Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!rutgers!gatech!udel!mmdf
From: "kosma@ALAN.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM"@alan.kahuna.decnet.lockheed.com
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Handshake w/ dMouse problems :^(
Message-ID: <21222@louie.udel.EDU>
Date: 8 Aug 89 01:38:39 GMT
Lines: 25

Received: from GEORG.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM by ALAN.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM via CHAOS with CHAOS-MAIL id 31747; Thu 27-Jul-89 12:06:46 PDT
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 89 12:06 PDT
From: Montgomery Kosma <kosma@ALAN.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM>
Subject: Re: Handshake w/ dMouse problems :^(
To: "Eagle::amiga-relay%udel.edu"@KAHUNA.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM
In-Reply-To: Your message of 27 Jul 89 11:43 PDT
Message-ID: <19890727190601.4.KOSMA@GEORG.LAAC-AI.Dialnet.Symbolics.COM>
 
    Well I've never used Dmouse or Conman, but I do use Handshake with Mach II
    and I've never had any problems with them. Mach II has a screen blanker
    with variable time setting as well as a whole bunch of other neat things,
    check it out.
			   ...Peter
 
well, based on some previous net discussion, a couple of months back I
switched from Mach II to QMouse, and found QMouse to be more reliable,
smaller, and in some ways more powerful than Mach II.  I'd encourage
everyone who can get a hold of it to try it out.  The best thing about
QMouse is what I *didn't* notice--I don't think I've ever had a problem
with qmouse interacting with another piece of software, while with Mach
II there were a couple times when I'd had to turn it off to get
something else to run (I don't recall exactly...it was a while back.)
 
monty kosma