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."
... they can't afford to pay for the second button.
No article of this kind would be complete without mentioning that users get confused with two buttons
I know (from experience) that it takes no more than five minutes to explain left- and right-clicking to a three-year-old child.
Apple must consider their customers to be mental defects. (Not that that's necessarily wrong, but it's just... wrong.)
more to do with differentiating the apple than anything else. Man, they love to be apple users, and 2 buttons... "thats a windows crazy thing. we know better!"
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
Me? I use a Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer for Bluetooth both at work and at home. I didn't have to install any drivers or anything. Just pair the mouse to my PowerBook (with built-in Bluetooth), and I'm done.
Mouse button 1 = regular click
Mouse button 2 = contextual click
Mouse button 3 = not used because it's too easy to scroll with the wheel when clicking, but it used to be mapped such that when I clicked it and scrolled, the Mac screen would either zoom in or zoom out (really nice Quartz Extreme feature)
Mouse button 4 = Expose show all windows
Mouse button 5 = Expose show desktop
My wife is the opposite. She prefers a single button mouse for her iMac and PowerBook. I bought her a multi-button mouse with scroll wheel for playing Jedi Academy. When she's done playing, she unplugs the multi-button mouse and plugs in her white Apple mouse.
Apple's got the right idea. Ship a single button mouse to make sure that developers don't start hiding things in the contextual menu, but support multiple button mice out of the box with no need for drivers. The scenario Gear Live describes is pretty common: "left click or right click?" On a Mac, that statement doesn't come up.
However, I'm sure some people will still complain about the single button mouse. Some people are just looking for nits to pick, and they're looking for excuses to deride Macs, though not necessarily reasons.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Just put one of these six button mice on their desk and watch their head explode.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
...to bring down a site before the first comment is even posted, apparently... *sigh*
I've never found the single button mouse to be annoying. I started on Macs back in the day, and have since moved onto PCs.
The one place I know that a two-button mouse would be better on a Mac is gaming. That second, third, fourth, fifth, and wheel buttons really come in handy then.
Colin Dean Go a year without DRM
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.
No, it's because Apple thinks its' users aren't surfing the web with one hand, if you know what I mean...
has the power to view the web page anymore...
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
There's a rumor that John Carmack once asked Steve Jobs what would happen if they'd put one more key on the keyboard.
How can you give a statement like that and not also put the rumored witty riposte?
Anyway, the numbers tell the story... 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.
To be honest, this sounds more like a years-long pissing match ("I insist, two buttons on a mouse will destroy the world!") than anything of real substance.
Yes! And what about all those function keys on the keyboard? F1? Do I press F and then 1? And Alt? What the heck does that do? Two Alt buttons!?!? And why do we need both backspace and delete; they just confuse everyone!! I think Apple should be shipping a one-button keyboard!!
developers are forced to rethink their design approach and can't flood the right click menu.
What? In a lot of applications, if you hold down the button, you get the equivalent of a right-click menu. How in the world does this restrict developers?
The coolest voice ever.
Gillete came out with a triple blade razor (Mach 3). Then Schick came out with a four blade design (Schick quattro).
Are we going to have a button wars on mice??
I'm happy with two buttons and a scroll wheel on my mouse. I've tried some of the pre-existing mouse designs with more buttons buyt wasn't impressed. Either someone invent something radically cooler or the two buttons/scroll wheel design seems fine to me. Especially since i have a keyboard.
I would however like a touchscreen interface on my cell phone. I have big fingers so the touch screen will have to figure out where the center of my finger is.
I hope that Steve Jobs replied to John Carmack, " I think you mean what would happen if they'd put 104 more keys on the keyboard.....sucka!"
"One button for one brain cell... "
just kidding but i like my right click menu sorry mac users!
Why the extraneous link to Carmack in the article? /.er who hasn't heard of him?
Is there
And why not link to the Wikipedia article (first Google hit) instead? ID's homepage isn't about Carmack.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Ok, a second button *might* be confusing to the grandma or little kid who is running an iMac or Mac Mini. But the graphic artists, sound and video editors and other power users who buy the $3000 G5 can certainly handle the complexity of a mult-button mouse.
Why do all Apple computers necessarily have to come with the same mouse?
Although you and I actually would prefer 3 buttons on the contraption, we are not the typical tech-ignorant consumer. The typical consumer more closely resembles the folks in Florida in 2000. They could not understand even simple instructions on how to complete a paper voting ballot. Sometimes, the sheer ignorance in society can shock us tech-savvy folks who have no hope of ever dating a gorgeous blonde babe.
As a regular wintel user, I find apples to be very annoying - mostly because of the single button mouse. I honestly think that making the switch over would benefit them and their users (I use my right mouse button and scroll wheel A LOT to get around windows). For a company that is normally so good at ergonomics, I am amazed the switch didn't happen 10 years ago.
The analogy is not putting *one* more key on the keyboard, but 105 more keys on the keyboard.
The difference between the keyboard and mouse is important in another way - keyboard buttons are labeled, mouse ones are not and the way we reference mouse buttons and actions stems from a one-button mouse world.
Had we started with 2 button mice, you'd say double-left click, or double-select click. Instead of right-click you'd probably say menu-click or context-click. Writing 'select' and 'context menu' on the ends of the mouse buttons wouldn't have been a bad idea either.
The unfortunate truth is that a lot of new users cannot type without looking at the keyboard - they have very little kinesthetic sense for that kind of action (vs opposable thumb actions which everybody does constantly). Watch a struggling user follow verbal left-click vs. right-click instructions and they have to *look* at the mouse a lot. If you have to *look* at a two button mouse, you're one button in too deep.
Anyway, I'm interested in this subject because the mouse thing seems like the last barrier between me (and my wife) and a Mac. We surf the Web in Mozilla, using an MS Explorer (4 buttons, plus a clickable wheel). The ability to use the side buttons to do back-page and forward-page without moving the mouse cursor is completely non-negotiable for us, and I'm wondering if I can do this on a Mac without a lot of hassle.
Anyone got an answer? I would prefer a simple "yes, it's trivial," or "no, that's not supported."
Good luck to Apple then, as my Grandmother hasn't been using anything for the past ten years now. Well, except, she was apparently able to use a ballot box last election in Chicago.
common sense: noun
What those who are ignorant of the subject matter think; usually wrong.
The common argument is that you can plug in any mouse you like, so if the standard one button mouse isn't to your liking, you can change it.
But plugging an external mouse into an Apple laptop is going to be a big pain.
Why can't Apple laptops come with split left/right mouse buttons like PC laptops, but simply configure them both to do the same thing by default?
That way, novice users (or those who prefer a 1 button system) could simply click on either button - essentially simulating a 1 button mouse - while those of us who prefer 2 buttons could change a configuration option to allow the buttons to work as left and right mouse buttons, rather than having to plug in an external mouse.
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.
The reverse is sort of the point:
Imagine a cluster of buttons on your mouse. Thanks to the architecture, you won't ever need to.
...by using an old saying we all learn in high school technical/vocational classes -- "Keep it simple, stupid." After reading this article I tried to think about why my mouse has two buttons in the first place. Frankly, Microsoft could simply apply a concept they already use on Windows CE to simulate an alternate kind of click -- holding down the button for a few seconds...which is what one does with the stylus when one needs to open a menu with commands like cut, paste, copy, etc. So in effect, Windows users could easily be afforded a one-button simple mouse as well. You would have the single click, the double click, and the held click. See how simple that is? And, much like the article and the other user comments mention, money could be saved this way not only for materials, but on the cost of design...though I am inclined to agree that gaming mice need many more buttons to be effective.
Part of the problem is that you can't really fit two buttons on one of Apple's "Hulk SMASH!!!" mice.
You're going to spend $3000 on a computer but can't handle going to the store to spend $40 on a mouse? Why does the mouse have to come with the computer?
I mean, it isn't like you're planning on buying your monitor or RAM from the Apple Store, are you? You are? Don't do that. They gouge.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
I cant actually think of anything I do that requires the second mouse button, or has it as a primary function for anything. Ditto for any but the main one of the 10 buttons on this thing.
When I purchased this replacement mouse, I had imagined that the other people who occasional make use of my PC would be confused by all these buttons at least at first, but to my surprise they simply ignore unfamiliar buttons and use what they know. Even though these people have very little experience of computers and even need me to connect since "the internet button [IE icon] doesnt work", physical objects cause no such problems. Due to good design carefully placing these buttons, I've not had anyone yet even get confused due to accidentally hitting a button.
Each of the extra buttons is simply useful if you want them. I use all but one of them (some Logitech Program Selector, maybe I can change it to always go to WinAmp or something).
(I did not RTFA because it is slashdotted)
The reason they keep the one-button mice on the desktops is so that developers don't expect users to have multi-button mice.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
...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
that costs eighty fucking dollars :P
Coders are using the right-click as a crutch. There are so many Windoze programs that rely on right-clicking for so many things that users don't even know the features exist. Contextual pop up menus are nice, but since no one reads the manual, how does a user find it? The one-button mouse forces programmers to design a more intuitive, simpler application and to not crutch on the right-click, center-click thing.
The aticle is /.ed so I can not read it. But I've aleady read (must have been on /.) that when Jobs borrowed his MacOS interface from Xeros, they showed him only a one button mouse while they already add multiple buttons mouses for quite some time.
AWx
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
I guess the control key is to hard your you to use then huh? especially since you need your left hand to side idle on a laptop and do nothing.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
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..."
Not just in this case, of course, but since it's been raised ...
;) Imagine a mouse whose action was determined by an on-screen "safe zone" of *inaction*, or which was activated not by clicking but by swirling over the screen area of intended action. I'm not advocating it, but if that had become a standard for some reason in 1960, we'd probably still have a few in production, and a clan of defenders noting that it was the greatest / only "real" design.
... 6. Maybe six standard functions could be conventionally associated with each, in a certain order going clockwise around. Then, the introduction of the fewer-button button mouse would be a huge controversy, dumbing-down, etc. "Stupid Apple mice only have 4 buttons! That's 2 less than normal!"
:)
- Apple (or anyone) could make a zero-button mouse, too. And Yes, I know they *have* the "zero-button" / unibody one, but that's not what I mean
Mice could (by default / most usually) have a larer number of buttons, like
I've gotten used to the 2/3 button variety (and you can blame familiarity here, too, but I like a pseudo-three button mouse better than an *actual* 3-button mouse -- that is, I like L+R click for center click). On the other hand, mouse isn't even the right word -- I generally use a trackball rather than a mouse anyhow, maybe it's easier this way.
The fact that Apple software is usually nicely designed and *works well with only one button* is I think the most persuasive argument to be had about whether it's a "good idea" for Apple to make a single-button mouse. The unibutton forces the software makers to make their interfaces compatable with it, reducing one layer of complexity for the user. (No, I'm not saying complexity is evil. No, I'm not saying having more options is bad. Just that sometimes having strictly bounded options makes a complex system more usable for most users, and can make a tool or plaything more pleasant to use than would a hard-to-figure-out interface.)
Of course, people like to argue, so there will always be the "No way, Christina Aguilera is *way* more hot now than Phoebe Cates was when she made Fast TImes at Ridgemont Hight!" crowd, but those people are wrong at two levels
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
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...
"Apple's got the right idea. Ship a single button mouse to make sure that developers don't start hiding things in the contextual menu, but support multiple button mice out of the box with no need for drivers. "
Because most people don't have multi-button mice on Macs, developers don't put as much effort into right-clicking then they would if it were standard equipment.
So you end up with a system where you just don't have as much flexibility with the mouse as you would with a Windows or Linux GUI. Why put all the effort into making proper context menus when most people won't even see them?
"However, I'm sure some people will still complain about the single button mouse. Some people are just looking for nits to pick, and they're looking for excuses to deride Macs, though not necessarily reasons."
That's crap. It's not just a "nitpick" it's a valid complaint. Because Apple has this quest to "be different" it just lowers the usability of their system.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
It's not the mouse that bothers me. You can always buy another mouse.
It's the damn trackpad on the laptops! They should at least give us the option of having a notebook with two buttons.
Bryan
nice generalization of mac users there... "mac users are stupid" yeah.. and all the windows users I had to help with things when I was tech support were not to bright either.... that must mean that windows users are stupid too.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Well, I'm one of those that would prefer zero buttons - nobody would get confused then. It'd nicer to just hold the mouse over an area of the screen and keep it there for around 5 seconds. Waiting that time would be the equivalent of a 'click'.
Seriously, two buttons is one of those things that might be harder to use initially, and then over time (i.e. 5 minutes), the increase in productivity, and general ease of use is all worth it. Even my mum can use 2 buttons, and if she can, anyone can.
Can any of the browsers use the the right mouse button to 'lock' the cursor, and then you move the mouse to scroll the page up and down (or even left and right) ? The idea is that the cursor doesn't move while you do so. I think that'd be a really neat idea - better than the usual scroll bar.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
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.
I don't see why... You have 2 or 3 fingers.
Free of Flash! Free of Flash!
Where you are required to use a right-button in Windows or Gnome or KDE?
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Apparently in your world, the babies come out ready to surf, send email and right-click their way through life. Seriously, Apple's design gives users the OPTION of a one- or multi- button mouse. Can Windoze users go to a one-button? As I said in another post, the single button mouse forces designers to make a simpler, more intuitive program instead of placing unknown contextual menus all over the place. You know as well as I do that nobody RTFM. And as far as Apple's "take features that all other similar devices have and market them as innovation" You're sadly misinformed or painfully bitter. I'll vote for the latter...
I figure the patents for 2 and 3 button mice were already taken.
While on the face of it, this statement sounds ridiculous, I have experienced cases where it has proved true. I relate the following Tech Support True Story.
me: Okay ma'am, I want you to move your mouse pointer over the My Computer icon and click your right mouse button.
caller: The right mouse button?
me: Yes ma'am.
caller: Which one is the right button?
me: (starting to get annoyed) You have two buttons on your mouse, One on the left and one on the right, I want you to click the right button over the My Computer icon.
caller: Um, your right or my right?
me: (putting my phone on mute and desperately trying to avoid laughing hysterically)
"I'm making perfect sense, you're just not keeping up."
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
Now, you didn't expect this. I use an Atari computer, and it is shipped with a two buttons mouse, but on the standard applications, right button is almost unused. Yet, working speed is twice faster than with PC using a 4-button mouse. WHY? Because it is the USER INTERFACE that does its job. It is a good design that leads the user to get benefits. I like the weel, though.
Pumbaa! I don't wonder; I know.
Seven years? Are you kidding me? There have been two-button mice available on the Mac since the debut of the original Kensington Turbo Mouse trackball in about 1990.
Seven years since Apple singlehandedly created the market for USB peripherals with the introduction of the iMac, maybe, but two-button mice have been available for the Mac for over twice that long.
Ah, to be a newbie with absolutely no sense of history. Must be nice.
p
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
I switched from 14 years of PC use to Mac OS X, and I have to say that while it did take a while to get used to-- the one button mouse is much more intuitive than a 2-button mouse.
You can do everything on OS X just using the mouse and clicking to get it, everything in a contextual menu can be found either in a button or the apple menu.
Also another beauty in OS X is that everything can be controlled through the keyboard which some people find very intuitive.
If you really 'need' to invoke a contextual menu you just hold down control and click-- it really isn't that hard, and it probably isnt necessary anyway.
so I can have a 'Right Button' and a 'Wrong Button'
I've worked as a tech for a number of different companies in quite a few different locations, and I don't remember ever seeing anyone get confused by having two buttons. I have seen a lot of people who can't learn how to use the second button, but those people just avoid the second button. They're not "confused" at all -- they're just sticking to what they know and understand. Is my experience unusual? Have others actually known users who can't use a two-button mouse? And if so, how the hell do they use their computers? Or do they use computers?
Show me an example of some application somewhere that ONLY has an option in a context menu and nowhere else.
What happens on a mac, is that the menus on the top bar get cluttered to hell with option because most people won't ever see context menus. So you can look at it either way.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
I don't understand Apple's inconsistency. If having a single mouse button really is better from a UI perspective, then why have they supported two-button mice for the last seven years?
What bothers me more than the one-button aspect of Apple's mouse is the fact that it's technically "no button."
The entire mouse IS the button. Sure, it sounds all nifty, but to people who aren't experts, that means hundreds of unwanted clicks.
I've seen dozens of technophobes move the mouse with the wrong type of force and accidentally cause a click. Over and over. They accidentally open applications or move window focus or screw up any action they're trying to do in the first place.
Since there's no set "push this place", users end up frustrating themselves with these "phantom" clicks.
Give me back the dreaded hockey-puck mouse. At least that had a well-defined button.
Nice rhetorical argument... I was barley convinced.
> 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.
No, I didn't decide that the Mac's "usability" was a myth. But on a Mac, everything is different. The lack of "right-click" commands is just one example. File browsing works differently. Switching between applications is completely different. Even ejecting media. Everything!
If I were totally new to computers, I might find the Mac way of doing things easier to learn. But I'm not, and nowadays hardly anybody is. Odds are, somebody trying out a Mac has some experience on a completely different system. And that experience actually makes using a Mac harder, because it gives you a huge body of habits and reflexes that are not just useless when you use a Mac, but actively get in your way.
So when Mac enthusiasts insist that the Mac way is better, I have to say, Maybe so. But it just doesn't matter. To most people it's not a better way, just a different way, and a difference that is too difficult to overcome.
... trackball :) much better heh
Fucking a fat girl is like riding a scooter... it's fun 'til someone sees you.
I suspect they have an even WORSE reason for shipping a 1-button mouse as standard. In an effort to enforce some odd ideal of "simplicity", the maintain 1-button as "standard" so third party software houses don't start taking 2 buttons as given, thus confounding "The Rest of Us"* who have all they can handle with the stock 1-button mouse already.
* you know, the kind that say "I don't like computers so I bought a Mac"
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Hence, interfaces should be designed for the intermediate user, but also designed to ease the path from beginner to intermediate (and, if you can, should also not hinder the expert).
Here's what Apple could do to design for the intermediate user but ease the path of the beginner:
The meanings of the two buttons are: "do the default action" and "select another action".
These meanings are straightforward, universal concepts. I don't know of any cases where the buttons are used inconsistently in the Windows interface, so, essentially, they represent a simple, perfectly regular, universally-understandable "grammar" for communicating to a computer.
People get confused between the two buttons for the same reason that young children sometimes get "left" and "right" mixed up -- they don't have enough practice and experience with it. That's natural, and is an acceptable cost required in order to communicate with computers. (Just as memorizing vocabularly and grammar is an acceptable cost required to communicate with humans.)
It's worth wondering if 3 buttons would be better than 2. But I doubt it. 2 buttons are perfect to represent the natural duality between the concepts of "do the default action" and "select another action". But having 3 buttons doesn't correspond to any universal, natural 3-option system that I know of.
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
Maybe you should just stop trying to copy that 17 meg file...
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I say this half seriously, and half as a joke, but the Mac is designed to be used by a person with both hands, umm "above the desk". [Insert your fark-like joke here.]
;).
As you may or may not know, the modifier buttons (known as control, alt and the windows / task key for the pc people) allow people on a mac to do the same stuff that a PC user could with a multi-button mouse, and even more quickly (I have an intellimouse wireless with the "forward" key placed so far towards the front of the mouse, it is damn near impossible to use it.)
Proper posture seems to be a side effect of using the modifier keys. You can't be leaned back, with one arm draped across the back of your seat while using a Mac without a multi-button mouse.
I worked Mac support a while and although you have 3-4 days of going "dammit, one button mouse" after that it doesn't feel so strange. You can use everything (well, mostly) with just a one button mouse, but power users (and those who use Maya / Photoshop)
Oh, and anyone who has worked support for a company that supports the technology illiterate (and apparantly blind) from zip codes that start with 3 (Florida, Alabama, Georgia et al) know the benefits of a one button mouse when "helping" someone who just bought a computer from walmart for $300. Sometimes it takes a really long time for people to be ready for something that can confuse them.
One thing that really is a pain to do is just lean back and browse the web, the lack of back / forward buttons and a scroll wheel is a real pain (damn are we spoiled
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
The vast majority of people use a mouse with more than one finger, so it just makes sense that there be multiple buttons available to them. One button mice are about as useful as a typist that only uses their index fingers - its about ease of input.
People obsess about the one button mouse because it's an icon of Apple's design philosophy. When Apple was doing the UI testing for the original MacOS, they used people who were completely unfamiliar with computers, and designed the OS to be as intuitive as possible for someone who had no clue what they were doing. While this is a noble goal in some respects, ease of use should not come at the expense of usefulness. Just because something can be figured out easily doesn't necessarily mean it's the best way to do it.
What does the button do in bash?
While speaking about Carmack, FPS players should have noticed that Doom3 has no ACTION command, unlike all others FPS. ... or a website in the same kind), they had an interview with Carmack where he tells he had to battle with his team to remove this command. People consider it as obvious and not arguable.
In an article from GamaSutra (or GameDev
With this ACTION command away, Id made a wonderfull game where you have seamless interfaction with objects. When you arrive next to a CCTV system, you don't 'jump' into CCTV control mode : a 3D TV set displays the camera view and next to it, a console allows you to swicth feeds. When you are pointing an active area, your guns goes away and a hand cursor appears.
The ACTION command was like the 2nd button : it's easier to code with it, but without this second button, you have to think in a way that makes thing even better. That is the MacOS experience Jobs want to achieve.
An exemple of this way of thinking is the dialog box policy from Mac. In Win world, your dialog boxes should have 'Yes', 'No' and 'Cancel' buttons and you have to guess their behaviour from the something confiusing sentence above ('Are you sure you don't like to loose the data you have not saved before ?'). In Mac world, buttons should have action labels : 'Save', 'Do Not Save'.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
You think my grandmother can afford a Mac? She's on a very fixed income!!!
I got a Mac last November after having been a Linux user for six years. I use it for some pretty hardcore development work. I still use the one-button mouse and I've never once had any inclination to switch.
Why Apple has to pretend that such an obvious blunder was some visionary breakthrough and why the rest of us have to pretend that it renders Macs useless is beyond me. The GUI, not the mouse, on OS/X renders it useless to my mind but since I don't own a Mac and only have to use one for work occasionally, I don't think I need to worry about it.
Just don't ask me to live without my three-button mouse, that's all.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Figure out how many mouse buttons you like, buy a mouse with that many, and shut the hell up about it.
You shouldn't have to buy extra equipment to get the basic functionality like a scroll wheel.
Because most macs won't have a multi button mouse, developers won't put the amount of effort into context menus that they do on a Windows system.
Your mac mini arguement is stupid.
Context menus are great and all the apps I use make great use of them. Instead of flooding the main menu bar's drop-downs with crap, they can move some of those item-specific options into sub-menus to keep it clean, meanwhile making them top option in context menus.
Defending the one-button mouse is like defending the Iraq war. It's an exercise in futility.
- It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
Those "special" directories that you speak of are also in every other current OS: Windows, Mac, and various linux distros. FYI: Windows, by default, saves to "My Documents", and Mac saves to your user directory.
I'm a Mac user, and the only times I need a two-button mouse is when playing Diablo or Homeworld.
For daily desktop activities (writing, Java programming, image editing, video editing,...) the shiny mouse-is-one-big-button is perfect.
Even nicer than extra buttons!
SideTrack
SideTrack is a replacement driver for the Apple PowerBook and iBook trackpads. With SideTrack installed your standard trackpad becomes a powerful multi-button scrolling mouse.
Leave your external mouse at home and take full control over your trackpad:
Vertical scrolling at left or right edge of pad.
Horizontal scrolling at top or bottom edge of pad.
Map hardware button to left or right click.
Map trackpad taps to no action, left click, left click drag (with or without drag lock), or right click.
Map trackpad corner taps to mouse buttons 1-6 or simulated keystrokes.
Extensive control over accidental input filtering.
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/12800Mouse prices came down after the Mini. Bluetooth mice are all expensive though. Apple's price for a corded mouse now? $30. Yeah it's still overpriced, but not as much now.
What if it is just turtles all the way down?
Unless you've got a Powerbook. The hideous trackpad/button combo on an otherwise great machine really besmirches Apple's reputation for good industrial design. The machine is practically useless without an external (and not included) mouse.
Funny!? It's _true_. After my Mom started using a computer, it literally took her a year to get the left-click right-click thing down. She knew what I meant when I said left click or right click, but she would forget which did which, and still generally has to be told to give the right mouse button a shot when she's trying to figure out how to manipulate things in certain ways.
You're sadly misinformed or painfully bitter. I'll vote for the latter...
Sadly misinformed? The iPod shuffle's biggest feature is that it plays songs randomly. Their campaign uses slogans like "Life is random" and "Give uncertainty a chance". Every MP3 player I've ever owned, including regular cd players and Apple's own iPod, has a random playback feature. Not to mention the fact that the only reason they're touting this 'feature' is the severe limitation of having no clue what song is coming next, since it has no LCD screen.
And Apple's own software uses products that pretty much require a 2 button mouse.
At least I don't use monikors that make me sound bitter like 'Windoze'. I bet you even use M$. Oh, how rebellious art thou! I bet if Microsoft went the 'innovative' way and used a one button mouse instead of Apple, everyone would be praising Apple for being ahead of the curve with their 2-3 button mice while Microsoft is being monopolistic bastards.
Hey, what happens when you plug a standard (2 button) mouse into a mac USB port? Does only one button register? Will it reject the mouse?
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
link or study to back up this claim?
or is it just the vast majority of the people at your desk?
I like microcars
the majority of people most certainly do not use multiple fingers on a mouse. perhaps power users, yes, but you are deluded if you think most people are even remotely capable to using a computer proficiently.
besides that, as I said, control click is as easy as clicking the right finger on a two button mouse.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Perhaps it's just me, but the one button mouse lends itself to a touch screens much better then a two button mouse. Try to right click with your index finger.
Stick with me here. I am amazingly keyboard oriented (my fingers know vi without intervention from my brain). I find that a single button mouse helps immensely BECAUSE there's no dependable context menu. Think of it this way, without a context menu developers have to provide keyboard shortcuts for more functions, the really important ones that on the PC seem to end up in the context menu.
For me to open an appliction that isn't in the dock is a single button click. I click somwhere to get teh focus of Finder (because I never have been an ALT-TAB person for app switching) then I het Command-Shift-A, which opens the applications folder, then type the first few letters of the app I want to open (helps if you have an alias named 'Word' in Applications or whatever) then Command-O to open the app. One click. How can I do that in Windows? Alt-Esc and arrow all over hell and hit enter. The point is the process is predictible on the Mac. I shudder to think what the process would be like in Gnome or KDE (of course in CDE it's easy, open a terminal and start everything from the command line so that's predictible as well)
Would a two-button mouse help me in this situation? No. (unless this was GNUStep then with the launch menu on the 2nd button it would)
The sad thing in all of this really is that Apple ignores it's Human Interface guidelines more often than not anymore. There is a lot to be said for consistency and muscle memory. Contextural menus are for lazy slobs that can't deal with chorded commands. Then again, not everyone is a guitar player either.
What if it is just turtles all the way down?
the maintain 1-button as "standard" so third party software houses don't start taking 2 buttons as given
Except for one little thing: third party software houses already take 2 button mice as a given. Even Apple's own software does. There's some stuff in OS X that makes it oh so much easier to right click (oh wait, ctrl click). And Final Cut Pro is just a nightmare with one button.
Here's what absolutely kills me here, folks. I think very few people at this point would argue that a one-button mouse is somehow more intuitive or user-friendly than a 2 button mouse. When using anything, ask yourself, "What's the meaning of what I want to do here"? With a two-button mouse, the left one is "select or execute", and the right one is "give me a choice of things that I could do with this object". With a one-button mouse, the latter option is gone, and users are left out in the cold. One Apple salesman once asked me if I "knew about" the Apple-click option, which would bring up the context menu. "Knew about"? This is about as ringing an endorsement of a user interface as "you'll get used to it after a while". By the way, Steve Jobs himself knew the superiority of the 2-button mouse when he put it on the NeXT cube back in friggin' 1988. Here is a picture of it, if you don't believe me. http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?c =277&st=1
Apple, ship a damned scrollmouse with your computers, if you want people to switch. Everyone's used to it now, and your OS is designed for it. Stop this madness.
There are two things to think about Apple's one-button mouse.
First -- think about training a non - computer user on the mouse, or even think about a non - power user with a mouse. He will push down with his fingers indiscriminately until it is explained to him to push down on the left -- from then on he pushes down with his hand awkwardly to the left, trying to remember. You see -- to her the mouse is not buttons -- it is a mouse. It is an extension of her hand -- the way she reaches into the computer desktop to grasp icons -- and her instinctual motion is a grasping or pressing motion -- not a tapping of various buttons.
Second -- of course Apple is hyping. People use Windows and Linux machines and two- or more-button mice all the time -- even grandmothers and preschoolers. However, for Apple the one-button mouse is a sort of trademark. It is a visible, tangible, ostentatious advertisement of their commitment to intuitive computing. They are not going to change it anymore than America is going to change the eagle.
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
Historically, Macs had only one mouse button because desktop computers only used one mouse button at the time, and Apple had a thing for simplifying anything they could reasonably.
But Macs have supported right-clicks for the better part of a decade now, and you can control click, and the right mouse button is suddenly useful. As are scroll-wheel mice. Given that, I don't think you can claim that Macs get along just fine without two (or three) mouse buttons. So why don't Apple computers ship with them?
I'm sure you can make lots of vague hand-wavy excuses based on human-computer interaction theory and research, but the HCI arguments against the splat-click that Apple gives us as a replacement are far far stronger. And you can't really give strict adherence to HCI standards as a serious reason when you're talking about Apple's reasons for doing things anymore - a Google search will turn up scads of pages listing all sorts of UI blunders in OS X.
I think the real reason why Apple uses one-button mice is because Apple, especially now that Steve Jobs is at the wheel, is obsessed with visual appeal. From a design standpoint, a one-button mouse is almost naturally sexier to look at. The standard Apple mouse looks like something that raver kids would suck on, while I have never seen a three-button mouse that gets any better than wavering between unappealing and ugly.
The Apple mouse has become simply another great example of the 'function follows form' attitude that Apple has taken in recent years.
There's a rumor that John Carmack once asked Steve Jobs what would happen if they'd put one more key on the keyboard.
Like maybe the insert key? Its absence makes it quite the pain to copy and paste with emacs based word processors on my ibook. I will admit though, I really like the way home, end, pgup, and pgdn are layed out compared with my other keyboards.
BTW, I use vim for all my coding, but texmacs when taking notes in my math classes, and for most homework assignments.
She just instantly forgets it until the next time it comes up and I have to explain it again.
...and then if you try to make them actually remember what you told them before, they get pissed and accuse you of being snotty and unhelpful. Well, in my case, anyway.
I have no problem with ignorance. Ignorance can be correct. It's stubborn, deliberate ignorance that makes me want to swing their heads against a wall.
Frankly, if people get 'confused' by a two or three button mice, then they shouldn't be using a computer in the first place.
Nothing says "my opinion is valuable and worth hearing" like a spew of unbridled elitism.
Funny how well-written Mac applications, and indeed most Mac applications, all do take sensible, full advantage of contextual menus. Of course, it shouldn't be arbitrarily polluted with crap, or used extensively inappropriately.
Additionally, it seems that you seem to have missed that about 72% of eligible Iraqi voters turned out, some literally in tears at the prospect of voting, and only 40 people were killed the entire election day by a determined insurgency in a country of over 25 million people. Additionally, Zogby polling within Iraq at polling places showed that over 58% of Iraqis believe there should be religious pluralism and freedom, with less than 30% favoring some form of Islamic council, and a significantly smaller percentage (~1%) favoring a Taliban style Islamic theocracy. But, I'm sure it makes you feel better to gloss over all of this, and think that Bush & Co. are on some evil mission to dominate the entire globe and turn the US into a police state, while spreading propaganda to keep Americans in fear to allow them to continue warmongering to line their pockets, instead of actually considering the truth that even Kerry understood about the threat of Panislamic radicalism in the mideast, and the fact that the US's economy, as well as that of our allies in Europe, is heavily intertwined with the stability of the petroleum economy. And before you say "UM, DUDE, IRAQ WASN'T A HOTBED FOR TERROR, IT WAS ALL LIES", read the fucking link
Nice way to work in *Iraq* in a fucking article about single-button mice, though...
Hmm A Trackpoint seems prett damm usefull to me, I can 2 handed type WHILE Mving the curso and Clicking the buttons, I even had an IBM Trackpoint FULL Sized keyboard that was a godsend to productivity.
The Ultimate failure of the trackpoint want its usablity but rather its reliablity as they were known to get very hinky after not so much use, which is what inevatibly happened to EVERY Single trackpoint i had after heavy use.
Well I think the control key helps to prove his point... It's a "solution" to a problem they created by refusing to modernize their input devices. The fact that Apple implemented control-clicking shows that they were fully aware of their hardware limitations even while their software was evolving for two-button mice environments.
If the one-button mouse was truly the way to go from a design and interface standpoint, then control-clicking should never be required. Software should be engineered to be easily and COMPLETELY usable with a single button mouse. Now that would truly be "thinking different".
But the truth is that even OS X, Apple's primary software, was engineered to be used with a two-button mouse (or via control-clicks of course)... So their hardware contradicts their software, and coming from a company that presents itself as the leader in interface design and usability, I just find that mind-boggling.
Eh.
Because when your grandmother uses Windows, she licks the left and the right button at the same time. Watch her the next time she's using the computer -- really, she does this.
...I definitely agree with you on.
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple moves silently away from the one-button paradigm, as they have been for years. Remember: this article isn't *Apple* justifying a one-button mouse; it's some random person doing it. So don't interpret this as Apple or anyone related to it "digging in" about a one-button mouse.
Welcome to the real world. Some otherwise productive (particularly older) people have trouble with two button mice. Deal with it.
It's all fine and dandy if you buy a tower Apple, but what if you bought a Powerbook? A lot of the time you won't have a mouse handy, and you're stuck with that stupid one button trackpad.
Got one. I love it, and I'm generally of the school that wants as many buttons as possible. If I want more buttons I just hold down control/Option/Command or Shift. All the modifiers I could want. Try leaving your bedroom sometime and meeting people in the real world. Oh yeah, and try using a mac for more than five minutes at a time.
Why?
It's worth pointing out that Jef Raskin was the inspiration for the Macintosh, but he really had very little to do with its development. So saying that "even Jef Raskin thinks it was a mistake" doesn't mean anything. He thinks everything about the Mac was a mistake, because he had something entirely different in mind.
Number of Mac-team-designed computers shipped: Upwards of 40 million. Number of Raskin-designed computers shipped: Um. How many Canon "Cats" ever made it out the door?
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")
...as the religious argument over the Shroud of Turin in the other thread. Now it's back to Mac vs. PC again. Some things never change, I guess.
If you just look at most Mac software, including from Apple, it is obvious that they all were forced to have a context menu. You have to hold down ctrl or option or something and click, and you get a menu very similar to the right-button on a Windows or Linux program.
This is all fine and you can argue all you want about which is an easier or clearer way of getting at the context menu.
However the problem with the Apple design for software is that it has now consumed the ctrl+click (or option+click) action, making it impossible to reuse that action for another thing. For most user-friendly programs this is not a problem. But advanced graphics programs have figured out that there are many things you want to drag on the screen (position, rotation, the view, etc) and for power users the ability to hold down various sets of modifier keys and drag is pretty useful. This is making it a pain to transfer such programs to the Mac. Even if you plug in a 3-button mouse, the ctrl+click is still taken (unless you either detect the mouse, which is frustrating for users who may sometimes unplug it, or you insist on a 3-button mouse, which is a solution programs like Maya do, but I don't like that).
I believe if Apple had made a 2-button mouse initially, and printed the word "menu" on the right button, there would be no problems. We probably would be using context menus for everything now, with no menu bar (complaints about Fitt's law can be countered by using pie menus, by remembering and popping up with the previous item selected, and by many other innovations that probably would have happened with much more extensive use of context menus).
All Apple achieves is forcing developers to figure out ways to emulate the functionality of two buttons with one. One common way is to use a function key + mouse click. Another way is to click and hold for a second. Neither way improves upon the simplicity of two buttons, and it just feels like a kludge. Things can get ugly when they try to emulate three buttons with one.
I always use TrackPad tapping for the left button, and use my thumb to work the right. That works pretty well.
Well, I want a power book with a two button mouse input because I do not feel I should have to plug/carry another item to get this feature. Try playing some games... Maybe my problem is I am not coordinated enogh for a Mac!
There's no outline to delineate where one starts and the other begins. They look like one damn button with a crack in it.
The "crack" would be the 'outline to delineate' that.
We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
Both the Amiga and Atari ST shipped with two-button mice in 1985. Ever since then IMO the one-button mouse has been obsolete -- if not before that. (Didn't the original Xerox machines have a mouse with three color-coded buttons?)
The Amiga was particularly interesting because you practically couldn't use the computer without a two-button mouse. (I mean, aside from playing games with a joystick.) The left button was used for most typical GUI input, but the right button was used to access the drop-down menus. Yes, all of them.
So. . . On Amiga, avoiding the right button, or failing to learn what it did, was never a realistic option for the user. Somehow I don't recall ever hearing any complaints about it during all the years that I used an Amiga. (And for some time after getting a Mac, I habitually accessed the drop-down menus using the right button -- why this even works on a Mac, I really don't know.)
All nostalgic rambling aside, I think Amiga had the right idea. If some people are confused or intimidated by the right button, *make* them learn it. I say tie it to the desktop interface so closely that they will soon become familiar with it, like it or not.
I wish I could RTFA and rebut the article more closely, but it appears to be slashdotted. I do feel like I've seen all the arguments before -- time after time. This is something that has bugged me for a long time. For goodness sake. . . Can't Apple at least ship the "professional" end of their line -- the Power Mac -- with a multi-button mouse? Can't they at least put two buttons on the Powerbook? It's not like the user has an option to easily replace the trackpad on those things.
As far as forcing developers to make their interface simpler, and make it work with a one-button mouse. . . If that was the intent, it's not working. The Mac has a convention that you can hold down CTRL and left-click to simulate a right-click. Application programmers haven't been shy about asking their users to do that. But it's needlessly awkward, it's a kludge.
In fact, one might argue that double-clicking to launch apps is a kludge too. A lot of people have trouble with double-clicking, it requires a bit of dexterity, and we didn't all grow up playing Asteroids. Double-clicking is an awkward convention forced onto Apple by their choice of a one-button mouse, and then thoughtlessly copied by everyone else.
Why stick with these awkward work-arounds? It would be simpler for everyone if we just tossed the one-button mouse onto the ash heap of history, where it should have gone 20 years ago. Apple's obstinance over this issue is just puzzling to me.
...SideTrack:
SideTrack is a replacement driver for the Apple PowerBook and iBook trackpads. With SideTrack installed your standard trackpad becomes a powerful multi-button scrolling mouse.
Leave your external mouse at home and take full control over your trackpad:
- Vertical scrolling at left or right edge of pad.
- Horizontal scrolling at top or bottom edge of pad.
- Map hardware button to left or right click.
- Map trackpad taps to no action, left click, left click drag (with or without drag lock), or right click.
- Map trackpad corner taps to mouse buttons 1-6 or simulated keystrokes.
- Extensive control over accidental input filtering.
SideTrack is multiuser aware and fully compatible with MacOS X 10.3 fast user switching (FUS). Every user on your PowerBook can have different settings depending on their needs.
Useless for you, you mean. For those who just have to have their contextual menus on the button--despite the fact that all the same options are available from the menubar, despite the fact that you can just control-click--there's SideTrack. (Yeah, I'm one of those too.)
Then Microsoft eventually adopted the mouse, and made the design decision they often do, that if one is good, more is better, and two-button mice became common. As GUI applications adopted contextual menus off the right mouse button, Apple adopted CMs via control-click. Now the complaint from Microsoft users was that Apple required you to keep one hand on the keyboard. (Assuming they didn't need two hands to use the mouse, I wonder what they needed the other hand for.)
One advantage to using the keyboard modifiers for the mouse clicks is that a meticulously designed application can provide visual clues about what will happen if a modified click is performed ahead of time. For example, when the Control key is down, Apple's Finder decorates the cursor with a small menu graphic to indicate the availability of the contextual menu.
Look, a user is not brain-damaged or deficient for not caring to remember the function of alternate mouse keys. A large number of users (probably 0% of the /. crowd) view the computer as an auxiliary device that's supposed to assist them at their Real Job while distracting them as little as possible with the need for special training and knowledge.
Even some of us who are power users and unafraid to learn non-intuitive gestures (I used to "fat-finger" bootstrap code into PDP-11 consoles using binary switches) are just as comfortable with a single-button mouse and alternative techniques to accelerate our work. It's neither better nor lamer; it's just another way of getting things done.
Finally, Apple is perfectly accommodating to those of you who prefer something other than what they offer as standard. If you prefer another mouse with 2, 4, or 7 buttons, the online store will sell you one, and the OS will support it. No, you won't get a credit for deleting the standard mouse (where offered), but last time I checked (three minutes ago), neither does Dell.
I must disagree with this.
Sure, it's far more convenient to have an external mouse, and I carry one of those little Kensington cord retractable (and more recently, a wireless) mice in my laptop bag for that purpose.
But, sometimes, I'm using the Powerbook in a situation where there's no suitable surface for the mouse (such as a vehicle seat, or a waiting lounge), or I want to use the computer so briefly there's no point connecting the mouse.
So... I just use the trackpad. And, a lack of a 'right button' is totally of no consequence. I can switch from 'right-click' to 'ctrl-click' with no problems whatsoever. However, I HAVE Found that, when using a PC, locating the different position for the left and right buttons to be a little awkward. I MUCH prefer Apple's decision on this.
I'm left handed and find using a one button mouse easier than switching the mouse buttons on a two button mouse. Another advantage is for computers that have a left and right handed users. No issues when switching users. On Windows XP Home if one account is set for right hand mouse use and another is set for left hand use, login initially must be using right hand convention of left click. Also, fast user switching does not switch the hand of the mouse! Adobe Elements 2 does not work correctly with a left handed mouse. (I think it is fixed in version 3) Any other lefties have comments on this?
Go to your local university computer lab and watch the people on Windows PCs. How many people do you see using the right mouse button? Unless you're in the engineering department (and maybe not even then), it won't be very common.
And university students take forever to die. Trust me.
I had a laptop long ago (486sx w/ grayscale monitor) that had no built-in pointer. Instead, it had a logitech trackball that clipped to the side and protruded out and at a slight angle upward. The butt of your hand would rest on the table while using the mouse. It was very comfortable. The outside edge of the mouse was rounded, so when you grabbed it, thumb to the sky then curled over the ball, index finger rested easily on the L-mouse button located on the curve, it was very easy to use. I can't remember where the other button was though ..... Luckily, I found a picture. It was a comfy laptop mouse but of course, it wasn't permanently attached.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
From IdiotOnMyLeft: 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.
They give the trolls too much credit. I am not aware of anything that happened 7 years ago to make two button mice work with Macs. And while I'm not aware of any specific multi-button mice that will work on a Mac Plus, there are plenty of multi-button ADB mice going back nearly two decades.
I'm not a smorgasbord.
Question: has anyone here ever met a 'productive' person that has trouble with a two button mouse?
Mostly, I agree with you completely. The one button mouse idea is exactly what Apple stands for, and I'll buy into replacing the mouse if I want more buttons.
But there's one broad situation where you often DO use the mouse that came with your computer - your laptop.
I've given this suggestion before, and I'll give it again. Apple should ship all their laptops with at least 2 mouse buttons (preferably 3), and a control panel allowing you to map them places.
AND THE DEFAULT SHOULD BE THAT THEY ARE ALL MAPPED TO LEFT CLICK. This means that it ships with exactly Apple's paradigm, but I don't have to carry around extra external hardware just to use right click - I just have to change settings in a control panel.
I'm aware of some hacks involving tapping on the trackpad, but they're, well, hacks. And while they're better than not existing, they're not better than at least one more button. Heck, I'd take a three button laptop and the clicks to give me 4 or 5.
Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
Yes Photoshop does this. However I cannot think of any other programs I use that have a similar design - InDesign for instance I don't think does that.
Certainly an interface like that is not part of any general design guidelnes.
Mostly, interfaces either have toolbars or menus that allow you to reach all the parts you can get to - contextual menus are used but mainly as shortcuts.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Because most people don't have multi-button mice on Macs, developers don't put as much effort into right-clicking then they would if it were standard equipment. ...huh?
So in the closing days of OS 9, when there were still pre-contextual-menu legacy apps running around, this might have been a valid complaint. But have you actually used a mac in the last four years?
Right-click/control-click support is now universal to all apps. Most OS X applications are built up from the default interface objects, which apple built right-button support right into; and adding right-click menu support to anything else is dead easy, you just call setMenu: or override the - defaultMenu object on your NSResponder subclasses, and bam, you've got a contextual menu. And developers always do this, because while not all mac users have those third-party scrollmice, for some funny reason nearly all developers do, and we like being able to use our own applications.
Perhaps what you could have said is that developers don't design their apps around the second mouse button. I consider this a benefit, not a flaw. This just means that despite the presence of the contextual menus, the application must still be fully usable without ever clicking that right mouse button-- there must be a one-mouse-button path through the interface, contextual menu use is always an option, but never a requirement. This leads to more generally expressive interfaces, fewer gimpy interfaces. The existence of one-mouse-button users simply enforces the idea that the contextual menu serves its appropriate purpose-- that of a shortcut-- without becoming something to hide interface elements behind.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
But the ones wo do like a one button mouse have no alternatives to choose from! Why do you want to make them unhappy?
It was a plurality, actually. No candidate got a majority in Florida that year. (Official tally: Bush: 48.85%, Gore: 48.84%.)
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
I'm very confused as to how bringing the relevant options for something to that thing is bad UI design. Especially since it's optional.
I do agree that *mandatory* context menus are poor UI design, but so long as the functionality also exists elsewhere I think they're a fantastic time and effort saver that let people perform common tasks quickly and efficiently.
Nine years after Microsoft invented it, there's no justification for Mac mice to not have a scroll wheel (or capacitve strip, or IBM trackstick scroller, or rocker switch, any of the other alternative scroll devices that have been tried since 1996) on either mouse or the left side of the keyboard.
The on-side-of-window click-and-move scroller is a vastly inferior interface. It's simply inexcusable for Macs to have a crippled scrolling interface by default. Make a mouse with an unclickable scroll wheel and only one button, if one button is better -- but drop the Not Invented Here blinders and admit that Microsoft actually had a good idea.
> good solutions to a dozen things I'd likly want to do within 3 inches of my pointer.
// Mac equivalent // Keyboard shortcut // Get Info // Cmd-I // Make Alias // Cmd-L // New Folder // Cmd-N // Rename // [Return] ("Enter") key // Desktop/Screensaver Pref Pane // None (use Apple menu) // No equivalent (not necessary) // No equivalent
There, you just said it--there are maybe a dozen things most of us use the context menu for in Windows. Let's go through my list:
Windows
Properties for a file.
Create Shortcut
New... > Folder*
Rename
Display Control Panel
My Computer Properties, to get Device Manager
Opening a Start Menu Programs folder in Explorer (Right-click->Open)
I can't think of many more, but my point is just that, for the few things there are that most of us actually use, we don't have to search through menus to find it. We just learn a couple keyboard shortcuts and be done with it.
The * above by "New > Folder" is what I hated most about Windows. On Mac OS X, to make a new folder, you hit Cmd-N. On Windows, you must use either the File menu or the Context menu, click "New," wait for the disk to churn for a while as it loads all the garbage document templates, then click "Folder." This, to me, is worth far more than the $25 mouse that settles your problem. There is no way that I have ever heard, in seven years of heavy Windows use, to create a folder without going through that mess, or opening up the command line.
The terms "Left-click" and "Right-click" are a manifestation of a right-hand-centric view of the world.
If you notice that no matter in which hand you hold a mouse or whatever trackpad you use, the index finger is the primary click and the middle finger will be the context click.
SO, why not change the terminology to "index click" and "middle-click"?
All those posters trying to teach their parents, see if you get better uptake this way. They will definitely know which is their index and middle fingers.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
- mouse users with 1-button mouse,
- mouse users with n-button mouse,
- users without mouse (mostly Emacs users)
If you have good ui that gives users powerful configurable keybindings (like Emacs), that really speeds things up for powerusers.Intresting thing is that trying to teach people to move from level 2 to level 3 is IMHO usually as difficult as from level 1 to level 2.
In both cases there are significant reasons to upgrade your ui-habits. It also seems that in both cases there is many weeks of hard training before benefits can be seen.
Dyslexics have more fnu.
Most Mac users that I know buy replacement keyboard and a mouse (usually from Macally). I have never seen a replacement mouse for Mac that has only one button so it is really hard for me to even think of a good enough reason why Apple still refuses to admit that 2 buttons and a scroll wheel are very useful
MAC == Media Access Control
Mac == abbreviation for Macintosh
This sig has been deprecated.
Context menus were designed to fix confusing menus full of options that are not always available (because _surprise!_ they are contextual menu items!) greyed out menu options confuse EVERYONE, not just grandma. Mac developers often still use context menus, they just assign them to a control key plus mouse click. I wonder if this is easier or harder for old people to understand? I'm betting harder, because it takes two actions instead of one, and you would be less likely to find it by accident unless someone actually notified you of the control-clicks.
The nice thing about Aple only shipping single button mice with desktops, is that it makes laptops much easier to use.
I have used a number of laptops, IBM and Dell and Toshiba and others. And on every one it was annoying to use the right mouse button; it was not natural and felt awkward. Indeed on some of them they tried to compensate and made it actually somewhat hard to not hit the right mouse button while using the trackpad or attempting to left-click.
Furthermore it was an issue because PC developers expect, and pretty much demand you have a right button - as some features are only availiable there (as the article notes would be an issue). So the awkwardness of right-mice button on laptops meant that to really do serious work with a lot of programs you just about had to have an external mouse.
With the Apple laptops, I find the single button very easy to reach (it can be larger since there is only one) and since they keys are right there next to the button chording to reach context menus is very natural and easy to use.
Furthermore because programs are all designed to accomidate sinlge button mice, it's really pretty easy to use any program without an external mouse. When I frst got the laptop I bought an external mouse just as I had with every other PC laptop I'd ever used; but with the Apple laptop I found myself never using it so I just gave it away.
Although Apple jlaptops are justafiably popular because of build quality and features, I cannot help but think that the simple adherance to the single button has served to increase Apple laptop populartiy even further without users understanding why the laptops just seem simpler to use.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I remember the Acorn Archimedes computers. They had 3 mouse buttons, which was pretty unusual 15 years ago. However, they did something really clever. They named the buttons. Left was Select, right was Menu, and middle was Adjust. All programs adhered to the standard and they all did the same sort of thing regardless of the application.
They went a step further, though, and supplied a set of audio tapes that taught you how to use your OS. This ensured that even people who didn't have a clue about computers could get up to speed in just a few hours.
The thing that is missing with Windows and OS X is the in depth tutorial for complete n00bs.
Such a simple solution for such a redundant problem.
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
You don't 'click' a one-button Macintosh mouse, you mash it!
Bunch of bogus elitism, if you ask me.
No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
Thanks. Now I feel like some kind of a sucker with my three-button 2d-scrollball mouse with eight modification keys on the keyboard to use EMACS. But isn't it true that using an input device that is artificially simple induces artificial complexity in all of the input entered using that device? You cannot just sweep the complexity under the carpet, can you? Sure, using this or this is certainly easier than using this, but is it equally rewarding once you master it? Isn't it just a question of beginners vs. experts emphasis?
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
My preferred mouse has three buttons and a scroll wheel and they all work just fine.
By the way - from looking at your sig I guess you didn't go to an inner city high school, or you would know the answer to that question.
Clear, Dark Skies
He can't play minesweeper with just one button...
Most of the time, people look at the computer as something they can break, or will be broken if they do anything wrong, most geeks have broken so many in there time they don't fear it.
Right mouse button, well strange things pop up when that happens, so I don't want to touch that incase I do something wrong.
Really we just have to teach people that computers are fairly robust, the worst thing most people can do on windowsxp unless there deliberately mallicious is forget to save a document when turning off the computer.
I'm platform agnostic, owning both a Mac which I love and a PC that I, well, use.
However, I've recommended countless systems to countless clueless family members over the years and I can tell you with near certainty:
The confusion of a two-button mouse has never once outweight the price differential when deciding to purchase a PC over a Mac.
Never, not once ever, have I had a friend or relative say to me, "Well, I find that two button mouse on the PC just so confusing... could I buy a one button mouse to replace it?"
I have, however, had people say, "That Mac looks great, and it sure was easy to use... but I can get the PC so much cheaper."
So really, most people could give a sh*t about one vs. two button mice.
Most people, that is. However, those who do care *tend* to be advanced users who actually do want a two-button mouse. I agree with all the poster's who've said, "Just buy one!". In fact, I have a very nice Logitech two-button wheel mouse that I use with the Mac. It works great, context menus and all.
The problem--and this is a problem--is with laptops. I have a PC desktop and laptop. I have only a Mac desktop. I *would* buy a Mac laptop. In fact, I *want* to buy a Mac laptop. But I won't, because of the mouse issue.
My PC laptop, as irritating as it can be, has both a track point and a track pad. It has two buttons for each, and also a handy scrolling feature to mimic a wheel mouse. And you know what? I use them, without having to carry an extra mouse. And yes, having to carry an extra mouse is a big deal to me. I spend too much to get laptops that are really, really, small and lightweight for a reason.
The bottom line is that two button mice have been standard on PCs for ages. Hell, even my grandmother knows what a wheel mouse is. They've also been standard on Unix workstations for ages. Even Amigas!
Apple could easily introduce a two-button mouse, and just make both buttons do the same click by default--advanced users could change the settings in preferences. Then, no confusion to novice users--it won't matter which button they click. But big advantage to advanced users. And those who want an anachronistic one-button mouse could buy the Apple "Classic" iMouse.
It's simply about giving consumers more choices. I appreciate Apple's committment to beauty in industrial design. I just wish they would appreciate my wishes as a consumer who buys their products.
The world won't end in darkness, it'll end in family fun, with Coca-cola clouds behind a Big Mac sun.
The only reason for it is the man-hours saved in tech-support... On a MAC: TS:'now click the mouse button' Client:'why, yes it works!, thank you!' On a PC: TS:'now click on it with the mouse' Client:'eeerp, that does nothing' TS:'put the mouse cursor on top of the button and now press the left mouse button sir' Client:'hmmm... which button?' TS:'Left one LEFT!' Client:'now i get a menu, is that normal?' TS:'that's your Left mouse button sir, not the computer's left!' Client:'Ahhhh!!! how do you know which side I'm sitting on then?'
Although I agree with both sides on this one, apple needs to allow people to buy two button mice from them. At my high school, and now at college, the computer department won't just throw equipment away and then cough up more money. Adept students are left with choosing a PC for using Photoshop, over the Mac.
My XBox controller has 10 buttons, two joysticks, a directional pad and two triggers. Let's see a Mac handle that.
fault-tolerant
That's why I don't use it.
That makes no sense! If anything, having one button on a mouse is MORE confusing because you don't know how to easily get to what you need to do. You have to search through menus or settings to find something that's easy to do on a PC. Also, apple added TWO buttons to the keyboard! These buttons are there because macs lack a right mouse button.
Apple does not include a 2-button mouse for the same reason that they only include 256 MB of RAM.
It provides an opportunity for resellers to sell you the additional ram, proper mouse, and toehr goodies once they get you in the store. Resellers likley makes as much profic on these items as they do on the entry-level Mac.
Maybe if we sacrifice a goat and perform and exorcism or something...
--- Ban humanity.
I do believe it will play songs in the playlist order.
I have an older MP3 player, a Nomad II mg. I think it was about $250 in 2000. Anyway, the control buttons are lined up in columns on the left and right sides of the device. In the 4 years I've owned it, I have NEVER been able to control it without actually looking at the buttons (way too easy to accidently delete songs). Oh yeah, and the LCD screen is miniscule. I know not all MP3 players are as poorly designed as mine, but the cheap ones seem to be. And the LCDs that come with cheap ones are basically too small to be useable (when you can only see 16 letters across and the name has to slide across the screen, you'll know what song is next by listening faster than reading).
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
actually, all the stuff in a context menu is accessible from the application menu... since the finder has one of those no one needs to right click o control click.. it is used by those who like the expedience of a contextual menu.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
My favourite laptop pointing device of all time is the pop-out mouse on the first generation HP OmniBooks. This was a small mouse that fitted into the side of the machine itself. When you pushed a button, it popped out. Rather than using a ball or an optical sensor, it was tethered by a rigid connector and used the movement of this to detect motion. I didn't use one for very long (only on demo models) but in that brief exposure it seemed to behave almost exactly as I expected a mouse to behave, while also being completely portable (although no use for left-handed people). Unfortunately, I can't find any pictures of it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The ADB Mouse II that came with my old 6500 was much more comfortable than the ProMouse that came with my iMac indigo. Apple definitely put ergonomics aside when they designed the ProMouse. I'm seriously thinking about getting an Intellimouse Explorer now! *checks wallet* No, I'm not!
Oh, and the Pro Keyboard also sucks, in comparison to the old ADB Keyboard.
Circumcision is child abuse.
actually... the only difference is that the command key takes over the control functions used in windows.... and the alt and option key ARE THE SAME KEY!!!!
also, a novice doe snot right click so who the fuck cares if it is difficult for them to use a keyboard and a mouse in concert.
and an expert user should be able to move between platforms and not expect those platforms to operate the same way... I move between Windows, linux and OS X and I know all the different ways in which they are different from an interaction POV.
get over it... you want a right mouse button because you are a lamer loser who cannot accept differences. then get a fucking mouse with a right button.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
I'd prefer to use both hands with a super large mouse. That way I could exercise all muscle groups in my arms as well as all my fingers.
Better still, replace the scrollwheel with an exercise bicycle. That way I could lose calories while reading PDF documents.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
I mouse ambidextrously, in a vain attempt to stave off RSI in my good hand. I don't swap the mouse button functions when I switch hands - my brain prefers "right/left" to keeping the same task for the same finger. If a left-handed person learns to use a mouse with the default setup, they'll learn to use their middle finger for left-clicking, and their index for right-clicking.
Now... your average basic user may not know how to swap the buttons' functions, and may be using either finger to press either button depending on their handedness, understanding of mouse setup, and preference. I'd stick with the left/right terminology.
Freedom: "I won't!"
I had the same mouse, and I liked it very much. The right mouse button was under the trackball and you got it with your thumb. They were such nice mice, I wonder why they stopped making them?
This post written under Gentoo-linux with an SCO IP license.
Actually, it is the infamous Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field that he keeps ramping the power on. Gates is filled with envy over it, as his own versions of the thing keep crashing.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
I cannot read the article, so I might as well detail why the lack of a second mouse button is wrong by addressing common arguments to the negative. I am not a troll, I am sick of bad arguments that get repeated ENDLESSLY on here whenever this stupid topic comes up.
1. not having context menus forces you to plan your UI.
OK, first of all, macintosh has had context menus forever. They are control-click, and holding down the single button. So the premise isn't even true.
Secondly, let's say you rightly expect that no one will ever use control-click or holding down the mouse button. So, you add all your options to menu items. Depending on the, wait for it, CONTEXT of the usage of the item, it may or may not be enabled. Everyone has had the experience of trying to figure out how the flip to enable a greyed out menu item. Guess what. That's what context menus were invented to solve. So tell me, how the hell does this help UI design by making menus MORE confusing?
2. Old people cannot figure out the second mouse button.
Besides the blatant prejudice of this statement, I have not seen anything beside anecdotal evidence that this is the case. I have in fact met people that do not understand right-clicking. There is a good chance that they also do not understand control-clicking, and as slashdot has demonstrated, MOST people, including mac users, are not aware of holding down the mouse button for context menus. I have also met people that cannot double click without practice. I've met people (who were NOT even "old" by the way) who don't know what the "desktop" and "icons" are. If an application _needs_ context menus, you have established a minimum level of competency needed to operate that application. Frankly, nearly every person I have seen, old or otherwise who pisses and moans about not being able to work the simplest fuctions of a MACINTOSH, was intentionally refusing to learn. I personally have no interest in catering to these people. If the macintosh had a second mouse button as standard, the vast majority of these people would suddenly cope.
Don't agree with me? The great thing about both your and my anecdotal evidence is that neither proves anything. Back it up with some studies. In the meantime, I have explained logically what context menus are for, what they fix, and by extension, why they are better.
3. I know better than the developers what I want on the context menu.
Unless you are using a CAD or 3D modelling program, I doubt it. There's usually as menu context menu items as normally used context options.
On the other hand, if you are arguing that program menus should be user-configurable, I agree 100%. But, that's not a standard on any platform at all, macintosh, windows or otherwise.
4. Just buy a stupid mouse with a stupid second mouse button, you moron anti-apple troll.
I like the implication that I am an "anti-apple troll" who owns or is forced to use an Apple for some reason despite hating them to the core (yuck yuck.) I own several apples, probably more than the majority of Apple owners. I like Apples. The single mouse button is still stupid.
Because you can't expect people to have a second mouse button, and because you can't even expect people to know about ANY context menus once you get down to that level of patronization, you get no benefits of the second mouse button. It's not enough that it's available, it should be standard. If a developer chooses not to implement it, it then becomes solely the fault of the developer, same as on windows or unix or any other platform with a standard of more than one button.
As it stands right now, I use apps all the time that don't have any right-click functionality at all, even though it would be entirely appropriate. Finder supports it, which is some consolation, but it's still annoying.
5. Plenty of people get along just fine with one mouse button.
That's not a justification, but ok. More people HATE it, so I guess by your own reasoning, you're wr
Heh. OK, so we have two possible scenarios: 1) Apple is too stubborn to admit they made a mistake with the 1-button mouse; or 2) apple is too stubborn to stray from their definition of "standard", despite the fact that it generally goes unheeded. I must admit that your thery sounds more likely, as it fits with the Apple marketting notion that the Mac is a computer "for the rest of [them]"*.
* You know, the kind of people smugly say they bought a Mac because they "don't like computers", as if that's some sort of badge of prestige.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
they don't make them because they're two damned stubborn to admit they were wrong
Holding down the stylus brings up the right click menu
I seem to remember thats how the Macs do it too. But, I wonder, given the way a tablet PC is used, do you really use the contextual menu that often?
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
I do everything from tcsh anyway.
Clear, Dark Skies
This is the best argument I've heard. Of course, you are talking about application design. Perhaps all apps should be designed to work with one button. However, providing shortcuts with other buttons could be a bonus.
For the record, my trackball has 5 buttons. And I like it.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Personaly I have never had this problem and I think the issue here is choice. Dont want to right click dont.
My issue with the macs is more on their keyboard layout. I always miss the enter key on iBooks, but at the end of the day it is a question of choice.
The right click is very useful and to not have it is to be patronised. I have the feeling of having bought a great racing bike and having training wheels welded on.
But, by that logic, consider the story of the old lady who thought her CD-Rom was really a drink holder. Does that mean CD-Roms should be removed from computers? What about Homer Simpson, who struggled to find the "Any Key"? Should computer manufacturers add a button labeled "Any Key"? Do you see the problems that occur when you try to design a machine so that no one, no matter how stupid, can use it?
Besides, if Apple really wanted to make computers that are usable by both normal users and grandmothers, they would offer this thing called "options". You know, allow users to buy computers with one, two, or three buttons, depending on which they prefer. Grandma could get the one button mouse, the rest of us who prefer being able to carry out basic tasks using only one input device could get the 2+ button mice.
And with regard to buying a new mouse with more buttons to replace the standard issue, maybe this hasn't occured to you, but most of us whining about one button mice don't own our own Macs. Our interactions with one button mice are not with our own machines but with machines we encounter in our daily life. For instance back in school, our math lab contained only Macs. Were we supposed to go to class with an extra mouse in our backpacks just in case we encountered a computer designed more for grandmother stereotypes than for college students?
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
I am doing perfectly fine with a two button mouse; and I can't do web browsing or document reading without a scroll wheel.
...normal.
On the other hand, newcomers to computers like my aunt always confuse left and right buttons, click and double click, never remember to to go to 'start' and end computer operation etc.
Would it be easier for them with one button only? absolutely. But in the long run, if one learns to use a mouse with multiple buttons, it saves a lot of time...especially if the second button is not a context menu, but rather a useful operation, like 'erase' or 'background color' in Deluxe Paint.
So one size does not fit all. Apple wants to make it easy for newcomers to computers, and that has been Apple's mentality since the original Macintosh. When the newcomers get experienced enough, they can try the two-button mouse. There is no need for a holy war of 'one vs two' mice.
A forgotten interface is the keyboard. No, I don't mean the command line, but the keyboard-driven gui. Recently, my mouse got broken. It was night, and I couldn't go out to buy a new one. But I needed to find some information on the internet. I switched on my XP machine, and started browsing, using the keyboard. It was frustrating at first, but then I learned all the shortcuts and I was much faster (and productive) than using a mouse (for those applications that have not forgotten to implement a keyboard interface). After a while I found out that I had accidentally unplugged my mouse though, so everything was back to
Between this conversation and the endless discussion of the mac mini vs. the cheap dell, I love pro and anti-mac punditry lately. It is like the blue state/red state divide. If you do not like macs or their 1 button mice or their graphics cards, do not buy one. Apple can go out of business with out you. :)
Seriously, I have custom built pc running windows and g4 laptop and dual g5 running os x, and they all have their purposes.
I will say this though, my 3 button mouse on my mac is the exact same as the 3 button mouse on my PC, except that every couple of times I restart windows XP, the logitech mouse driver on my PC just starting reversing the direction the cursor moves to the direction I move the mouse and I have to restart windows to cure it.
Macs are good computers for your parents, that just happen to kick ass at design and video editing and run UNIX apps.
My mother (in her 50's) doesn't get it, one button mouse or 5, and she could care less. My father, same age as my mother does.
My grandmother (80) uses a 4 button mouse (came with her box) like she was born with it. It took her all of one minute to understand. My great-grandmother (100), uses my grandmother's computer with no probs.
The whole age-ism in this issue is BS. The whole argument about the nuumber of buttons (like you stated) is also BS. I've decided, from observation, that Apple ships one button mice because they think they look cool. That hockey-puck-thing on the iMacs is the classic example. Can't use it without accidentally clicking all over the place. Gives you tunnel-carpal if you use it for more than 5 seconds. But, it *looks cool* with an iMac. And how it looks is what must be really important.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
Most Mac applications support right clicking to bring up a context menu. The point is that there should never be anything that can be done by right clicking that can not be done another way. Right clicking is a short-cut, not something that should be relied upon, in the same way that you should not be able to do things with shortcut keys that you can't do via menu options.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
"Menus can be dragged wherever you like (even off screen, and the two-button NEXTSTEP mouse will bring up the main menu if the right button is clicked -- this is, of course, optional behavior). In addition, submenus can be ripped off the main menu and placed anywhere on screen, for as long as you like. When this is done, the submenu sprouts a close button so that it can be removed. Menus also remember their location by app, so that the next time you start an app, the main menu (and all the submenus, if you have any laying around) will reappear wherever you left them." http://www120.pair.com/mccarthy/nextstep/intro.htm ld/
I do think that the one button encourages good interface design practices for apps. I have gotten used to control + click but I think at this point everyone can grasp the 2 button mouse concept ( the guy who mentioned touchsceens had a good point wondering how you right click on a touch-screen ). On a Mac laptop I dont mind control + click but on a Mac desktop prefer using a logitec USB mouse.
I like the NeXT decision to encourage developers to avoid the dependancy of full functionality of the app to rely on the right button and to include the right button for people that like to use the contextual menu. Mac OS X is the descendant of NeXTStep and NeXt had the 2 button mouse. Even OS 8 and 9 had contextual menus. I think that they should break the old mac tradition and include a Apple Pro Mouse with 2 buttons already! Then again I kind of like the fact that right and left handed people have a mouse that's consistent if it only has one button. Grrrrrrrr I give up Apple (If you are reading this) never mind what I just said and just keep the dammed one button mouse standard!
Are you saying that there is no right clicking capability on an Apple laptop unless you bring your multi-button mouse with you?
Well, if you hold down the ctrl button when you click the "mouse" button on the laptop, you get your right-click functions. This has been true FOREVER in the Mac OS so I've never understood the idea that one *needs* two buttons on the mouse (though i admit to using a two-button with scroll wheel mouse when at my desk).
Forget the argument about the superiority or inferiority of the one-button mouse itself -- that's irrelevant. What one needs to realize is that the presence of one button mice and trackpads in the Mac world fosters more intuitive UI design, where one doesn't need to plow through a series of confusing contextual menus to find an option.
Case in point, there's a world of difference between using a native OS X app for the first time, and then using an app like Gimp under X11 for the first time. For me, the clutter level feels much higher with X11 apps, and the right-clicking, over reliance on contextual menus adds to that problem.
So let's say 3 and 4 button mice become standard, and developers start programming with that in mind. Who will agree upon a standard way of handling what each button does? How confused will even experienced users become when finding contextual menus act completely different across different apps?
The Apple mouse adds to UI consistently, and yet still provides power users with the ability to expand if need be. As someone who has a Logitech dual-optical attached to his PowerMac, I plead that Apple keeps the one-button mouse. If it weren't for gaming, I would probably still be using the pack-in mouse.
Now, as an interesting twist, when using my iBook I find the one button trackpad much easier to deal with, and control clicking feels much more intuitive. When I use my friend's PC laptop I constantly find myself accidently hitting the right click on the track pad, and the time it takes me to reposition my thumb from the left to right button actually slows me down. I was a PC user most of my life by the way, so it's not just a matter of habit.
With all that said, I think Apple might want to consider adding a scroll wheel to their pro mice. I don't believe it would overly clutter things, and it's something even inexperienced users like my parents can figure out. Whether they would decide to go with a traditional scroll wheel is another story.
I guess you'd have to hit ctrl, or shift while pressing the mouse in order to lower terrain(or raise). Kind of weird to require the user to use the keyboard to modify mouse input. I imagine this would be a pain to use for a someone who had lost his left arm, or who was paralyzed on one side.
Not that the old Windows wasn't guilty of that too, in order to force it to show the "open with" option. I seem to remember this is gone in XP.
I'm talking about populous 1(2) by the way, later versions might not require you to raise and lower terrain as much.
Well I guess you could work around that by using raise/lower keys on the keyboard, but it doesn't quite feel as much like a video game if you can't use the mouse except for pointing. Hey, I got an idea: why not advocate the NO-BUTTON MOUSE because it is even less confusing for users?
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
The 1 button mouse relieves the pain from repetitive clicking, by allowing you to use all of your fingers to click. Photo retouching for 8 hrs or more hurts my arm I use the 1 button mouse when I need to relax my arm. Works for me, Mac mouse is light that helps too. http://practicallynothing.oxyfx.com/
Even on my windows PC, I use keyboard modified clicks all the time, especially in a web browser.
I know what you're getting at, but I still have an image of people using their mouse in a way that requires their hands to fly off their keyboard and put them behind their back before they can use the mouse. When I reach for the mouse, my left hand is usually still on the keyboard anyway. Ctrl-clicking (or Command-clicking) is fairly natural to me.
I think keyboard shortcuts are the best way to do things, and I like that almost all of them are system configurable, though I really don't like the way Apple does it to be honest. After years of being an Emacs user, getting things done with keystrokes is definitely the way to go. Now if I can only get quicksilver to properly reference menu items in a M-x type fashion, I totally win.
Since you are not questioning the usefulness of the context menu, the question then becomes which is more intuitive for the beginning user, right-click or control-click? hold-down click is the automatic loser. I contend that the second mouse button is more intuitive than the concept of control keys with the mouse.
I envision the creation of the second mouse button as being "this control click stuff would be a lot easier if I just had a second stupid mouse button!", and someone actually inventing it.
Also, if you only had one hand, you'd probably end up having to use a keyboard mouse control, or else have OS support to map context menus to holding down the mouse button.
I think the real problem here is that there was never a clean instruction that the right mouse button should ONLY be for context menus, not other goofy stuff like in GIMP, where there's a hundred items on it when you right click the canvas. This seems to be where much argument comes from, that many context menus in Windows are just plain wrong. I have not actually seen this so much in windows anymore, at least not for a very, very long time. Most developers in the Windows world have figured out what the context button is for, and use it appropriately.
Real world news: Not all memory is good. Apple-purchased memory always works. Store purchased memory sometimes doesn't. It costs a bit more, but it's reliable. Like everything Apple.
I use both Mac and PC. People who don't use Macs are just as silly as people who used VHS instead of Beta.
Or GM instead of Toyota. You get my drift.
Flame on, PC users that have never used a Mac... I use both and I know.
Steve Jobs: One mouse button should be enough for anyone.
You-know-who was much further off with his prediction though...
First off, how do you map the zoom function to the mouse button? That would be terribly useful!
My biggest complaint with Apple's insistance on keeping with the one button mouse is that there isn't a nice, elegant, ergonomic multi-button mouse from Apple. I don't care if they call it the Apple Technical Mouse or what, I just wish there was one.
I always stayed away from Apple in the past for several reasons; a major one was the mouse. Being a recent switcher (last year, and no it had nothing to do with iPods) I can say that an interface that assumes that the user will only have one button is very well designed.
Since using a Mac with and without a multi-button mouse, I've seen many people, including otherwise competent ones, click wrong buttons on the PC. It makes me think that maybe Apple is really thinking about things instead of just being stubborn.
the first laptops from Apple (with the trackball and the revolutionary placement of the keyboard -yes at the time, although it seems so obvious, it was revolutionary-) had two buttons: one above, one below...
And there were a couple of utility programs that allowed for setting the buttons to right or left click according to how you wanted it.
=====
I lie all the time, including now
Timing the double click while keeping the mouse positioned over the icon however...
The talk about flooding the right click menu nails it. Mac developers simply do not understand the purpose behind a two button mouse.
I used to use a program called First Class Client. It was initially a Mac program. I was ported to Win3.1. Then finally the Win95 version was released with full two button support.
To say the right click support was useless was an understatement. OS/shell developers for the PC (Windows, BeOS, KDE) understand to make the right click context sensitive. But the Mac developers for FFC didn't get that. If you right clicked you got a HUGE menu with nearly ever option the program offered. You got the exact same menu regardless of where you right clicked.
Instead of worrying about the "flood" why doesn't Apply simple learn how to use right clicking first?!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I think it all depends on what you are doing. If you are doing something simple like Solitare or word processing, then you only need 1 button. Applications like Photoshop start needing more buttons, ie: 1 to apply effect, and a second to hold and drag to move around easy. Finally, 3D stuff requires (well, doesn't require, but it's heckava lot easier with) 3 or more mouse buttons, so that you can navigate easily. For example, RollerCoaster Tycoon 3 (fun game, BTW) would be a pain in the arse to play if you only had 1 mouse button.
Once you start tying mouse buttons to context menu's is when things get annoying and useless. I think the burdon lies mainly on the programmers.
...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
As is usual this topic, a guarnateed comment generator, will have the following set of replies:
1. The usual group of people who have little or no experience of the Mac will make comments to the effect that Windows and Linux live off multi button mice, to the extent that certain applications have functionality in the CM that exists no where else in the programme.
2. Those same people will make comments to the effect that a three year old child can learn to use the right mouse button (They've obviously never done tech support!) and that Apple is therefore treating its user as being mentally defecient.
3. The people who actually use Macs will make the usual response that you can tack any two button mouse with scroll wheel and USB onto your Mac. (There is even one PC guy here who says that he feels insulted that Apple doesn't sell multi button mice and that's his reason for not buying a Mac, although I suspect that his problem has more to do with his rigid views)
4. The people who have done tech support for family and friends will know that most NORMAL people do not know what the right mouse button does.
And this last group is the one that has the point and it is the reason Apple does so well with its Mac, but more importantly with the iPod and iTunes: Your average NORMAL consumer is NOT interested in whether a gadget can has all sorts of myriad options. Your average NORMAL person wants a gadget that makes their life easier, not more complex, and computers, for the most part, make their lives more complex.
In spite of this and in spite of the fact that you can use any multi button mouse with OSX (The crowd that thinks Apple should offer multi button mice because any "three year old can use them" is ironically unable to fathom the fact that any USB mouse with two buttons and a scroll wheel works in OSX), such as I do (McAlly mouse), I think Apple should offer two buttoned mice with scroll wheels of their own design and brand on their store website as an option for those who want them.
Not default, but as an option in a popup menu, the same as choosing more RAM or another HD.
That will effectively kill these arguments once and for all. It won't make that much difference, I think, to those who complain about Apple all the time, because those people will always complain, no matter what Apple, Microsoft or Linus does.
I hadn't heard about the need to stuff carrots up your nose. I'm suddenly very glad that I switched to Linux before Windows XP came out.
May be this. Apple clearly sees the mouse as an obstacle only neccesary at the moment, not in the future. By forcing the one-button mouse agenda, they make it easier to accentuate the GUI via keyboard (now) or voice (in the future). Smaller and smaller devices are coming, and they won't have the luxury of having any mouse buttons.
...2011, I guess since the actor refers to 2006 as 5 years ago. I see some of the elements in MacOS like iChat AV system wide document search (in Tiger). Actually, the screen itself could be viable as electronic ink in 2011 so the video is very much spot on for the future.
The link goes to a vision of how humans interact with computers in uh...
I am left handed, so for me right click is pressing the left button. It is the right button, the one closes to the keyboard that is the normal primary mouse button.
Try but a right handed computer user in front of my computer, and it takes hours for him to not use the wrong buttons.
Just a plain logitech usb mouse.. their software let's you map the third button. I've almost got my mac emulating windows xp mouse functions..
... is that the one-button mentality mandated the "click once to select, twice to open" mentality that still drags down both Mac and Windows OS design. And no matter how much easier people say it is to teach neophytes one button rather than context menus, that is more than compensated for how hard it is to tesch them that the precise amount of delay in clicking controls what happens.
One previous reply lamented how his father after six years still right-clicks and opens things rather than just (double) clicking on them. And I say, Why is that a fault? Double-clicking is just a lazy default; context menus make clear that sometimes you want to do something different with a file than open it.
As for why Apple sticks with the one-button mouse, I think it's pretty clear: Apple is constitutionally incapable of admiting a design mistake. Their selling point is their hipness and their superior design, and they must maintain that image no matter what. So designs might evolve -- and bad features quietly expire -- but only if something "revolutionary" can take their place. Learning from their competitors would undercut the whole Apple mentality.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Has anyone used one of these Logitech MX1000 Laser Cordless Mice? http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/details /US/EN,CRID=2135,CONTENTID=9043
I'm thinking about one of these when my current RatShack mouse dies. But 5 years later it's not giving up...
The more buttons on a mouse the better.
i ew/sma ll%20Real%20F16%20Stick.jpg
i ls /US/EN,CRID=3,CONTENTID=9043,ad=g03
Take a look at this image from the flight stick of an F-16 fighter jet:
http://www.simflight.com/~reviews/com-chrev
The military has invested much Research and Development effort into creating an input controller that will allow it's pilots the easiest way to get their jobs done and survive battle. They must be doing something right.
Having aircraft controls on the flight stick is equivalent to having them on a mouse; having the controls on the cockpit dash is equivalent to having them on the the keyboard.
I am a loyal Mac user, but I do not like single button mice. I have upgraded my Macs to Logitech MX-1000s that have buttons way beyond two.
http://www.logitech.com/index.cfm/products/deta
I work much faster now that I've memorized what each one does. We're not talking a pilot-training learning curve here. Just a few hours to set your habits and you'll be using all the buttons without thinking about it.
It's probably ok that Apple still ships single button as default since there's an expectation for things to "just work" without reading manuals and such for new users.
More buttons are definetly better though.
I absolutely hate having to use both the keyboard and mouse in conjuction to access sub-menus... I used to find this VERY annoying, now I remind you... I started on a MAC. When it was my first happenstance to use a two button mouse to access menus... yes I did find it easier to navigate and get around the screen... Why because I'm not a great typist and I tend not to keep my hand on the keyboard while using the mouse, so I look down at the keyboard to locate the key... the mouse ay move in the process... yada, yada... Control-clicking felt awkward from the very beginning, right clicking felt perfect... and sped up my productivity. Anyone who is using control menus on a regular basis anyway, would probably be more comfortable with a two button mouse...
But as for Apple saying that a one-button mouse is simpler... that's a load of crock... that logic can easily be divided 50/50... but considering how much of a market share Windows has 80 to Apples 12... you would think most users would be already used to a 2 button mouse.
Now Apple folks are going to say this and that about not catering to Windows users... that's fine... but then Apple will forever remain a niche player, catering to the elitest who refuse to see the business side of this. So then what is the point of the MAC mini? Also, understand that most of the world is using a 2 button or more mouse... What sense does it make staying simpler if 80% of the rest of the world is already over that hump?
I went to uni with a guy that had lost his left arm below the elbow. For a laugh we went into a Mac store as he was "looking for a new computer that didn't have windows".
All was going well until he asked the sales rep how to display the context menu. It was very funny seeing the sales rep tripping over his words when he was explaining that you hold down the apple (or whatever) key with your left hand and click the mouse button with your right hand. Another sales rep tactfully came up and offered to sell a two button mouse for $80.
He now uses a PC with a trackball.
PS. Although he only has one hand, he can type at about 70-80 wpm and let me just say "damn it is impressive."
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
You may not have been around then, but when iMacs had recently come out, everyone said they were goofy and sucked. They sold well and revived Apple for the first time in years.
The iPod came out in 2001. We all know Taco's editorializing--"No wireless. Less space then a nomad. Lame." It's a good thing Taco's not running a computer company.
When the iPod mini was announced, just about every single post in the article on Slashdot talked about how it was a failure and an inevitable flop. So, how many iPods were sold last quarter? OVER FOUR MILLION.
Somehow, based on current Slashdot opinion, I'm going to guess that the issue of a one-button mouse isn't going to kill off Apple any time soon. As for me, I prefer them because it hurts my hand to strain when clicking a right-mouse button. It feels so much nicer to use both fingers to click one big button, and any right-click functionality I need is a simple as Ctrl-click or click-hold. I don't get hte big deal. Everyone has described their tech support nightmares with two-button mice, and I have my own as well (including a guy who feels the need to right-click absolutely everything for no reason). The people who would need or want right-click functionality are the ones who would know to buy a cheap two button mouse anyway, so the issue is moot, and anyone still whining about "Apple and their one-button mice" quite seriously need to get a clue. It's a complete non-issue people use to troll with.
but if you want the Apple keyboard for use with your mini you'll be buying the stupid mouse as well. Otherwise I completely agree with you.
yes I do, actually. Its a 2 button intellimouse with a scroll wheel. The mouse that god intended.
Historically, Macs had only one mouse button because desktop computers only used one mouse button at the time, and Apple had a thing for simplifying anything they could reasonably.
The Xerox Star used a three-button mouse. The Star is the same computer Apple is often accused of "copying" to create the Mac. One of the major distinctions between the two is the single-button mouse. The Mac used the double-click and click-and-drag behaviors to eliminate the other two buttons.
And don't blame Steve, either. When Steve was forced out of Apple in the '80s, he started NeXT and built the NeXT, a machine that was supposed to beat the Mac in every way.
It used a two-button mouse.
Mod parent up funny!
Slashdot: You will never find a more wretched hive of spam and zealotry. We must be cautious.
My grandmothers dead. She cant use a computer. My 85 year old grandfather on the other hand right clicks just fine.
Look at Photoshop for a really good example of this as the right-button still doesn't do anything particularly useful in the Windows version, which is a side effect of the Mac heritage.
And yet, somehow, Photoshop still manages to be an extremely powerful application. In fact, it dominates its market segment, on both the Mac and on Windows, despite costing hundreds of dollars, and despite the existence of a major, Free alternative.
Apparently, the lack of right-click functionality doesn't seem to hurt this application much. Maybe there's a UI lesson there.
That is, if he were dead.
Originally, the idea was for a mouse, and a one-handed chording keyboard. Imagine it, you'd be able to enter any textual command at any point on the screen.
Most geeks like command lines because they give you so much more expressive power. One sentence of command line can tell the computer to do just about anything. On the other hand with the mouse you can only tell it to do one thing (or two things if you have a multi-button mouse).
With the second window, that second thing becomes "open up a menu and let me see everything that I could really do to this object". And then you can click the menu and say "do this to the object I opened the menu on".
With a chording keyboard you could simply click on an object, and with your hand say anything you wanted about it. Just type in "do this."
But since we're stuck with qwerty boards (and foot-mice never caught on) we can't.
By the way, Macs don't really use one-button mice. You've got your open-apple-click, your ctrl-click, your shift-click, etc, etc. It's not a one-button mouse, it's a multi-button mouse with the extra buttons on the keyboard.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
that three year old has a 'soft' head, meaning you can still stick stuff into it. For a lot of people, growing up means they are done with school and never have to learn any of this 'new' crap. For those people the diffrence between a left and a right mouse button is much to difficult to learn. Not because it's hard, but because they don't want to learn.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH "TOTAL WIMP" (user 564548) YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF INDEPENDENT THOUGHT!
You said it. My idiot 3 year old nephew keeps re-implementing vectors no matter how many times I tell him to just use the template from the STL.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
yoh... ne1 got nfo on 0day deluxe four buton mice? need lether grip pro edition.. couldnt find it on exeem.
Sincerely,
slashd0t w4rez cr3w
My mom will write down list of spesific instructions on how to do things. I tried explaining webmail too her and one of the steps was to open netscape (this was back in the day, like 5+ years ago). If netscape didn't load quick enough she'd click it again and again, and like 50 instances of netscape would pop up.
Eventualy she admitted that she just didn't want to learn computers, and had no intrest in learning
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
::Looks down at his Apple keyboard::
::shrugs::
Up Arrow, Down Arrow, Up Arrow, Down Arrow
That seems to work fine and is on the keyboard. (Albiet on the right side but so what...) I can also hit the space bar to progress one page in Safari, just like pine.
Most of the time I just use the scroll wheel on my IntelliMouse.
Time to bitch about the slashdot readership again... oh man that line about Taco and the iPod never gets old.
And get this, Al Gore didn't actually invent the Internet. Hahahah!
*wipes tear away from eye*
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
I made the experience that more than one mouse button is really confusing for computer newbies. My girlfriends father (56 years old) started using computers in July 2004 and has still got problems with his two mouse buttons. He sometimes doesn't know which button to click. Another problem he has is the doubleclick.
So this is nothing to laugh about, some folks really have these problems.
I love to use my 5-button Microsoft mouse for Counterstrike.
Button 1: Fire
Button 2: Walk forward (in direction mouse is pointing)
Button 3: Walk Backwards
Button 4: Microphone talk (I only use it when in a room with a friend - i'm never a "t3h gai" loser
Button 5: Nothing yet (any suggestions?)
I've noticed something quite interesting in my time administering both Mac and Windows based PC's:
Whenever I stand above the average Windows Office user to help them out, they are almost oblivious to the right mouse button. They know it's there, if I tell them to use it for a particular task, and they understand me just fine. But for some reason, the pc users insist on mousing all the way to the menu bar at the top of their window to perform 95% of their actions.
The Mac users, all graphics artisits, almost never use their menu bar. They use control/option/openapple and whatever shortcut key gets the job done the fastest. Of the few Mac users that have had 2-button (or more) mice, they constantly ask me what it's used for. When I tell them it is an alternative to option-clicking everything, I usually hear something along the lines of, "Oh, well, screww that. I can do it faster with the keyboard."
I think it all has to do with the specific tasks you're performing from day-to-day. All of the Mac users spend most of their time "building" page layouts and the likes. They'll also spend hours of their time in one program with plenty of time to learns it's interface. They'll pick up on shortcuts in no time at all. If they didn't, I'd imagine they'd work a bit slower than those around them.
On the other hand, our Microsoft users don't spend much time in any one program, other than Outlook. They spend 75% of their day on the phone, researching whatever, communicating inter-departmentally, or whatever they do. None of them care to become faster at the PC because they see no real benefit in it. They know they can use their left mouse button to read/reply/delete emails. They don't spend much time writing works of art in Word, so they don't worry about the contextual shortcuts built-in.
Myself, being a rather technical user, I'd be completely pissed off without my right mouse button and scroll wheel when using Windows (at work) or Linux (at home). However, when I'm using a Mac, I find it much easier to learn the shortcuts than with Windows. It just seems that the Mac makes better use of the keyboard for redundant, neccesary tasks.
My favourite mouse button arrangemet was always the Acorn RISC OS system. Three buttons: left: select; middle: menu; right: adjust. So the left button was the "normal" button, the middle button would bring up the menu (usually including both context-sensitive and general items, so not quite the same as the Windows right mouse button), and the right button would do things like pasting from the clipboard or rotating, depending on application. Where it got clever though, is that when the menu was brought up with the middle button, the right button would then become "select, but don't clear the menus." This then meant you could use lots of nested menus and put lots of toggle options on them, such as bold/italics/underlines in a word processor, say. The result of this was that the middle-mouse-button menus were so comprehensive, most applications had no toolbars or menu bars at all, which freed up a lot of screen space.
Anyone who uses a mac seriously does not need more than one mouse button. Really! As an old windows/linux user I remember how "hard" it was to only have 1 ouse button. Now that I have used a mac exclusively as my desktop I am completly used to the single mouse button and in fact i like it better.
Don't have one? quit complaining about shit you don understand.
Sometimes you want to simultaneously have access to a left and right mouse click. Other times, ctrl click means something completely different.
In my case, when web-browsing, left click is follow in current frame, right click is a context menu, middle (or left+right click) is open in new window, and CTRL+left click is open in new tab.
I've been using this browsing method for years now. If I have to sit down at an OSX box, I have to make sure I bring a scroll mouse with me or I go completely nuts...
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
You'd think Apple would get the hint and be providing this out of the box. Hell my Palm m100 had a more configurable from the get go.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
My mother (who works mostly on Windows) finds that learning to right-click was the single best computer trick I ever taught her. She's not incredibly computer-literate, but it's not that stupendously hard a concept: whenever I want to do a to b, I right-click on b and look for a.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
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.
Using voice control is also easy if everything is in the regular menus. The same goes for simplified interfaces for people with muscular problems. The same probably holds true for other interfaces that I have not considered. Most importantly though, it makes it easier for regular people using regular mice (1 button or 7). It is much easier for me to find a function if I have only one place to look. If functionality can only be found in a contextual menu or toolbar, I end up looking in manual to perform a task.
I prefer to use a multi-button mouse. I want Apple to start shipping them on their professional line just as soon as they can force all third party developers to not include functionality that can only accessed by using a second button, and as soon as they can insure that anything a 3rd party adds that is accessed by a second button, is customizable by the end user.
The addition of a second mouse button would otherwise slow down and annoy users like myself, who like to add the most often used functionality there. Otherwise, it would quickly degrade the UI to be just as bad as the second mouse buttons on Windows.
My Dell laptop doesn't have a scroll wheel. Instead, a userspace part of the driver software tracks drags along the right and bottom edges of the touchpad and translates the movements into movements of the scrollbar. You can also "throw" the scrollbar down (release while still moving) and it'll keep scrolling until you put your finger back down still.
I find it even better than a scrollwheel, so much so that I installed the software on a friend's non-Dell laptop (as illegal as that probably is) so that she could do the same thing. Of course, this software doesn't work on a Mac, but I'm sure someone could create a similar thing for MacOS if they wanted to.
In case anyone is interested, the touchpad and software is created by Synaptics. They seem to have a generic version of the driver software, although I can't say whether or not that'll do everything that Dell's customized version does, or whether it'll work for non-Synaptics touchpads.
no. I don't actually care for a system designed for the least common denominator.
----- If communism is a system where the government owns business, what do you call a system where business owns govern
My Grandma is an expert five button mouse user BTW. So should the default be one button because a very small portion of the population can only handle one button? No.
The place I work has a large number of Mac users. I don't see any of then using the one button mouse. The real kicker is with the lap tops. The trackpad still only comes with one button just so a few grandmas don't get confused.
Silly.
I know you'll say that the option key is also right there on a lap top so it isn't an issue. But this goes against the main simplicity argument. Needed two buttons (option+click) to perform a task is less simple than one button (right button).
From that I'm not sure exactly where to begin with your argument, but I can say at a minimum it wasn't researched, some parts it lacks so much reason that it makes no surprise that the closed mindedness on this issue keeps it making news on slashdot.(Why they seem to care so much about buttons is beyond me, especially when it's clear they don't use the hardware for any real length of time.)
For starters an end user isn't really to know whether or not their software is running on a 8, 16, 32, 64 bit machine. The reality is with much video acceleration and vector calculators often code is running on 128 bit machinery, but you don't know this until you bother going under the hood. This however doesn't change their UI experience, while the mouse button does, and the photoshop argument still stands to reason from your particular slant.(If you wanted to take it down you might have noted that it's one button nature is really to cope with graphics tablets anymore than it is to cope with the Mac platform.)
As for Maya, you might have not noticed recently, but even according to Alias, the promoted Alias user base and even the images used for press, OS X is the preferrered platform for Alias Maya.(At this stage it's most likely a marketing slant i'm sure) But you'll find them noting things like that the loading screen was created by a Maya user on OS X, to OS X being listed above Windows and linux in just about every drop box on the alias.com website.
So sure you might not be trolling, but you are on the other hand haven't done any useful research before hitting reply.(Try that this time before you reply to this.)
So Maya -requires- a multibutton mouse, not from Windows, but from PowerAnimator days on IRIX. Additionally since Maya doesn't ship with OS X as standard, I don't see why it should be made sole-mouse button friendly. If you can afford maya, I think you can afford a new mouse.
Also take a look at apple laptops, be amazed with the shock and awe that they too only feature one button on the track pad... So it's definitely something they like to keep up on all their hardware not just their mice.
This sort of topic presented on slashdot is such a perfect example of why a lot of software for windows and linux is poorly presented and generally unconsumable, the average person in this crowd doesn't 'get' the idea of the one mouse button(nor is interested to), to them it's about a list of technical advantages over an aesthetic design choice, and they most certainly don't get any other subtleties that come with dedicated UI refinement. (Notice that word refinement.. it means not adding crap just because you can, but removing items because you can, the second mouse button, a third...or 7th on some MS mice.. that's the excessive crap that needs removing.) Design relies heavily on what you can take away without having an expense on the experience, the mouse button comes under this.
As a result of this design ethic, you won't find extra buttons on apple keyboards for instant mail, instant internet, instant shopping, etc etc. Which interestingly counters another argument 'would it be so confusing to add another button to the keyboard?' in short 'no, but it'd be stupid and probably damn ugly' *thinks compaq, hp and dell*
The design ethic follows through to most other design choices, from having things in plain white, or plain brushed metal, to having no exposed latches, hooks, etc on their laptops, while other brands are fine having plastic hooks sticking out of their screen.
For the wider /. audience, if you don't get it by now, then don't bother trying anymore, it's clearly not for you.
So, lets see, on a Mac you can use mice with 1 or more buttons.
On Windows, you can use mice with 2 or more buttons.
However, to keep it simple for joe average, Macs come with 1 button mice.
Now, I see that as greater choice. Has anyone tried using a 1 button mouse in windows?
...or "Copy Link URL" in any web browser.
And, no, it's not always possible to just follow the link and copy the URL from the location bar. (For example, a link to a redirect page.)
A wise UI designer would let you highlight the link and choose a menu command.
As for the second part of your post...have you seen Microsoft Word lately? The menus are so cluttered that Microsoft experimented with "hiding" infrequently used menu items. (Which actually makes it harder to remember where those less-frequently-used options are, since they're missing most of the time.) Eclipse also has a horribly cluttered menu system. Even though there are plenty of right-click menus in both those apps.
1. Give a one-button mouse and sell a two-button mouse.
2. ???
3. Profit!
I don't care what anyone says. The intelligence level required to use a two button mouse does not far exceed the level required to use a one button mouse. Your grandmother and mother can figure out how to use a two-button mouse in relatively the same amount of time as a one-button (On the other hand, convincing someone to single-click instead of double-click when you say "click on..." is extremely difficult for some reason). There is no justification for not shipping with a two button mouse other than apathy and profit.
Saying that one mouse button is less confusing is great (and probably true), but
a) I don't think wheels are confusing, and they are very useful, yet absent from Apple mice
b) The Command, option and ctrl keys on the (mac) keyboard are each at least as confusing as another mouse button.
SPAM
Here's a hint, the button status is stored as a single word, with a bit for every button (this allows 32). The code for dealing with button change events over the USB HID interface doesn't care which button changed status: same code path for each.
The end user applications can ignore every other mouse event except those concerning button0... I don't see what the problem is.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Wait just a minute. Let me get this straight.
You're blaming the fact that the Windows version of Photoshop doesn't do anything special with the right-button on the Mac heritage?
That's funny, because last time I checked (just now as a matter of fact), the right-button in the Mac Classic/OS X versions of Photoshop does craploads of useful things - almost every tool brings up a contextual menu or chooser of some kind.
If you should be blaming anyone, it's Adobe for a lack-luster Windows port of a great Mac application.
When apple themselves make a web browser that it's possible to use without needing to use one hand on the keyboard and another on the mouse, I might believe them.
Look out!
Now, here is a Linux/X11 system doing just that, with a touchscreen.
I still don't understand why they didn't at some later point make 2 (or 3, including a scrollwheel) mice standard but require that apps be fully and sensibly usable with just 1 mouse button.
I know (from experience) that it takes no more than five minutes to explain left- and right-clicking to a three-year-old child.
i teach kindergarden. i used to do tech support. i assure you that it's easier to explain *anything* to a 3 year old than it is to a 30 year old (or a 60 year old for that matter)
the three year old *wants* to learn it.... the older folks only claim they do
I'm flabbergasted at all the posts here that claim that any idiot knows how to work a mouse with multiple buttons.
Doesn't anyone do any usability studies on their applications with "joe six-pack" user types?
I've done a few myself (mostly websites) and nearly every time, there is at least one person who has trouble working the mouse to one degree or another:
- clicking the wrong button
- hesitation of picking up the mouse for repositioning
- disorientation between the cursor onscreen and their hand
And let's not even get started on how many people still have a problem with scrolling down a pageSeems to me a few of you just take your own experience levels for granted
Taking your idea one step furthuer: If it came with a clicker that supported 2 buttons, but by default had a trim piece that used both as one, that would be neat. Then we uber-users could just pry the button off and snap on the 2-button trim. Another alternative is having a 2-button pad as a BTO option.
That would be neat. I don't think it will happen though, and only having a single button is not enough to keep me away from this beautiful hardware and platform. It really is just a joy to use.
Thankfully, there are work-arounds as you say. I'll just plug one for anyone interested, it's called SideTrack. It lets you use the physical button for right-click and touchpad tap for left. This is how I used my PC laptop anyway, so it was a comfortable switch.
What's he thinking?? :)
In 99% of programs it does.
Actually, that works fine with a CTRL-click. Mac apps are designed to benefit from 2+buttons, but only require 1. It's a set-up I like because I find a 1-button trackpad more pleasant to use than a 2+ button one, but a 2+ button mouse even more.
Like most kids nowadays, he probably thinks he knows better!
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
While it may be easy to teach a three year old the difference between a left and right mouse button, it's not so easy to teach some parents. Trust me on that.
This is definitely true. After getting used to using my new Powerbook (my first Mac), I feel weird working with the buttons on PC laptops. I do, however, sorely miss the efficiency that comes with having a second button. I think the solution is to provide a second, smaller right button. It wouldn't even necessarily have to be rectangular. Here are three possible solutions, two off the top of my head and one repeated from another post:
left button 3/4, right button 1/4.
Shrink the main button to 3/4 its normal size, and put the right button in the vacated space. This would retain the emphasis on the main button, making it obvious to inexperienced users which button they should default to using. It would also reduce concerns over accidentally right-clicking.
Right button triangular
Make the main button trapezoidal (smaller edge on top), and put a smaller triangular button in each of the right and left hand upper corners. This could dramatically reduce or eliminate the problem of accidentally right-clicking, as it seems to me to be an unnatural (though not difficult) motion to click the upper corner of a Powerbook mouse button. Having a "right" button in both the left and right corners addresses handedness issues.
Hidden second button (two switches)
Someone else posted this idea in this thread, but it's good enough to repeat: put two switches under the button instead of one. Allow the user to enable the second switch, such that pressing on the left side of the button is a left click, and pressing on the right side is a right click. The only problem with this approach is that it does not address the issue of accidental clickage. Other than that, it seems like the perfect fix.
This account verified sig-free since..., uh, never mind.
Actually, most grandmothers capable of using a computer are probably smart enough to understand left and right buttons. People don't get stupider as they get older (in general); but they let their brains atrophy.
My grandmother is still sharp as a tack because she'd never contemplate letting her mind or body fall apart. If your grandmother doesn't keep using her mind so that concepts evidently quite simple become difficult, that's her own problem.
While this particular grandmother of mine dispises computers, her brother (my great uncle), who speaks no English and came to Australia last year, and who didn't start using a computer till he was relatively old, was right- and left-clicking quite successfully according to the nature of the task (without prompting) in the English version of Windows we have. (Actually, some things he was doing better than I would've, because I'm out of practice using Windows. But am I stupid because I keep forgetting I need to explicitly say I want to copy text?) In fact, he even briefly used Linux on my computer without much difficulty (considering he's used to Windows).
And there's a huge difference between right-clicking and control-clicking. One's goddamned annoying because you need to use two hands. The other's a mildly annoying because the person in question is either out of practice learning, refuses to learn, or isn't being taught at the correct pace, but can be overcome.
Look out!
Like most kids nowadays, he probably thinks he knows better!
He knows better *what*? Where to find free adu:1t pr:0n?
Your head a splode
If your user base is mostly Mac, then you'll probably almost completely igore the right mouse button, maybe putting a few things in there for those users who don't see Ctrl+Click as so much of a pain, but definately not providing the same rich context menu support you would if you expected everyone to be right clicking.
No, there's a difference... I think you've stumbled upon it on the end of your post. [Most] Mac developers don't ignore the right mouse button. That would be foolish, it's really useful! However, because the default configuration of the platform is ONE button, they do not link a feature to the right mouse button which can not be found elsewhere. This just ensures good design. The right mouse button is there for speeding up a task, but it shouldn't be something a program depends on. Much like nobody would use a keyboard accelerator (Command-Q, Alt-X, etc...) without having a visible UI component that does the same thing. It's role is a time-saver, and this helps keep it that way.
BTW, it was the ggp that said Macs were for grandmothers, not me. It would be nice if you were to RTFT next time. And I really don't see what "aesthetic beauty" has to do with the number of buttons on a mouse, which in case you didn't notice was what this entire story was about. Learning to RTFA (or even just the headline) would be nice as well.
Damn ACs...
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
...every time I use the Mac at work, it's an exercise in frustration.
So why don't you axe your boss for a 2 button mouse you can use?
You should never explain things in terms of left and right to anybody.
Maybe you've been using a lousy 2 button mouse. On my mouse, my first 2 fingers rest naturally on the 2 buttons. It's no harder to click one than to click the other. It's WAY more strain to hold down the control key. Of course, I've never forgiven IBM for moving the ctrl key from its perfect spot just to the left of 'A', but that's a different story.
I'm left handed, so my mouse is on the left side of my computer. I also have the "left" and "right" buttons reversed. It's a blast watching the computer support people (or anyone else for that matter) come and try and do stuff on my computer. It was had Macs, I wouldn't be able to get this dose of amusement.
un-ALTERED reproduction and dissimination of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED
I saw a talk by a MS VP at Waterloo in 1999. Basically he said that his kids tried to use his Windows PC, and they were like 2-4 years old, and they could figure out how to use anything, but they could not figure out double click.
So that is why as of Windows98 you can 'single click' on a icon, which is now a 'link'. And every neophyte now single clicks, then double clicks, then single clicks on the icon.
I'm not trolling, this is a genuine question - can you give some examples where a right mouse button is required under Windows, and how is the same situation better handled in MacOS?
Right-click on a touch-screen could be done by pressing control too - awkward, but just what you have to do on a one-button mouse, and that behaviour seems to be acceptable judging by the comments here.
What if every key on your keyboard did something different depending on whether you pressed it with your index finger or your middle finger, and there was no visual indication of which you should use? That would suck.
Apple believes that you should be able to tell what you're about to do with the mouse by looking at the GUI and deciding where to click. Deciding which button to click, with no GUI hint, is not in keeping with the whole GUI philosophy. It's easy to think that something's intuitive just because you already know it, but as little things like that gradually creep into a system, it eventually becomes very non-intuitive.
darel@alienryderflex.com
There is no separate button on top: you press down on the WHOLE mouse body.
How Apple can you get?
Christ, I knew Mac users were for the most part dense, but you take the cake.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
Developers can still "hide" options from users who don't understand context menus; the context menus in a Mac app are just accessed differently. So eliminating the right button still doesn't force anyone to come up with a better UI.
IMO, accessing a context menu by holding down the button or ctrl+clicking is less intuitive than right-clicking, not more.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Tell them that "click" means "left-click". If you want them to use their right mouse button you will specifically tell them to by saying "right-click".
http://brandonbloom.name
Where is EnderWigginsXenocide? He/she/it should be here to comment ...
See, here's the thing. I love my scroll mouse. I have a really nice Kensington bluetooth mouse w/ 2 buttons and a scrollwheel and its really lovelly. I just sit on the couch and scroll thru my iTunes library on my TV, and all is right with the world.
But more often, I find myself wanting to go page by page rather than line by line (or 3 lines at a time, or whatever). I usually have one hand on the keyboard anyway, and between Home, End, Page Up, and Page Down, I really don't spend as much time scrolling around (move wheel, reposition finger, move wheel again, reposition finger, etc. etc.). I prefer using PU and PD especially on long web pages (like EVERY slashdot article that brings out this pointless Apple vs. PC debate). If I really NEED to go incrementally, then i'll use the scrollbutton. Even though I could accomplish the same task w/ arrow up and arrown down.
So while a scrollwheel is a really nice feature, I don't see it as imperative. There are a million ways to do most things on a computer. Some people will always prefer one way. Others will always prefer the opposive. That's one of the cool things about being human, see? We all work and think and do things in different ways, and that's OK. In fact, I pefer it that way. If we all did things the same way, we'd never have those moments where someone says "Here, let me show you this..." and introduces you to a concept or action that completely revolutionizes the way you work for the better.
I'd rather think that BOTH a single and multi button mouse are useful and necessary, depending on the operator. That's who should really be making the call anway.
I won't bother to rehash the point that you can get a multibutton scroll mouse for five bucks. Or the fact that not assuming a right-click is present forces devs to program their apps more accessibly and well-organized. Or, and here's something that's really interesting: What PC user really has the option of getting their computer with a one-button mouse for simplicity's sake? The one who buys an Apple, that's who.
Of all the times not to have mod points...
I can't agree more with this poster and the parent. Look at early cars, look at early radios, look at early televisions. There were lots of things that needed to be adjusted, fiddled with, watched, etc. Ultimately the interfaces were simplified to the minimal complexity necessary to do whatever one wanted to do with the mechanism. Apple takes the time to do the analysis of what people want to do with their computers, and simplifies the interfaces until they allow the user to do as much as possible while requiring minimal learning and minimal ongoing effort.
Making the simpler interfaces allows people to do the task they set out to do, rather than spend time making the computer work. Having a minimal interface also allows new users who, as you say, have a lot of "mental baggage" to more easily learn the computer.
Making something complex is easy, making something simple is hard...
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
who uses the standard shitty mouse that comes with a PC? Then stop bitching and get the mouse you want with your mac! I dont see what the issue is. And for users who arent doing much beyond standard consumer use no second button is needed in OSX, contextual menus arent that important. If you are using Final Cut, or something else that utilizes then just get a mouse.
While shipping a desktop computer with a one-button mouse is perfectly understandable (it can always be replaced) what I DONT understand is why apple notebook products don't ship with a two-button touch-pad. It would be trivial to bind both buttons to the same action by default as to not confuse existing apple users, but at the same time, allow those who appreciate the efficienty of contextual menus (with out needing keyboard modifiers) enjoy using their machines. Now - while you *can* get an external mouse for your laptop, that's really REALLY pointless when the whole point of getting the notebook in the first place was to be able to carry it around WITHOUT extra stuff.
Mak'tal shree lok'tak mek'ta sa'tak Oz! - Daniel Jackson
Apple doesn't stop developers (or themselves) from requiring mullti button mice. Also you can always hold the Apple key and click, and it's a right click, this is how you play Neverwinter Nights.
However, Apple just likes to simplifiy things for 99% of uses.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
Doesn't "Tap and Hold" for right click (contextual menus) get in the way of dragging?
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
Actually, Apple has had multi-button mice since the early days. They just put the buttons on the keyboard.
Use the trackpad pointing area itself for single and double click, and click and drag. It takes like maybe fifteen minutes to get the feel of working this way. After you see for yourself how well this works, and given Apple's penchant for the zero button mouse on the desktop, you will become appropriately grateful the iBook/PowerBook includes even the single button!
Once you get used to tapping the trackpad, the same System Preference dialog box also has a setting to change the physical mouse button to act like the right click you insist that you need. Problem solved!
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
"Me: Right click on "My Computer" Caller: Right? Me: The right mouse button Caller: Oh, okay...Now there's a menu. Me: Select "Manage" Caller: okay Me: Double click on 'Device Manager' Caller: Left or right click?" "It doesnt matter" is what i told the lamers. and they listened to me!! cant wait for my mac mini! another linux man converted to OSX. (still winblows at work tho :(
Use the trackpad pointing area itself for single and double click, and click and drag. It takes like maybe fifteen minutes to get the feel of working this way. After you see for yourself how well this works, and given Apple's penchant for the zero button mouse on the desktop, you will become appropriately grateful the iBook/PowerBook includes even the single button!
Once you get used to tapping the trackpad, the same System Preference dialog box also has a setting to change the physical mouse button to act like the right click you insist that you need. Problem solved!
I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
You get hand strain from right clicking? You're voted off the island.
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
Apple's "one button" mouse has five buttons. It's just that three of the buttons are on the keyboard, and one is based on timing:
Click
Double-click (the equivalent of the third button on Xerox original design)
Control-click (the equivalent of the second button)
Command-click (the equivalent of the third button on Sun's original 3-button layout)
Alt-click (the equivalent of the third button on many X11 apps)
Shift-click
How this is simpler and easier to learn than two buttons, I'll never understand. Especially when these extra buttons are not just accelerateors or shortcuts but are absolutely required to perform many functions.
But anyone who claims a single button is easier had better be able to show a study that compared apples to apples... the ones Apple published really compared two-buttons plus only context menus to single buttons with menu bars, and nobody's modern two-button mice actually behave that way.
In any menu system that uses clicks, EITHER left or right click will dismiss the menu and activate teh selected action. IT DOESN'T MATTER.
But I do support, and I still get users who are trying to double-click on things that only take a single click, or double-click on menus. ALL of which is Apple's fault... because with only a single button mouse they couldn't use the middle button for "action" like Xerox had... so they "invented" a second button called double-click.
No, the "stupid users" argument cuts both ways. The answer is, "stupid users are stupid... design for smart users, and train the novices, necause you have to anyway. The only "intuitive" user interface is the nipple.
I think I could live without my right mouse button but I NEED my scroll wheel. Most other new mouse features, save the optical mouse, are just fads.
> There's a rumor that John Carmack once asked Steve .......... AND?!?!?!
> Jobs what would happen if they'd put one more key
> on the keyboard."
What is up with the story. It says there is a rumor but doesn't fully elaborate on what the rumor is.
Does anyone know what supposedly happened in this exchange?
If such a rumor exists, obviously Jobs must have had some answer.
-Michael
Threshold RPG
If there's any mouse that looks like a vagina, it's this one. :)
It's OK! I'm a limo driver!
Every mouse protocol (PS/2, serial, USB) are all packet based and treat mouse buttons as a parameter in the event. The OS drivers will reflect this.
The distinction between an OS which is designed from, as you call it, "the ground up" to support one mouse button vs. many can be summed up like this:
A parameter in an input event packet is ignored. This would be the same field that would indicated which joystick button was pressed or which keyboard key was used if the event class field was not of type 'MOUSE'. In fact the same field is probably co-opted with a mouse-motion event as the X-coordinate of the relative displacement (another field would be Y, and a third, Z, for the scroll wheel).
So essentially, if in your event handling code, you check to see if this is a mouse event, you might skip a switch statement that would respond to combination of mouse button chords you are interested in.
Wow. A whole 5 cycles, maybe. With absolutely zero change in the API. Congratulations.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
None.
I was talking about Moz/Firefox. Which happens to work the same on all platforms once you configure it.
I don't primarily use a Mac, get it?
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
As for me, I prefer them because it hurts my hand to strain when clicking a right-mouse button. It feels so much nicer to use both fingers to click one big button, and any right-click functionality I need is a simple as Ctrl-click or click-hold
Thats nothing compared to the strain of tryin to use the mouse and hit control with the same hand while executing an "open link in new tab". Why couldn't god have given me 3 hands???
Seriously though, 1 button mice boggles my mind and gives me a headache when i try to use it, but I always get a headache when I want something to work how I expect it and it doesn't. With that in mind, why am I studying to be a software engineer... hmm... Anyway, to each his own.
And what about the scroll wheel. I can live without the second button. But the scroll wheel is ESSENTIAL!
Or cartoons aimed at 10 year olds that draw in the 30 something comic book guys.
Nerd: On the episode of Itchy and Scratchy where Itchy plays Scratchy's ribs like a xylophone, he plays the same rib twice but it makes two distinct notes. What are we to believe - that this is some sort of magic xylophone?
Homer: And I've got a question for you! Why is a a grown man doing watching a kids' TV show?
Nerd: I withdraw my question.
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
I just invented an 89 button mouse. It's an 87 key notebook keyboard that you can roll around on your desk, with an additional scroll wheel and two mouse buttons.
Advantage: Only one cable is needed, instead of separate mouse and keyboard cables.
Disadvantage: It's a really retarded idea.
>> My ultraviolent Linux switch video.
If most computers don't have right click, any operator dealing with most users would say "hold down control and click" which would work for everyone.
And I don't even think it physically needs a 1 piece trim, no mac user is going to see a split button and not just think they can click on it...
Looking for freelance Actionscript (Flash/Flex) or ColdFusion work and/or freelance developers. Email me, put Slashdot
I take a class at school on macs, and i have to lug my mouse around all day, becuase i just CANT use a computer without at least a scroll wheel. I understand the ease of use issue, however if it was so easy, why have 3 seperate command keys? I spend almost 20 minutes trying to figure out that little picture wanted me to do apple, control z, for something thats just alt z on pc. I see the argument that pcs have a start button, but that does ONE thing no matter where you are, so i think its more of a conviance button. As for cluttering context menus, i dont see the argument. If i have to go menu diving to find something i can access with just right click (take winraring a new archive for example) It takes LONGER for me to do it, and i know what im doing! Its just apple trying to distance themselves from microsoft, they know its a issue if i can plug in my intelllimouse and have it work in seconds. If you want to say that two mouse buttons are too complicated for new users, anyone who drives pressess two seperate buttons(pedals) for diffrent things, and they cant even see the pedals (or rather shouldnt be looking at them) Anyone who cant figure out the diffrence is just behind the learning curve still, one mouse button isnt the cureall for that, i bet they still havent learned the art of picking up thier mouse.
Like the saying goes, never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes. -Pyrotic
Yep, his stereotype. Thank you and goodnight.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
First, the cursor keys move the cursor. Ever deal with a large text document where you needed to check back somewhere? The world is not just the Web.
Second there's a reason you use the scroll wheel on your IntelliMouse, after all. It's not because you can't work without one, its because it's a better human-computer interface. Since the Mac's claim to fame is HCI, it's a glaring omission from the default shipping Mac. And none of the one-button defenses apply.
(Oh, and why left of the keyboard instead of right? Because, for most of the population [righties], the two places to put the scroller so it's "to hand" are the mouse itself, or the left of the keyboard. On the right of the keyboard, most of the population is going to be moving its hand back-and-forth from the mouse to scroll. Not a fatal problem, but having it on the left is marginally superior. On the mouse, of course, works for both handednesses.)
Apple is targetting n00bs with their one button mouse.
Do you realize how much time is saved by having the right click button and the scroll wheel? Every time I touch an Apple I just think, "ok this is a waste of time".
And the author's claim that once you pick up a 2 button mouse you'd want a 5 button one? Nonsense. The scroll and the right click are essential. Anything more is just icing on the cake, but I can live without them just fine.
Just watch... the Apple fanatics will mod me a troll. But what I say is true.
eTrade SUCKS
"Why is it so difficult to understand that the one-button default is great for those older new-computer-users (I deal with my 75 year old aunt on the phone and my near-60 parents as their computer phone-support all the time)? "
In 40 years, those people will be dead. Everyone who is like you or me will be close to their age. Everyone, pretty much, will have grown up with computers by then, and have a much better understanding of such things. All future generations will also have this understanding. Why optimize for this hump that is temporary? No one really thinks ahead in comp sci -- near-term (5 years max) is about the end of where most people think to.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
None of my wife, my mother or my father use
scroll wheels. When I use it, they complain
that I'm making the window move too much. The
point out a scrollbar is that it's a direct
manipulation thing --- ``grab this, slide it
to where you want to be''. In fact, I use a
wheel-less most of the time and I only dimly
miss the wheel on the machines that don't have
one.
What I _really_ miss is the suntools thing of
middle-click in a scrollbar positioning the visible
window Just Here.
ian
" Nine years after Microsoft invented it, there's no justification for Mac mice to not have a scroll wheel [...]"
I love how history revisionists always credit the winners with inventing everything. Microsoft did not invent the scroll wheel, it was invented by Mouse Systems in the early 1990s. It was *popularized* by Microsoft's Intellimouse in 1996.
In the same vein, I've seen more than a few polls in the last few years where many people think Microsoft is actually the most innovative company in the world. I guess if Greatest Advertising Expenditure = Most Innovative that might be true. Despite what their PR Dept is spouting, as far as tech companies go Microsoft is not an innovator.
How would doraemon use a computer if it has more than more than 1 botton in mouse?
There's a very good reason why Macintoshes have a single button mouse. Right-clicking just plain sucks as a user interface. You have no visual way of knowing what is right-clickable or not, and you have no clue what features will be available before you click. That is something you get to learn on your own, and that's certainly not a user-friendly interface. Remember that Mac OS has a long history of being intuitive and right-clicking is a geek thing. If you want to go the geek way, you can, as Mac OS X supports buttons-endowed mice, but it should not be that way by default for the beginner. It sucks even more on Windows as contextual menus only pop up once you release the button (makes absolutely no sense, isn't consistent with left-clicking, doesn't allow for mistake correction, etc etc), so at least it's done right on Mac OS X.
Moreover, with softwares properly designed at least, the options available under the right-click are also available in the menu bar, and have keyboad shortcuts.
So while you might disagree with using a single button mouse (I myself have bought a Logitech replacement), you have to agree that such choice does make sense and is consistent with Apple's politics regarding user interface.
Open the finder to your desired directory. Give the web browser focus. Drag and drop the image. works for non-finder windows like word documents too. Don't get me wrong, I use right-click but drag and drop is done single button and is intuitive as well for this purpose.
The right mouse button is more comfortable to hit because that's where your fingers naturally fall.If you have an overdesigned 104 button mouse this might not work, but everyone using a normal mouse, give it a shot, it will be good for your hands.
Strange, my stylus allows me to right click. Quite handy in Photo Shop, actually.
No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
Apple's holding off on buttons until they release the iPod Shuffle Mouse. Just press play for some random mouse action.
and the tech ignorant consumer is apples typical target group today?
Seriously, one button or two, I couldn't care less.
But no scroll wheel? Hello? Anybody I know who has ever used it gets so used to this thing that not having one feels positively crippling. Heck, I'ld even accept a mouse that has no buttons and where I have to hit enter on the keyboard or something to click, but no scroll wheel? It's the single best HID-improvement since the invention of the mouse (you be the judge whether that is actually sad or not).
1. Come up with a software/hardware solution.
2. Make it unintuitive, buggy, insecure, inconsistent, and require carrots stuffed up your nose (optional).
3. Profit!!!
Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
But here's the funny part.
l .html#anchor12
http://www.asktog.com/columns/034OSX-FirstLook.htm l
The designer of the Mac's interface says himself that (1) Apple should have long ago switched to a two button mouse
http://www.asktog.com/readerMail/2000-01ReaderMai
(2) Apple should have added the scrollwheel
http://www.asktog.com/columns/035SquanAdv.html
I always thought it was just a roumor or a myth but i now understand that windows users are sub inteligent creatures, i am writing this on a powerbook with a one button trackpad and i have no problems using my computer, i would like to say that i am an advanced computer user and to those that would question it i can sent you a pic of the super computer i am building ( oh right you cant do that with windows) i get allong fine with a 1 button mouse, although at work i use a logitec trackball wit three buttons and a scroll wheel ( it works great with a mac also ) an earlier article mentioned how they fit a PC into a mini mac although on closer inspection it was so inferior to the mini that no reasonable person would use it. the fact is that windows is popular because of maketing and monopolistic tactics, it is the most inferior OS in the workd today and that says something about its users. so lets see here
i stic tactics
bad points
mac
1 button mouse ( falacy ))
PC
Viri
Spyware
Adware
Instability
monopol
crappy software
tech support nighmare
slow perfomance on even the most advanced systems.
(truth)
yea go on and continue to use your PC and complain about using a 1 button mouse.
i would rather use a PET than a PC, its less bothersom to use.
I agree 100%. Same when you are using a graphics tablet: you are supposed to right-click by pressing a button on the side of the pen, which is really ackward, because that button is just in the place where you usually put your thumb when holding the pen in a writing position.
The result, either you are right-clicking all the time, or you end up disabling the silly button. Which starts the pain of not having access to contextual menus...
I had noticed the same effect before, but was at a serious loss as to why would anyone actually try to look stupid.
The thing is, most people _aren't_ as stupid as they try to make themselves look. Sure, computers may not rank high on their list of hobbies, but stupid or completely unable to learn they aren't.
As exhibit number 1: forget mothers. I recently went and taught my GRANDmother to play the latest Sierra empire buiding game. Think SimCity with an acient Chinese theme. Also think a nice 80 year old lady who has positively never ever touched a computer in her whole life before.
You know what? After some coaching, she was doing just fine.
Yes, she _did_ have some problems with the left and right buttons, so I can see Apple's point there. (She: "Which button do I click again to see what's in the warehouse?" Me: "Uh, the right one. No, the one towards the door. Uh. Grandma? You're holding your fingers on itwrong again.") But I find that excusable for someone who started from zero computer literacy at that age.
But again, she was learning pretty damn fast. Especially considering her age. Definitely exceeded my expectations there. But that's what you get when people _don't_ try to be fashionably stupid.
On the other hand, exhibit 2: yeah, let's talk mothers after all. See, unlike most people whose mothers are the example of someone who's computer illiterate, mine used to be a programmer. A damn good one, too, according to her bosses at the time.
Except at some point she caught the "oh, I'm too stupid to use the computer" fashion. And resigned from that line of work. Dunno, maybe it was some new friends she's found. Maybe it got her more attention from dad. No idea.
So I'm surprised at the great lengths she'll go to prove that she's as stupid as she claims. Forget about left and right buttons. That's lightweight stuff.
By comparison, take this: one time I told her to just plug her camera in the USB port. It's something she's done before a thousand times, FFS. (Not to mention she's done far more complicated than that back in her geek days.)
She: "But I don't know which one is USB!"
Me: "Mom, just plug it in the only connector that fits that size and shape. You really can't miss."
So she squeezes the cable between the pins of the serial port. *sigh*
Sorry, there's no way to take that as anything but putting up a (bad) show. There's no f***ing way anyone would think an USB connector is supposed to go there. Except, that is, someone for whom it would be unfashionable to admit that she knows anything about computers, including such basics as which is the USB port.
Another time she went and deleted her photos instead of copying them (and what a good excuse for tears and guilt trips that is) just to show that no, goddamn it, she really can't copy them without my help. Never mind that she's copied them just fine a thousand times before on her own. (And yes, of course I undeleted them for her. But you know what? I highly suspect that she knew how to do that too.)
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
Well, your grandma may be a moron, but mine never seesed to have any problem operating cookers and TVs and a radiogram which looked like a mad whittler's reworking of mission control huston. Strangely, all of them had more than one button.
Since they have spent decades in the real world, I'd back the average grandmother's mechanical aptitude against that of the average graphic designer -- the real drag of the Mac GUI -- any day.
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
....for a fairly complex program, but where I still want it to basicly function for id10ts. This means that my menus, toolbars and context menus are complex. So I put the most "sane" option on single/double left-clicks (usually single-select, double-execute).
You can always reach the other options by menu, toolbar or context (in fact, with Qt this is easy since "actions" keep the three in synch with same icons etc.) And it is in fact usable by a one-button mouse, even though it's never intentionally designed for a Mac.
Depending on who your targat users are (and if you really want to design several different UIs, I don't) this might not apply to you. But I found it quite useful to think this way. If you constantly have to mix-n-match left and right button actions to do common tasks, you're doing something wrong.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I'd be really fine with Apple mouse came with my G5. It has a genius design taking advantage (yes!) of single button setup that whole mouse is the button.
A ppleStore.woa/71201/wo/AW4wffzQMEEn37IbyzE25f9rSqI /1.0.11.1.0.6.12.1.2.1.17.0
:)
;)
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/
Only thing missing is a WHEEL. Wheel makes you addict after using it 1 day. You start to hate scrollbars while browsing. Well, another way exist, use excellent speech recognition to scroll page but you will lose your voice after 1 day
If any Apple people read this using pro mouse, see where your thumb finger is. Imagine a wheel under it. Yes, left side (or right side) of mouse.
I hope someone steals/uses this idea if it hasn't been done yet
They earn at least twice as much money as I do, and yet I find myself standing over their shoulder at least once a week, trouble-shooting their "mysterious" computer problems.
Last week, it was Carl. While in PowerPoint, I told him to hover over a slide and click the right mouse button. He just stared at me like I grew a second head.
Eventually, he did press the right mouse button, and got what he needed done, but then after that, he had to ask "left or right?" after each of my instructions to "click the mouse".
So, on one hand, I can see why Apple decided to go with a single-button mouse. If I had not witnessed such stunning ignorance and stupidity, I would not have believed Apple's argument at all.
On the other hand, Carl has been using a computer with Windows 95 or better since it was released. As a rough estimate, Carl has sat at his PC for eight and a half hours a day, 250 days a year, for nine years. After 19,125 hours of use, why is right-clicking so difficult?
Seriously, if a tradesman did not know how to use his tools he would be fired. A plumber who can't snake? A carpenter who can't saw? They would be gone in short order. An office worker who can't compute? We should expect the same of office incompetents, such as Carl, Gary, and Bernie.
I may be harsh here, but I believe that we should "kill" the "idiots" in the land of computers. If somebody cannot understand the difference between a left and a right click, then he shouldn`t be using a computer in the first place. It`s because of these persons that viruses get spread, or when they sit at our computers we return to find them totally messed up. A friend of mines sister cannot, as well, understand the difference between the left and the right button. At the same time she cannot understand why she shouldn`t "delete the windows folder", and sure as heck she cannot understand why when she pressed "save" on a doc she was working on, it didn`t appear in the diskette she had in the drive. Your (and my) grandma, parents, friends, "idiots" in general (as far as computers go), should not and cannot use a computer without help from someone. And when they do, its bad news for other people. If your grandma cannot understand what is the right click and why she shouldn`t do it, try to explain to her why she shouldn`t open the attachments in her mail. Do it now or ban her from using computers, `cause later you`ll be busy cleaning your PCs from the latest "oportunity letters from Mongolia"...
What you have to understand is that Apple, and to a lesser extent Microsoft, are trying to build user interfaces so intuitive to Humans that you can sit down and use it without having to read a hefty manual, or listen to hours of audio tapes. The archimedes os was missing the point by bundling os instruction audio tapes, in effect it was a workaround to a problem that has existed since the age of the computer operating system. Personally I think apple are closer than anyone, and conversely I personally think KDE is the user interface currently furthest away (sadly, since I like KDE alot).
My other OS is also FreeBSD
I can tell you my experience.
I don't use context menus when I can.
I use GNU/Linux, and gnome, firefox, thunderbird, openoffice, don't make me use the second button.
I don't care what there is inside context menus, the only thing I use is Properties, but Alt-Enter does the job.
I have been using mswindows since 3.0, and used the same policy.
Now I use Eclipse, and there are some options missing in the default menus that force me to use context menus. I hate them. They show up at different places, are difficult to click, and not keyboard accesible. I don't like them at all, and I have had a lot of time to learn to use them.
On the other hand, I like my second and third button so I can alt-resize/move my windows, without searching for the title bar.
Regrettably, though it does add charming symmetry to your fable, that was never a complaint from "Microsoft users" as far as I remember. Cite please?
One example is, regrettably, Dvorak's widely quoted review: The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse.' There is no evidence that people want to use these things. But I'm speaking mainly from my experiences working for Lotus, where people were tightly focused on the PC experience, starting in late 1983; the merits of the mouse were widely debated as it appeared on the Mac and later showed up as first an optional, and later a standard, component of Windows installations. The absence of keyboard equivalents for all mousable actions was a parallel debate.
That isn't the point, is it? Some people who drive cars are comfortable riding bikes or walking; that doesn't mean walking, riding bikes and driving are equally capable means of transportation. I prefer the analogy of standard and automatic transmissions. I drive a standard, and I'm encouraging my kids to learn. My wife can't be bothered, and she gets where she's going just as effectively as I do. I am more competent across a wider variety of vehicles and perhaps in a broader range of conditions (which is equally true on computers), but my advantages are meaningless with respect to her needs.
One-button apologia is sickening. Nothing that you've said matches anyone's experience in reality, even yours.
I don't know what amuses me more; that you're so confident that you understand my "experience in reality" better than I, or that somebody can get so angry that someone else doesn't share their preferences in trivial things.
I usually dont respond to people nitpicking whatever bad english I may produce as I think it is by every definition offtopic, but in this I'll make an exception.
My bad. Shitty writing. The fact that I'm not a native english speaker, it was early in the morning, I hadn't had my coffee and that I wasn't wearing my contact lenses can't excuse writing that bad. Just let me in advance thank the slashdot community for not making a bigger deal out of it, and preferebly let it slide. I promise I will more thouroughly take advantage of the preview feature in the future.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Geeks seem to have a problem accepting that somebody would want to use anything on or with a computer in a different manner than they do.
--
Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius-and a lot of courage-to move in the opposite direction. --Albert Einstein
I suspect this is really bullshit. Those developers that want to pollute the interface with useless functions can rely on Cmd+click, which is basically the same as the right click, only more cumbersome. And those developers that understand the value of usability follow the Human Interface Guidelines voluntarily and then boast about it on their websites.
The real reason is that there is no compelling reason to change the official Apple policy, because everyone can get a 2-button mouse and everyone can use cmd+click, but there is a strong reason not to change anything, because Apple would look stupid for sticking so much to a stupid design decision.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Nonsense. In most windows applications the convention is simple - left click for action, right click for the context menu. I guess Gear Live doesn't really use anything besides OS X, because there is really nothing in Win/Lin world that would justify such FUD.
Mac software has context menus too. It's just that to access them you need to use both keyboard (press command key) and mouse, while with a 2-mouse button you just click the right button.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Look, if there was a compelling demand for simplicity, Logitech would carry a mouse with buttons marked LMB/RMB, Action/Menu or something like that. The cold fact is that most users have no problem with using a mouse and those few that have a problem can be ignored and/or told to FOAD.
Apple's insistence on a one button mouse is just arrogance and stubbornness.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
The parent's point is probably that if you need context menus, the argument about not complicating the interfact with "hidden" menus does not hold. If you make the user use a context menu anyway, why not make it convinient and add a 2nd button just for that purpose.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Because 99.9% of the potential customers already know that mice are supposed to have 2 buttons. If the Grandma doesn't know that, someone should simply explain it to her. Heck, there are lots of things a person should know about computers, it's not the responsibility of software developers to dumb down the interface to cater to the 0.1% of clueless newbies.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
I dunno. I recall from a screenshot that some of the items on Apple menu in OS X require pressing 5 keys.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Your idea has a problem: now there's a hidden trapdoor for newbies. Not many, but the ones who for some reason press only the right-hand side of the button (perhaps they are scared of the computer and timidly pecking at the button in a strange way). Their programs will 'stop working' and bring up a strange menu.
It's important not to introduce invisible extra behaviour - context menus are a convenience, but the items can be reached elsewhere. A newbie doesn't need them, and will be confused if he/she accidentally brings one up.
#define struct union
Then it's too bad Apple doesn't follow that design philosophy either. In iPhoto, for example, the only ways to "Open in External Application" are via context menu, or to change a setting in the preferences to make double-click result in opening in an external application or to drag a photo out of iPhoto and onto another application. There is no such functionality in the normally visible menus (speaking of version 4 - I haven't seen version 5, yet.)
There are numerous examples of it in a variety of Apple developed applications. How about "Open Link in new Window/Tab" in Safari? This can only be done either via context menu or keyboard shortcut. No normal menu item.
Or my favorite: iTunes' "Copy to Play Order". This is only available in the context menu and only when right-clicking/control-clicking a playlist in the sources pane. Nobody even understands what that command does, let alone how to invoke it! :)
It is not always the case that having the functionality also in the main menu is desirable. Do we really want the main menubar cluttered up with commands such as "Copy to Play Order"? At some point the basics get to be cumbersome and so some commands are best left hidden. I don't think Apple has the balance figured out yet either.
--- What?
Well... I remember when the first mice came out with the scroll wheel on it. I remember thinking that this was really stupid. These days, I can't live without the dang thing.
I'm so used to right-clicking on everything these days, I dunno what I would do with a single button mouse other than be massively frustrated.
Actually, that works fine with a CTRL-click. Mac apps are designed to benefit from 2+buttons, but only require 1. It's a set-up I like because I find a 1-button trackpad more pleasant to use than a 2+ button one, but a 2+ button mouse even more.
Couldn't have said it better. I can function great with my 12" Powerbook using the trackpad/button and ctrl. However with my 3 button+scroll Logitech mouse, that's when things really shine. Left click, right click for context menus, center click opens pages in new tabs, and the thumb button acts as f9 for expose' which REALLY helps give window navigation a whole new definition of easy. However, without the mouse, all of this stuff is just as easy to do without even moving my hand from the k/b.
Three words: Font Book, motherfucker.
Yeah, fuck Windows and its font aliasing that looks like it's on a British dental plan... Jaggies so horrible, you could put someone's eye out with MS Word.
Three More Words: Color Sync, bitch.
I'd like to see proper color separations prepared on a PC that actually deliver imaging on a monitor true to a PANTONE color wheel... Sorry, pal, ain't gonna happen.
Add to that, Apple displays are SWOP Certified.
You know what's more.. have you ever tried inserting a special character into HTML on Windows?
Three More Words: Option Button, stupid.
That's right, all your umlauts, em-dashes, en-dashes, accents, carats, etc. etc. ad infinitum... easily inserted into HTML or posted on a form without crawling back to that horrid, sloppy bastard of a word processor just to use the "Insert character" menu to go scrambling for a symbol.
Let's see...
Font Smoothing below 8pt:
OS X - check
Windows - no dice
Organized Font Manager:
OS X - Font Book
Windows - Buy Adobe ATM or a $700 app that has it
True SWOP-certified color and color profiles:
OS X - You betcha
Windows - Productivity? Who wants that in an OS?
A few last things for everyone bemoaning OS X font management, one-button mice, or the lack of a mechanical eject button on the DVD-ROM drive... Aside from all of the aforementioned that makes an OS X desktop look picturesque, compared to the Windows desktop that looks like some retard used a buggy version of MS paint with a palette consisting exclusively of garish colors and absolutely no opacity control...
Pages is the streamlined publishing beauty that MS Word wishes it could be... and for everyone who has ever wanted to kill the guy who insists on using the stupidest animations and sound effects Powerpoint can provide, Keynote is Michelangelo by comparison.
All OS X GUI objects have an embedded alpha channel... Being able to manage continuously variable levels of transparency, OS X has a depth of field in the desktop that all versions of Windows can only have wet dreams about.
This may seem superfluous to the wannabe-geeks who simultaneously believe that Windows has real administration capabilities (I'm sorry... did I miss something or did Windows become a UNIX-based platform?)... but if you're going to stare at a screen for more than eight hours a day, it helps if looking at text and images doesn't feel like razor blades are being tossed at your eyeballs.
Lastly, Core Audio, Core Image and Core Video... Core Audio, facilitating almost zero ms latency sampling, is already destroying any hopes of Windows being taken seriously by audio professionals. Core Image and Core Video will do the same to Bill Gates' dream of Windows and Windows Media being multimedia reference standards. Core Image may also spell doom for Adobe, whose After Effects & Premiere market share is already being destroyed by Apple's Shake, Motion and Final Cut Pro... but Core Image will eventually put in the hands of OS X itself, an enormous amount of realtime bitmap filtering that requires rendering time in Photoshop.
The gloves are off, and Apple, in their most profitable, highest-revenue, highest stock price since the 1980s, is poised for their next greatest trick...
Apple's next big move may very well be to combine the strengths of Quicktime 7 (specifically the H.264 codec) and Core Video to deliver HD-quality movies via an online store as the sequel to the hit iTunes Music Store that proved that, yes, indeed, people will pay for music downloads if it means they don't have to sift through countless half-corrupt Mp3s in a nonintuitive interface that has absolutely no browsing or track preview functionality.
It'll be a real slap in the face to Microsoft, the PC industry and the army of DMCA-minded attorneys at the MPAA if Apple reveals that, as a recent Slashdot article speculated, that the Mac Mini was all-along the proverbial trojan horse that would infiltrate millions of homes to facilitate and popularize internet-based movie distribution.
They felt that having 2 buttons would confuse the user since she would need to remember the specific functions associated with each button. [...] Although you and I actually would prefer 3 buttons on the contraption, we are not the typical tech-ignorant consumer.
They were right. You know, I can't believe with this site being so heavy on the tech worker side that people even bring up this argument. I think they bring it up just to be pricks because they like seeing their own type and like starting arguments.
I know I'm not the only one who's had the extremely frustrating conversations over "no, you press the RIGHT mouse button!" hell, I've taught people how to drag icons to another point on the screen and even that took a few minutes "No, you click and hold down the mouse button, then move the mouse!!" "I clicked on it but when I moved the mouse it didn't move" "CLICK AND HOLD!!!!" or am I the only person who's ever received an entire email contained in the Subject line? I've actually had a completely computer illiterate friend take a basic computing class because he just wanted to learn how to use his system, they took a day to teach them how to use the right mouse button, and he was shocked over how much you could do with the right mouse button. A lot of people are confused as hell over the second mouse button and never know 'when' to use it.
So anyhow, I think bitching over not having a second mouse button is stupid. If you want a mouse with a second button, go buy one for $10, but a lot of the 'clueless lusers' that you always rant about, don't know what the second button is for anyway, so let Apple cater to the lowest common user, and if you're so tech savvy, fix it yourself. I mean hell, the only thing you're limited to is not adding a second mouse button to a laptop, but you're not limited the funcionality due to the ctrl key. Seriously, why is this an issue? Oh yeah, because people like to troll and argue.
IIRC, the NeXT had three-button mice, and Steve Jobs' head didn't explode from the experience.
Not that this would stop the one-mice-button trolls...
--R.J.
Electric-Escape.net
consider the story of the old lady who thought her CD-Rom was really a drink holder. Does that mean CD-Roms should be removed from computers?
;)
When's the last time you saw a Macintosh with an external CD-ROM tray?
Actually, if you saw some early Apple tutorials on navigating the finder, double-clicking was never mentioned in them. They'd always tell the user to open a file from the Finder by single clicking it, then going to the "File" menu and choosing "Open."
Double clicking was an optional shortcut that has become common place.
I absolutely love the ad hominum attacks. Keep it up. You might just become the person you hope to become.
I have used and mastered more than two dozen operating system families (i.e. all Windows versions, 3.1, '95, '98, NT, XP, etc. all count as one, as do all flavors of Linux.. heck I'll even lump in all flavors of Unix as one) and even more variations of hardware familes. The point I'm trying to make here is that there is a tendancy to try and complexify a very simple problem, like trying to get a mouse handler routine to become invoked when a mouse is clicked over a certain grouping of pixels on the screen.
Having written device drivers, as well as helped to form the specs for many hardware devices, there is also a tendancy to throw in features just because, and often those features are never invoked.
I also beg to differ that the number of cycles saved from a ground-up implementation of only one mouse button would be just 5 cycles. And that was not the only point I was trying to make either. There are also additional costs of trying to debug multi-button mouse handlers, particularly when each button has a different context.
I'm not advocating that Microsoft or Linus make a sweeping change in the OS API architechture here. I'm just pointing out that there are some benefits to having a single mouse button that go way beyond user training issues.
BTW, an OS from the "ground up" would not merely ignore an input event packet. That packet would never even be there in the first place. If like Apple has done with the Mac, they designed the equipment itself so it never has to do anything other than merely signal that the mouse has been clicked. That means that from there on up the hardware doesn't even have to translate what mouse button has been pressed, the interrupt has to be invoked alone. The motion information would be handled through other means anyway, but a simple memory copy would be all that is needed to get this information to the application software, or a lookup from another API function that can be invoked if needed. The whole chain from CPU interrupt to invoking the application code, including thread switching, would take just a couple dozen cycles. The threading would take more time to deal with that the event processing itself.
BTW, on interrupt-driven operating systems a keyboard is handled considerably different from a mouse handler...usually a totally different interrupt. Only on the API level does the distinction begin to blur, and even that is based on how interrupt events get passed to the application.
mmm, a mac user can't handle the concept of a right mouse click... yet Adobe in Photoshop see fit that PC users have the joy of Alt-Shift-Ctrl-S to save for web.... its like playing the friggin piano!... Arent they insulting their audience to say "our users dont *get* a right mouse click, but the rest of the world can handle a 4 note Chord?"...
Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
may I ask if you've completed high school yet?
Yes, as well as a BS and MS in Computer Science (the last of those conferred 18 years ago this month).
I have used and mastered more than two dozen operating system families...
Good for you.
The point I'm trying to make here is that there is a tendancy to try and complexify a very simple problem...
Mouse handlers are not a good example. Handling multiple buttons is easy. Polling the mouse for smooth interpretation of movement and acceleration is hard.
Okay, you're right. 5 cycles is hyperbole. But the difference is neglible in any system manufactured in the last 10 years. Even PDAs. This is considering that it is physically impossible to change mouse button state with a human finger more than 30 times a second, which is a reasonable hardware interrupt rate. (d + x + s) * 30, where d is the processing time for a single mouse button event, and s is the time to go from user mode into an interrupt context and back, and x is my additional time to add an OR and SHIFT... I'd say s probably dominates x, don't you?
And sure keyboards, joysticks, et. al. are all handled on different interrupts. Unless they're all USB devices (which is increasingly common, especially on Macs) in which case they all share an interrupt.
And this interrupt does nothing except notify the input subsystem that it might need to copy something into memory... when it gets a chance.
Well, a keyboard interrupt on an x86 PC will also include copying the scancode into a kernel buffer before it disappears, but I digress.
Similarly, the application code could have a switch statement, or not. So what, we might mis-predict a branch if it could handle multiple buttons? How often do you get mouse input events anyway? They're pretty sparse, when CPU speeds exceed 1GHz. I doubt that's a consideration either.
No... I think your strongest point might be the "extra debugging" an application developer would have to go through to handle multiple mouse buttons.
Of course, if it were me, I'd just NOT BIND anything to the mouse buttons I didn't feel like considering, or write my event handlers in such a way that keyboard+mouse strokes and alternate mouse button strokes invoke the same functions.
Or maybe I'll go NUTS and parse a configuration file. You know, like most video games out there or Mozilla or something. Surely there's some example code to help my poor helpless self out.
God... you just don't LIKE multiple mouse buttons, do you? What if we go back to calling them "Red", "Yellow", and "Blue" click. You can color the buttons with a magic marker if it's confusing.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Though note that this method works with Windows too anyway.
And it's not clear to me which method is more intuitive - I myself find trying out right click and seeing what options are available a lot more easier than trying to drag and drop things, and not knowing what effect it will have until I investigate (what about image links - will it save the image, or the target link?)
Indeed, I note how I have always known the right click method, but never thought to try the drag and drop method until you mentioned it.
OK, whoopee, the shuffle functions similarly to other flash music players. And just what else is there to do with a pack-of-gum sized device? Apple's products do not require a 2 button mouse. The software developers write for it, knowing that Apple users have the option, unlike Windoze users. Windoze programmers lazily make these "contextual menus" that most users don't even know about since no one RTFM anyway. Yes, I use Windoze. But those bruises on the side of my head are from the gun that's pressed against it. If I got paid by the useless, redundant click, I would love Windoze. Given the option, I would take my office PC and either convert it to Linux or throw it in the lake to make a lovely artificial reef.
From my Apple menu (OS X 10.3.7) I only see shortcuts requiring at most three keys pressed at the same time. All the shortcuts can also be done with the left hand only (so long as the user has a fully functional hand with no disabilities.)
On a side note, I have not installed any 3rd-party add-ons that replaces the original Apple menu, such as Fruit Menu.
As I write this on a one button iBook - I have to say that although I can't stand not having a two button mouse on my G5 I'm happy with the one button mouse on the iBook.
ctrl click is just not a big deal.
What I really miss is a scroll wheel on the iBook - but then again you never see scroll wheels on PC laptops. And I freaking hate two buttons on PC laptops. Always pressing the wrong one.
You see the iBook one button is huge - so I click it with my right thumb the same way I do the space bar. With a PC I try to click on the button and it is always the right click I hit - not the left.
Sorry - although I'm a fiend for two button scrolling mice - one button laptop buttons are the way to go. I'd have to switch the button mapping over if I had to use a PC two button laptop.
And don't get me started on 'tap to click' trackpads - what a pain.
I don't remember the source of the screenshot and I don't have a Mac nearby to check it myself. I recall it was something related to logging off, but not exactly that. Oh, I got it - it was force quitting Finder (line 3 from the top or something), with 3-4 keys, and there was one more command in the bottom part, with 4-5 keys.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Here's a new one: it's called Windows. Using M$ and Windoze just makes you sound like a bitter pale geek living in his parents basement. As for Apple's products that don't require 2 button mice, clearly you haven't used Apple's own Final Cut Pro, Soundtrack, Shake or DVD Studio Pro. Not to mention programs like Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, any 3D app or so on, all of which would be a nightmare to use without contextualized menus.
This is also a problem for my three year-old son - with our old two button mouse he was forever managing to screw up his games by clicking the two buttons indiscriminately (not helped by the fact that the mouse was way too big for his hand). Now we've got a mouse with the scroll wheel between the two buttons, he can feel that there's two separate buttons and better tell which one he's clicking.
I use photoshop and illustrator regularly without that precious second button. And they work just fine. And I'm just as fast and just as productive without the right-click. Both of my arms work, so the occasional option-click is not a problem. I sleep fine, no nightmares. The nice thing about Apple is that the user makes the decision on how many buttons his/her mouse has. M$ Windoze dictates. Freedom vs. Dictatorship.
You didn't just equate 2-buttons on a mouse to a dictatorship, did you? And for God's sake it's MS Windows.
He never said it wasn't a word; he simply said it was no longer a word.