Touchscreen with a 'real' stylus. On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:10 PM Kenton A. Hoover via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> I don't think that portrayal of Xerox's view on the mouse is correct. Much > of Interlisp and all of Smalltalk was mouse-based and Interlisp was never > designed for (only) use by youth. > > Trackpads are fine except for detail work. Touchscreens are bound by touch > targets needing to be finger-sized. The trackpoint works well if you never > want to take your hands off the keyboard at all. The mouse/trackball just > sit in the middle of the graph of connivence/precision. > > .. > > -- > Kenton A. Hoover > ken...@nemersonhoover.org > shib...@mail.marchordie.org > +1 415 830 5843 > On Jan 22, 2023, 05:14 -0800, Chris via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org>, > wrote: > > Originally as I understand it the mouse as a product of Xerox was > intended not so much for general use but to aid youngins and disabled > people with their usage. And despite the never-mousers, predominantly linux > fanatics, it's an indispensable tool for nearly everyone. There was a stint > where I favored trackballs. But it's a toss up as to which is more natural > and faster. Each may excel in cwrtain applications. > > > > Then there's the touch screen (and touch pad). I find touch pads > superior, make that way superior to that horrific track point used on old > Thinkpads. But again that'a me. Touch screens, my hatred for them grows > almost daily. They have their place. And for portable devices they're > largely the only game in town. But I often wish I at least had the option > of a mouse or something close. > > > > Is this an example of where older tech beats the new tech? Or do aspects > of the newer tech just await refinement? >
