🚀 go-pugleaf

Hello,

The original author asked for comparisons of mouse types.  In
short, this is what I've encountered so far:

I.  Mircosoft serial mouse:  This guy plugs into the parallel port
of a PC.  It talks at 1200 baud.  In theory, it ought to be able to
talk with any type of computer, given the correct software.  The
output from the mouse consists of 5 bytes everytime the mouse is
moved or the status of one of the buttons changes.  If memory
serves me correctly, there are two bytes of x, two bytes of y, and
then a button status byte.  The order is really immaterial, as the
interface between the mouse and applications program is a terminate
and stay resident program that adds mouse functions to DOS.  Most
available graphics programs or whatever recognize the driver, and
the one from Microsoft is the de facto standard.  The Microsoft
mouse has difficulty rolling properly on smooth surfaces.  I'd
recommend using it with a mouse pad for omptimum performance.  The
buttom cover of the mouse is easily removed for cleaning the ball.
The microsoft mouse also comes with a good selection of
demonstration programs that give an idea of how to put it to use.
some of the pull-down menu examples that came with the Microsoft
mouse that I bought about a year ago did not function correctly
with Wordstar and 1-2-3.

II.  Microsoft Parallel Mouse:  This critter is essentially the
same thing as the one above.  The difference here is that it costs
a little more and comes with an interface card that plugs directly
into the machine buss, ths making it machine dependent.  The DOS
interrupts supported by the installable driver are the same as the
the serial version, thus making it compatible with a large array of
off-the-shelf software.

III.  Summa Graphics Mouse model 445:  This guy is an optical
mouse.  One disadvantage is that it requires a little 9v adapter
pack that supplies the CPU chip and LEDs in the mouse, thus tieing
up another AC outlet (this was a problem, as I had already used up
all the outlets in my office).  The sensing surace is a piece of
shiny mirrored flexible plastic with a rubberized back (to stick to
the desk).  The mouse looks at light vertical and horizontal lines
on the plastic-- one set is sensitive to IR and the other set is
sensitive to visible light.  The Summa mouse has a fancy litte
optical chip that figures out what blinking is going on.  The
sensing surface is roughly 8.5 * 11 inches.  The Summa mouse is
easily trained to recognize either landscape or portrail
orientation of the surface by pushing all three buttons and sliding
the mouse for a few seconds.

The Summa mouse is supplied with pretty decent software that allows
it to operate in either the microsoft driver mode or its own
native mode.  I haven't found anything that fails to work yet.  DR
GEM provides specific recognition of the model 445.  Summa also has
a unique SM mode that makes it very easy to set up pull down menus
that are configured from plain text files from edlin, or whatever.
The menus are transparent, and can work through ws, 1-2-3, basica,
etc.  The manual is pretty clear.

In spite of the extra dongle to plug into an AC outlet, I think
that I still like the model 445 the best of the ones that I've
tried so far.  I also wish that the sensing surface were rigid like
Plexiglas (r), rather than flexible plastic.  I've been using the
model 445 since the beginning of this summer.

IV:  Xerox / Olivetti (?) / AT&T (?) mouse:  This guy plugs into
the back of the keyboard and comes with software that makes it
compatible with the Microsoft driver.  Obviously, this one is
machine specific, since it wants to plug into the Xerox keyboard.
It is an optical mouse.  My biggest gripe is that the sensing
surface is a sheet of heavy paper that is about he same weight as
the  paper that photographs are printed on.  The paper mat gets
dogeared and grungy very fast; generally nasty to live with.  As
far as I know, all three manufacturers claim to have a mouse.
Xerox is the only company that has actually been able to deliver
one to us.  AT&T curiously enough brought out the Microsoft
Parallel mouse when we asked them to cough up a mouse for one of
our 6300s.

Hope this is useful.  I tried to stay fairly unbiased.  I think
that I like optical mice better as a rule.  The main disadvantage
is that one runs off the edge of the sensing sheet sometimes, but
then, I guess that I roll the machanical mouse off the edge of my
desk some times.

 ---Bill Mayhew
    Electrical Engineer
    Division of Basic Medical Sciences  room E-110
    Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
    4209 State Route 44
    Rootstown, Ohio  44272   USA

    Phone:  216-325-2511, extension 323

    (wtm@neoucom.UUCP)