Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Aug 2005 21:08 UTC
Apple Many reviews of Apple's new Mighty Mouse have already appeared on the web, and most of them were quite negative. Walter Mossberg even concluded: "Microsoft has beaten Apple on hardware design, at least in this one case." Are these findings correct? To find out, we put the Mighty Mouse to the test.
Thread beginning with comment 17637
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: OSX and mouse acceleration
by andrewg on Fri 12th Aug 2005 22:09 UTC in reply to "OSX and mouse acceleration"
andrewg
Member since:
2005-07-06

Just replying to myself. I see you are talking about acceleration. Sorry. Yes Windows is more configurable. I think probably they are trying to keep things simple. Like Gnome, but you seem favour Gnome simplicity over KDE configurability normally. With mice you seem to like configurability over simplicity.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

Gnome *does* allow you to configure acceleration. They call it "threshold".

Reply Parent Score: 5

kmarius Member since:
2005-06-30

Certain things must be configurable. When you work in a GUI, the mouse is the most important tool. Removing the cofigurability of the mouse to make things simpler just isn't an option.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Member since:

YES IT IS AN option !

because most people don't care about
they totally don't care !

I work with people without knowledge of computer : they don't care about settings, they just want to work

to WORK

and the mac os default setting (or even windows or goddamn Gnome ) WORKS

for some people a speedy accelerated mouse will work
for others NOT

I work EVERYDAY (real work) on macintosh (and also linux box) and NEVER I thought I will change settings for my mouse. I can CLICK ,it's aLL I want
(I will say, it's slow as it needs to be for me ,I can click)

and please, accept default choice for commons people
Gnome (or osx) doesn't need thousand or settings (or even one more, even one more is too much).
Hackers can change it, people will be lost in settings .


SIMPLICITY

Reply Parent Score: 0

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

you seem favour Gnome simplicity over KDE configurability normally. With mice you seem to like configurability over simplicity

Simplicity is only optimal when good defaults are chosen by the developer.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Member since:

Simplicity is only optimal when good defaults are chosen by the developer.

Right. But where good defaults can't be chosen because people differ too much, then configuration options become necessary.

That seems to be the Gnome philosophy - rather than offer screens to configure *everything*, provide a UI for only the options they believe people will often want to change, and hide the rest in GConf.

Reply Parent Score: 0