4 ms·

Buddy, I posted a link - the actual difference in latency in time to click and movements with wireless mice with dedicated receivers. Some do better than wired

Buddy, I posted a link - the actual difference in latency in time to click and movements with wireless mice with dedicated receivers. Some do better than wired models - in any event the latency of the RF link is on the order or hundreds of microseconds and the wired part of the peripheral bus (ie USB) and the software is at least a couple milliseconds. It's very well possible my wireless mouse setup has lower latency than most wired setups. That’s why I said essentially no lag. A good gaming wireless mouse will do better than many wired mice. In those cases it’s better but it’s still not enough difference to matter to anyone. The advantage of wired is not just aesthetics. This thread started because of any accessory to deal with the wire. I don't need to bother at all with a damn wire in the way. > This might as be considered a law of physics - electromagnetic energy will always travel faster, more accurately, with less interference, with less required current through a conductive medium than through air. I mean you might want to go back and read a high school physics textbook - because you’ve got the speed of light exactly backwards. The reason digital wireless signals may have additional latency has nothing to do with the propagation which is faster in air. Also I’ve never seen a networking over powerline system that worked better than Wi-Fi. Not all conductive paths are effective for signals. > Wired is ALWAYS the objectively superior option in all metrics except for superficial & subjective "aesthetics", all else equal. Which is why professional musicians and broadcasters would never use wireless microphones and pickups. (sarcasm)

rektide 4y ago
A good number of these mouse show a difference of 0.2 ms betwen wired & wireless. That's one frame at 500fps. As you say, there are so many other factors that radically dwarf this transport concern. It's hard to take this as a discussion when people protest so vehemently against such a tiny figure, when it's such a small factor. Also griefing about battery seem like horseshit too. I have a travel mouse with a single rechargeable AA battery in it. I have a variety of gaming mice, including a Razer Naga Epic from ~2010 that I've literally worn the buttons through to unreliability on. These mice all have li-ion batteries and they all work fine. Maybe in aggregate I've worn through like a single rechargable AA cells worth of use over a decade. The rate of attrition on rechargeable batteries is tiny. It's just incredible what the cables-or-die undead-alliance goes through to justify their fanatical anti-cause.
- anonym29 4y ago
  I agree, the real world difference is negligible.
  - rektide 4y ago
    Oh I absolutely have a long-held aversion to the sight of cables. Because I have had to live among them, among many many many many of them, because I have had to manage them, growing up amidst so very many of them. They have never been fun to manage. I have long toiled to not be so enwrapped by cables. Slower? Not really, not according to the links already shared. Less bandwidth? My headphones, my mouse, my keyboard are nowhere near their practical limits over wireless. Higher latency? I just cited 0.2ms, which seems absurd to grumble over. Higher error rate? This is not a problem I've ever experienced. More prone to interference? Literally never seen an issue. There's just no real solid reports on this being an issue. It's not seen with any statistical significance in real reviews. Higher power requirements? Yes, having some awareness of batteries is required, but if you set things up (slash most devices are set up) to not be caught unprepared it's a remarkable low-toil system. Most devices can charge themselves. Most will operate for a week without charge. The only problem is being a total newb who doesn't have any handle at all, who gets caught out unprepared in the cold, by having absolutely no indicators & no warning. Once you actually start trying to use these devices, once you actually start looking at the battery level, the power concern is remarkably low issue.
    - anonym29 4y ago
      Many great points made.
      - rektide 4y ago
        ok editing my reply here too thanks
anonym29 4y ago
Couldn't agree more. Upvoting for visibility.
- riceart 4y ago
  Why do stage musicians use wireless microphones? Is it because they have a hatred strictly for aesthetic reasons? Nobody said you can’t use your damn wired mouse if it makes you happy - but latency is not an actual reason to prefer a wired mouse. > Again, wireless can be superior, but only when you are deliberately cherry-picking the least efficient wired setup to compare to the most efficient wireless setup, just like your argument for mice. But earlier I thought you said it was a law of physics that conductive mediums were always superior to air. Also that the speed of light in air is slower than a “conductive” medium. You don’t seem well.
  - anonym29 4y ago
    No argument here! Great points.
    - riceart 4y ago
      > Just to be clear, your wireless mouse, keyboard, headset, and network connection are not making use of light through air Yes they are. “The terms light, electromagnetic waves, and radiation all refer to the same physical phenomenon: electromagnetic energy.” https://science.nasa.gov/ems/02_anatomy https://science.nasa.gov/ems/02_anatomy Light and radio are both electromagnetic energy. Radio waves and light both propagate at the speed of light. The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant. The speed of light in various mediums is always slower. Among copper, air and glass, light/EM waves will propagate the slowest in glass and the fastest in air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light > cannot make use of light through air even a fraction as efficiently as light through fiber optic cable, due to a guaranteed minimum amount of light interference in air that a fiber optic cable will never have, right? No, not right. As someone else pointed out a point to point link through the air will have lower latency than fiber (glass or plastic). Whether or not a signal can be carried accurately and error free through any medium involves concepts beyond a basic understanding of the speed of light. But in the real world one will encounter reliable well designed wireless links and poorly performing wired links.
serf 4y ago
>Also I’ve never seen a networking over powerline system that worked better than Wi-Fi. Not all conductive paths are effective for signals. although I agree that powerline networking is garbage, I have encountered older construction houses that create an environment that is just about impossible to conquer without specialist wireless equipment. passive blocking via exotic wall materials, older drywall and fairing compounds that contained metallic particulate, various metallic accoutrements -- and accidental active jamming from poor wiring. >Which is why professional musicians and broadcasters would never use wireless microphones and pickups. (sarcasm) eh -- this is just an effective and allowed compromise. A performer will usually prefer not to drag wires around a stage just from the sheer physical discomfort from the additional weight and the worry of a trip hazard on an already hazardous stage. That said , many performers opt to avoid such conveniences due to a perceived difference in quality. [0] [0]: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-wireless-rigs-not-the-standard-in-guitar-live-performance https://www.quora.com/Why-are-wireless-rigs-not-the-standard...
- riceart 4y ago
  > A performer will usually prefer not to drag wires around a stage just from the sheer physical discomfort from the additional weight and the worry of a trip hazard on an already hazardous stage. eh — this is not a “purely” aesthetic or superficial difference, which was the foolishness I was replying to: “Wired is ALWAYS the objectively superior option in all metrics except for superficial & subjective "aesthetics", all else equal.”
  - serf 4y ago
    Ah, I better understand. Thanks, my mistake; I had forgotten the superficial element. I'm not sure if the mocking elements that you edited in after the initial reply added much, I wasn't trying to come across as derogatory, I just speak/type like that.
    - riceart 4y ago
      Sorry. I was not appreciative of the uncalled for personal attacks (not from you) - that have now been mostly edited away.

rektide 4y ago

A good number of these mouse show a difference of 0.2 ms betwen wired & wireless. That's one frame at 500fps. As you say, there are so many other factors that radically dwarf this transport concern. It's hard to take this as a discussion when people protest so vehemently against such a tiny figure, when it's such a small factor. Also griefing about battery seem like horseshit too. I have a travel mouse with a single rechargeable AA battery in it. I have a variety of gaming mice, including a Razer Naga Epic from ~2010 that I've literally worn the buttons through to unreliability on. These mice all have li-ion batteries and they all work fine. Maybe in aggregate I've worn through like a single rechargable AA cells worth of use over a decade. The rate of attrition on rechargeable batteries is tiny. It's just incredible what the cables-or-die undead-alliance goes through to justify their fanatical anti-cause.

anonym29 4y ago
I agree, the real world difference is negligible.
- rektide 4y ago
  Oh I absolutely have a long-held aversion to the sight of cables. Because I have had to live among them, among many many many many of them, because I have had to manage them, growing up amidst so very many of them. They have never been fun to manage. I have long toiled to not be so enwrapped by cables. Slower? Not really, not according to the links already shared. Less bandwidth? My headphones, my mouse, my keyboard are nowhere near their practical limits over wireless. Higher latency? I just cited 0.2ms, which seems absurd to grumble over. Higher error rate? This is not a problem I've ever experienced. More prone to interference? Literally never seen an issue. There's just no real solid reports on this being an issue. It's not seen with any statistical significance in real reviews. Higher power requirements? Yes, having some awareness of batteries is required, but if you set things up (slash most devices are set up) to not be caught unprepared it's a remarkable low-toil system. Most devices can charge themselves. Most will operate for a week without charge. The only problem is being a total newb who doesn't have any handle at all, who gets caught out unprepared in the cold, by having absolutely no indicators & no warning. Once you actually start trying to use these devices, once you actually start looking at the battery level, the power concern is remarkably low issue.
  - anonym29 4y ago
    Many great points made.
    - rektide 4y ago
      ok editing my reply here too thanks

anonym29 4y ago

Couldn't agree more. Upvoting for visibility.

riceart 4y ago
Why do stage musicians use wireless microphones? Is it because they have a hatred strictly for aesthetic reasons? Nobody said you can’t use your damn wired mouse if it makes you happy - but latency is not an actual reason to prefer a wired mouse. > Again, wireless can be superior, but only when you are deliberately cherry-picking the least efficient wired setup to compare to the most efficient wireless setup, just like your argument for mice. But earlier I thought you said it was a law of physics that conductive mediums were always superior to air. Also that the speed of light in air is slower than a “conductive” medium. You don’t seem well.
- anonym29 4y ago
  No argument here! Great points.
  - riceart 4y ago
    > Just to be clear, your wireless mouse, keyboard, headset, and network connection are not making use of light through air Yes they are. “The terms light, electromagnetic waves, and radiation all refer to the same physical phenomenon: electromagnetic energy.” https://science.nasa.gov/ems/02_anatomy https://science.nasa.gov/ems/02_anatomy Light and radio are both electromagnetic energy. Radio waves and light both propagate at the speed of light. The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant. The speed of light in various mediums is always slower. Among copper, air and glass, light/EM waves will propagate the slowest in glass and the fastest in air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light > cannot make use of light through air even a fraction as efficiently as light through fiber optic cable, due to a guaranteed minimum amount of light interference in air that a fiber optic cable will never have, right? No, not right. As someone else pointed out a point to point link through the air will have lower latency than fiber (glass or plastic). Whether or not a signal can be carried accurately and error free through any medium involves concepts beyond a basic understanding of the speed of light. But in the real world one will encounter reliable well designed wireless links and poorly performing wired links.

serf 4y ago

>Also I’ve never seen a networking over powerline system that worked better than Wi-Fi. Not all conductive paths are effective for signals. although I agree that powerline networking is garbage, I have encountered older construction houses that create an environment that is just about impossible to conquer without specialist wireless equipment. passive blocking via exotic wall materials, older drywall and fairing compounds that contained metallic particulate, various metallic accoutrements -- and accidental active jamming from poor wiring. >Which is why professional musicians and broadcasters would never use wireless microphones and pickups. (sarcasm) eh -- this is just an effective and allowed compromise. A performer will usually prefer not to drag wires around a stage just from the sheer physical discomfort from the additional weight and the worry of a trip hazard on an already hazardous stage. That said , many performers opt to avoid such conveniences due to a perceived difference in quality. [0] [0]: https://www.quora.com/Why-are-wireless-rigs-not-the-standard-in-guitar-live-performance https://www.quora.com/Why-are-wireless-rigs-not-the-standard...

riceart 4y ago
> A performer will usually prefer not to drag wires around a stage just from the sheer physical discomfort from the additional weight and the worry of a trip hazard on an already hazardous stage. eh — this is not a “purely” aesthetic or superficial difference, which was the foolishness I was replying to: “Wired is ALWAYS the objectively superior option in all metrics except for superficial & subjective "aesthetics", all else equal.”
- serf 4y ago
  Ah, I better understand. Thanks, my mistake; I had forgotten the superficial element. I'm not sure if the mocking elements that you edited in after the initial reply added much, I wasn't trying to come across as derogatory, I just speak/type like that.
  - riceart 4y ago
    Sorry. I was not appreciative of the uncalled for personal attacks (not from you) - that have now been mostly edited away.