Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA From: SCHMIDT@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Newsgroups: net.works Subject: mice Message-ID: <17625@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Fri, 16-Mar-84 17:46:14 EST Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.17625 Posted: Fri Mar 16 17:46:14 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 19-Mar-84 07:54:24 EST Lines: 26 From: Christopher SchmidtI find that the best mouse traps for mechanical mice are the "self healing" cutting bases sold in art stores. I buy a brand called Charvoz. They are the only material that I've found that works at all well with the LM-2 Kinetronics mouse, and are the best (albeit not the only) that work with the 3600 mouse. They work fine with the Xerox Hawley mice too, but other, cheaper, mouse traps work just as well because the Hawley mice (most of them, at least) are pretty tolerant of the surface. I have a Radio Shack mouse on my Commodore 64 at home (using a home-grown adapter). A sheet of typing paper is all the mouse trap it needs! I've used both the 2 button mechanical mouse for the 1108 and the 3 button optical mouse for the 1108. The former tracked adequately on the Xerox provided mouse trap, but the missing middle button was a real loss. The "Center" key on the star keyboard is equivalent to the middle button, but just doesn't cut it. Too much software relies on its convenience. The optical mouse (which we got a month after using the mechanical mouse) was a dream by comparison. I think Xerox does itself a disservice by pricing this mouse so high. If it is cheaper to manufacture (which I am told is true), it should be the standard product at the standard price. The mechanical mouse only gives buyers of the standard product the impression that Xerox can't make a decent mouse any more. --Christopher -------