Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).

I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.

Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?

What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.

Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
me.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

E2E t-bot BT wrote:
> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>
> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>
> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
>
> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
> a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>
> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
> me.

I like my logitech cordless optical mouse and keyboard combo. The newer
version of it, where the receiver acts as a battery recharger when not
in use, is even better (batteries run down in the mouse fairly quickly,
in my experience).

--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I have the logitech cordless desktop MX at home and a logitech cordless
keyboard & mouse (forgot model) in work. The MX has a charger / receiver.
The mouse lasts for about 3 days from a charge.

The mouse in work takes standard batteries. I have had it for about 5 months
and never needed to change the batteries (rollerball)

A few points to bear in mind:
- optical mice will drain batteries quicker
- dont go for a cheap brand ( i had a a4 tech keyboard & mouse, ended up
binnign it it was so bad)



"E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish> wrote in
message news:94C6825DEB901K187D@64.62.191.98...
> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>
> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>
> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
>
> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
> a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>
> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
> me.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish> wrote in
message news:94C6825DEB901K187D@64.62.191.98...
> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>
> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>
> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
>
> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
> a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>
> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
> me.

I use a Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical (it's a wired version - about £15 on
Amazon.co.uk). Find it excellent, and the best mouse I've ever used, and
that's saying something as I've got through quite a few over the years.

Movement is good and it seems very responsive. Doesn't suffer from the
clunky feel that a ball based mouse has - it just glides when you move it.
Also the scroll wheel (on mine) is nice and free with a slight bit of a
click as you move it, where as some other models have a much stiffer scroll
wheel which I really don't like. I Spent about 30 minutes in my local PC
World trying out the button presses/wheel scrolling of their mice before
going back home to order one ;-)

Wouldn't go anywhere near a wireless mouse personally, as the two I've had
ate batteries faster than a mouse eats cheese/chocolate... as my PC is on 24
hours a day it's not hard for it to flatten (not fully flat, but beyond
being any use in the mouse) a set of decent batteries within a week or so!
You'll also find that as the batteries get flatter the responsiveness of the
movement goes way downhill, and it's as if you are using a mouse with a
highly gunked up ball/rollers, back to front, with your wrong hand, whilst
using it on your knee... keep far far away (although I know of a few people
who reckon they're great)

Simon

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish> wrote:

>I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).

>I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
>precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.

>Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?

It's very much down to personal preference. If find ball mice feel
more positive, probably because they make physical contact with the
mousing surface, offer some resistance and are generally heavier.
Optical mice can be more accurate but can feel less positive and,
despite working on a wider variety of surfaces, can get "confused" by
variations in reflectivity caused by colour changes etc.

The design of the mouse can make a great deal of difference too; you
find some mice more comfortable that others.

If you're thinking spending a reasonable about of money on a good
quality mouse I'd suggest trying it out first. Retail outlets such a
PC World are ideal as they often have lots of display models
side-by-side.

>What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
>a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.

A good cordless mouse will perform as well as a wired one. The
benefit of optical cordless mice is the batteries add weight and, in
my opinion, make it feel more positive in use. The downside is the
batteries don't tend to last long in cordless optical mice so you'll
probably want to add the price of two sets of rechargeables and a
charger to the purchase cost.

Most of the BlueTooth sets offer little benefit over convention
wireless RF except range; RF tends to be limited to distances of
around 6ft between device and receiver where BT is around 30ft.
Driver support isn't as good as many BT devices require loading of a
BlueTooth stack before they will work; this means they only work
within a few supported operating systems. Unless you have a
particular requirement to operate the mice more than 6ft from the PC
I'd stick with conventional wireless equipment.

One exception to both rules is the Logitech wireless mice. Their more
recent models are supplied with rechargeable batteries and a base
station which recharges the mouse when not in use. Their BT
implementation is overlaid over their wireless technology and work in
every situation where their standard wireless or, for that matter, a
wired product would.


--
>iv< Paul >iv<

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 12:48:56 +0100, "E2E t-bot BT"
<English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish> wrote:

>I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>
>I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
>precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>
>Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?

Probably.

>
>What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
>a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>

IMO, in most cases, wireless serves no purpose.

>Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
>me.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Simon Martin wrote:
> "E2E t-bot BT" <English-to-English.translator.bot@Babel.Fish> wrote in
> message news:94C6825DEB901K187D@64.62.191.98...
>> I am still using a corded mouse (logitech wheelmouse).
>>
>> I would like to get a better mouse which has at least as good
>> precision, responsiveness, accuracy, etc.
>>
>> Would an optical mouse be better on all counts?
>>
>> What about a cordless mouse. Are they poor performers? What about
>> a Bluetooth connection - is that good. Is it pricey.
>>
>> Are there any web sites which discuss this. Google is no help to
>> me.
>
> I use a Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical (it's a wired version - about
> £15 on Amazon.co.uk). Find it excellent, and the best mouse I've ever
> used, and that's saying something as I've got through quite a few
> over the years.
>
> Movement is good and it seems very responsive. Doesn't suffer from the
> clunky feel that a ball based mouse has - it just glides when you
> move it. Also the scroll wheel (on mine) is nice and free with a
> slight bit of a click as you move it, where as some other models have
> a much stiffer scroll wheel which I really don't like. I Spent about
> 30 minutes in my local PC World trying out the button presses/wheel
> scrolling of their mice before going back home to order one ;-)
>
> Wouldn't go anywhere near a wireless mouse personally, as the two
> I've had ate batteries faster than a mouse eats cheese/chocolate...
> as my PC is on 24 hours a day it's not hard for it to flatten (not
> fully flat, but beyond being any use in the mouse) a set of decent
> batteries within a week or so! You'll also find that as the batteries
> get flatter the responsiveness of the movement goes way downhill, and
> it's as if you are using a mouse with a highly gunked up
> ball/rollers, back to front, with your wrong hand, whilst using it on
> your knee... keep far far away (although I know of a few people who
> reckon they're great)
>
> Simon

I use wireless mouses exclusively, but your comments are correct. An
USB optical mouse will give better performance and control than a
wireless mouse and wireless do eat batteries. I have gotten accustomed
to the idiosyncrasies of the mouse with the trade-off that I can mouse
from nearly anywhere and there is no cable.

Q

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

i used to use an infrared microsoft 5 button wireless mouse thing, and the
batteries needed to be replaced every 4 weeks
did get annoying though i must say!

my friends blue tooth on the otherhand... been about 2 or 3 months since he
last replaced the batteries!

battery life does depend quite heavily on the brand used.
blue tooth seems the way to go... but i only have experience with these two
mice!

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

From my personal experience, I would prefer corded optical mouse.
I have been using my Logitech one for 3 years, still working fine for me.
Also, you don't need to worry about battery or any change in physical
contact of the mouse ball at all!
No problem in sensitivity for general use.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Louie" <popo@google.com> wrote in message
news:XUAdc.48464$_E.31658@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
> From my personal experience, I would prefer corded optical mouse.
> I have been using my Logitech one for 3 years, still working fine for me.
> Also, you don't need to worry about battery or any change in physical
> contact of the mouse ball at all!
> No problem in sensitivity for general use.
>
>

I have a Microsoft wireless keyboard and mouse combo. However, I am still
using a wireless optical mouse made by Chic, which comes with a
re-chargeable "holster". An overnight charge is sufficient for the mouse to
last the next day. However, I have managed to wear away the silver paint in
two places through usage, so it is looking a bit tatty.

I have ordered a Logitech diNovo Media desktop combo as a replacement ( and
an Easter present to myself).
--
Doug Ramage

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

imho if your using the mouse with games dont go for cordless versions it
will drain the batteries a whole lot faster if your using cordless only for
graphic and other uses then by all means go for the cordless if you want to
i have a cordless versions both wheel and optical and still get by at least
2-3 months without needing to replace the batteries but get constantly stuck
inbetween games when the batteries run out at the vital moment. soon to be
replace my mouse with a wired version so i dont get caught like this again

"Louie" <popo@google.com> wrote in message
news:XUAdc.48464$_E.31658@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com...
> From my personal experience, I would prefer corded optical mouse.
> I have been using my Logitech one for 3 years, still working fine for me.
> Also, you don't need to worry about battery or any change in physical
> contact of the mouse ball at all!
> No problem in sensitivity for general use.
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote:

> I use wireless mouses exclusively, but your comments are
> correct. An USB optical mouse will give better performance
> and control than a wireless mouse and wireless do eat
> batteries. I have gotten accustomed to the idiosyncrasies of
> the mouse with the trade-off that I can mouse from nearly
> anywhere and there is no cable.
>

Is a USB port a better way to connect a mouse than PS/2 port?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com> wrote:
>"Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote:
>
>> I use wireless mouses exclusively, but your comments are
>> correct. An USB optical mouse will give better performance
>> and control than a wireless mouse and wireless do eat
>> batteries. I have gotten accustomed to the idiosyncrasies of
>> the mouse with the trade-off that I can mouse from nearly
>> anywhere and there is no cable.
>
>Is a USB port a better way to connect a mouse than PS/2 port?

In terms of performance there's probably nothing of note in it, but
USB has the multi-purpose thing going for it.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <os4e70h7cjo2dmfcdvap0jh9j1j1kh6q9n@4ax.com>, Tim Auton
<tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY]> writes
>>
>>Is a USB port a better way to connect a mouse than PS/2 port?
>
>In terms of performance there's probably nothing of note in it, but
>USB has the multi-purpose thing going for it.
>
>
Disagree. I've used both and ps/2 is far, far superior. It just
registers your mouse movements with far more accuracy. Went from a £17
USB mouse to ps/2 for less than a fiver 6 months ago and have not gone
back.
--
Peter Ives
Remove ALL_STRESS only before sending me an email

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Peter Ives" <pete@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Mxc4EHASI0dAFwQk@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk...
> In article <os4e70h7cjo2dmfcdvap0jh9j1j1kh6q9n@4ax.com>, Tim Auton
> <tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY]> writes
> >>
> >>Is a USB port a better way to connect a mouse than PS/2 port?
> >
> >In terms of performance there's probably nothing of note in it, but
> >USB has the multi-purpose thing going for it.
> >
> Disagree. I've used both and ps/2 is far, far superior. It just
> registers your mouse movements with far more accuracy. Went from a £17
> USB mouse to ps/2 for less than a fiver 6 months ago and have not gone
> back.

But that's a different mouse, so there's no way of knowing whether the
difference was down to the mouse itself or the interface.

I have a Microsoft optical mouse (five button one, no idea what model),
which can be used either via USB or PS/2 (with an adapter). Initially I used
it on PS/2, but I couldn't tell the difference when I switched to USB a year
or so ago.

Alex

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <c57hs0$2otro2$1@ID-149533.news.uni-berlin.de>, Alex Fraser
<me@privacy.net> writes
>"Peter Ives" <pete@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in
>message
>news:Mxc4EHASI0dAFwQk@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk...
>> In article <os4e70h7cjo2dmfcdvap0jh9j1j1kh6q9n@4ax.com>, Tim Auton
>> <tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY]> writes
>> >>
>> >>Is a USB port a better way to connect a mouse than PS/2 port?
>> >
>> >In terms of performance there's probably nothing of note in it, but
>> >USB has the multi-purpose thing going for it.
>> >
>> Disagree. I've used both and ps/2 is far, far superior. It just
>> registers your mouse movements with far more accuracy. Went from a
>£17
>> USB mouse to ps/2 for less than a fiver 6 months ago and have not gone
>> back.
>
>But that's a different mouse, so there's no way of knowing whether the
>difference was down to the mouse itself or the interface.
>
>I have a Microsoft optical mouse (five button one, no idea what model),
>which can be used either via USB or PS/2 (with an adapter). Initially I used
>it on PS/2, but I couldn't tell the difference when I switched to USB a year
>or so ago.
>
Yes, but as far as I've read, the sampling frequency for ps/2 can go as
high as 200Hz compared to a mere 125Hz for USB allowing for more
precision, regardless of the quality of the mouse.
--
Peter Ives
Remove ALL_STRESS only before sending me an email

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Peter Ives" <pete@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:$Rr08CAM60dAFwVX@pgives.ALL_STRESSfreeserve.co.uk...
> In article <c57hs0$2otro2$1@ID-149533.news.uni-berlin.de>, Alex Fraser
> <me@privacy.net> writes
> >I have a Microsoft optical mouse (five button one, no idea what model),
> >which can be used either via USB or PS/2 (with an adapter). Initially I
> >used it on PS/2, but I couldn't tell the difference when I switched to
> >USB a year or so ago.
>
> Yes, but as far as I've read, the sampling frequency for ps/2 can go as
> high as 200Hz compared to a mere 125Hz for USB allowing for more
> precision, regardless of the quality of the mouse.

I'm not aware of any reason that a mouse connected via USB would be limited
to 125Hz sampling. What I do know about USB leads me to think that this is
unlikely (1kHz is much more likely), although USB need not be the limiting
factor. That said, the mouse position reported by Windows on this system
(with the mouse attached by USB) appears to change at (up to) 125Hz

The obvious related question is whether or not there is anything to be
gained by sampling at 200Hz. I think this is debatable, and the benefit
marginal at best. At 200Hz, there is a 2.5ms average and 5ms worst case
delay between moving the mouse and that movement registering. At "a mere
125Hz", these figures increase to 4ms and 8ms respectively. These seem
rather small periods of time in the context of human perception.

Alex

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,uk.comp.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I use a MS Wireless InteliMouse Explorer 2.0 ... wouldn't trade it for
anything! The b