Xref: utzoo comp.misc:7719 comp.cog-eng:1492
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!maytag!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.cog-eng
Subject: Re: Multi-button mice (Re: Xerox sues Apple!)
Message-ID: <63649@looking.on.ca>
Date: 19 Dec 89 05:43:42 GMT
References: <172@comcon.UUCP> <7326@ficc.uu.net> <9320@hoptoad.uucp> <1989Dec18.081450.28019@psuvax1.cs.psu.edu> <2253@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <37371@apple.Apple.COM>
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Lines: 20
Class: discussion

Hmm.  So one button is clearly too few, and two buttons is too many.
Interesting dilemma.

I'm a touch typist, and not so big on mice, one button mice even less.
I can do things with my keyboard very quickly.  And I have an unlimited
array of commands available to me that I can get at quickly -- because they
have names.  I don't forget the names of the things I do frequently, and
there are hundreds of those.

But a mouse is a pain because it takes my hands off the home row,
where they are so powerful.  A one button mouse is worse because you have
to go to the keyboard for any input that isn't just selecting and pointing.
Even a trackball isn't good enough.  Moving hands on and off the keyboard
(as in text editing) slows things down a lot.

But people do forget the functions of mouse buttons, largely because they
are inconsistent.   Perhaps the buttoms should be given names, those names
should be put on the mouse, and never deviated from?
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473