30 Sep
2010
30 Sep
'10
5:27 a.m.
On 9/29/10 1:44 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
True. You have to realise, though, that even for stuff I am going to use,
I prefer things I can repair. I know this is odd, but I would rather have
something that needs minor repairs every couple of years (like replacing
microswitches) but if I do that can carru on running for many years than
something that runs fine for 5 years and then fails in a way that I can't
fix.
Fair enough. And I do see where you're coming from, but for
something as pedestrian as a mass-market mouse, personally I don't go
that far. More power to you, though.
None of course, but they all use imaging-based optical positioning
sensors rather than mechanical rollers, axles, and opto-interrupter wheels.
Sure, but the types of functionality we're talking about are far from
"gimmicks". I'm the most gimmick-averse person you'll ever meet (save
for perhaps yourself ;)) and *I* want one of those new mice. Why?
Because I want a scroll wheel that's not a "wheel" (I find them very
difficult to use), and I want two-finger zoom manipulation. This is
real functionality that I will use every day...I know this because my
laptop has that functionality in its trackpad, and I use it to great
advantage.
Just my $6.72. (inflation..)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
Unlike a custom silicon device. OK, I am
strange, but I nearly always favour the simple solution.
Sure, but this is a mass-market device that will never be
"collectible" in any sense. The choice is between a cheap device that will last
maybe a year or two and give limited functionality, or a more
expensive device that will last more likely a decade or more (I have
several decade-old expensive Apple optical mice) and give enhanced
And how many of those used capacitive sensors in place of switches?
"I'm not rich enough to buy cheap tools." ;) *poke*
Indeed not. But equally, I want to be sure that when I buy the expensive
tool I am actually paying the money for what I want. And not, say,
gimmicks that do noting for the useability or reliavility of the tool.