Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!pacbell.com!ames!dftsrv!nssdcs!grobbins
From: grobbins@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov (Grobbins (IDM))
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Can't resize windows? (was Re: Windows 3.0 & the Mac)
Summary: one button mouse is more natural for all users
Message-ID: <2835@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: 18 Jul 90 20:40:43 GMT
References: <1990Jul18.173018.18971@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: grobbins@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov
Organization: NSSDC Greenbelt Md.
Lines: 18

In article <1990Jul18.173018.18971@midway.uchicago.edu> gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <BARNETT.90Jul18130957@grymoire.crd.ge.com> barnett@grymoire writes:
>>Apple *knows* that a two-or-three button mouse provides a more efficient
>>user interface. (An Apple employee told me this.)
>First, a 2 or 3 button mouse doesn't provice a more efficient interface.  Check
>out the Next.  A multi-button mouse is _much_ harder to learn to use.

Right.  The theory at Apple was something like this:  to be a natural
pointing device, the mouse should never be something you have to
think about or look down at.  WIth 2 and 3 button mice, even experienced 
users frequently pause to think about which button they're pressing.

After noting how multiple buttons made mice more complex and less natural,
Apple worked to have the Lisa use a one-button mouse.  You can always argue 
that three buttons are necessary or better, but Apple's original rationale 
still holds.

Grobbins      grobbins@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov