Re: OSX vs XP

Snit wrote
(in article <BF0A6EC7.260EF%SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):
>>>>> Maybe people can use a two button mouse but not attach one...
>>>>
>>>> then that would be a BIG problem for apple, since the mouse
>>>> comes separate and you must attach it. Try again.
>>>
>>> Have you ever heard of BlueTooth? :)
>>
>> Of course. I was referring to the usb mouse that comes with the
>> majority of Macs.
>
> You were? Why change the topic from adding a two button mouse? That is, of
> course, what the topic was when I stated "Maybe people can use a two button
> mouse but not attach one..."

Because that is the mouse that Apple ships with most of their
systems, as should be clear to you. You said that people had
problems attaching a two-button mouse. I don't see how there is
any difference in difficulty between attaching 1-button and
2-button mice. Perhaps you can explain why they might have more
trouble with the latter?

The mouse I am currently using is wireless (via a usb
charger/cradle) and has 7 buttons, along with a clickable scroll
wheel that also scrolls left/right in addition to up/down.
Despite all the extra gizmos, it took no longer to attach than
one shipped from Apple, or obtained elsewhere.

>>> Seriously - how many people can use a two button mouse but not figure out
>>> how to plug in a device to a USB port - esp. one on the keyboard, which is
>>> where most folks plug in mice on Macs?
>>
>> anyone that is too stupid to plug in a mouse should probably be
>> running Windows.
>
> LOL... so it is no big deal for a Mac user to plug in another mouse... I
> agree.

Correct. The point here is should Apple ship a mouse
competitive with other vendors ship, or one that almost all
customers will replace?

>>>> Yeah, but it is unlikely that the gimme mouse would be worth a
>>>> damn anyway. Better to have an option to ship no mouse and let
>>>> you pick one you like instead.
>>>
>>> I can accept that - though I think it would be more likely to have the
>>> single button as the standard and then other mice as a BTO option.
>>
>> I'd rather not pay for a mouse that I don't want in the base
>> price, although Apple probably pays less than ten cents each for
>> those pieces of *** in bulk.
>
> If you get another mouse BTO you need not get the Apple one-button mouse.

That presumes that Apple has an option for the mouse the
customer wants. If they do not have the desired one in the BTO
list, then you pay for something you don't want.

>>> - keeps the UI "cleaner" and less dependant on contextual menus for common
>>> tasks
>>
>> I do not have a problem with a UI that has more capabilities at
>> the cost of it being supposedly less clean. If you are too
>> stupid to use a UI with right-click capabilities, then maybe you
>> should be doing something else, like watching reality TV.
>
> Who said the UI should *not* have right-click (or contextual menu)
> capabilities? Why are you changing the topic?

here we go, the Snit nitpicking filter. Pass.

>>> - eliminates problems for left and right handed users of the same computer
>>
>> I am left handed, yet have never found it to be problematic in
>> any way.
>
> Good for you. So? What does this have to do with my comment - other than
> to offer one claim from someone who is clearly biases - you?

Your comment was without any justification. you claim there are
problems, presumably mostly with left-handers (given population
distributions), yet no reasons for them. If you want to be
taken seriously, provide details. I have been using mice since
they first appeared for PC use, and have never had a problem
with their use due to being left-handed. If there are issues,
what are they?

>>> - easier to learn; as a teacher I cannot tell you how often people ask
>>> which
>>> button to use
>>
>> so? they will eventually figure it out, or give up. Those in
>> the latter camp are too dumb to be of relevance.
>
> Wow... at least you do not hide the the fact you are an elitist jerk.

It's not elitist. If people can't figure out how to use a
mouse, then they better not be trying to use a GUI that is
mouse-dependent. You certainly don't want a GUI designed for
people that cannot use a mouse. That limits everyone for the
sake of a few that probably won't really use it anyway. It's
called pragmatism.

>>> - better for people with certain handicaps.
>>
>> So let people with 'certain handicaps' install one-button mice.
>
> But if the UI is not designed for a one-button mouse what good will it do
> them? Hmmm, you forgot about that, eh? :)

It is obviously already designed for one, since Apple ships with
one. duh.

>>> We can add to that the fact that some people simply prefer a one button
>>> mouse...
>>
>> So let them install a one-button mouse.
>
> Great - just like people who prefer a two button, or more, mouse can do
> that.

Obviously.

> Do you realize how inconsistent you are being?

I'm not being inconsistent, I'm simply stating that a two-button
(or more) mouse would be more generally useful to the average
customer.

> You like a two button mouse -

Actually I don't. I like the mouse described above, but a
2-button mouse would be preferable to one, in most cases.

> so that should be standard and others can
> replace it. Do you think the world revolves around you?

No. But the majority of the world's mouse users have 2-button
mice (or more), with advanced features. As such, shipping
something applicable to the majority makes sense than trying to
honor the wishes of a dead UI designer.

> Is it harder for
> you to plug in a two button mouse than it is for someone else to plug in a
> one button rodent?

Not physically, no. In terms of having to go buy another mouse
for the majority, yes.

>> There are my responses. If you like them, or not, I don't care.
>
> Oh, I like them...

Goodie.

>>>> See the recent Ars Technica article that covered it. I didn't
>>>> save the link, but it was widely reported on macslash, slashdot,
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> If you can not be bothered to look up the link you surely do not expect me
>>> to do your research, do you?
>>
>> If you want to pay me, I'll be happy to work for you. If you
>> aren't really interested, just say so.
>
> Gee, let me think: do I want to pay you to actually support a claim of
> yours... um, no.

That's your problem. Anyone that reads up regularly on items of
interest to Mac owners would know it already and not even ask
for the link.

> Most certainly no. I have no desire to pay you to support
> a think you say.

I do not need to support it, it was basically a reiteration of
something written in a major technical news source. If you
aren't familiar with it, then it is up to you to learn about it,
or ignore it. your choice, I don't care which.


.