Jayomatic
Active Member
yeah, but the feeling still bothers me and I find the ball really tiny to get used to.
|
|
|
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
- Status
RedRocket191
Senior Member
It also gunks up very easily. I got my iMac in August, and the scroll ball doesn't work anymore due to dirt and dust inside.
MetroMan
Senior Member
I've become so proficient with my MacBook Pro's multi touch trackpad that I can't even go back to a mouse. It's made me quite productive, all the while getting rid of the sore wrist I used to have when using a mouse.
afransen
Senior Member
A classic example of PC vs Mac ignorance.
Mac's can use any mouse you can throw at it... 2 buttons... 20 buttons.
Secondary clicks (which Windows calls "Right Click") can be accessed by tapping the right side of a Mac (Mighty) Mouse or touching two fingers to a MacBook trackpad instead of one and clicking.
The latter is the most intuitive user interface action since Apple first introduced the Mouse to computer users over 20 years ago.
Scrolling by dragging two fingers on the trackpad and now pinching to zoom in and out are a good example of how Apple's at the forefront of innovation in computing.
I'm not sure that Apple can claim that technology/HCI concept. They may be the first to commercialise it in a home computer...
MetroMan
Senior Member
Yes of course, like the mouse... and the GUI.
Apple's always been at the forefront. Steve Jobs has a knack for realizing the potential of key technologies and implements them in straight forward beautiful industrial design.
Hence, Apple introduced the mouse to the computing public.... hence Apple introduced the graphical user interface to a BASIC and DOS typing world... and 1984 was not like 1984.
Apple pioneered the floppy disk in personal computers and was the first to discard it in the 90's. They're pioneering the first consumer multi touch devices (iPhone) which will be the biggest revolution in personal computers since the invention of the mouse.
Apple is an innovator and a risk taker. Microsoft often comes behind and tries to implement these successes without getting too far away from the safety of the status quo. This is why I prefer one over the other. This is why Vista is failing.
Don't get me wrong. I don't want to see Microsoft fail. Like I said, I think they got it right with X BOX.
Bill Gates recently took the best step for his company since its inception: he left. It's time for the Steve Balmers of the company to do the same and hand over the reigns to young blood that understands how to serve the consumer market.
As is being proved by the Asus EEE PC, the future of consumer level operating systems is in multiple compatible OS's versus one big monopoly. We're beginning to see that computers should be accessible as any other home appliance. Microsoft's bloated OS does not provide that. Over the next few years, we're going to see multiple flavors of Linux emerge as pre-installed proprietary OS's of Sony, HP and Dell PC's. We might even see the much whispered about Google OS. Apple OS X is going to be a part of that ecosystem of OS's.
Bold statement: Windows XP was the last Microsoft monopoly in the OS business. They had the chance to extend it with Vista but we're seeing where that's going. Windows 7 (even if it's all that is promised) will be too late to the game.
Apple's always been at the forefront. Steve Jobs has a knack for realizing the potential of key technologies and implements them in straight forward beautiful industrial design.
Hence, Apple introduced the mouse to the computing public.... hence Apple introduced the graphical user interface to a BASIC and DOS typing world... and 1984 was not like 1984.
Apple pioneered the floppy disk in personal computers and was the first to discard it in the 90's. They're pioneering the first consumer multi touch devices (iPhone) which will be the biggest revolution in personal computers since the invention of the mouse.
Apple is an innovator and a risk taker. Microsoft often comes behind and tries to implement these successes without getting too far away from the safety of the status quo. This is why I prefer one over the other. This is why Vista is failing.
Don't get me wrong. I don't want to see Microsoft fail. Like I said, I think they got it right with X BOX.
Bill Gates recently took the best step for his company since its inception: he left. It's time for the Steve Balmers of the company to do the same and hand over the reigns to young blood that understands how to serve the consumer market.
As is being proved by the Asus EEE PC, the future of consumer level operating systems is in multiple compatible OS's versus one big monopoly. We're beginning to see that computers should be accessible as any other home appliance. Microsoft's bloated OS does not provide that. Over the next few years, we're going to see multiple flavors of Linux emerge as pre-installed proprietary OS's of Sony, HP and Dell PC's. We might even see the much whispered about Google OS. Apple OS X is going to be a part of that ecosystem of OS's.
Bold statement: Windows XP was the last Microsoft monopoly in the OS business. They had the chance to extend it with Vista but we're seeing where that's going. Windows 7 (even if it's all that is promised) will be too late to the game.
299 bloor call control.
Senior Member
Then hook up ANY mouse... Up until I got my Mighty Mouse (which I love), I was using my ol' PC mouse and it worked fine, scroll wheel and everything.
Steve_D
New Member
Apple or Xerox...so easy to confuse the two
Jayomatic
Active Member
Yeah. thats what i've been doing. I've got my multi button logitech on it. I had to retire my 8 year old microsoft laser mouse recently but they did get along for about 6 years before they decided to stop working with one another.
afransen
Senior Member
I don't know... according to some web studies of web traffic, 97% of home PCs run Windows, and that proportion actually increased. I'm not nearly so convinced that Microsoft is about the be toppled. I, too, hope heads will roll over Vista.
In the end, there are some serious problems with the paradigm of all major OSes in terms of bloat-ware and instability. Microkernels are the wave of the future, especially as the slight performance cost becomes increasingly irrelevant in the face of high levels of unreliability (buy the computer, plug it in, and it works flawlessly for 6 years--that's where PCs have to go).
In the end, there are some serious problems with the paradigm of all major OSes in terms of bloat-ware and instability. Microkernels are the wave of the future, especially as the slight performance cost becomes increasingly irrelevant in the face of high levels of unreliability (buy the computer, plug it in, and it works flawlessly for 6 years--that's where PCs have to go).
Brandon716
Senior Member
There is one thing about Windows XP that I'll give it credit for. It was truly the first really usable version of Windows. Windows 98 and previous versions were so crash-proned that it made it very hard to use for any significant period of time.
The first version of Windows I ever used was Windows 3.1 on a friend's computer, before I had a home PC as a small kid. To be honest, from what I recollect, Windows 3.1 and 3.11 had plenty of shortcomings: no plug and play, 8 character limitations due to its DOS roots, but it actually was fairly stable from what I remember. Now if one program crashed it practically brought the entire system down. There was no ctrl-alt-del then just end application of your choosing. So yea it was technically inferior in many ways, but I don't remember Win 3.1 crashing as much as Win 95 when it first came out.
That old Windows 3.1 PC was multi-media enabled and I remember running plenty of advanced applications for its day, and it never crashed much. You gotta remember, just having a sound card and CD-ROM drive was considered advanced back in the day. LOL
Windows 95 introduced so many new features I think it caused it to be very crash-proned. Windows 98-ME is the same deal. My first PC had Windows 3.1 on it and I upgraded to Windows 95 a year after. Even with a clean installation it never was that stable.
Windows XP came along and aside from some horrible worms that caused the thing to crash before SP2, it has been the most stable version of Windows that had ever come out relative to its predecessors.
The first version of Windows I ever used was Windows 3.1 on a friend's computer, before I had a home PC as a small kid. To be honest, from what I recollect, Windows 3.1 and 3.11 had plenty of shortcomings: no plug and play, 8 character limitations due to its DOS roots, but it actually was fairly stable from what I remember. Now if one program crashed it practically brought the entire system down. There was no ctrl-alt-del then just end application of your choosing. So yea it was technically inferior in many ways, but I don't remember Win 3.1 crashing as much as Win 95 when it first came out.
That old Windows 3.1 PC was multi-media enabled and I remember running plenty of advanced applications for its day, and it never crashed much. You gotta remember, just having a sound card and CD-ROM drive was considered advanced back in the day. LOL
Windows 95 introduced so many new features I think it caused it to be very crash-proned. Windows 98-ME is the same deal. My first PC had Windows 3.1 on it and I upgraded to Windows 95 a year after. Even with a clean installation it never was that stable.
Windows XP came along and aside from some horrible worms that caused the thing to crash before SP2, it has been the most stable version of Windows that had ever come out relative to its predecessors.
Brandon716
Senior Member
*double*
syn
Senior Member
Apple lifted the GUI straight from Xerox.
Apple really didn't pioneer the multi touch device. It's been in development for years. It's an evolution of the touch screen that's been around for ages on phones and touch screen monitors. MS has their own, multi-touch devices coming out too (Surfaces).
Apple has produced some nice hardware and software, but they've also produced their share of duds. Even some of their current products aren't very well designed.
Apple markets itself as an innovator and people buy into it. If they actually took the time to do some research they'd see that some of the "innovative" concepts/products that Apple has introduced already exist.
If you look at the research most companies do (including MS) there's some pretty impressive stuff going on. Apple is great at marketing their products and have an easier time getting software to the market, but they're just another large company that uses the same kind of tactics MS does.
I'm not sure how Vista makes the computer that unaccessible. While it's far from perfect that seems to be a pretty extreme statement.
You may be right. I'm not so sure though. If it's improved with the next SP or two it could end up being like XP - criticized a lot at first but then appreciated.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Apple or Xerox...so easy to confuse the two
Xerox introduced the mouse to computer users? Xerox was the inventor. Apple brought the mouse to mass market, as they did the GUI, as they did the floppy and as they're doing with multi touch.
Let me clear up what I'm saying here. Apple did not invent the mouse. They did not invent the GUI. They didn't invent mp3 players. They saw the potential of a technology and knew how to bring it to market.
syn
Senior Member
None of this is innovation. It's just marketing. Taking technology developed by others and making money off of it is one of the main things people slag Microsoft for.
doady
Senior Member
A classic example of PC vs Mac ignorance.
Mac's can use any mouse you can throw at it... 2 buttons... 20 buttons.
Secondary clicks (which Windows calls "Right Click") can be accessed by tapping the right side of a Mac (Mighty) Mouse or touching two fingers to a MacBook trackpad instead of one and clicking.
The latter is the most intuitive user interface action since Apple first introduced the Mouse to computer users over 20 years ago.
Scrolling by dragging two fingers on the trackpad and now pinching to zoom in and out are a good example of how Apple's at the forefront of innovation in computing.
Macs are advertised with single button mice. Every display I've seen has a single-button mouse and Mac keyboards even have special button to simulate right-click. It suggests to me that Mac is not serious product, and that it does not cater to serious computer users.
It is also ridiculous to say that Microsoft "got it right" with the Xbox. The Xbox is garbage. Microsoft actually lost money on each Xbox sold. It was huge, and its original controller was huge. Just poor design overall.
- Status