Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!killer!ames!amdahl!apple!voder!pyramid!prls!philabs!ttidca!quad1!few
From: few@quad1.quad.com (Frank Whaley)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.misc
Subject: Re: Mouse buttons
Message-ID: <1585@quad1.quad.com>
Date: 6 Jul 88 19:17:29 GMT
References: <4688@killer.UUCP>
Reply-To: few@quad1.quad.com (Frank Whaley)
Organization: Quadratron Systems Inc, Westlake Village, CA
Lines: 24

In article <4688@killer.UUCP> chari@killer.UUCP (Chris Whatley) writes:
>When mousing, do most prefer a three button, two button or one button mouse?
>This all seems like an uneccessary complication to the interface.

Complication, yes.  Uneccessary, no.  More buttons mean more choices.  As
most of us regular readers know, many (marginally successful) systems have
been built around multi-button mice.  Some (like SmallTalk) are virtually
unusable with a one-button mouse.

I like to have several different applications running in different windows
(in different states).  Some of them have hierarchical command systems that
run 3-4 levels deep, with numerous shortcuts available.  Pull-down menus
are a simplification that actually slows me down.

Besides, with the mouse between my thumb and pinky, my other fingers might
atrophy without three buttons to keep them busy:-)
-- 
Frank Whaley
Senior Programmer
Quadratron Systems Incorporated
few@quad1.quad.com

Water separates the people of the world;
Wine unites them.