4 ms·
I lean towards this, but I've never seen anything that suggests it is more than a (possibly wrong) intuition. If Starcraft players can do 200 actions per minute
by aaron-lebo 9y ago
I lean towards this, but I've never seen anything that suggests it is more than a (possibly wrong) intuition. If Starcraft players can do 200 actions per minute, what suggests the mouse is the limiting factor?
I'd suspect we spend more time processing what we are going to do than we do actually doing it. I often find myself pausing to think about how to get the right layout I want in i3, but if I just could drag some windows around, it'd be done.
The mouse is very intuitive, that's probably why Jobs got stuck on it. It's hard to get much more "natural language" than literally using text to control actions as Acme does.
- secure 9y agoRegarding your comment about getting the right layout in i3: https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 https://github.com/i3/i3/pull/2653 might be relevant. It hasn’t seen an update in quite a while, though.
- taeric 9y agoIt is hard to see how the mouse enhances textual interaction. Contrasted with GUI interaction like Starcraft, where it is kind of a clear win. Similarly, using a pen is a clear win for artists, which is why wacom and now surface are such successes in their fields.
- boomlinde 9y agoFor me it's not so much a matter of time as it is about ergonomics. Typing with only one hand or constantly switching between the mouse and the keyboard is not good for your arms. Starcraft players on the other hand perform a task where one hand can always stay on the mouse while the other is on the keyboard.
- 0x445442 9y agoI'd suggest if you could map all your movement, navigation, pre-configured layouts to a command box with fuzzy matching available with Ctrl-Space or the like you would quickly become more proficient than with the mouse. Spacemacs and the Hydra package for Emacs are interesting as well but I actually prefer to just start typing commands until I get the match I want.