🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <13650002@hpsmtc1.HP.COM> dlw@hpsmtc1.HP.COM (David Williams) writes:

>So, the difference seems to be one of moving and clicking the mouse versus
>moving the mouse. Now I'm sure the nanosecond police are going to say that
>they save hundreds of man hours by not having to click the mouse, but it seems
>a bit extreme to me!


      I think we are straying into a matter of personal opinion here on this
issue as well as the issue of how many mouse buttons are appropriate.  What
is really needed are some empirical studies.  The hardcopy and CRT terminal
technology is fairly well studied in terms of human factors.  The bit-mapped
graphical user interface which typically uses windows, menus, icons, along
with a mouse and keyboard for input has not been studied extensively enough
to backup any arguements.


      My personal opinion on mouse buttons is a reflection of what I am
accustomed to.  I have used the Blit (DMD 6520), UNIX PC (7300), Sun 3,
and a PC with a Logitech mouse.  All have three buttons!  So to  me that
seems natural.


      My opinion on context switching between windows is mostly based on
personal preferences, but I also think I have a decent point to make.  I
prefer to click on the window I want to activate.  There are two reasons.
First, if I accidently bumb into the mouse I most often change the current
window.  I didn't want that to happen.  I am loosing a bit of control.  If
I move the mouse and explicitly click on a window I definitely want a context
switch to occur!  My second reason is that once I activate a window I want
the mouse cursor out of my view.  Only with a point and click model can I
move the mouse cursor off the window's real estate.



-- 
George W. Leach					Paradyne Corporation
{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie	Mail stop LF-207
Phone: (813) 530-2376				P.O. Box 2826
						Largo, FL  34649-2826