgets it until the next time it comes up and I have to explain it again.
If Apple dropped the option of the one-button mouse like you people seem to be demanding, my job of tech supporting relatives would get just that much harder. "It isn't letting me check my email! I click the button and nothing happens!" "You're pressing the wrong side of the mouse... again..."
While I won't judge Apple for refusing to ship a 3-button mouse, I will say it's the one thing that keeps me from buying one of their laptops. When I'm using X applications, the PRIMARY buffer is my best friend. Copying text via simple selection and pasting just by clicking the middle mouse button does actually help me work faster.
And please don't tell me that I can just plug in a USB mouse. My Apple-owning friends have suggested that, but it's really not a solution. I want a laptop for portability, not for lugging around external devices to compensate for poor design decisions on the part of the manufacturer.
I'd pay the extra $5 for some more buttons. A wheel would be cool, but I'd settle for 3 plain buttons, like the Thinkpads have. I'd also like to have the option of using a nipple for pointing instead of a touchpad because it just feels better to me, but that's another discussion...
The parent might have been rated as "funny", but it is a fact.
One of the reasons my brother and I decided to recommend my mother an iMac is because of the fact that you are able to do most things with one mouse button. She just cannot see the difference between left and right mouse buttons. She is not retarded at all, but she is not used to computers. Since MacOS can work with only one mouse button, that's something else to worry about whenever she uses the machine or we are teaching her to do so.
Anyways, if you have an interface that needs two mouse buttons to do most tasks, there is something wrong with your interface.
When I switched to Windows (in the 3.1 days), I had a two buttom mouse, and it wasn't bad. I seem to remember that the second button didn't really DO anything untill Windows 95 came out, but that could be wrong.
But let's talk about normal people. Let's talk about my parrents. With me in the house, we have had computers the whole time. And they use them. They like them. They surf the 'net, look at Ebay, and use e-mail and such. But what do they think of the right mouse button? I use it all the time, I find it a great time saver. They avoid it. They have no idea what it does (despite occasional attempts to teach them). In fact, they avoid the scroll wheel (an even BETTER time saver) too. They don't scroll with it. They don't click it. It's confusing. When they first had to use a two button mouse, weird things happened when they used the right mouse button, it didn't do what they expected (click, open program, etc). So they learned an easy lesson: NEVER CLICK IT. Ever. They don't touch that scroll wheel either for much the same reason (they never tried, they had already learned not to touch the other buttons). They have next to no idea what it's for. It's just there.
My parrents are quite smart (my mom has a PhD and my father has many degrees and has been a CIO). But what about other people I know? As a computer-literate kid (and nerd), I'm the person everyone comes to for help with their computers (installing things, fixing things, teaching them things). They range from people terrified by computers who have to think for 5 minutes before they do anything incase they do something wrong, to people who have a very good idea what they are doing and only need me when things go REALLY wrong. And in all the years I've been doing this in all the places I've lived, almost NO ONE uses the right mouse button. Just one or two. 99% of them have learned to just avoid it.
As much as we nerds like to complain, Apple knows what it's doing. If you feel limited by having only one button, you can buy a multibutton mouse and it works INSTANTLY. If not, you can use the one button. They have the right idea, trust me.
Now my only complaint is with Apple laptops, where you would have to carry a mouse to use the right button (I know about the command-click, that's not the point; and there is software that will let you tap a corner to work like a right click). What I would really like would be for there to be two contact switches under the button on Apple's laptop. It would work just like it does now. It's one solid button, and it works like one button. BUT if you know what you are doing, there is a "secret" option in the OS that interprets things differently. Click the left half of the button, you get a left click. Click the right half of the button, you get a right click. And if you accidently click both at once, that's a left click (just to make things easier). That would give the laptop's a second button, but you'd have to enable it and know what you were doing, so Aunt Tillie wouldn't have to deal with two buttons. I would LOVE this.
But that's a minor complaint. It'll never stop me from buying an Apple laptop.
Apple has it right!
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Well, a touchscreen (be it stylus or finger optimized) is a specialized case of one-button mouse, just like tapping a touchpad for those who use that feature.
It'd be a lot easier to use a touchscreen Mac than a touchscreen Windows or GNOME/KDE box, because they don't make touchscreens where you can right-click.
I imagine an interface optimized for one-button use also has applications in accessibility to disabled users.
If Windows has 90% of the market share and Windows uses two mouse buttons, then at the very least having two mouse buttons is not an impediment to computer usability.
If Windows has 90% of the market share and Windows crashes a lot, then at the very least crashing a lot is not an impediment to computer usability.
If Windows has 90% of the market share and Windows is prone to viruses and spyware, then at the very least being prone to viruses and spyware is not an impediment to computer usability.
If Windows has 90% of the market share and Windows applications' user interface standards vary wildly, then at the very least user interface is not an impediment to computer usability.
If Windows has 90% of the market share and Windows only works when you stuff carrots up your nose, then at the very least the carrot-stuffing requirement is not an impediment to computer usability.
-Waldo Jaquith
because two buttons on a trackpad is obnoxiously uncomfortable, and because the keyboard is right there next to the trackpad so it's perfectly reasonable to use the modifier keys and the mouse at the same time.
But if it's really killing you, there's also sidetrack.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
> I know (from experience) that it takes no more than five minutes to explain left- and right-clicking to a three-year-old child.
Okay, I'll bite.
I know (from experience) that it takes at least six years to explain left- and right-clicking to my father, who was 57 in 1999 when he got his first Windows PC. Ever since he found the right button, he has insisted on using it for literally everything, all the time, for no reason at all. Everything that you or I would just click on, he right-clicks, moves the mouse the requisite six inches up to the top menu choice, "Open," and clicks. No amount of explaining will do. He just will not use the left button. Every time I give him instructions and use the verb "click," he asks me, "Right or left click?"
So don't pretend that just because you told your three-year-old, "Only use this button," that everyone else has the luxury of such obedience from users. Many users (yes, PC users) have asked me repeatedly, "Right or left click?" because to them, it's simply not self-explanatory. They don't really understand what a context menu is, let alone the rule that "the right button always makes a context menu appear." My father would waste a lot less of his time if I plugged in an Apple USB mouse to his PC (it works, I tried it.) Of course, it'd be impossible to do certain things, but it's poor software design that requires two mouse buttons. There's nothing wrong with having the option, though. When I'm at my desk, I use a Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer with five buttons. But the right-button is probably my least-used one. When I'm not at my desk (which is usually), I rarely reach for the control key to bring up a context menu. It just doesn't come up.
It's really a pretty unfair comparison to be making. Most cheap PC vendors (Dell, Gateway, etc) were still distributing mice with balls up until a year or two ago. No actual geek uses the mouse that came with his computer. (Heck, no real geek even buys a pre-built PC for that matter.) So why bitch about the Apple mouse? Even if the Apple mouse had two buttons, you'd replace it for the cool MS or Logitech one anyway, for gaming or whatever. The OS supports the context menu. But it also, as a rule, gives you another way to do anything you can do in a context menu. And that has to be a Good Thing.
The problem with control-click is that its not ergonomically correct. I hate applications that make me use the mouse and keyboard at the same time (I realize sometimes its necessary). Having to use one hand on the mouse and one on the keyboard is annoying. Keyboard shortcuts are good for the same reason, you can do all the work with the keyboard, and not have to move to the mouse and then back to the keyboard.
"brxref
[i]Why put all the effort into making proper context menus when most people won't even see them?[/i]
That's the WHOLE POINT! The user can't see the options until they start right clicking everything!
Not burying functionality into invisible menus is good UI design. Context menus should replicate functionality that can be accessed through visible controls.
> So they learned an easy lesson: NEVER CLICK IT. Ever. They
> don't touch that scroll wheel either for much the same reason
> (they never tried, they had already learned not to touch the
> other buttons). They have next to no idea what it's for. It's just
> there.
> My parrents are quite smart (my mom has a PhD and my
> father has many degrees and has been a CIO).
Agreed. It's not that they're not smart; oftentimes, it's that they don't care to learn it. My boss is like this. He's smart -- West Point grad, engineering degree, MBA, etc. And he doesn't quite grasp all the details about his computer. The reason is that he doesn't care enough about the computer to learn everything about it. He's a "mainstream user" when it comes to computers, so he's very pragmatic. "What will the computer allow me to do?" That question does not involve him learning much more than the basics. He thought it was cute that I could control my PowerBook using my cell phone using Bluetooth and Salling Clicker, but for him, the benefits weren't important enough for him to care. However, when he got his Blackberry, the benefits of a Bluetooth headset were obvious -- no fumbling for a corded head set. He was willing to put the effort into learning the buttons for the beneift.
My wife's like that too. She's easily smarter than me, but she doesn't care to learn about all the cool stuff she can do with her Mac.
So it's not that the user isn't intelligent enough to learn about the computer (and that second mouse button). It's that the user is pragmatic. If they can do everything they care to do with their computer and never touch the extra mouse buttons or whatever, then they're happy.
Apple has been very good lately about understanding this pragmatism. Many computer enthusiasts see a feature Apple introduces (like Dashboard, for example), and says, well conceptually that's similar to a virtual desktop. The difference is that Apple is structuring the feature so that pragmatic mainstream users can use it simply enough that the benefits significantly outweigh the efforts of learning how to use the feature (and remembering about it when you need it).
It's a hard concept for technology enthusiasts to understand, but it's an important one.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
I'm looking at my Logitech mouse, and it seems to me that this isn't Grandma's fault. The mouse buttons seem designed to look like one button. They're the same color. There's no outline to delineate where one starts and the other begins. They look like one damn button with a crack in it.
-Dave
Every user has their own font directory, ~/Library/Fonts. These are fonts that only they have access to. The system font directory, /Library/Fonts is shared by all users.
HBH
"Smart is sexy." -- D. Scully ("War of the Coprophages")
And yet, every time I use the Mac at work, it's an exercise in frustration. Part of it is the unfamiliarity with the way to do things on a Mac (bass-ackwards, it seems, is the rule of the day), but part of it is sheer torture (font handling, for instance). And every time I use it, I find myself trying to use the one-button mouse as though it were a two-button mouse.
That's the whole problem. To a neophyte computer user, a one-button mouse may well be easier to manage than a two (or more) button mouse. Problem is, how many neophyte computer users are left? Most people have some computer experience, and for better or worse, it's usually on a Windows machine with a two-button mouse. Like it or not, Windows is the lingua franca of personal computers. Telling users that a one-button mouse is simpler is like telling me Esperanto is easier than English. That may well be true, in a technical sense, but since I already speak English, and all my friends speak English, and everyone who posts on Slashdot speaks English, having to learn to speak Esperanto wouldn't make my life any simpler.
Now, don't get me wrong, I love my (several) Mac notebooks, but the fact is that through my experience with Windows and X-based Unix user interfaces I'm accustomed to interacting with the user interface in a certain way out of habit, and when I go for the non-existent right-mouse button and it isn't there, it's a bit of a jarring experience. I understand that Apple doesn't want developers to become reliant on the second mouse button, and I'm fine with that. I also recognize that you can get a mouse with as many buttons as you like, which is also fine.
My problem is with their notebooks, which, while you can get an external mouse for them, that doesn't really solve the problem. Unfortunately, a number of situations you're going to use a notebook in (such as on a train, waiting in an airport, or lying on your couch with your feet in the air) make using an external mouse a royal pain in the ass. Why don't they just make the trackpad/mouse assembly user replacable so third parties can accomodate the needs of people who want a multi-button mouse on a notebook?
I work tech support, and I had the same question for the first couple of weeks of this job.
In this, as in most things :), Slashdot users have a skewed perspective. They know computers, inside and out, and it is a fair assumption that many if not all of the people they know know computers inside and out. But there are a lot of people out there -- even (and this shocked me) young people -- who don't have the first clue about how to use the machine.
Do I think the one-button mouse is necessarily more appropriate for them? Well, I'm not really in a position to say. The company I work for only makes one-button mice. So I won't comment.
stripShow - Where WordPress meets webcomics
The difference is, Apple "enforces" this user interface guideline by making it impossible for developers to rely on the existence of the right mouse button.
Yes, the user interface guidelines you cite all suggest that contextual menus shouldn't be the only way to do things. Apple is the only designer to force the issue.
And, as somebody who gets to explain left mouse button vs. right mouse button all day, I think they're absolutely right.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!