3 ms·

Au contraire, that diamond blade cuts masonry and masonry only. It doesn't cut masonry and metal, so you don't need to remember "Does this blade also cut this t

Au contraire, that diamond blade cuts masonry and masonry only. It doesn't cut masonry and metal, so you don't need to remember "Does this blade also cut this too?". The grinder grinds and grinds only, it doesn't also make you breakfast. Likewise, Apple mice only ever click. It doesn't left and right click. Speaking more broadly, Apple computers only ever do One Apple Way(tm). They don't do One Apple Way(tm) and also IBM-compatible/Windows/Linux. Tools are supposed to be simple in design, because their value is in them delivering results quickly and easily for everyone. And most people using computers want results because computers are tools, they couldn't care less about the process other than keeping it as simple as possible. I would be the last person on the planet to defend Jobs or Apple's philosophy, but I will give credit where credit is due because they by far understand human psychology the best out of everyone in the tech industry.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
> Likewise, Apple mice only ever click. Precisely. It's like DeWalt or Milwaukee only making a diamond blade, because "you never need to cut metal, and you shouldn't have to think about that anyway". > Tools are supposed to be simple in design, because their value is in them delivering results quickly and easily for everyone. This is not the history of human tools.
adrian_b 3y ago
People have three fingers on the mouse and there is nothing obvious or simple in the fact that they must use only one of the three fingers. According to your theory, most people should cut their extra fingers, because it is too difficult for them to remember that they can do and they should do different actions with each finger. The user must input eventually the same information with a 1-button Apple mouse or a 2-button Microsoft mouse or a 3-button Mouse Systems mouse. An Apple user must compensate the lack of mouse buttons by either making multiple mouse clicks or pressing simultaneously with the mouse various keyboard keys. All these additional actions are slower, more complicated and harder to remember than the task of a user who must just choose with which finger to click. So no, the idea that a one-button mouse is simpler for the user is just wrong. In fact it is both slower and more complicated.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

> Likewise, Apple mice only ever click. Precisely. It's like DeWalt or Milwaukee only making a diamond blade, because "you never need to cut metal, and you shouldn't have to think about that anyway". > Tools are supposed to be simple in design, because their value is in them delivering results quickly and easily for everyone. This is not the history of human tools.

adrian_b 3y ago

People have three fingers on the mouse and there is nothing obvious or simple in the fact that they must use only one of the three fingers. According to your theory, most people should cut their extra fingers, because it is too difficult for them to remember that they can do and they should do different actions with each finger. The user must input eventually the same information with a 1-button Apple mouse or a 2-button Microsoft mouse or a 3-button Mouse Systems mouse. An Apple user must compensate the lack of mouse buttons by either making multiple mouse clicks or pressing simultaneously with the mouse various keyboard keys. All these additional actions are slower, more complicated and harder to remember than the task of a user who must just choose with which finger to click. So no, the idea that a one-button mouse is simpler for the user is just wrong. In fact it is both slower and more complicated.