Mighty Mouse

> In reality, there are *far* more actions than just the one.
> Let's see, I can click, double-click, triple-click (thank god
> nobody does this),
[...]

Many (most?) word processing programs treat triple-click as
select-paragraph. This does seem somewhat reasonable: click once = select
point, click twice = select word, click thrice = select paragraph. I recall
using something in the past (exactly what escapes me at the moment) that
also had quadruple-click meaning select-all. That was probably overkill.

I can't think of any other uses of triple-click offhand, but at least this
one exists.

=Tony.Meyer

On 8/10/05 23:23, "Christopher Smith" <xxman.org> wrote:

>> I think you're missing the point; those '8 buttons plus scroll wheel
>> plus trackball' is exactly what the Mighty Mouse was designed to
>> *avoid*. The whole argument for a single-button mouse is to avoid user
>> confusion, by presenting them with a simple design with only one action.
>
> Well, except they have this big keyboard with 100+ buttons on it right
> beside it. ;-)
>
> I dunno, the justification for the single button mouse for me has always
> seemed a bit weak. In reality, there are *far* more actions than just
> the one. Let's see, I can click, double-click, triple-click (thank god
> nobody does this), try morse code ;-), shift-click, option-click,
> cntrl-click, command-click, click-and-drag, not to mention all the
> hideous combinations of the above.

It's not the amount of possible clicks, because if you want, adding another
button VASTLY increases this. It's that with a single button, you cannot
click the wrong one.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

On Aug 11, 2005, at 8:34 AM, John C. Welch wrote:

> It's not the amount of possible clicks, because if you want, adding
> another
> button VASTLY increases this. It's that with a single button, you
> cannot
> click the wrong one.

Actually, I can. In my current situation of using an Apple Pro (1
button) mouse on the G4 and a Microsoft Intellimouse (software not
installed) on the Mini, I find myself occasionally using my middle
finger on the G4 to "right click" something. When that doesn't work,
I start again with a control click.

We're also forgetting that at least for some applications, "pressing"
the mouse (aka "click and hold") brings up the same menu as control-
click (aka right click).

Apple, as usual these days, is inconsistent here--pressing works for
dock icons, not within the main window in Safari (to pick one of each
case).

--
John W Baxter
jwbaxtermac.com

On 8/11/05 10:56, "John W Baxter" <jwbaxtermac.com> wrote:

> We're also forgetting that at least for some applications, "pressing"
> the mouse (aka "click and hold") brings up the same menu as control-
> click (aka right click).
>
> Apple, as usual these days, is inconsistent here--pressing works for
> dock icons, not within the main window in Safari (to pick one of each
> case).

You're still not clicking the wrong button on a one button mouse. The point
of that single button is to remove the potential fear of "what if I do
something wrong?" Well, it's a single button. You may use that button
incorrectly, but you can never click the incorrect button on a single
button mouse.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

John C. Welch wrote:

>
>It's not the amount of possible clicks, because if you want, adding another
>button VASTLY increases this.
>
Not if your guiding principle is that a click events are in no way tied
to keyboard state. Unfortunately Apple didn't follow this principle
(effectively misinterpreting their own studies) and everyone else
followed their lead.

> It's that with a single button, you cannot click the wrong one.
>
Yes, but that isn't what's really happening. You still have more than
one button, just that some of the extra buttons are on your keyboard
instead of your mouse. You can still press the wrong key, and there are
a lot more of those to choose from. There are maybe a dozen different
kinds of clicks actually employed by programs. It wouldn't be too hard
to get that down to two or three main ones plus a few more that are less
often needed (which could perhaps be represented by combining clicks
either in sequence or parallel). This is effectively what people do
right now with programmable mouse buttons. What you're left with is a
device that is more complex than a one-button mouse, but a user
interface that is both simpler and more intuitive. (In what way is it
intuitive that you need to hold down control on your keyboard while
pressing a button on a mouse? Certainly my toddler's intuition leads him
to think that the two should only be peripherally related.)

--Chris

Chris "x" wrote:
>I can click, double-click, triple-click (thank god nobody does this), ...

In many contexts,
   click = set cursor point or select item
   double click = select word
   triple click = select line
The triple is very handy in the rare cases when it's needed.

Carl

>In many contexts,
> click = set cursor point or select item
> double click = select word
> triple click = select line
>The triple is very handy in the rare cases when it's needed.

I'd also add click four times = select paragraph, also very handy!

Chris

Chris Reed, BBR Solutions Ltd * http://www.bbr-online.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12.8.2005, space aliens observed Chris saying:
>>It's not the amount of possible clicks, because if you want, adding
>>another button VASTLY increases this.
>Not if your guiding principle is that a click events are in no way
>tied to keyboard state. Unfortunately Apple didn't follow this
>principle (effectively misinterpreting their own studies) and
>everyone else followed their lead.

I don't think that matters. If you're not a power user, you most likely
don't know about, say, Ctrl-Click. It can't confuse you. Your mouse
still only has one button, so you always know which one to push.


>>It's that with a single button, you cannot click the wrong one.
>Yes, but that isn't what's really happening. You still have more than
>one button, just that some of the extra buttons are on your keyboard
>instead of your mouse. You can still press the wrong key, and there
>are a lot more of those to choose from.

In what real-world situation could this possibly happen? The buttons on
your keyboard are labeled, and each one serves a clear function. In
addition to that, most people don't use the keyboard for anything other
than writing. Surely you aren't suggesting that people accidentially
type wrong letters because there are so many of them?

Users generally use the mouse to navigate their applications, and they
use the keyboard to enter text. Additionally, a lot of people actually
look at their keyboard while typing. Nobody looks at the mouse while
using a computer. That's why the mouse only needs one button, while the
keybaord needs many, and it's why many people get confused by
multi-button-mice, but not by multi-key-keyboards.


>In what way is it intuitive that you need to hold down control on your
>keyboard while pressing a button on a mouse?

In no way. It's not any more or less intuitive than having more buttons
on your mouse, but it's less confusing, because people don't constantly
have to think about whether they should Ctr-click or just click. They
don't *see* that they can Ctrl-click, so they can't get confused by it.

As an aside, I think the click-to-select, double-click-to-open system is
reasonably easy to learn and makes quite a bit of sense. It's a pity
recent developments have destroyed this consistent behaviour.
Double-clicking links to open them makes sense and should be the default
behaviour. Single-clicking on a link should either select the link or
move the I-beam to the place the user clicked for mouse usage to be
consistent.

lucas

- --
"The time when you need to do something is when no one else is willing to do it, when people are saying it can't be done."
  -- Mary Frances Berry

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP SDK 3.2.2

iQA/AwUBQvysdc0zN2kKTjB0EQJKrQCg88nHSDf6tll1BERkebCVKmLvEC0An0JF
Zz64HGFU7fTy30cIacW6vuWY
=XiAO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Christopher Smith wrote:

> the one. Let's see, I can click, double-click, triple-click (thank god
> nobody does this),

Huh? Tripple-click selects either the entire line, or (when you
configure your xterm correctly) the portion of the line starting at the
word you clicked, and proceeding rightward.

Its fairly useful. Especially when combined with middle-click (two
button mouse... pffft!) paste.

> A good general design principle is to keep the ratio of
> functions-to-inputs as low as possible, preferably 1 or lower.

I'm not sure if that's really a good idea, less you wind up with
something like the Space Cadet keyboard. I suspect a better design
theory is to make the frequently used actions easy to perform.

Example: Who actually uses the F-keys to copy/paste? At least on some
Mac keyboards, they're labeled as cut, copy, paste. And in some apps
they do work. But... do you just use Cmd-C/V/X because it's easier to type?

Oh, and I should point out that this 'S' key on my keyboard has at least
 6 uses: typing 's', 'S' (with shift), 'ß' (with option), ?? (can't
remember; with option-shift); save document (with command); save
document as (with command-shift, or sometimes command-option).

Every key has at least the 4 uses of alone, with shift, with option, and
with option-shift. To keep the function to input ration <= 1, you'd
likely need a keyboard with at least 180 keys.

Oh, and let's talk about the programs which use different keyboard
shortcuts, because they have different functions... This keyboard seems
to keep growing...

I agree with you that 1 function per input is unobtainable. I disagree
with you that it is desirable.

John C. Welch wrote:

> You're still not clicking the wrong button on a one button mouse. The point
> of that single button is to remove the potential fear of "what if I do
> something wrong?"

I think that is far better addressed by having a clear, and consistently
implemented, standard of what each button on a multiple button mouse does.
Which, unfortunately, we don't have.

On 8/12/05 16:26, "Anthony DeRobertis" <anthonyderobert.net> wrote:

> I think that is far better addressed by having a clear, and consistently
> implemented, standard of what each button on a multiple button mouse does.
> Which, unfortunately, we don't have.

How do you clearly label what a right/ctrl - click does, since, by design,
it changes constantly

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> I think that is far better addressed by having a clear, and consistently
> implemented, standard of what each button on a multiple button mouse does.
> Which, unfortunately, we don't have.

Yes, and I think this is one thing that Windows has done better than the
Mac. Windows applications these days tend to follow the CUA guidelines
as far as mouse buttons go. Microsoft also came up with little
innovations like having the left mouse button be bigger than the right,
so even if you have no sense of left or right you can distinguish the
two buttons (although interestingly this concept was abandoned as it
turned out few if anyone really is confused about the left/right thing).

--Chris

--On August 12, 2005 8:48:32 PM -0700 Christopher Smith <xxman.org> wrote:

> Yes, and I think this is one thing that Windows has done better than the
> Mac. Windows applications these days tend to follow the CUA guidelines
> as far as mouse buttons go.

Microsoft doesn't define actions for more than the left/right and scroll
wheel. And it has they have the same properties as the Mac does. Virtually
every Windows app does offer contextual menus on the right-click, more than
Mac apps do, but it's common enough on the Mac to be considered Standard
and apps that don't offer right-clicks should.

One thing some Mac apps offer on right-click that Windows apps can't is
access to the Services menu. I've only seen a few apps do this (and can't
find one on my computer at the moment). But adding the services menu to
right-click can make some nice options available.

> Microsoft also came up with little
> innovations like having the left mouse button be bigger than the right,
> so even if you have no sense of left or right you can distinguish the
> two buttons (although interestingly this concept was abandoned as it
> turned out few if anyone really is confused about the left/right thing).

Non-symmetrical mice, like having one button larger than the other, sucks
if you're left-handed. Although I don't bother switching the buttons when I
use a mouse left-handed, most lefty mouses I've seen have been switched and
buttons of differing size make the primary click smaller than the secondary
click.

On 8/12/05 22:48, "Christopher Smith" <xxman.org> wrote:

>> I think that is far better addressed by having a clear, and consistently
>> implemented, standard of what each button on a multiple button mouse does.
>> Which, unfortunately, we don't have.
>
> Yes, and I think this is one thing that Windows has done better than the
> Mac. Windows applications these days tend to follow the CUA guidelines
> as far as mouse buttons go. Microsoft also came up with little
> innovations like having the left mouse button be bigger than the right,
> so even if you have no sense of left or right you can distinguish the
> two buttons (although interestingly this concept was abandoned as it
> turned out few if anyone really is confused about the left/right thing).

That also assumes you're right - handed

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

John C. Welch wrote:
> On 8/12/05 16:26, "Anthony DeRobertis" <anthonyderobert.net> wrote:

> How do you clearly label what a right/ctrl - click does, since, by design,
> it changes constantly

You label it as providing relevant actions for the thing you clicked on,
drawn from the application's menu bar.

Isn't really any more constantly-changing than left-click.


[OK, let's wind this down - it's become ratholed... -Adam]

mine just came today... i love it... did not install the software on my 10.3.8 G5 imac I'll buy the bluetooth model when released!

scroll ball is another unique hardware thingy that just creates interest when seen. love that.

my daugher loves it... wants one for christmas (college student in PC world with a G5 imac that everyone loves)

<http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=08208>

smugjoe

On 16/8/05 15:14, "Joe" <smugjoemac.com> wrote:

> mine just came today

I got mine from the London Apple Store yesterday.

First impressions - I agree with some of what Glenn says; the shape is a
little more awkward than the MS Wireless mice I am used to, and pressing the
side buttons is not at all intuitive yet - they seem to be positioned in a
place where my fingers almost always fail to be. When my first two fingers
are resting in 'ready for clicking' position my thumb is set back of the
side button. My little finger is bang on the side button on the other side,
but have you tried clicking with your little finger?

The scroll ball, however, I am greatly enamoured of. It has a fine control I
don't see with any other scroll wheel mouse I have used, and the sideways
scrolling is a lot better than the 'tilt & turn' scroll wheels I use -
better in that I appear to be in more control of the scrolling.

Surprisingly, being a 'finger-rester', I have not had any trouble with the
right-click. It seems that I naturally raise my index finger to click with
the middle finger. I never realised I did that until I started watching
myself!

Overall rating - 8 out of 10. Apple lost a point for the wires, and another
point for the placement of the side buttons. Other than that it has been a
joy to use. I will certainly be getting a Bluetooth version if/when they
arrive.

--
Barry

Christopher Smith wrote:
> I encourage you to read The Design of Everyday Things as a primer on design:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465067107/qid=1123882944/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-2540177-4237706?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Hmmmm, a lot of the Amazon reviews on it aren't that postive. Well, at
least the text of the reviews aren't; the stars, OTOH...

> Even the 180 key keyboard wouldn't work. Even if you had one key for
> every ASCII character you still wouldn't have 1 function per input. The
> whole point of a keyboard is that you can type in a near infinite set of
> commands. Computers are just too general, have too many functions, to
> ever be able to even approach the 1 function per input ratio. Having
> that many functions alone violates principles of good design (no wonder
> people find them hard to use).

That generality is also their chief strength. There is, I think, a
trade-off at work there.

>
> As a simple example of the one button per function principle, most phone
> companies give you a ton of features available by pressing "*" and then
> a few numbers. Now, a sizeable chunk of the population does remember
> *69, as the feature is that compelling and was that heavily marketed
> that it has entered in to modern vocabulary. Almost nobody remembers the
> other features, and of those, even fewer people use them. If presented
> with a phone and told to keep redialing a busy number until they get
> through, most people will press the redial button repeatedly rather than
> using *66.

That, I think, has more to do with how hard it is to remember all the
weird code numbers than the fact that the 6 key is being given multiple
functions. Either that, or people not wanting to be billed for using
those features. I'm pretty sure that if you introduced 10, 11, 12, etc.
keys for all the *xx functions, people would still not use them.

OTOH, if you gave a voice prompt "Press 1 to have us call you back when
the line is free", I suspect people would use that. Even though you're
overloading 1 as much as you're overloading 6.

I've had mine for a week now. I love the trackpea. It's faster &
smoother than any scroll wheel I've used. I'm using USB OverDrive
rather than Apple's software, since it's a lot more flexible.

I already tend to lift my finger off the left button when I right
click, so I haven't had any problems with right clicking. My only
annoyance is with the side buttons. I find it very hard to click them
intentionally, but I get a lot of false side clicks, especially when
I'm tired & tend to rest my fingers on the mouse surface.

I know this is bad form, but I'm going to have to followup on one of
my own posts with a correction. A few days back I wrote:

> Built-in to the new mouse control panel is the ability to assign the
> application switcher to any button, and the application-switcher does
> let you scroll through the apps using the roller. You do have to hit
> return to switch to the desired app, though.

This is not correct. You can click and hold the button assigned to
the app switcher and use the roller to scroll to the app that you
want and then release the button to select. A bit awkward at first,
but it works. You can even use this technique with the roller-button
assigned to the app switcher.

Discovered this quite accidentally while reading the description of a
third party mouse driver for the Mighty Mouse called SteerMouse:

http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/index.html

SteerMouse adds enlarges the repertoire of actions assignable to
buttons, but $20 seems a bit steep.

Tn