info-mac@uw-beaver (info-mac) (11/27/84)
From: Gustavo Fernandez <FERNANDEZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA> I think what you see here is a hardware vs software discrepency. There is no reason why koala couldn't come up with a touchpad for the mac that would function exactly like the mouse for any application which doesn't try to read the mouse directly from the hardware ports. (I know of none as yet) The only thing that they would have to do on the outside is to remove one of the buttons. (There really isn't any way to provide a 2 button mouse for the mac.) Trackballs, bit (stylus) pads, joysicks, touchpads, etc. are all acceptable substitutes for mice and there is no reason why such devices will not come on the market as mouse substitutes for the mac. The main difference, however, is not the hardware, but the software. In a good Mac program, the mouse is central, and there is no escaping it. The speed-key software tries to "fool" the application program that it is using the keyboard, and not the mouse. Unfortunately, most non-mouse driven programs are modal which keeps all functions from being available to the user at any one time. While many Mac programs cannot be said to be modeless, mostly due to memory constraints, you certainly don't see the plewthora of modes as on, lets say, symphony, degrading the mouse to not being much better than the keyboard. Even the simplest mouse movements, however, can be useful, for example, for positioning the cursor in a screen editor or spreadsheet. The methods of dragging and autoscrolling to make selections, however, don't make it to many noin-mouse oriented products with a "fake mouse." and you eventually have to go back to the keyboard for evewrything but the most mundane functions. The Macintosh will always remain head and sholders above the IBM PC when it comes to user-interface issues, while the IBM will probably always have a broader variety of business software to fill every possible niche. Just because an IBM has a mouse doesn't make it a Macintosh unless the particular package was designed with the mouse in mind from the start (i.e. mouse required to run) and even then, the programmer probably chose his own set of user interface standards which might be consistent within his own program but which are not seen anywhere outside. -------