Re: Optical better than non-optical?
From: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\) (user_at_#notme.com)
Date: 04/09/04
- Next message: Rich Barry: "Re: what have I done!"
- Previous message: Lester Stiefel: "Re: Pop-up Stopper interfering with Norton Antivirus email scan?"
- In reply to: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Next in thread: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Reply: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 16:58:51 -0700
My uncle uses a trackball, it drives me nuts!<VBG> Whenever he asks me to
figure out some issue he's having that darn trackball just gets in the way.
In the future, I'm bringing my own mouse!
-- Michael Solomon MS-MVP Windows Shell/User Backup is a PC User's Best Friend DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/ "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote in message news:e4hyecoHEHA.3356@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >I would prefer optical with a USB wire. I might have a > wireless as a second device. > > I al;so like trackballs. The trackball does need to be > cleaned because dust, lint and even dead skin cells do get > in the ball socket. A standard optical mouse is > self-cleaning since the base is flat. They work on any > surface except polished metal and mirrors. > > > "Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User)" > <user@#notme.com> wrote in message > news:%23GD7VHoHEHA.4088@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > | The big difference is that an optical mouse has no roller > ball, hence it > | doesn't require a mouse pad, can be used on virtually any > solid surface and > | there are no maintenance problems such as grime clogging > the roller ball > | thus requiring it to periodically be cleaned. > | > | -- > | Michael Solomon MS-MVP > | Windows Shell/User > | Backup is a PC User's Best Friend > | DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/ > | > | "Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message > | news:94C6EA6A6FDAA31E75@130.133.1.4... > | > "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? > | >> > | >> 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. > | > > | > > | > Assuming both are cord-attached then is an optical mouse > is > | > inherently better than a non-optical mouse? > | > | > >
- Next message: Rich Barry: "Re: what have I done!"
- Previous message: Lester Stiefel: "Re: Pop-up Stopper interfering with Norton Antivirus email scan?"
- In reply to: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Next in thread: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Reply: Jim Macklin: "Re: Optical better than non-optical?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|