|
Maybe I just have higher expectations. The last one from Microsoft (before I bought this newer batch of 5) lasted probably 10 years, so...well, I don't think I have another 50 years in me. 
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: mouse
The lifespan of a mouse 🐀 is generally much lesser than that of a human being. 
|
|
|
|
|
With this generation, Microsoft went out of its way to prove you right. 
|
|
|
|
|
I moved to Logitech, Logi as they are now known. After various models with more or less successful lives under my ham-fisted use I finally opted for their Signature M650 L - note the "L", this mouse comes in two sizes!
It is quiet, precise and has so far lasted 2 1/2 years with no sign of trouble. Wife & daughter have since got the same ones after using mine (Not the L version, they are not ham-fisted).
Your one with the dodgy scroll wheel might have been fixable by a simple air-blast to clean the optical system.
So old that I did my first coding in octal via switches on a DEC PDP 8
|
|
|
|
|
Clumpco wrote: Your one with the dodgy scroll wheel might have been fixable by a simple air-blast to clean the optical system.
That's what I'm hoping for. I still haven't opened up a single one of them to try to fix/clean them. Hopefully I can salvage one or two when the time comes.
|
|
|
|
|
My Classic Intellimouse has a blue LED that started going bad around the 2 year mark. I thought, hey, I'll just put a new LED in it. Well, I did put a new LED in it, but it was ridiculously difficult, the LED was a surface mount 1206 in a very confined recess in the optical IC itself. I used my hot air to destroy the old LED to get it out, then some solder paste and hot air again to put the new LED in. I was very worried that I had overheated the optical IC, but fortunately everything still worked afterword. If I have to do it again though, I will, the Intellimouse is also my favorite mouse, the ergonomics just fit.
|
|
|
|
|
crapcoder670 wrote: If I have to do it again though, I will, the Intellimouse is also my favorite mouse, the ergonomics just fit.
Exactly. It's a rare piece of hardware that it just exactly what I want.
I never had a problem with the LED (always a button or the scrollwheel or the pointer moving randomly) - and I never took the time to try to open them/clean them/replace the button contacts and the like. So I do have a small pile that might be revived, if I only took the time to clean/fix them...
|
|
|
|
|
Like you, I am very partial to certain keyboards and rodents. I fell in love with the Microsoft Trackball Optical when it first came out -- it fit my hand perfectly and it worked as it should. As a side benefit, anyone who tried to use my computer could never figure it out, so they left my machine alone.
When Microsoft discontinued them, I bought a half-dozen (I think on eBay) for dirt. They last a very long time -- I think I've only worn out one, so they'll definitely be with me for as long as computers have Type-A USB ports.
I've never been a huge fan of mice. Another nice feature of a trackball is that it takes little desk space since you don't need to move it around.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting. I had a coworker using a trackball, nearly two decades ago...I don't remember if it was from Microsoft or someone else's, or whether today's are any different or not...but there's two things I remember:
(a) I could not get the hang of it, I was always quicker using a mouse (although my experience with it amounted to a few minutes at a time here and there), and
(b) I thought in the long run that would only end up hurting my thumb. I used to believe carpal tunnel was a BS syndrome, until I experienced it myself. Even after only a few minutes of use, I felt my whole hand cramping. Although that might just be a 'getting used to' phase...
I know people who use them love them.
|
|
|
|
|
You must be very hard on mice. I have a pile of working mice removed from equipment that no longer runs. I hand 'em out to my kids when they destroy one, but even they can't seem to wreck mise as fast as they accumulate. My current mouse is a very ordinary J-Tech Digital vertical mouse I've had since the pandemic. Must have cost me all of $25.
|
|
|
|
|
SeattleC++ wrote: You must be very hard on mice.
Not particularly; I don't even play games with that mouse. It took probably a decade for the last of my original IntelliMouse to become unusable. It's the newer production batch (MS's "Classic IntelliMouse") that all developed problems, under 2-3 years each.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, those older ball-less MS Intellimouse weren't bad. But I am rather "mouse tolerant", though I definitely don't like a lot of those fancy gaming mice or those round "eagle claw" ones.
Right now, here at the two computers I am daily using, I have a cheap Logitech M325 on one, and a M185 (from a wireless keyboard/mouse combo) on the other. Both are working just fine for a couple of years at last, and I have a Logitech M325c in my backpack that I take with me when I am visiting clients, so I do have a mouse to use if I run into a laptop with only touchpad (I am on war path with touchpads!  ). That one is probably 7-8 years old now and gets bounced around in that bag a lot. With no ill effects. Each one probably wasn't more than $20....
|
|
|
|
|
I have used the same stock HP laser mouse for about 15-20 years.
It was not tracking well at one point and careful inspection showed some fine fibers had collected in the laser port. A pair of tweezers fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
they cannot even make a stable OS, and you want a quality mouse? I know, you are whining, here have some cheese. I plead guilty to doing the same thing.
best mouse I've used over the last 7 years? A CORDED (Bluetooth blows) Corsair Razor. I gave up on Logitech except for their keyboards.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: they cannot even make a stable OS, and you want a quality mouse?
By many accounts, MS used to make great keyboards and mice. Keyword, "used to". They did. Really.
|
|
|
|
|
I would agree, they did make good mice. Someone moved in and swiped their cheese, their margins went way down, and they wandered off. I know their are still some keyboards and mice (of some variation) sold under the Microsoft name, but I think they are out of the manufacturing business.
I confess my previous comment was a bit snarky.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: I know their are still some keyboards and mice (of some variation) sold under the Microsoft name, but I think they are out of the manufacturing business.
It's my understanding MS is out of the mouse/keyboard business but let some unrelated company design their next generation of products. It's not clear to me however if they're allowed to keep selling under MS's name. It'll be interesting to find out.
charlieg wrote: I confess my previous comment was a bit snarky.
When it comes to Microsoft, who can resist the opportunity?
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I have written a bit of Code to talk to bit of hardware. All good I now having to document it for the records,
In the past I have worked on embedded and analogue test rigs which can be covered by a flowchart and a listing.
This will not work for a Windows program there is too much going on compared to a PIC or Atmel. Is there a way of creating the asked for without going mad? It can't be too odd as I think there must be other companies who need this...
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to a reason I don't do desktop and server development anymore.
The truth is I've only ever done flow diagrams for embedded code.
To verify desktop applications, rather than design a flow diagram, I design a test matrix. My functional requirements basically dictate the tests.
If you really must diagram your software's behavior, you could use UML, but it won't make things easier, just more comprehensible because anyone with a UML background could understand it.
UML - Behavioral Diagram vs Structural Diagram[^]
Adding: To my mind this is the difference between programming realtime systems and programming non-realtime systems - realtime systems are predictable enough to diagram. As a rough rule of thumb anyway.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
uml - meh. never met anyone that used or understood that garbage except for the ump prophet.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not a fan of it myself, but I had to learn my away around it back when I was a software architect by trade.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
Well, there's the high level stuff:
1. What does the hardware do, and why?
2. What are the requirements for the code?
Mid-level stuff:
1. How to integrate the code into a project
2. How to test the code and hardware
Low-level stuff:
1. What are the "public" methods to initialize the code & hardware
2. What are the "public" methods to interact with the hardware -- read/write/reset/diagnostics, etc
3. What is a typical use-case scenario
4. What are the best practices for initialization and shutdown of the code/hardware?
5. What parts of the code are thread-safe, what parts are not? (I would assume none of it is thread safe, but who knows.)
Nano-level stuff:
1. Describe the low-level interface between the code and the hardware.
2. Describe signals and timing (or include the specs on the hardware)
3. Describe specific constraints on the code, like, are there timing dependencies
4. Describe interrupts the code uses when interacting with the hardware
My 2c of some ideas, dredging up memories of documentation I've written in the past for software-hardware stuff 
|
|
|
|
|
Can a part of the documentation be written within the code itself, aka, self documenting code. In the form of class headers, function headers, etc.
And the remaining part of documentation as a high level document giving the overall architecture, hardware interfaces, assumptions, limitations, errors, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Mmm, self documenting code, sounds good until you have to figure out how and why!
|
|
|
|
|
"military intelligence" is known as perfect example of oxymoron
allow me to add
"self documented code " into the growing list
corollary:
when "open source code " is NOT documented at all - period
is it still
"open source code " ?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
