Optical better than non-optical?

[user]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <ejoAALyHEHA.3248@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>, "Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" <user@#notme.com> wrote:
>It may be a royalty issue. Consider how USB took off when Firewire was
>faster and better. So paranoid over the subject are PC manufacturers that
>when they do include it on their systems, they almost never refer to it as
>Firewire preferring to refer to the ports as IEEE-1394. That's certainly a
>proper designation but it still goes right back to the reason why most
>manufacturer's still don't routinely include such ports; I believe there's a
>royalty on firewire to Apple.
>

USB and firewire is totally different. You're comparing apples and oranges.
There are many differences between the two.

The below is a part from http://www.usb.org/faq/

Q7: So how does USB compare to IEEE-1394?
A7: While the two serial buses seem similar, they are intended to fulfill
different market and cost needs. 1394 has the potential to move more data in a
given amount of time, but is considerably more expensive than USB due to its
more complex protocol and signaling rate. Applications that are best suited
for 1394 are high quality consumer or professional video streams and other
high bandwidth entertainment applications; all higher end consumer devices.
USB is appropriate for high and low bandwidth computer peripherals such as
mass storage,video, audio, scanners, printers, keyboards, and just about any
peripheral.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In message <uo5la0t7qpnrvmt6ki78fjgbh4nt4rn7v6@4ax.com>, kony
<spam@spam.com> writes
>On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 GMT, a@b.c (_) wrote:
>
>
>>I know what you mean by jumpy, but, if you're a decent gamer and play with a
>>mouse, you will adjust and adapt. If you have hard time controlling it, then
>>you need to practice. I still play Quake Arena once in a while using my
>>optical ... and shall we say ... It Rocks!
>
>Early generations of optical mice weren't any better than balled mice, any
>quick movement and they'd jump around the screen.

I always chose a Mouse Systems optical mouse whenever I had the choice
(this was back in 1990). It was so much more precise and stable than any
ball mouse. Of course you had to use their mouse mat with a grid printed
on it.



--
Bernard Peek
London, UK. DBA, Manager, Trainer & Author. Will work for money.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <Zg+Oll7zEqqAFwKU@shrdlu.com>, bap@shrdlu.com
says...
> In message <uo5la0t7qpnrvmt6ki78fjgbh4nt4rn7v6@4ax.com>, kony
> <spam@spam.com> writes
> >On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 GMT, a@b.c (_) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I know what you mean by jumpy, but, if you're a decent gamer and play with a
> >>mouse, you will adjust and adapt. If you have hard time controlling it, then
> >>you need to practice. I still play Quake Arena once in a while using my
> >>optical ... and shall we say ... It Rocks!
> >
> >Early generations of optical mice weren't any better than balled mice, any
> >quick movement and they'd jump around the screen.
>
> I always chose a Mouse Systems optical mouse whenever I had the choice
> (this was back in 1990). It was so much more precise and stable than any
> ball mouse. Of course you had to use their mouse mat with a grid printed
> on it.
>

Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
properly.

Modern optical mice are so much nicer since they work on
any rough surface.

I spent the bucks back when the first MS Optical came
out, and I've never bought a balled-mouse since.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Toshi1873" <toshi1873@nowhere.com> wrote

> Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
> Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
> glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
> pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
> properly.

I remember seeing one of those once and thought it was a
horrible kludge.

> Modern optical mice are so much nicer since they work on
> any rough surface.

How do they manage to do that?

--
Bob
Kanyak's Doghouse
http://www.kanyak.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

_ wrote:

> In article <qsidnfEWSrvxrerdRVn-sw@comcast.com>, "Dave C."
> <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:
>>
>> For a notebook, you want a mechanical mouse (the kind with a mouse
>> ball). That's because optical mice don't work too well on many
>> surfaces you will find in motel rooms, and it's inconvenient to
>> have to carry a mouse pad with a notebook computer.

What do you need a mousemat for? My MS optical mouse works just fine on
the top of my leg. It doesn't work so well on skin though so you'll need
to keep your trousers on in your motel room 🙂

>> Also, optical mice (all brands) get a bit jumpy on quick movement.

My MS one seems fine; maybe you have the acceleration set too high in
Properties? That will make it jerky on quick movements.

Parish

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Toshi1873 wrote:

> In article <Zg+Oll7zEqqAFwKU@shrdlu.com>, bap@shrdlu.com says...
>>
>> I always chose a Mouse Systems optical mouse whenever I had the
>> choice (this was back in 1990). It was so much more precise and
>> stable than any ball mouse. Of course you had to use their mouse
>> mat with a grid printed on it.
>>
>
> Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun Workstation with an
> optical mouse and a special glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid
> lines.

IIRC Sun optical mice were made by Mouse Systems.

> What a pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track properly.
>

And making the non-Sun users in the office understand that they weren't
a flashy coaster for coffee cups!

Parish

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Toshi1873 wrote:

> Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
> Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
> glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
> pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
> properly.

I remember those. The thing I didn't like about them was that you had
to keep the mouse roughly aligned to the grid. At 45 degrees it didn't
work properly.

--
Paul

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In message <MPG.1b14b635e02c88269898e9@news-50.giganews.com>, Toshi1873
<toshi1873@nowhere.com> writes
>In article <Zg+Oll7zEqqAFwKU@shrdlu.com>, bap@shrdlu.com
>says...
>> In message <uo5la0t7qpnrvmt6ki78fjgbh4nt4rn7v6@4ax.com>, kony
>> <spam@spam.com> writes
>> >On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 GMT, a@b.c (_) wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>I know what you mean by jumpy, but, if you're a decent gamer and
>> >>play with a
>> >>mouse, you will adjust and adapt. If you have hard time
>> >>controlling it, then
>> >>you need to practice. I still play Quake Arena once in a while using my
>> >>optical ... and shall we say ... It Rocks!
>> >
>> >Early generations of optical mice weren't any better than balled mice, any
>> >quick movement and they'd jump around the screen.
>>
>> I always chose a Mouse Systems optical mouse whenever I had the choice
>> (this was back in 1990). It was so much more precise and stable than any
>> ball mouse. Of course you had to use their mouse mat with a grid printed
>> on it.
>>
>
>Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
>Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
>glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
>pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
>properly.

Those were made by Mouse Systems, I acquired a rigid metal mouse mat
made by Sun and took my mouse and mat with me between jobs.

>
>Modern optical mice are so much nicer since they work on
>any rough surface.
>
>I spent the bucks back when the first MS Optical came
>out, and I've never bought a balled-mouse since.

Ditto.


--
Bernard Peek
London, UK. DBA, Manager, Trainer & Author. Will work for money.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <1084955471.13678.1@a lovely person.uk.clara.net>,
paul.hill_nospam@clara.co.uk says...
> Toshi1873 wrote:
>
> > Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
> > Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
> > glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
> > pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
> > properly.
>
> I remember those. The thing I didn't like about them was that you had
> to keep the mouse roughly aligned to the grid. At 45 degrees it didn't
> work properly.
>

Ugh... thanks for that memory! I tended to cant my hand
throughout the day, so every so often I had to realign
the mouse, the mousepad and my hand.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <10altj7dc8jo36a@news.supernews.com>,
gezgin@spamcop.net says...
> "Toshi1873" <toshi1873@nowhere.com> wrote
>
> > Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
> > Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
> > glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
> > pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
> > properly.
>
> I remember seeing one of those once and thought it was a
> horrible kludge.
>
> > Modern optical mice are so much nicer since they work on
> > any rough surface.
>
> How do they manage to do that?
>

They track the contrast values, not 100% sure how it
works, but it basically takes a "picture" of what's lit
by the LED and figures out whether what it "sees" has
moved in a certain direction. So either there's an
array of sensors that capture the LED light being
scattered, or there's some sort of low-res camera chip.

Mirror-like or other reflective surfaces either don't
provide enough contrast from spot-to-spot to notice the
motion, or the reflections "jam the signal". Shiny
plastic mousepads don't work well, cloth ones are good.

Jeans work well, curdoroy as well. My current desktop
is actually a plain white semi-rough surface and the MS
optical has zero issues with it. There's enough
imperfections in the finish (it's a matte finish that
feels rough to the touch, not a glossy finish) that it
works.

 

[martin]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

kony wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 GMT, a@b.c (_) wrote:
>
>
>> I know what you mean by jumpy, but, if you're a decent gamer and
>> play with a mouse, you will adjust and adapt. If you have hard time
>> controlling it, then you need to practice. I still play Quake Arena
>> once in a while using my optical ... and shall we say ... It Rocks!
>
> Early generations of optical mice weren't any better than balled
> mice, any quick movement and they'd jump around the screen. Then
> they improved a bit and it was more dependant on mousing surface and
> just HOW fast they're being moved. Moving forward, optical
> technology has improved to the point where today, a good optical
> (like a Logitech "MX" series) is a great choice for gaming.
> However, a hard-core gamer will probably want a corded mouse,
> Logitech MX300, 310, 500, 510, do not suffer from the slight lag
> inherent to ALL cordless mice, even Logitech's more expensive MX700
> (though if you're right-handed and not an avid gamer the MX700 is a
> nice mouse though a bit pricey).

That's not really the case. Plenty of hard core gamers (including me)
recommend the MX700. Do a search in alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 and
you'll find it is very popular.

Martin


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.688 / Virus Database: 449 - Release Date: 18/05/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Wed, 19 May 2004 20:53:20 +0100, "Martin" <martin@scotland.org> wrote:

>kony wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 GMT, a@b.c (_) wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I know what you mean by jumpy, but, if you're a decent gamer and
>>> play with a mouse, you will adjust and adapt. If you have hard time
>>> controlling it, then you need to practice. I still play Quake Arena
>>> once in a while using my optical ... and shall we say ... It Rocks!
>>
>> Early generations of optical mice weren't any better than balled
>> mice, any quick movement and they'd jump around the screen. Then
>> they improved a bit and it was more dependant on mousing surface and
>> just HOW fast they're being moved. Moving forward, optical
>> technology has improved to the point where today, a good optical
>> (like a Logitech "MX" series) is a great choice for gaming.
>> However, a hard-core gamer will probably want a corded mouse,
>> Logitech MX300, 310, 500, 510, do not suffer from the slight lag
>> inherent to ALL cordless mice, even Logitech's more expensive MX700
>> (though if you're right-handed and not an avid gamer the MX700 is a
>> nice mouse though a bit pricey).
>
>That's not really the case. Plenty of hard core gamers (including me)
>recommend the MX700. Do a search in alt.games.unreal.tournament2003 and
>you'll find it is very popular.

I'm sure it is popular, it's not at all a bad mouse but not optimal for
gaming. Apparently the primary criteria used to choose a mouse was not
gaming but rather cordless. I will not argue that it isn't one of the
best cordless mice.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:29:16 +0100, Bernard Peek <bap@shrdlu.com> put
finger to keyboard and composed:

>>Ugh, brings back bad memorires of using a Sun
>>Workstation with an optical mouse and a special
>>glass/plastic/metal "mouse pad" with grid lines. What a
>>pain to keep clean so that the mouse would track
>>properly.
>
>Those were made by Mouse Systems, I acquired a rigid metal mouse mat
>made by Sun and took my mouse and mat with me between jobs.

I'm still using a serial optical Mouse Systems mouse which I obtained
secondhand approx 10 years ago. I don't have any problem with the mat
getting dirty, but the metal grid is starting to wear out. Anybody
have a spare? BTW, I have replaced the felt pads at least twice in
that time.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

 

[martin]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

<SNIP>
>>> However, a hard-core gamer will probably want a corded mouse,
>>> Logitech MX300, 310, 500, 510, do not suffer from the slight lag
>>> inherent to ALL cordless mice, even Logitech's more expensive MX700
>>> (though if you're right-handed and not an avid gamer the MX700 is a
>>> nice mouse though a bit pricey).
>>
>> That's not really the case. Plenty of hard core gamers (including me)
>> recommend the MX700. Do a search in alt.games.unreal.tournament2003
>> and you'll find it is very popular.
>
> I'm sure it is popular, it's not at all a bad mouse but not optimal
> for gaming. Apparently the primary criteria used to choose a mouse
> was not gaming but rather cordless. I will not argue that it isn't
> one of the best cordless mice.

It is popular because it is very good for games. What has your own
experience been like with it? There is no lag here - perhaps you had a
problem with your set up. You have actually played games with an MX700
haven't you?

Martin


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Tue, 25 May 2004 18:59:50 +0100, "Martin" <martin@scotland.org> wrote:

><SNIP>
>>>> However, a hard-core gamer will probably want a corded mouse,
>>>> Logitech MX300, 310, 500, 510, do not suffer from the slight lag
>>>> inherent to ALL cordless mice, even Logitech's more expensive MX700
>>>> (though if you're right-handed and not an avid gamer the MX700 is a
>>>> nice mouse though a bit pricey).
>>>
>>> That's not really the case. Plenty of hard core gamers (including me)
>>> recommend the MX700. Do a search in alt.games.unreal.tournament2003
>>> and you'll find it is very popular.
>>
>> I'm sure it is popular, it's not at all a bad mouse but not optimal
>> for gaming. Apparently the primary criteria used to choose a mouse
>> was not gaming but rather cordless. I will not argue that it isn't
>> one of the best cordless mice.
>
>It is popular because it is very good for games. What has your own
>experience been like with it? There is no lag here - perhaps you had a
>problem with your set up. You have actually played games with an MX700
>haven't you?
>

I do not own an MX700 but have used one on multiple occasions. It is
suitable enough and I'm sure it seems great compared to some of the poorer
mice the owners previously used, but not OPTIMAL. WIll it work? Yes, but
not as well as the corded version. Unfortunately it seems that you
plonked down a lot of $$ then can't accept that your moues isn't the
absolute BEST thing for gaming.

 

[martin]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

>>
>> It is popular because it is very good for games. What has your own
>> experience been like with it? There is no lag here - perhaps you had
>> a problem with your set up. You have actually played games with an
>> MX700 haven't you?
>>
>
> I do not own an MX700 but have used one on multiple occasions. It is
> suitable enough and I'm sure it seems great compared to some of the
> poorer mice the owners previously used, but not OPTIMAL. WIll it
> work? Yes, but not as well as the corded version. Unfortunately it
> seems that you plonked down a lot of $$ then can't accept that your
> moues isn't the absolute BEST thing for gaming.

Actually these mice are not a lot of "$$" (even in the UK). It's not a
question of my "acceptance." It is very good for games. It seems you haven't
owned one. Nor have you checked out the UT newsgroup to see the opinions of
others who actually have one. What is really bothering me here, is that you
are doling out advice based on very little experience, and there is a danger
that others may actually change a buying decision based on what you say.
Hopefully our little usenet exchange may at least give them pause for
thought.

Regards

Martin


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Wed, 26 May 2004 19:58:00 +0100, "Martin" <martin@scotland.org> wrote:


>Actually these mice are not a lot of "$$" (even in the UK). It's not a
>question of my "acceptance."

Relative to a CPU, they're not a lot of $$.
Relative to *almost* any mouse, or the corded version, they are.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Wed, 26 May 2004 19:58:00 +0100, "Martin" <martin@scotland.org> wrote:

>
>>>
>>> It is popular because it is very good for games. What has your own
>>> experience been like with it? There is no lag here - perhaps you had
>>> a problem with your set up. You have actually played games with an
>>> MX700 haven't you?
>>>
>>
>> I do not own an MX700 but have used one on multiple occasions. It is
>> suitable enough and I'm sure it seems great compared to some of the
>> poorer mice the owners previously used, but not OPTIMAL. WIll it
>> work? Yes, but not as well as the corded version. Unfortunately it
>> seems that you plonked down a lot of $$ then can't accept that your
>> moues isn't the absolute BEST thing for gaming.
>
>Actually these mice are not a lot of "$$" (even in the UK). It's not a
>question of my "acceptance." It is very good for games. It seems you haven't
>owned one. Nor have you checked out the UT newsgroup to see the opinions of
>others who actually have one. What is really bothering me here, is that you
>are doling out advice based on very little experience, and there is a danger
>that others may actually change a buying decision based on what you say.
>Hopefully our little usenet exchange may at least give them pause for
>thought.
>

Again, let me state that is IS a good mouse, and I have used one, for
gaming on multiple occasions.

You're right, there is actually a chance that a buyer will realize that no
matter how good a mouse is, that it will have faster response in it's
(same optial technology but) corded version. By using one and also
bringing a MX300 I confirmed that same system, same use, did in fact have
perceptible improvement in response, but perhaps everyone is not so
critical of their mouse?

The pause is to realize that it is a choice between fastest response and
cordless feature. If you don't need or can't even notice the difference
then of course the whole point is moot.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:39:07 +0000, _ wrote:

[SNIP]
>
> p.s. And don't ever have to clean that gunk on the ball.

Personally I have never had a problem with the ball. However the
rollers are a problem.

My personal favourite is a mouse with axially inclined rotating
feet. Pretty rare, but certainly a vastly superior solution
than a ball and works on *any*

--
Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk
Northumberland, United Kingdom. Tel: +44 1661-832195