! Kempston mouse: Bottom line!
ZXNet echo conference «real.speccy»
Original was from 2All: I don’t care how to do it. If you want a counter instead of 2 bits, there will be a counter. Let's think about it: 2 bits or a counter? The majority will be “right” ;) [I ZX] !mPeR!0
OM> I propose to make the wheel on the mouse as follows:
OM> D3 - 0 digit of the wheel counter
OM> D4 - 1 -//-
OM> D5 - 2 -//-
OM> D6 - 3 -//-
D4 - direction, D5,D6,D7 - counter. will it work?
or is it still D3, D4 D5 D6 D7
OM> What do people think? This is more correct, more logical and more reliable in terms of
OM> circuit design. The counter can be made not 4-digit, but 3, for example...
OM> But this is not a fundamental question.
Just decide finally. And then one wants it this way, the other that way.
Here Pavel Demchuk writes to All and I wouldn’t mind intervening:
PD> 2All: I don’t care how to do it. If you want a counter instead of 2 bits -
PD> will be a counter. Just decide finally. Otherwise, one wants this way,
PD> the other wants that way.
PD> Let's think about it: 2 bits or a counter? The majority will be “right” ;)
the counter is more logical - this way the element of “analogue” of the wheel is preserved
- remember the first low-budget schemes for connecting a mouse to a Kempston port
when moving along x, y was converted into pressing the joystick buttons
corresponding to the direction - of course it all worked, but the most important
advantage of the mouse was lost - sensitivity not only to direction, but also in terms of speed.
the counter is better...
and again it would be more logical to place it on the high nibble of the port - bits
d7, d6, d5, d4 - since in this case you can speed up the driver using the command
rrd, which will transfer the high nibble to the low one, after which it can be
safely used for summing... for example like this:
ld bc,port
ld hl,buffer
...
ini
rrd ; in the low-order nibble (hl) we have the counter value, in digits
; d0, d1, d2 of register A - the state of the buttons.
Pavel, Paka! WbW, i┌i└/4D.
No direction needed... In principle, everything is simple, just like movement...
Hello, Pavel!
19 Nov 01 10:56, Pavel Demchuk -> All:
I propose a compromise ;) Sacrifice the potential 4th button and make a bit
configuration.
If D3=1, then D4,5,6,7 is a counter
If D3=0, then D6,7 is a rocker.
Just don’t forget that half of the mice are on rocking chairs. And connecting a rocker
is much easier than a wheel (in fact, just throw in 2 wires and that’s it).
PD> Let’s talk about it: 2 bits or a counter? The majority will be “right” ;)
2 bits.
This is easier to process, and it’s easier to connect a mouse with a rocking chair, and you won’t have to think in
the program - a wheel or a rocking chair.
Sincerely, Evgeniy.
On Monday November 19 2001 Pavel Demchuk wrote to All:
PD> D4 - direction, D5, D6, D7 - counter. will it work?
PD> or is it still D3, D4 D5 D6 D7
It’s easier to put the counter at 4 digits - so proceed from this.
PD> 2All: I don’t care how to do it. If you want a counter instead of 2 bits, there will be a
PD> counter. Just decide finally. Otherwise, one wants it this way, the other
PD> that way.
A counter, otherwise the wheel is of little use.
PD> Let's talk about it: 2 bits or a counter? The majority will be “right” ;)
I can replace the majority, provided there is no majority :)
Bye, Pavel! >>.. tigr...@mail.ru >>.. http://brainwave.dax.ru
EP> 2 bits.
EP> This is easier to process, and it’s easier to connect a mouse with a rocker, and you don’t have to
EP> in the program think about whether it’s a wheel or a rocker.
But the wheel is analog. If you turn it quickly, you’ll jump a couple of dozen lines at once; if you turn it slowly, then gradually. And the rocker only records
the very fact of pressing, which actually equates the mouse to just a 4-button mouse.
WBR, Jason.
20 Nov 01 00:55, Eugene Palenock wrote to Pavel Demchuk:
EP> I suggest a compromise ;) Sacrifice the potential 4th button and make
EP> a configuration bit.
This is all nonsense. A special driver must handle mouse processing.
Software is easier to fix than hardware.
Hello, Valerij!
20 Nov 01 21:42, Valerij Kozhevnikoff -> Pavel Demchuk:
VK> you’ll skip dozens of lines, if slowly, then gradually. And the rocking chair
VK> only records the fact of pressing, which actually equates the mouse to
VK> just a 4-button one.
Then to a 5-button one ;)
The rocking chair, in addition to rocking forward/backward, is also pressed and pressing it
is perceived by all software as the third button of the mouse.
Somehow Wednesday November 21, 2001 at 04:23:23, Eugene and Valerij were arguing about the topic !
Kempston mouse: Result!
EP> Then to the 5-button ;)
EP> The rocker, in addition to rocking forward/backward, is also pressed and its
EP> pressing
EP> is perceived by all software as the third mouse button.
First of all, tell me WHY I might need a 5-button mouse...
1st - choice
2nd - rollback (escape)
even the second button is ALREADY superfluous... why do I need three more?
[El Capitan Trueno] Yurik aka Jerri / Alien Factory /I \
[No RAR allowed] [SoHm] [Conceptual Minimalism] \ZX/
EP> a configuration bit.
Perversion...
EP> If D3=1, then D4,5,6,7 is a counter
EP> If D3=0, then D6,7 is a rocking chair.
Horror.
EP> Just don’t forget that half of the mice have rocking chairs.
Oh, well? I've only seen one.... All the geniuses have a scroll bar, and
the rocking chair is a thing of the past, no one installs them anymore....
EP> And connecting the rocking chair is much easier than a wheel (in fact, you just need to throw 2
EP> wires and that's it).
Oh, how's the wheel? Also two wires...
IT>
IT> Bye, Pavel! >>.. tigr...@mail.ru >>.. http://brainwave.dax.ru
ALL PAUL, QUESTION SOLVED. DO THIS:
D0-D3 4 buttons
D4-D7 Wheel
Approx. I threw the algorithm somewhere...
VK>> equates the mouse to just a 4-button mouse.
EP> Then to a 5-button one ;)
EP> In addition to rocking forward/backward, the rocking chair is also pressed and pressing it
EP> is perceived by all software as the third button of the mouse.
REALLY? Well damn, isn’t there a wheel?
Somehow Thursday November 22, 2001 at 01:31:58, Kirill and Yuri were arguing about the topic !
Kempston mouse: Result!
KF> 1 - start/take into clipboard
KF> 2 - rollback/menu
KF> 3 - insert from clipboard
KF> is especially pleased with the 3rd button.
What if you didn’t have a 3rd button?
Somehow Wednesday November 21, 2001 at 23:30:02, Michael and Yuri were arguing about the topic !
Kempston mouse: Bottom line!
MG> Mountains of options. In the commander:
MG> 1 - select
normal
MG> 2 - mark the file
well, where did it go
MG> 3 - menu
why the hell?
MG> 4 - cursor up
MG> 5 - cursor down.
UGU and the fact that in the mouse, in addition to the buttons, there is also a ball already forgot?
MG> Well, damn it, there wasn’t enough to roll back.
insanity in one word
MG> In the editor:
MG> 1 - installing the cursor.
MG> 2 - installing/removing the “scroll-cursor” (let’s say, like on
MG> offtopic)
you mean “scroll” bar"... so what kind of editor is this where the priority
function (and they don’t put anything else on the mouse) is to turn on/off the
"scrollbar"?
MG> 3 - menu
here you go through the menus :)
MG> 4 - scroll the text up
MG> 5 - scroll the text down.
in the editor you press the buttons anyway 4.5 is superfluous
another insanity
especially we must take into account that in the editor the mouse is not a vital gadget but
an unobtrusive service feature
look at ACEdit... there is no need to stick a mouse there... and it’s convenient without it... but
for whatever MS Word, yes, a mouse is needed... since the ENTIRE editor is mouse-friendly
sharpened
MG> Etc., etc.
well, yes... they are strong in coming up with insanity
where is BiluVorotyansky...
KF>> 1 - start/take into clipboard
KF>> 2 - rollback/menu
KF>> 3 - insert from clipboard
KF>> the 3rd button is especially pleasing.
YP> well, where did it go
MG>> 3 - menu
YP> why the hell?
Dlq of organizing an intuitive interface.
YP> well, yes... strong to come up with insanity
YP> where does Bill Vorotyansky go...
Why is it not on the spec anywhere clipboard?
... Still its hard,hard 2 c fragile lives,shattered dreams...
YP> in the editor you love to press the buttons 4.5 - superfluous
No, to quickly view the text, it’s very convenient. Otherwise, wait until the cursor reaches the edge of the screen...
YP> another insanity
A mouse with a wheel is in itself insanity. More precisely, as I say, “perversion.” But if
there’s nowhere to spend money (and now a good mouse without scrolling is more expensive than an inexpensive one with scrolling), then you can take it :-).
YP> all the more you have to take into account that in the editor the mouse is not a vital
YP> gadget but an unobtrusive service feature
Well, if already exists, then we need to make people’s lives more convenient :-)
YP> look at ACEdit... there’s no need to stick a mouse in there... and without it
YP> it’s convenient... but for MS Word, yes, you need a mouse... because
YP> THE ENTIRE editor is designed for a mouse
ACEdit hasn’t seen it, but, it seems to me, in ZX-Worde, graphic editors and
some commanders it would not be superfluous to use not only the mouse, but
namely with scroll.
YP> well, where did it go
Do you think? But I used to think that you can see what’s under the cursor at the moment
you press the left button, for example, and depending on the type of field under the cursor
select, mark, scroll, etc. ;-)))
Sincerely, Dmitriy.
25 Nov 01 02:27, Michael Generalov wrote to Yuri Potapov:
MG> A mouse with a wheel is in itself insanity. More precisely, as I say, “perversion.” But
MG> if you have nowhere to spend money (and now a good mouse without scrolling costs
MG> more than an inexpensive one with scrolling), then you can take it :-).
I agree. A good option is when by pressing the 3rd button you can move the mouse
drag
the text in 4 directions.
Somehow Saturday November 24, 2001 at 00:42:48, Kirill and Yuri were arguing about the topic !
Kempston mouse: Result!
MG>>> 3 - menu
YP>> why the hell?
KF> Dlq organizing intuitive interface.
KF> I would turn on its emulation and press 1 and 2 at the same time.
periodically taking unnecessary things into the clipboard or dropping into the menu
:)
If I also remember that in many programs with a windowed arrow interface
the arrow works from the Joystick!
Have you seen a Joystick with more than one working button on the spec?
:)
YP>> is
YP>> turning on/off the “scrollbar”?
MG> No. A stationary round cursor appears. The mouse
MG> cursor, meanwhile,
MG> is moving, *HO*. The further he moves away from the round
MG> (down/up/right/left),
MG>, the faster the text on the screen will scroll in the same
MG> direction. If the mouse cursor
MG> is on the round one or in close proximity, then the text
MG> will not scroll.
and without it everything looks great
MG> The round cursor is removed by another click of the wheel or by turning it
MG>. Until you try it yourself, you won’t feel the benefits. In general, it’s a nonsense :-)
yeah - hemp is also a nonsense...
MG> No, why? Toss buffer operations there, as the most
MG> most frequently used ones.
MG> It’s just that nothing comes into my head besides the menu. :-)
Are you always copying something in the editor?
DN> Do you think so? And I used to think that you can see what is under the
DN> cursor at the moment
DN> you press the left button, for example, and depending on the type of field
DN> under the
DN> cursor, select, mark, scroll, etc. ;-))).
YP> in a graphical editor? scroll...
YP> only in Picasso :)
I don’t remember Picasso, but in all (or almost all) editors, part of the screen is covered with a menu. This is where scrolling comes in handy for moving the screen. Yes, and if you enlarge it, it wouldn’t hurt, even a second wheel could be added
:-). Although, of course, it’s easier to make a vertical shift by twisting the pressed
wheel.
YP> by the way, we must remember that most of the arrows are also controlled by Kempston
YP> Joystick... and it only has one button :)
My friend made his own joystick (from Segov’s), which was placed on floor
keyboard. The joystick was specially designed and thought out for ChV and Max
Petrov. Gave _huge_ conveniences. So one button is not always enough.
Somehow Wednesday November 28, 2001 at 21:14:13, Michael and Yuri were arguing about the topic !
Kempston mouse: Bottom line!
MG> No, you know, it’s still a little more convenient. Although not for everyone.
MG> After all, not everyone
MG> generally uses a mouse in commanders.
exactly for everyone
MG> Well, if you already have one, don’t leave it hanging. And duplicating
MG> useful functions or
MG> making scrolling the screen more convenient would not hurt
MG>.
And if not?
MG> maybe I didn’t explain it very clearly, but I can’t be more precise -
MG> you need to look. If you're in
MG> 4616 - show me :-).
...
MG> they wrote on the box that the wheel reduces the number of movements
MG> with the mouse by 30%.
MG> In reality it may be less, but there is a benefit without a doubt.
I don’t know, I don’t know... we don’t drive on wheels, and we have mice with balls :)
MG> If I’m just typing a text (which happens rarely), then no. If
MG> I compose something
MG> (lab, kyrsak, control) - then all the time.
...
MG> And if a person has a keyboard not from an offtopic, but a regular
MG> 40-key? Not so yzh
where did he get one?
MG> With a wheel - and faster (although maybe not much), but much
MG> more convenient.
I know that a wheel is more convenient... but I don’t have one... and I probably won’t have a mouse with a wheel
MG> only light-photo
MG> diodes and microphones, which in extreme casesyou can always
MG> replace it. More precisely, not for
MG> work, but in order to assemble a working mouse.
I don’t know... I have a regular PC mouse... and I didn’t have to cut it
MG> A huge number of spectromists (and not only) sit and
MG> work without a mouse. And
MG> they feel great. It's just more convenient with a mouse.
...
MG> I don't remember Picasso, but in all (or almost all)
MG> editors, part of the screen
MG> is covered with a menu. Scroll and
MG> are useful for moving the screen. And when
the screen moves only in ArtStudio... in modern editors
it simply disappears
MG> My friend made his own joystick (from a Segov one), on which
^^^^^^^^^^
not everyone has such friends
MG> half of the
MG> keyboard was placed on it. The joystick was specially designed and designed
MG> for ChV and Max
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and accordingly not everyone has such joysticks, so
joystick = 4 directions + 1 shot
MG> Petrov. Gave _huge_ conveniences. So not always
MG> one button is enough.
whether it is enough or not is another question..
but the joystick has one button
YP> and if not?
It’s not worth buying a wheeled mouse just for this, IMHO. But many cheap mice die quickly, and not always completely. And they are often just
thrown away. For example, they simply gave me 2 wheeled mice, one of which
had a broken cord, and the other did not always have the left button working.
Of course, both work perfectly now. If you (or anyone else) are not a shy person, go to companies and tell everyone that you are a poor student, you just bought a computer for work and you really need a mouse, and even a broken one will do. A friend of mine at one time quite successfully obtained toys for himself in this way.