The Mouse Roars
Not long ago on Apple Matters, one of their astute (or maybe lucky) writers suggested Apple needed not a two-button mouse, but a multi-button mouse. The article was What OS X could learn from Windows.
In an article that posed five other suggestions for Apple, that suggestion generated the most controversy and comment. Not the multi-button mind you, but the suggestion Apple desert the single-button mouse that had for 20 years, been an icon of what it meant to be a Mac user. Kind of like a rallying flag. You could just imagine the battle flag of the Mac legions bearing, not a Mac, but a one button mouse. In this simple device, were all the philosophies of Macdom - simplicity, ease of use, being different, being innovative, defiance.
And now, in one fell swoop, Apple have reset the playing field. They’ve switched decks on us again. We have to change another argument about why we are Mac users. We are getting to the point where the only difference will be the OS - and I’m just fine with that.
A Mighty Mouse
Here’s how Apple broke the news to world and shattered another myth:
With up to four programmable buttons, Mighty Mouse makes it easy to access key features of Tiger with the side buttons and Scroll Ball providing quick, one-click access to Spotlight, Dashboard and Exposé.
Sound familiar? Here’s what was in that article:
3) A multi button mouse. And you thought I’d say two. Why stop at two? Especially with things like Exposé, Dashboard and Spotlight. They’re just crying out for single click activation from a mouse.
That article was written with no prior knowledge of Apple’s plans, including a forgotten rumor on Apple Insider in March, which I didn’t turn up until several days after my article was released.
And now, much sooner than expected Apple has, as desired by me and a few others, given us a multi-button mouse to access things like Spotlight, Dashboard and Exposé from a single click.
There were many, many responses to that article - mostly about the mouse. Several people posting comments indicated they did not want button-bloat. A few others said a mouse that worked like a single or multi-button mouse would be good. Maybe Apple has made both of these groups happy as this mouse can be one, two, three or four button. Whatever takes you fancy. But I reckon they’ll start using the other buttons before long.
Several though voiced very strong concerns about ergonomics and software ease of use being compromised - suggesting developers could become lazy. I trust this won’t happen - especially as developers have had context menus for years.
It’s interesting to note, that the side buttons on Apple’s single button mouse have always been there - I’ve tried pressing them many times to no avail. How long have Apple been planning this? Have they planned this from the beginning of the redesigned one-button mouse - like the Intel switch which was planned for from the beginnings of OS X?
And it upholds the ideals of simplicity, ease of use, being different, being innovative - whilst defiantly challenging the PC world to do better.
The Mighty Mouse, although the name doesn’t grab me, certainly grabs me on looks. The Apple designers at their best yet again. And it’s got a scroll wheel that I wanted too! I want one!
What’s it mean?
This isn’t a chance to gloat. Sitting alone in a dimly lit room, there’s no one here to pat my back and say “Good onya, mate!” But that’s cool - since there’s still another five requests on that list that could become egg on my face.
Rather, this is a chance to take stock of Apple. Who are Apple, 2005? How many “nevers” have been tossed aside in the last six months alone? An x86 Mac; A flash based iPod; A cheap Mac; A multi-button Mouse. Hell’s looking decidedly cold. What’s next? iPod’s that play videos are strongly rumored. And what after that? OS X licensed to Dell? The Apple keyboard modifier keys changed to match Windows’? This is a new Apple that is letting go of the past when it sees it doesn’t need to hold onto it. This is an Apple that is prepared to change. This is an Apple that really does want a much larger slice of the PC market. This is an Apple of who you really should never say never.
This Apple is about making great products that really are accessible to everyone. That is the key. That is Apple 2005.
I guess I can take my flame-proof vest off now.
Thanks Steve, I owe you a beer.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
I like my new Trojan Mouse - oops, I mean Mighty Mouse.
I haven’t had any problems with the right-click. In fact, it “just worked” for me. When I read Dick’s review, I did a little self-examination and discovered I already instinctively lift my left finger before right clicking. Dunno where I learnt that, but glad I did - coz if you don’t, you will have to learn that.
It’s great having a scroll wheel. The squeeze buttons do take a little getting used to.
My only real complaint? It’s so damn NOISY! The mechanics of it - same as old single button - are very squeaky. “It’s a mouse! They should be,” says my wife. Bet she won’t at 1am when I’m squeaking away on the computer which happens to be right next to our bed. She complains about the keyboard click. Sheesh! She’s gunna hate the mouse squeak.
Oh, and one other thing - the cursor occasionally jumps across the screen for no reason. I figure that is a problem of optical mouses (I’ve been using a trackball for the last couple of years)
And, as the publisher of this site I have to say his comments are almost always great. In-depth and well-thought out. And his viewpoint is consistent.
Thanks, Hadley, although it’s so very, very sad that you have to defend me in this way. I appreciate it.
His viewpoint would be fine if it didn’t come with all the name-calling crap and the baseless assumptions of other people’s opinions.
Do you REALLY have a problem with name-calling? Because I can copy and paste a few choice words that some of the Mac zealots, you included, have used to describe Windows users (and me directly). And I can count on zero fingers the number of times you’ve objected to THAT.
And you can’t really have a problem with the use of the word “zealot” either because almost everyone here uses it; there was an even an article on this site describing the zealots, with several members even confessing to being zealots. And certainly no one denies that Mac zealots exist.
So what I gather is that your sole objection is that I, Beeblebrox, am referring to YOU, lavar, as a zealot. And I gather then that you must not think you are one. I can’t remember if I posted this in that “What kind of Mac head are you” article or not, but my suggestion was for a new category called “zealots in denial.”
Oh, and one other thing - the cursor occasionally jumps across the screen for no reason. I figure that is a problem of optical mouses (I’ve been using a trackball for the last couple of years)
I actually get this weird thing I describe as “cursor creep.” The cursor will just start moving slowly across the screen for no reason at all. It’s really strange but thankfully only moderately annoying and not disabling at all.
I actually get this weird thing I describe as “cursor creep.” The cursor will just start moving slowly across the screen for no reason at all.
Yeah, I remember getting that on optical mice. Haven’t had it on this one yet. Though the “teleporting” is starting to become rather annoying.
Do you REALLY have a problem with name-calling? Because I can copy and paste a few choice words that ... you ... have used to describe Windows users (and me directly).
Prove it.
I can’t remember if I posted this in that “What kind of Mac head are you” article or not, but my suggestion was for a new category called “zealots in denial.”
I don’t think you remember what you post at all. At any rate, it’s nice that you’ve made a category for yourself—even though you still don’t realize you belong to it. Oh, the irony…
Beeblebrox,
I think that you’re missing the point some of us have tried to make here.
You seem to think I’m a “zealot” because I agree with Apple’s decision to allow users to choose something other than your preference.
I don’t have a problem with Apple making a multi-button mouse. However, I think that shipping a mouse that responds to both left and right clicks *by default* would take away the users ability to choose one or two buttons. Why?
If Apple starts shipping two-buttons enabled by default, developers will start linking functionality to the second button, “Just because they can”. I’m not talking shortcuts, but important features that should be accessible without requiring a left click. The millions of Mac systems that are shipped with a single button mouse (or a multi button mouse mouse that acts like one) by default makes developers think twice before ignoring Apple’s UI guideline and results in better designed apps that are more accessible to entry level uses and those with disabilities.
And it’s not that Apple thinks people are too “Stupid” to use a two button mouse, but that, unlike most of us who post here, not everyone *wants* to use all the shortcuts and extra features available using the contextual button. They just want to read their email, view photos of their grandchildren or surf the web. Why do you need a second button for that? And for new users, the concept of a right clicking is foreign. I mean, do you think about what finger you use when you point at something with your hand? Not everyone want’s to change the way they think to use a computer.
Just as some people choose an automatic over a manual transmission, some people just want one button. And the Mighty Mouse gives them that choice, while allowing two button functionality for those who want it.
A couple of years ago, I read something, completely unrelated to Apple, that I think saved me from being an idiot lemming zealot.
I read about some women having tattoos done of expensive fashion brand logos. Stuff like Versace or YSL or Louise Vuitton etc. The were having them done at a tattoo place that had opened in an upmarket London department store.
Right up until I read that, I’d been toying with the idea of a little apple tattoo. A little 1cm thing on my upper arm. But not having any other body mods, it was always just an idea.
Having read that, and thinking, “Jesus f’ing christ. these otherwise normal, moderately wealthy, successful women are willingly being branded. How f***ed up is that ?”, it was plain to me that getting an Apple tattoo would be exactly the same thing.
And from that moment, I think I’ve been ablet o maintain a reasonably objective view of Apple stuff. Not always, but most of the time.
So when there was criticism of the G5 iMac’s power button being at the back, I could see that the critics were wrong, and that the design worked really well. (If you have a button at the fron to f a screen that tilts, when you poke it, you mess up the screen angle. To not move the screen, you have to apply a force at the back too. The easiest way of doing that it squeezing between thumb and finger. So if you have press at the front and back anyway, why not put the switch at the back ? Makes perfect sense, and works perfectly). I can also see how the design of the power button on the G4 iMac pretty much sucked.
So to the mouse.
Now I really like Apple stuff. They make cool and interesting things that are a joy to use. My fanoby side wants to get one of these. I have a one-button mouse, which does the job quite well, but I don’t hate contextual menus at all. I happen to think that contextual menus are a superb idea. Have an object. Right-click on it, and it tells you what you can do with it. Simple and effective. So a two button mouse would suit me, but holdina key down on a keyboard that’s under the other hand hasn’t been such a chore after all. And the pro mouse does look classy (even if it is crippled).
So I know I shuold buy a multi-button mouse. But I’ve been putting it off for reasons of vanity. Sad, but true. I am pretty much Apple’s dead-centre, bull’s eye, number one target customer for this thing.
But this things just a mouse.
It’s £35. Expensive for a wired mouse, but ignoring the wire, and looking at features, not really so expensive, and the nipple might just give it the edge. In the UK, it’s the same price as a Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer (OK, it’s wireless, but it’s the one with 4 way scrolling).
.... I have to leave work now. I’ll finish this when I get home…
You know, I can’t say I’m a fan of wireless mice at all. In fact, they’d have to be priced lower than wired versions for me to entertain buying one. The idea is inherently cool, but I don’t want to deal with changing batteries or charging it.
Prove it.
From THIS very thread:
He’s a troll as far as I’m concerned…
-lavar78
I await your superhero feats of gymnastic logic to get out of this one.
I await your superhero feats of gymnastic logic to get out of this one.
That’s your domain. You’re right, I called you a troll. I did so after seeing more than enough of your rude, immature antics to make that call. As I said earlier, I didn’t want to accept the idea that you were a troll, but your behavior convinced me. Now, care to explain why you called me a “fanatic” in response to my very first post?
I await your skirting the issue, putting words in my mouth, and making more gross assumptions.
You’re right, I called you a troll.
Yes, I know. You’re the one who seems to have forgotten, since you asked me to prove it as if you never had.
And then you wrote this rather hilarious criticism of ME: “I don’t think you remember what you post at all.”
You know why that’s so funny? Because you asked me to PROVE that you had ever called me a name, when you did it in this very thread just one post prior.
Funny, right? Because your criticism of me forgetting what I post could easily apply to you as well!
I did so after seeing more than enough of your rude, immature antics to make that call.
Yes, we all have our reasons. I just want to make sure that I understand YOUR “rule”: It’s okay and justified for YOU to call ANYONE ELSE names. It’s NOT okay for anyone to call YOU names. Is that about right?
Unfortunately for you, I don’t live by that rule. Unlike you, I try to apply the SAME rules to myself that I apply to others. Being arrogant myself, for example, I wouldn’t call James “arrogant” because to do so would be just like your INSANE HYPOCRISY of being able to call me names while getting all offended at me calling you names.
And sadly, your behavior, while hypocritical in almost a mind-numbing way, is not anything unusual. The fact is that prominent adults engage in just this sort of thing all the time.
It reminds me of when Bill O’Reilly said that Al Franken engaged in name-calling and then turned around in nearly the same breath and called Al Franken an “idiot.” His pathetic justification, much like yours, was “I wasn’t name-calling; I was making an observation.”
So how about this? You go on calling me a rude, immature trolling zealot (as long as the mods don’t have a problem with it) and you can go on pretending somehow that this is NOT name-calling. And I’ll go on calling you Mac zealot. If all else fails, the status quo works for me.
I don’t have a problem with Beeblebrox not liking certain Apple products… I have a problem with him constantly name calling and insuting other people.
Who exactly does that add positively to the discourse?
Argh.. sometimes I type too fast for my own good. How exactly...
I don’t have a problem with Beeblebrox not liking certain Apple products… I have a problem with him constantly name calling and insuting other people.
The worst I’ve called anyone here (besides hypocrite) is a “zealot,” a name Mac users often use to refer to themselves.
The zealots, on the other hand, have variously referred to me and others as drones, trolls, idiots, lemmings, morons, weenies, and so on. You get the idea. And if you go to MDN, it gets even worse.
What exactly does THAT add to the discourse and why don’t you or lavar ever complain about that?
If I can take it, you can.