Apple Requires Three-Button Mouse for Shake 2.5 116
SpillerC writes "The requirements for the newest version of Shake (cross-platform: Mac OS X, Linux, Windows, Irix) will require a three-button mouse on the Mac. Are there any other Apple-produced applications (Apple owns Shake) that require a three-button mouse? Will Apple release its own three-button mouse now?"
It is too early for this crap (Score:2, Insightful)
Does Dell ship cad/cam tablets standard because AutoCad suggests using them?
What kind of nonsense news is this anyway? Can't the Slashdot editors tell a troll when they see one?
Re:It is too early for this crap (Score:2, Informative)
Does Dell ship cad/cam tablets standard because AutoCad suggests using them?
No, but they might sell cad/cam tablets if they had the idea that more people might want them, which is what the poster was probably suggesting.
I, personally, would be very interested to see what the Apple Design Group would do for a 3-button mouse, but I'm so hooked on my lasermouse-with-mousewheel (that acts like a 3rd mouse button, in a pinch) that even snazzy design and the "Jobs Reality Field" probably couldn't pull me away from it. I'd rather see the ADG work on more important tasks.
Re:It is too early for this crap (Score:1)
So Mac Users don't even come close to having a monopoly on the "Form Over Function" philosophy. Don't even get me started about artists. Function? What function! And people
The point being, just because platforms have different philosophies doesn't mean the kind of overreaction of the original post is warrented. Some people get worked up over silly things.
In the meantime, I'm going to go see if I can get my Mac to glow blue neon from the inside. That would be so cool.
Re:It is too early for this crap (Score:2)
I saw a G4 tower at MacWorld Expo set up this way... they had one side with openings cut in the sheet metal and they removed the silver paper behind the clear plastic shell.
They had blue neon inside. It was pretty cool!
I think it was at the OtherWorld Computing booth.
I bought one of those red LED gooseneck USB lights that plug into the keyboard... that's pretty cool too.. matches the tail light on the MS mouse...
Re:It is too early for this crap (Score:2)
Does AutoCAD require a cad/cam tablet? No, and in my opinion they aren't particularly useful, especially considering AutoCAD's powerful and flexible command line system.
In contrast, Apple does own Shake, and Shake does require a 3-button mouse.
Personally, Apple would only have to add one button to the iBook to get me to buy one...
Mousebuttons are overrated (Score:2, Interesting)
Last december however I bought an iBook (impulse buy...mainly due to OS X), and after about one week you are completely used to it. Your second hand just rests near the "Option" key. I've become that used to it that now when I'm on a PC, I tend to push "Control"-click accidentally. Needless to say that doesn't work
One thing that is great about the Mac is the pr0n surfing with Internet Explorer. Press Alt-Mousclick on a thumbnail and the link will be saved using the download manager. This is the only reason I still use IE for Mac, because mozilla does not have this function.
I probably sound like a "Apple convert", but really the second mouse button is not needed. And on intel machines I never use the third mousebutton unless running Linux where it's copy paste.
Crap! (Score:1)
In any case, I'm one of those who've wondered where the right mouse click is on my mac(I work on a PC). It provides more robost/immediate io management for me. So 3 is even better. Bring it on.
Otherwise, why not take the mouse click away entirely and instead, when you are over something interesting you hit some 'other' key? Thanks, no.
Re:Crap! (Score:2)
On a one button mouse Mac, you press the Control key when you click the mouse button, and this gives you the right click.
In Mac OS 9, there is a wonderful free control panel called FinderPop that gave you a right click just by clicking and holding the mouse button.
It also added a bunch of contextual menu features. That's the nice thing about Mac OS, you can add menu items to the contextual menus.
Back when I ran BeOS on my Mac clone I got tired of clicking on modifier keys for the other two buttons so I bought a three button mouse.
Now I use that Mac as a dual boot into OS 9 for my son, and LinuxPPC for me. The mouse comes in handy, but my son prefers to use the one button optical mouse from my G4, since I use an MS Intellimouse Optical.
People need to realize you can plug any USB mouse into a Mac, doesn't matter how many buttons it has. If the company doesn't make drivers for OS X, you can use USB Overdrive to program the extra buttons.
Re:It is too early for this crap (Score:2)
Maya also requires a three button mouse.
And programs like Photoshop are a lot easier to use with a two button mouse.
I think Apple might come out with an optional multibutton mouse... but then again there are a few compnaies making USB mice that work in OS X...
Temporary (Score:5, Interesting)
Shake is something which Apple acquired from another company. I suspect it will only require a three button mouse until Apple has a chance to rewrite it.
Having said that, one other Apple product which used a three button mouse was, the now long gone, A/UX (Apple UNIX).
Nice theory, but... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Nice theory, but... (Score:5, Informative)
This is because OS X apps are not supposed to conform to the MHIG. There is a new set of Human Interface guildines called the Aqua HIG.
These aren't guildines that are "Enforced" -- you can make your app look and work like windows if you want. But Apple certainly does encourage it.
The interface builder has the guildlines built in and will tell you where to place your controls in relation to each other, comes with a default menu layout and the default hotkeys set up. etc.
As to 3 button mice, Apple is correct in not shipping them out of the box. It breaks the paradigm and actually slows people down. I use a three button mouse, though, I got it because its a trackball, the scroll wheel and other button are useful, and I like them.
But for most users, a one button mouse is the correct choice to ship. Billions in productivity have been wasted by microsoft choosing to ship the 2 button mouse (not to mention the billions lost wasting time reinstalling your os, etc. on windows.)
Re:Nice theory, but... (Score:2)
Holy shit! I've got five (5) buttons on my mouse, that must translate into trillions, no, quadrillions, no -- THE UNIVERSE IS ABOUT TO IMPLODE!
Sorry dude, just joking around.
Re:Nice theory, but... (Score:1)
Multiple buttons in PC land... (Score:2)
What is the paradigm being broken? I had always thought that the cursor was a hand metaphor; and a hand is more of a multi-purpose tool than a single button mouse would seem to allow for.
Not that anyone one asked me. =)
Re:Multiple buttons in PC land... (Score:2)
Only web browsers do that click and hold thing. Everything else makes you press the Control key when you click. BTW Mac OS has contextual menus, and it's not a port from Windows! ;-) Applications like Photoshop and Illustrator also have them, and they are also not ports of Windows apps, but alas, Quark does not.
I agree that a two button mouse is faster on a Mac.
But I know a LOT of Windows users that have no clue what the right button does, even though they use a PC everyday.
But the paradigm on Mac OS is the modifier key. Holding either Option (alt), Command or Control, or a combination of them changes what a mouse click or drag does. Option drag copies a file, while Command-Option drag makes an alias (shortcut). Different programs, like Photoshop, use modifier-click for different functions too.
Re:Nice theory, but... (Score:1)
And so you think that more click-of-a-button options automatically means a better interface?
Heck, then why not just put wheels on a keyboard?
2-button mice not the answer; need a new design (Score:2, Insightful)
I hate to defend this person's post, especially since I strongly prefer my 2-button Microsoft mouse to Apple's 1-button mouse, but there is one thread of truth here.
For expert users, 2-button mice allow faster access to commands in context menus than either 1-button mice with the Ctrl key or the use of the main menus. Duh. The speed of 2 buttons on laptops is debatable. For novice users, it's not that using 2 buttons is slower, it's that the 2nd button confuses them. Since Apple sells a lot of computers to schools with young children, they should probably keep 1-button mice as standard on iMacs and eMacs but sell 2-button mice for expert PowerMac users.
The real issue isn't that Apple doesn't offer a 2-button mouse, but that a 2-button mouse isn't ideal anyway. There are other gestures that could be supported by a new mouse such as squeezing, rubbing, etc. There's lots of room for innovation. A limited set of unique gestures is faster than context menus because there is no time to acquire the target. Context menus are modal and they require you to move the mouse and then choose a command.
The only reason we need context menus is that programs have so many menu options that it's hard to find the relevant commands. Over the years, toolbars and palettes were invented to let us avoid the menus but then they got so cluttered that we needed context menus. Now context menus are so cluttered in programs like MS Word that MS has to drop some commands in some situations, ruining the predicitability of what's going to be in the menu. A better interface would be to design programs and computers so that you didn't really need context menus.
Re:Temporary (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Temporary (Score:2, Insightful)
Nothing that I can think of on the Mac actually requires control-clicking except for situations where you are emulating some other machine. A basic part of the HIG, which others have referred to, is that you can find every function of a program in the top pulldown menu. That way, everything is in one place and you don't have to search.
I take your point that it may be easier for occasional users coming from another OS who regularly use a mouse with more than one button. You want to be able to do things without having to think.
Re:Temporary (Score:1)
Or the keyboard shortcuts, since that what the Mac users around me prefer. Just being used to a multi -button mouse and the features associated with it, it was nice under OS X to have it work.
I think (no pun intended) it's not about being able to think about how to do stuff, it's more about usability, and being able to use it efficiently....or I'm probably just lazy :-)
Re:Temporary (Score:1)
as a long time Apple user i am still not used to taking advantage of it, so i still try to old keyboard shortcuts or "click and hold". i think as i remember to use the buttons i will dig them. i never use windows, so i don't even think of there being more than one button. i bet a lot of dedicated mac people are the same way. give them a multi-button mouse, show them it does something and they will learn.
i can support the simplicity of 1 button for newbies. maybe they'll start shipping the Pro models with multibuttons, but it hink the iMac an eMac will stay single button for a while. updating the laptops will be a whole new issue. much bigger than just swapping a device. if not the next G4 revision, i would think the next BIG change to the Pro tower (G5 or whatever) would be the logical time to ship a 2+ button device.
3-button might be nice for some thing (Score:1)
A well-done Apple 3-button mouse standard could be good in many situations and extremely good in a few. Don't hold your breath.
Who cares, really? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is it really that big of a deal that Apple doesn't produce one of their own?
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2, Insightful)
I would, however,like Apple to allow the trackpad tap to emulate a second mouse button
-
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have come to realize that on a laptop (like my iBook) with a touch-pad or a pointy-stick, one button is much easier to use than two buttons. Using the pointer devices on laptops requires you to contort your hand to use the other button (to right drag or get a menu, usually what I'm doing with it).
However, with OS X and one button, I simply use 'ctrl' with my left. Both hands stay in a natural position and (IMO) this is much faster than right clicking in windows (on one of my pc laptops).
When using a mouse, however, I like the convenience of having two buttons and a scroll wheel, so that's what I plug in (right clicking yields a context-menu, even in "classic" which I don't use).
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
That said, I vastly prefer my tiny two-button and scrollwheel Macally USB optical micro-mouse. Its small enough to use the space to the right of the touchpad as a mousing surface.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:4, Informative)
This is the silliest reason not to buy a TiBook I've ever heard.
You should buy it. you'll quickly discover that you don't need the extra buttons and the machine works fine without them.
The idea that you need more than one button is a false one, it simply isn't true, and you only think you do because you've been using poorly designed operating systems that make you use absurdly complicated controls (like three button mice when only one is *necessary*.)
Something tells me that TiBook would have to be an X86 running at 1/4 speed under battery too, and THEN you'd really buy it.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
Responding to your other points:
I don't think it's a question of _needing_ a mouse with more than one button, it's a question of what your used to and what makes sense to you. Personally, on Windows (rarely used), I use an MS Explorer mouse with 5 buttons. I _really_ like the forward and back buttons for browsing on the mouse. That doesn't work in Linux however (not by default anyways, someday I'll figure it out if I get bored). I don't think this is absurdly complicated and it is quite nice actully because it minimizes the amount of extra movement you have to do.
Personally I don't like using two different input devices. It's not as much of an issue on a laptop because they are so close together you don't need to move your hands. With a desktop though, it would be nice not to have to move my right hand back and forth between the keyboard and mouse. Yes, I'm sure there is hardware I can buy to avoid the issue, but I don't wanna. It seems to me that if I had to make as big of a context switch as moving my hand from keyboard to mouse, then the mouse should do a little more than point and click. And if that's all that's required by the OS, then it seems that the OS should be designed to be more efficient by only using one main input device that doesn't require your hands to move anywhere (yay keybindings!). Laptops with a trackpad right under the keyboard or the ones with the little nipple in the keyboard allieviate this quite a bit and I like that, I just wish they were as easy to use as a mouse (not quite there yet for me, but I probably just need more practice).
I just wish there was an option for more buttons on a ibook, more options are always nice (but having options in hardware isn't really what running a Mac is really all about is it?)
(Sorry, that was too easy and too much fun).
I'm not quite sure what your dig about being and X86 running at 1/4 speed under battery really has to do with anything. I could care less what's under the hood and I certainly don't want to lose speed for any reason. I can run the software I need to run on whatever OS/platform I can get (well almost any platform).
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
My point was that x86s don't run at full speed and most people ignore that fact when comparing them to powerbooks-- its yet another reason that the powerbooks are much much MUCH faster computers and better deals since the prices are the same.
You want to us a 5 button mouse iwht your powerbook? Feel free-- you can use the one you already have if its USB.
On the road, however, you can't carry a mouse on any laptop, and so you're going to change your formfactor... and the tibook pad works very well. (Better than the pds on some pc laptops I've tried)
I just think its a silly thing to say you're not buying one because of the mouse button. If its price then you're not buying a laptop at all because of price, cause the Macs are the same price as PCs.
Oh, and you can get used powerbooks, even used tibooks, for less than a grand. They hold their value well.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
Your statement implies that they do not hold their value well. 1/3 the cost after only a year or so? I think not. Even more so now that 10.2 is coming soon.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
I didn't say $3,000 powerbooks could be had for less than a grand.
Remember, some TiBooks cost $2,000 or so.
And they've been out for a year and a half.
iBooks even longer.
Sheesh.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
My only real problem with Apple (yes, I am currently drooling over 700MHz 12" iBook), is that they upgrade the OS to force people to buy more of their hardware. It is not a easy thing to upgrade a CPU in a Mac and get much more than 10 or 20% gain in performance. And, you have to pay several hundreds of dollars to do it. To upgrade my AMD, it costs $200 tops, and I can get 25% out of it.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:4, Informative)
But that's changing the subject, isn't it? Pretty much nobody upgrades the CPU in their laptop computer, Mac or PC, so it has nothing to do with it.
I could get into the "desktop Macs are too hard to upgrade" debate with you, but it's way off the topic of the thread.
Getting back on topic, you simply will not get more ! for your $ in a laptop than buying a Mac. Their CPU's run cooler (and on less power) than either AMD or Intel chips, which allows them to run full-speed and fanless for hours on a single battery. They've got pretty much every feature you need already built in (modem, Ethernet, external video, USB, firewire) and an antenna for adding 802.11b wireless networking for a mere C-note. They are built rugged, have nice screens, and are reasonably priced.
Apple may never be able to compete on raw cost-for-hardware in the destop arena, where a home-built PC remains the ideal choice for penny pinchers (unless a Mac OS machine is worth the slight premium to you)... But their laptops take a back seat to nobody.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
The CPU certainly runs much cooler, I haven't been able to locate it on my iBook. However there is one component that runs pretty hot and that's the harddisk. Okay, it doesn't get much hot in the sense "it burns!", but a nice "hmmm, warm". :-)
While it is true that the Apple laptops are very very energy efficient, it is mainly due to the fact that the energy management is very good, not because of the CPU. I run Seti@Home on my iBook all the time, and you'd better turn it off while on battery power because I'm pretty sure it won't last 2 hours. (I should time it, I think) Turn Seti@Home off however and it can be used for ages.
Of course, I don't want to know how long a Intel/AMD laptop lives on battery power running Seti@Home.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
That's the same mouse I use in Mac OS X. On my PowerComputing Mac clone I use a three button ADB Mouse Works mouse for Linux.
OS X naturally uses the right button, and I use USB Overdrive to control the rest of the buttons. The MS software is an OEM version of USB Overdrive, but has fewer features. The cool thing is assigning different button functions for different applications. So I use the forward and back buttons in Mozilla, and then use them as copy and paste in everything else.
I haven't seen anyone mention it yet, but Maya on OS X also requires a three button mouse.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
But with macs. You have to CTRL + click. IMO, that's more complex. So their goes that argument. Macs are just as bad as PC's in that respect.
Of course. With a lastop, your hands are close to the keyboard anyway. So it's not as bad as a desktop.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you, and others, are making a inaccurate assumption here. Unlike Unix or Windows, in a properly designed Mac application there should never be a time where an operation is accessable only through a context-menu. This is, you should never have to ctrl-click (or right-click) on anything.
One of the core interface elements to the Mac environment is the unified menu bar. In many ways, it behaves like an omnipresent contextual menu. Switch from one app to another, it changes to reflect the new context. Within an application, items will enable/disable as they pertain to the currently selected object.
For instance, in Windows it is very common to have a window without menu bar - like in an installer perhaps. If that window contains a text input element, and you want to access Copy and Paste commands (ignoring ctrl-key shortcuts) you have to get them from the context-menu. On a Mac, there will always be an Edit menu in the top menu bar, with those commands ready and waiting.
The fact that Shake requires a 3 button mouse says to me that it is not a properly designed Mac app. That can be okay in some instances. Here, time to market was obviously an issue. And these types of professional apps tend to be an environment unto itself. You'll start the app at the beginning of the day and quit it when you go home, rarely switching between other programs. In such a case, having its own set of rules isn't quite as unforgivable. But I expect Apple to clean it up in time.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
Don't forget. Win has it possable to access anything via the keyboard. So it has to be possable to do things without the right mouse button.
It may be more inconvenient to not use the right mouse button. But that's the same story with macs, unless all you ever do is want contextual menus for links in IE.
Rules are made to be broken by the way. And there is no deffinite reason why one mouse button is better than 2. It's just a guide. Anyone who thinks otherwise has no real understaning of actual usablity.
In cases like Shake. It maybe that designing it to use one mouse button maybe infact decrease usablity as opposed to increase it.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
And it requires three buttons. Because it isn't supposed to be easy to use. A mac out of the box is meant to be very easy to use, hence, one button. The amount of text on slashdot concecerning this issue is shocking, but lets get this out. You don't need three on a mac, but you can have them if you need them, which you might. In one sentance: Macs ship with one button for beginners, but allow more for advanced users. There is no should here, its flexible, like it should be.
END OF LINE
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
I think we're arguing two different things here. Contextual menus and multi-button mice are not bad ideas. Apple isn't ignoring them, either. If you plug a multi-button mouse into an OS X box, you'll find that the scroll wheel scrolls, the middle button opens a link in a new window, and the right button brings up context-menus all over the place.
The only different is that multi-button mice are not required, or even expected. This forces the application and os designers to consider single-button access first and foremost. I would argue that this approach almost always leads to a better overall user interface. Of course, my "better" isn't necessarily the same as yours. But, you're more than welcome to use any mouse you like, and open a link in a new window any way you choose.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
Anyway, how do you open a link in a new window behind the other windows? In iCab it's just Command-Shift-click on the URL. While you need four buttons.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
ok. how can "command-Shift-Click" be an easy thing to do? you are using two hands, and one of those hands is pushing more than one button. to me, any command which requires a compliment of 3 buttons being pressed at one time is *not* intuitive.
and this is why i get angry. you mac people tout your interface. and somehow using two hands to press three buttons at the same time seems ok. trust me. it's not.
intuitive is using my pointer fFinger to press one button or to use a wheel, using my middle fFinger to press another, and using any other fFingers i fFeel like using to press any other buttons i might have on my particular mouse. THAT's intuitive. one fFinger actions.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
Think of it this way. It's like playing chords on a guitar. Sure, pressing single strings down is easier, but after a while you don't even think about having to press down six of them, with your LEFT hand, on different frets, and have to navigate your right picking hand to strike the correct string. And after a while you dont even have to look at your hand. Same as on a Mac.
I use the keyboard as much as I can, and after many years I know where to rest my fingers to press the left modifier keys, and the arrow buttons, and page up/down etc. People who type know where the keys are without looking (even me using two fingers), so how is pressing command-Shift any harder than shift W?
While I agree that a multi button mouse it faster for many (including my self), anyone can learn anything, if they do it often enough.
And on the Mac some things still need modifier keys, even if you have a five button mouse.
I do love middle clicking a link in Mozilla to make it open in a new tab though. :)
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
you're right. it's not. but if i have to exert any more effort than moving a hand a little bit, i's too much. isnt the macintosh idea to be a computer which a ham snadwich can run? so if i have to use TWO HANDS to do any operation, it's outrageous. right?
it's like this -- what is easier? click this way or that way; or press some button and click with that at the same time; know what i mean?
i'm surprised more people dont have a problem with this. really. i mean, maybe i'm off base here. but isnt a mac supposed to all the work, so i dont have to? which means i shouldnt ever have to do a two-handed action. right?
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:1)
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:2)
moral: use the right tool to do the right job.
Re:Who cares, really? (Score:3, Funny)
$30 (Score:1)
Re:$30 (Score:2)
oh, i should mention, i'm a PC person.
so when i buy a PC, i almost as a rule buy a new mouse too. because most pre-packed PC mice just dont cut it. i need an optical mouse with several buttons. all there is to it. and standard pre-packed mice usually are not optical, and often wont have more than 2 buttons.
so. perhaps that's an interesting lesson here: the cost of a nice new mouse should just sort of be tacked on to the price of a whole new machine.
Not a Chance (Score:2, Insightful)
But seriously, Apple will design new hardware for a single piece of software that very few use? If anyone can afford a third-party mouse, it's a Shake user.
Count on Apple simply rewriting the necessary code for version 2.6.
Re:Not a Chance (Score:2, Informative)
> Apple went from a one-button mouse to a
> zero-button mouse. If anything, the next interface
> device will be some sort of device that depends on
> telepathy or eye movement.
An early model of the Mac telepathic interface was lent to Toho in 1996. You can see it, in operation, in the 1997 movie released in the US as "Rebirth of Mothra 2". The same movie also featured Rainbow and Aqua Mothra, and was released five months before OS X and the rainbow hued iMacs were announced.
The number of buttons on mice are platform specific:
The Macintosh is one button,
Windows is two buttons,
The X Window GUI, used on many flavors of UNIX, is three buttons.
How do you get a program requiring three buttons on a one button platform like the Mac? Simple, it was most likely first written for UNIX/X and ported.
Mac being a minority platform that is ported to alot, has to support multiple buttons, while retaining its native one button preference.
The reason why this comes up on Slashdot so often: Slashdotters are more likely to want to run X under OS X so they can run ported UNIX apps. X requires 3 buttons, and a new mouse is a lot pricier to many Slashdotters than it would be to a Shake user.
Though I wonder why someone doesn't just modify their open source X server to simulate the three (seven counting chords) buttons with the same modifiers used by the Mac on its single button. Unless you need to be able to press the middle button in concert with the Control key for some other purpose?
"What I'm thinking is different from what you are."
Belabera, "Mothra 3" 1998
Re:Not a Chance (Score:1)
Sometimes I get this really odd feeling that His Steveness is developing a three-button (or more) mouse but keeps putting it off every time CmdrTaco complains about it. Sort of like how CT wrote in a FAQ file somewhere that he would delay updating SlashCode every time someone complained about the next version being released later than promised.
Though I wonder why someone doesn't just modify their open source X server to simulate the three (seven counting chords) buttons with the same modifiers used by the Mac on its single button.
You would think that the geeks that try to make web servers out of their telephones, PDAs and Olivettis would have no problem with this. I'm not enough of a geek to know why it's not done more often.
Re:Not a Chance (Score:1)
I can drive for 20 minutes and buy a 4 button optical mouse for $7. $5 if I don't need it to be optical. $6 can get you a three button mouse and a keyboard. All of the above have scroll wheels.
Mice are cheap! If you buy ten or more, you can even get a bulk discount. Some people can be so cheap.
wow! (Score:1)
Why don't they (Score:2, Insightful)
that explains the price cut... (Score:5, Funny)
In a seperate, unrelated announcement, Apple announced it would be releasing a new, multi-button mouse for use with Shake. The new mouse, initially available in a three-button model, will sell for $5,000.
Not LIkely (Score:2)
That being said, I'd probably buy an Apple wheel mouse if they made one. Doubt it'd happen, but a guy can hope.
--Dan
No $5,0000 G4 (Score:2)
Apple doesn't sell a $5,000 G4. The most expensive stock model at the Apple store is $3,000.
Sure you can add stuff to get a G4 up to $5,000 in cost, but you can do that with any computer.
I'm tired of hearing people misrepresent the prices of Macs to make them look expensive. These lies to justify your own prejudice are annoying.
ESPECIALLY in the context of pointing out that Apple is giving its customers a $5,0000 discount.
Once again (Final Cut Pro, Cinema Tools, iMovie, iTunes, iDVD, DVD Studio Pro) apple releases software that used to cost $50-$5,000 more at a great price, saving their customers %100-%50 of the cost and you guys try to use it to claim that Apple's products are overpriced.
How desperate are you?
Re:No $5,0000 G4 (Score:2)
the ultimate model of the G4 sells for $4,099.00. youd know that if you checked your facts every third millenia or so. and btw if your going to be using shake, your probably going to need the ultimate model plus some scsi drives, lets say 2@72gb. thus bringing our total to $6,049.00, before tax. remember, this is quite cheap compared to what SGI or SUN would charge you. hell the SGI Fuel begins at $11,000. and dont even get me started on the cost of an Octane. real machines cost real money.
now go crawl back into your pc using hole and shut up, you dont know what your talking about.
Re:No $5,0000 G4 (Score:2)
You're an idiot. What I said was that the standard configuration G4 is $3,000. Ok, its $2,999. Quote from the Apple store this morning.
Yes, you can get a $4,000 BTO machine. You can get at $5,000 BTO machine if you want.
But the idea that the standard Mac is a $5,000 computer is absurd, and just a continuation of the myth that macs are overpriced.
They aren't, you PC loving zeolot.
Re:No $5,0000 G4 (Score:2)
If you're spending $5000 on a software package, you're NOT going to get it stock, with 128 megs of ram and a shitty monitor. You're going to need to crank up all the stats and get a kickass display. The display doesn't factor into my five grand, but I've been building a dream system and even mine comes out to about $8000 USD, so you'd better believe a production film studio is going to drop more than I am on their system.
Stop freaking out dude. I never said macs were overpriced. Hell, I have one in my living room, G4/533, bought it brand new, with a monitor that can do 1900x1440 or some shit like that, and it only came to like three grand total. Oh, and a laser printer too. Maybe it was five grand actually, but that's $CDN, so oh well.
Let people say macs are overpriced, it just means you wont' have idiots buying them and bitching because they're too stupid to go out and buy their own two-button mouse instead of bitching about how one isn't included.
--Dan
Re:No $5,0000 G4 (Score:2)
Well you got me there!
It's official (Score:2, Insightful)
(Posted with a five button Microsoft Intellimouse on a g3 pismo.
Re:It's official (Score:1)
It has to change (Score:1)
Re:It has to change (Score:1)
Once you learn the keyboard shortcuts you'll find its much faster to play the game without the second button (just try building an orc burrow, f/e).
Your way: point at grunt, click on grunt, point at build command, click on build command, point to burrow structure, click on burrow structure, point to place on map, click on place on map.
My way: point at grunt, click on grunt, hit B, hit O, point to place on map, click on place on map.
I'm not even a hardcore gamer, talk to any true gamer and they will tell you you have to combine your UIs before you can get good at any game.
Re:It has to change (Score:1)
Re:It has to change (Score:1)
It's so fulfilling when your entire city gets wiped out while you sit and watch - all because you only have one button (or no button).
Quit whining!
MWNY - Steve Jobs: Oh my God! Apple's gone from a one-button mouse to a no-button mouse!
I'm going to assume you're naive and not stupid. It has to change? No, your ability to read manuals has to change. Command-click - duh!
article about apple mice (Score:3, Informative)
macobserver [macobserver.com]
Apple has shipped multi-button machines (Score:1, Interesting)
I remember a small extension that allowed one button to be mapped to control-click so that you could use the contextual menus in System 8.x.
As far as I know all of the other PowerBooks with two buttons were actually wired in parallel so that you could not make them perform different tasks.
-Jason
Maya needs it (Score:1)
apple needs to improve their mice anyways (Score:1)
Re:apple needs to improve their mice anyways (Score:2)
Mice -- get over it (Score:1)
Macs come standard with a no-button mouse. The mouse is hinged, you press the front of the case. It's amazing how little thought you give that after ten seconds. Go noodle on one in the store, see if you even notice it; I'm used to a two-button trackball, and the Apple Optical mouse feels fine.
You can buy the mouse of your choosing -- my optical trackball works fine -- and set it up any which way on your Mac. The Control-click thing works just fine. The OS will let you configure key equivalents for right-clicks and so on. In this case, it'd be simple to assign whatever combo-platter of clicks, chords, and keys you wanted to work this program. I've done the same thing for Photoshop, Pagemaker, and all sorts of games.
There is no correct mouse layout, it's a matter of taste. Apple's deliberately gone a different way, which is kind of cool, okay? Their OS can take anything you throw at it really. What's the big deal? Are you just so completely conditioned by your machine that you can't imagine someone designing it better?
shakin' mouse (Score:2)
shake is not for the first time computer user.
As has been said thousands of times, Apple ships their computers with a single button mouse because it's less confusing. They aren't stopping you from buying another one (although persnally I'd LOVE an Apple-branded two button optical mouse. rock mouse body left / right for different buttons, but that's just me). No new mac user is going to spend a huge chunk of change on a new computer and then throw down $5000 for a program they've never used.
Think of it this way - would you edit professional level digital video on a computer without a jog wheel? Same idea - it's the right tool for the job.
Triv
Re:shakin' mouse (Score:1)
Yeah, you can use CTRL or ALT or APPLE buttons, but largely these button combos are already mapped to other functions. Since when is using two hands optimal over just one.
Plus, Quake on a one-button mouse gargles the fat sack of Satan, lol.
Re:/me crosses finges (Score:2)
You're being silly.
You ahve the option-- go buy an external mouse if you want to slow yourself down.
But to say you're not seriously looking at an ibook because it has only has one mouse button is silly. It doesn't even need that mouse button.
default mapping would not solve the problem-- you'd still be slowed down when you have to stop and think about which mouse button to use. Course you don't think you stop and think, but you do- your mind just ignores that it had to stop
Its unfortunate that so many people are ignorant about basic CHI science.
Re:/me crosses fingers (Score:1)
wow. nice flame.
well, i think anyone paying all that money for an iBook deserves more than that, and if you think that's silly, fine. no wonder apple is such a niche market, where seemingly anyone who wants more than what they are presented is labled ignorant.
who cares karma?
Re:/me crosses fingers (Score:2)
All what money? You can get a very nice iBook for $1200. That's right in line with what other laptops cost. The iBook isn't particularly expensive at all.
Re:/me crosses fingers (Score:2)
If you think an iBook is too expensive, don't buy a new one. There are great macs out there for $500 that are still better than the new PCs you can get for the same price (Remember you don't get something for nothin.)
And as to being intolerant- -the "two button mouse" issue was laid to rest in, what, 1983? Its a scientific question and it has been asnwered. That you flamed for apple not including a two button mouse shows either your ignorance or your bullheadedness at defying the *FACT* that second mice buttons slow people down.
Sorry, if you didn't know that-- its one of the standard issue, mac Myths that pc zeolots trot out, and so I gave the standard issue response.
Re:/me crosses fingers (Score:1)
I'm not meaning to be an ass, but you've been throwing this "fact" in peoples faces, when it's really an opinion. It is an unfortunate tendancy to take a correlation and brand it as proof without going deeper into the causation.
You're point, though, *is* correct, the price is not as much as issue as poeple make it out to be, and the mice issue is trivial.
Re:/me crosses fingers (Score:2)
Sure, if you cook your figures and find people who are speedy on two button mice and slow on one button mice you can produce a study that says what you want.
But the fact still remains that even "proficient" three and two button mice users are slower than they would be using a one button mouse.
You just assume the study is flawed and take that as a fact-- I'm sorry, you're going to have to SHOW the flaw in the study.
Re:/me crosses finges (Score:1)
Re:I hate to say this, but... (Score:2)
I see it rather the opposite way. If such a thing were to happen at all, the 3 button mouse would more likely take the "Pro" name and the one button(realy in a way "no button") mouse would fall into the consumer arena.
That said, a multi-button mouse would take a lot of design work, given Apple's clear design goal of not exposing moving parts. To this end, a solid-state scroll wheel inspired by the new iPod would probably be quite a nice addition. Perhaps a side to side rocing motion could complement the forward wrist motion to produce three "clicks".
Re:I hate to say this, but... (Score:1)
Re:I hate to say this, but... (Score:2)