Optical better than non-optical?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

ROTFLOL (;-)


"Overlord" <kurt_SPAMLESS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40774ee1.582604953@news.central.cox.net...
| I can't decide between a vanilla moire pattern or a giant
fractal!
| I'm testing the algorithms now...
|
| On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 19:35:28 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
<p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:
|
| >A real computer geek would have the hair removed and get
a
| >tattoo over an 6x6 area for the mouse laser to track.
| >{🙂
| >
| >"Overlord" <kurt_SPAMLESS@hotmail.com> wrote in message
|
| >| On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 18:31:16 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| ><p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:
| >|
| >| >Optical mice work great on my blue jeans or my bare
leg.
| >| >
| >| >Haven't tried my gut.
| >| >
| >| Works fine on my stomach.... might be the hair giving
it
| >texture tho...
| ~~~~~~
| Bait for spammers:
| root@localhost
| postmaster@localhost
| admin@localhost
| abuse@localhost
| postmaster@[127.0.0.1]
| uce@ftc.gov
| ~~~~~~
| Remove "spamless" to email me.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:OFdiPfpHEHA.3696@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Cats and dogs belong outside or at least in another room
> from the computers.

You'll still get hair in any case, just less of it; either human hair, or
pet hair transferred via clothes. I probably overstated the problem a
little, I doubt I've needed to remove hair because the mouse stopped working
much more than once a year on average (although when I have done, there's
been a little collection there). This is quite a contrast to needing to
clean an ordinary mouse every few weeks to keep it in good condition.

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

Onideus Mad Hatter <mad_hatter@charter.net> wrote in message news:<1nne70p43dm2t0p2eg435dfsb3ojilh485@farfoos>...

> >AFAIK, optical mice are at a disadvantage in only in two respects:
> >
> >1. They draw about ten times the power of mechanical mice, which may
> >be why cordless versions are still rare.


> Cordless optical mice are rare? Um...*checks the Staples
> website*...well you can choose between TEN different models
> of cordless optical mice at Staples alone... 😵

I'm wrong. 🙁 My mouse shopping has been very limited, to models under $3.
 
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 Fri, 09 Apr 2004 23:02:38 +0100, Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com> wrote:


>Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>inherently better than a non-optical mouse?

Yes. No contest!

Bob

Remove "kins" from address to reply.
 
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 Fri, 9 Apr 2004 18:31:16 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
<p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:

>Optical mice work great on my blue jeans or my bare leg.
>
>Haven't tried my gut.

Not a pretty mental image! :)

Bob

Remove "kins" from address to reply.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Onideus Mad Hatter" <mad_hatter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:c6ie70d1lsnfkkip9lhlt90tsbj4sh7e2u@farfoos...
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 19:52:18 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
<p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:
>
> >You might try a WACOM graphing tablet and pen for the CAD.
> >www.wacom.com
>
> Yeah, I was about to say, doing CAD work with anything other than a
graphics tablet is just...not
> much fun.
>
> --
>
> Onideus Mad Hatter
> mhm ¹ x ¹
> http://www.backwater-productions.net

Aaahhh Yaahhhh.
That wouldn't, like, cost money, would it?
I 'm a builder by trade and I spend about 30% of my computer time doing CAD
work. If I was doing it all day every day I'd certainly break down and pry
open the wallet. But for now I will "struggle" with the keyboard and my
fidgety new mouse and stay clear of the learning curve till I have time to
dick around. I think I'll survive. Real men are still using a piece of
charcoal and animal hide!

Still interested in what happens when the batteries run low in a wireless.
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

The WACOM tablet can be had for less than $100 and you get a
tablet, pen and mouse. No batteries required, they're USB
powered. Great for photo editing and graphics, just like
drawing with charcoal. www.wacom.com



"BP" <Zpoweretal@110.neZt> wrote in message
news:107fmtbe3mqo5cb@corp.supernews.com...
|
| "Onideus Mad Hatter" <mad_hatter@charter.net> wrote in
message
| news:c6ie70d1lsnfkkip9lhlt90tsbj4sh7e2u@farfoos...
| > On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 19:52:18 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
| <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:
| >
| > >You might try a WACOM graphing tablet and pen for the
CAD.
| > >www.wacom.com
| >
| > Yeah, I was about to say, doing CAD work with anything
other than a
| graphics tablet is just...not
| > much fun.
| >
| > --
| >
| > Onideus Mad Hatter
| > mhm ¹ x ¹
| > http://www.backwater-productions.net
|
| Aaahhh Yaahhhh.
| That wouldn't, like, cost money, would it?
| I 'm a builder by trade and I spend about 30% of my
computer time doing CAD
| work. If I was doing it all day every day I'd certainly
break down and pry
| open the wallet. But for now I will "struggle" with the
keyboard and my
| fidgety new mouse and stay clear of the learning curve
till I have time to
| dick around. I think I'll survive. Real men are still
using a piece of
| charcoal and animal hide!
|
| Still interested in what happens when the batteries run
low in a wireless.
|
|
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

> "Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>> inherently better than a non-optical mouse?


"Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" wrote:
>
> The big difference is that an optical mouse has no roller
> ball, hence it doesn't require a mouse pad, can be used on
> virtually any solid surface and there are no maintenance
> problems such as grime clogging the roller ball thus requiring
> it to periodically be cleaned.



I must be one of the lucky ones as I never much have trouble with
dirty mouse-balls. At least they always clean up very easily for
me.

If cleaning a mouse-ball is not a factor then is there any other
advantage of optical?
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Actually, I never had to clean them either but I used to see this problem
mentioned in the newsgroups quite a bit. With the advent and popularity of
optical mice, I rarely see such complaints anymore. Still, as with you, I
never had that problem.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
news:94C78C576E03231E75@130.133.1.4...
>> "Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>>> inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
>
>
> "Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" wrote:
>>
>> The big difference is that an optical mouse has no roller
>> ball, hence it doesn't require a mouse pad, can be used on
>> virtually any solid surface and there are no maintenance
>> problems such as grime clogging the roller ball thus requiring
>> it to periodically be cleaned.
>
>
>
> I must be one of the lucky ones as I never much have trouble with
> dirty mouse-balls. At least they always clean up very easily for
> me.
>
> If cleaning a mouse-ball is not a factor then is there any other
> advantage of optical?
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I have had a Microsoft Optical mouse for over 2 years.

Normally within 6 months a regular mouse would give me problems and
have to be constantly cleaned or replaced.

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 23:02:38 +0100, Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com>
wrote:

>"E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish>
>wrote:
>
>> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>>
>> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
>> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>>
>> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
>>
>> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What
>> about a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>>
>> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help
>> to me.
>
>
>Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
 
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 news:<uiaeBfpHEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, Michael
Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
> And I prefer IBM's TrackPoint pointing system to the touchpad found
> on most laptops...That's my opinion, I'm sticking to it!🙂

Absolutely right!

I can't stand the scratch'n'sniff panels you get on most notebook
computers today. ALl the quality makers used to avoid them, but now
only IBM do ... (maybe it's just that the other makers are no longer
"quality").

Cheers,
Daniel.
 
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 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.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Daniel James" <wastebasket@nospam.aaisp.org> wrote in message
news:VA.00000648.06b8b018@nospam.aaisp.org...
> In article news:<uiaeBfpHEHA.3556@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, Michael
> Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
>> And I prefer IBM's TrackPoint pointing system to the touchpad found
>> on most laptops...That's my opinion, I'm sticking to it!🙂
>
> Absolutely right!
>
> I can't stand the scratch'n'sniff panels you get on most notebook
> computers today. ALl the quality makers used to avoid them, but now
> only IBM do ... (maybe it's just that the other makers are no longer
> "quality").
>
> Cheers,
> Daniel.
>
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

> 😵
>
> I'm sorry, could you tell me your name? I just want to make sure that if
you ever applied for a job
> at my company, that I would know not to hire you.
>
> No offense or anything, but if going out and buying a new mouse seemed
like a better option that
> just using a piece of paper on top of the shiny surface as a mouse
pad...um...yeah...
>

Oh that's just too funny. My phone's been ringing off the hook this past
week with people looking for work. We're currently hiring for high six
figure IT positions (the catch is, they are overseas, in rather iffy areas,
and a minimum one year). Nope, sorry . . . you can't have my name. Been
getting too many phone calls already. -Dave
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

$100!! That's three 30 packs!
OK, I put a little note on my bulletin board: Buy WACOM tablet. That'll do
it.
No No No- I meant the batteries in an optical wireless mouse. Remember? Way
back when? 4/9? You got CAD on the brain, boy!

"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:eZlhfiwHEHA.3536@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> The WACOM tablet can be had for less than $100 and you get a
> tablet, pen and mouse. No batteries required, they're USB
> powered. Great for photo editing and graphics, just like
> drawing with charcoal. www.wacom.com
>
>
>
> "BP" <Zpoweretal@110.neZt> wrote in message
> news:107fmtbe3mqo5cb@corp.supernews.com...
> |
> | "Onideus Mad Hatter" <mad_hatter@charter.net> wrote in
> message
> | news:c6ie70d1lsnfkkip9lhlt90tsbj4sh7e2u@farfoos...
> | > On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 19:52:18 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
> | <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote:
> | >
> | > >You might try a WACOM graphing tablet and pen for the
> CAD.
> | > >www.wacom.com
> | >
> | > Yeah, I was about to say, doing CAD work with anything
> other than a
> | graphics tablet is just...not
> | > much fun.
> | >
> | > --
> | >
> | > Onideus Mad Hatter
> | > mhm ¹ x ¹
> | > http://www.backwater-productions.net
> |
> | Aaahhh Yaahhhh.
> | That wouldn't, like, cost money, would it?
> | I 'm a builder by trade and I spend about 30% of my
> computer time doing CAD
> | work. If I was doing it all day every day I'd certainly
> break down and pry
> | open the wallet. But for now I will "struggle" with the
> keyboard and my
> | fidgety new mouse and stay clear of the learning curve
> till I have time to
> | dick around. I think I'll survive. Real men are still
> using a piece of
> | charcoal and animal hide!
> |
> | Still interested in what happens when the batteries run
> low in a wireless.
> |
> |
>
>
 
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 Sat, 10 Apr 2004 13:47:46 +0100, Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com> wrote:

>> "Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>>> inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
>
>
>"Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" wrote:
>>
>> The big difference is that an optical mouse has no roller
>> ball, hence it doesn't require a mouse pad, can be used on
>> virtually any solid surface and there are no maintenance
>> problems such as grime clogging the roller ball thus requiring
>> it to periodically be cleaned.
>
>
>
>I must be one of the lucky ones as I never much have trouble with
>dirty mouse-balls. At least they always clean up very easily for
>me.
>
>If cleaning a mouse-ball is not a factor then is there any other
>advantage of optical?

No mechanical parts aside from the buttons that can break?

Basically the advantage aside from not having to take it apart every couple weeks and cleaning it is
that because of it's nature (not as many moving parts), it's gonna last a lot longer.

It should also be noted that cleaning it (not the ball portion), can actually make it work worse,
since you'll likely clean off all the grease they use on the lil internal wheels that make them move
better. Not to mention that the mouse ball itself will wear down over time, think of it like a car
tire, eventually the treads wear. Now you can't really see the "treads" on a mouse ball, cause
they're uber tiny, but trust me, they're there. After a few years they wind up gettin more hard and
plasticy than soft and rubbery...sorta like when a capstan goes bad in a VCR.

And the ultimate bottom line is that optical mice are more precise, because, as I mentioned, no
moving parts. A ball mouse's precision is based on a whole variety of moving parts, an optical
mouse is based on a laser, with no moving parts, so it's inherently more precise...unless maybe
you've had a lil too much caffeine.

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

CyberGuys sells replacement mouse balls. www.cyberguys.com
They have some nice low prices on useful stuff. Nice flash
media cases made from aluminum, USB cables and Firewire
cables for just a few bucks.

Free catalog too.

"Onideus Mad Hatter" <mad_hatter@charter.net> wrote in
message news:64mh70te2hlls93jit50unaqhc3gl27c2r@farfoos...
| On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 13:47:46 +0100, Piotr Makley
<pmakley@mail.com> wrote:
|
| >> "Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
| >>>
| >>> Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical
mouse is
| >>> inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
| >
| >
| >"Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\)" wrote:
| >>
| >> The big difference is that an optical mouse has no
roller
| >> ball, hence it doesn't require a mouse pad, can be used
on
| >> virtually any solid surface and there are no
maintenance
| >> problems such as grime clogging the roller ball thus
requiring
| >> it to periodically be cleaned.
| >
| >
| >
| >I must be one of the lucky ones as I never much have
trouble with
| >dirty mouse-balls. At least they always clean up very
easily for
| >me.
| >
| >If cleaning a mouse-ball is not a factor then is there
any other
| >advantage of optical?
|
| No mechanical parts aside from the buttons that can break?
|
| Basically the advantage aside from not having to take it
apart every couple weeks and cleaning it is
| that because of it's nature (not as many moving parts),
it's gonna last a lot longer.
|
| It should also be noted that cleaning it (not the ball
portion), can actually make it work worse,
| since you'll likely clean off all the grease they use on
the lil internal wheels that make them move
| better. Not to mention that the mouse ball itself will
wear down over time, think of it like a car
| tire, eventually the treads wear. Now you can't really
see the "treads" on a mouse ball, cause
| they're uber tiny, but trust me, they're there. After a
few years they wind up gettin more hard and
| plasticy than soft and rubbery...sorta like when a capstan
goes bad in a VCR.
|
| And the ultimate bottom line is that optical mice are more
precise, because, as I mentioned, no
| moving parts. A ball mouse's precision is based on a
whole variety of moving parts, an optical
| mouse is based on a laser, with no moving parts, so it's
inherently more precise...unless maybe
| you've had a lil too much caffeine.
|
| --
|
| Onideus Mad Hatter
| mhm ¹ x ¹
| http://www.backwater-productions.net
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

I felt bad when I paid $59.99 for my MS IntelliMouse Explorer, back in '98.
I am still using it today. Now I only clean mouse balls at other peoples
houses.

--

Good Luck!
BB


"Last Boy Scout" <LastBoyScout@whitehouse.gov> wrote in message
news😱8ng705599a7dbldnsmjdj9q2emfk6orlk@4ax.com...
> I have had a Microsoft Optical mouse for over 2 years.
>
> Normally within 6 months a regular mouse would give me problems and
> have to be constantly cleaned or replaced.
>
> On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 23:02:38 +0100, Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >"E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
> >>
> >> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
> >> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
> >>
> >> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
> >>
> >> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What
> >> about a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
> >>
> >> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help
> >> to me.
> >
> >
> >Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
> >inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Can I take my guns with me?


"Anon" <noway@nohow.not> wrote in message
news:fd3d5427d529c988ef25bdc6d200a86f@news.teranews.com...
| > 😵
| >
| > I'm sorry, could you tell me your name? I just want to
make sure that if
| you ever applied for a job
| > at my company, that I would know not to hire you.
| >
| > No offense or anything, but if going out and buying a
new mouse seemed
| like a better option that
| > just using a piece of paper on top of the shiny surface
as a mouse
| pad...um...yeah...
| >
|
| Oh that's just too funny. My phone's been ringing off the
hook this past
| week with people looking for work. We're currently hiring
for high six
| figure IT positions (the catch is, they are overseas, in
rather iffy areas,
| and a minimum one year). Nope, sorry . . . you can't have
my name. Been
| getting too many phone calls already. -Dave
|
|
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 20:52:17 -0400, "Billy_Bat"
<billy_bat@reallyhotmail.com> wrote:

| Now I only clean mouse balls at other peoples
| houses.

I'm tempted almost beyond belief, but I wouldn't touch that line with
a ten-foot pole! ;-)

Larc



§§§ - Change planet to earth to reply by email - §§§
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:%23$hX5VFIEHA.3200@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Can I take my guns with me?
>

No. But in certain cases, you might be issued one. :) -Dave
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Unacceptable, I want MY guns 100% of the time. I'm probably
too old for the job anyway.

Proper equipment would include a 1911 .45 and an M4, with
adequate ammo in spare magazines. And a couple of good
knives.



"Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote in message
news:WsmdnTkSeILXAefdRVn-tA@comcast.com...
|
| "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
in message
| news:%23$hX5VFIEHA.3200@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
| > Can I take my guns with me?
| >
|
| No. But in certain cases, you might be issued one.
:) -Dave
|
|
 
Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message
news:%23Xn3%23TJIEHA.3044@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Unacceptable, I want MY guns 100% of the time. I'm probably
> too old for the job anyway.
>
> Proper equipment would include a 1911 .45 and an M4, with
> adequate ammo in spare magazines. And a couple of good
> knives.
>

There's no such thing as too old. If there was, I'd be in trouble. If
you've got formal electronics training and field service experience related
to any kind of computer networking, send me your resume'. I can't promise
anything, but we are definitely hiring, the work is easy, and the money is
nothing to sneeze at. Oh, my return e-mail address is of course faked, but
that shouldn't be a problem, see below -Dave

On hotmail dot com, I am user "junknothankyou"
On hotmail dot com, I am user "junknothankyou"
 
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 <qsidnfEWSrvxrerdRVn-sw@comcast.com>, "Dave C." <spammersdie@ahorribledeath.now> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse is
>> >inherently better than a non-optical mouse?
>>
>> ...like INFINITELY better. 😵
>>
>
>Way over-simplified. It depends on how you use it. If you are only running
>office apps. on a desktop computer and have a decent (non-reflective) mouse
>pad, then it's hard to beat an optical mouse. 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. Also,
>optical mice (all brands) get a bit jumpy on quick movement. If you are a
>gamer, you might want to stick with the ball. -Dave
>
I have a corded optical by Logitech.

I don't do much games anymore, but, boy, I wish I had an optical when I was
staying up all night playing DOOM on a BBS's. If you have a 'ball'ed' mouse,
you need to get a great mouse pad, that's not made with any felt. I remember
having 2 great mouse pads. One was given out free by PC Magazine. Then it
wore out after getting abused with all the games I used to play. I ordered
the magazine again just to get the mouse pad, but it wasn't the same quality.

After that, I had bought a mouse pad for 20 bucks at Egghead. A mouse pad made
by 3M, a non-slip surface with little tiny hard plastic pyramid shaped
contour. I think I kept that for more than 5 years.

Then the opticals came, it was a savior. Technology is wonderful.
Afterward, I did not have to buy any more mousepads.

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!


Peter.

p.s. And don't ever have to clean that gunk on the ball.
 
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 <fb7e442b1b5ac7926bfa95ea8488f02e@news.teranews.com>, "Anon" <noway@nohow.not> wrote:
>> Because so many desks are made out glass and mirrors...and for those times
>when you want to use the
>> mouse directly on the monitor, oh yeah, yer piss outta luck...but you
>know, white out on the monitor
>> will still work. ^_^
>>
>
>I travel a lot for work. I often stay in one motel room for a week or
>longer, where I have to set up my notebook to do paperwork, check my e-mail,
>etc. I had the misfortune of having to spend three weeks in a very NICE
>motel room where the only place to set up a notebook was a glass top table.
>Had my logitech optical mouse that I wanted to use with my notebook (hate
>the touchpad) and couldn't use it at all. Went out to buy a mouse pad, but
>unfortunately, it was one of the few mouse pads that optical mice don't like
>very well. It didn't look to be too reflective either, but my logitech
>optical mouse didn't like it one bit.

There were always free mouse pad available in all the places I stayed.
I't s black, a bit thick,sometimes in a drawer, had golden letters in front
spelled, B-i-b-l-e. I would flip it over, and use the back side of it.

Sometimes, I would open up and read my favorite passage, Psalm 23.

Peter.
 
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 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).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom