6 ms·

> release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing I’m still trying to understand who came with the idea of charging t

• Sharlin 8mo ago
  Textbook case of form over function. Either an engineering constraint forced by the design and deemed an acceptable trade-off by higher-ups, or maybe more likely, the designer just thought a visible charging port would’ve ruined their design.
  • tavavex 8mo ago
    While the exact reason has never been documented, if you look at that mouse's design, you'll see that its first generation had a regular battery compartment on the bottom. When gen 2 arrived, they fully reused the same shell and only replaced that bottom part to now be an integrated battery with a charging port instead of a compartment for AAs. Moving the charging port would've required a brand new design, since every edge of the mouse tapers way too much for a port to be placed anywhere else. They would also probably need to change more of the internal structure, as opposed to just swapping a battery module and changing the bottom lid. In this case the constraint seems to just be about functionality and manufacturing. Apple has made many controversial design decisions that have no functional justifications in the past, yet people keep bringing up the mouse.
    • throw_away_623 8mo ago
      The reason people talk about the mouse is that it's one of the worst ideas they ever had. At the time, I remember someone claimed that the reason was that they were afraid people could leave it plugged in for convenience. Apple thought that would lead to a worse experience because their mouse was designed to be used wirelessly. I think it was actually more related to aesthetic "icks" by the designers, because people would have disconnected the cable if it was in the way.
      • alexdbird 8mo ago
        Honestly, as a user of the mouse, I think the main reason people talk about the mouse is bike shedding. Charging isn't a problem in actual use, but everyone sure has an opinion on it. There are plenty of contenders for 'worst ideas they ever had' and this just isn't up there.
        • Oreb 8mo ago
          I agree, I always found the charging port location to be a total non-issue. The battery life is long, charging is fast, and you get warned that the battery level is low long before the mouse dies.
          • alexdbird 8mo ago
            In fact, the real crime of the Magic Mouse is how awkward it is to switch it between machines.
        • kmeisthax 8mo ago
          "If you see a stylus, they blew it" That's a quote from Steve Jobs about how basically all of their competition (except Google) had made the mistake of trying to ship desktop software on phones. The problem with the stylus is that it's a hardware workaround for a software problem: the sort of cost-reduced engineering you get when a company wants to "have a mobile strategy" without actually putting in the time and effort to make something good. The Magic Mouse is the exact same kind of "we couldn't care less" cost-reduction. The charging port is on the bottom because that's the only place you can put a charging port with the existing all-glass design. Because they re-used an existing design intended for removable batteries. This is such an uncharacteristically un-Apple move, and one so obviously detrimental to the design of the device, that people (including myself) actually psyopped themselves into thinking Apple had deliberately designed the mouse to enforce wireless usage. And, to be clear, Apple has never done that. All their other peripherals with rechargeable batteries in them will let you use them fully wired if you plug them in. In fact, if you somehow engineered a way to move the charging port somewhere less stupid, the Magic Mouse probably would work plugged-in, too. If you see a charging port on the bottom, they blew it.
    • moron4hire 8mo ago
      While I get the feeling you appreciate the, erhm, efficiency with which Apple modified this product, the problem is that Apple is not supposed to be efficient. They don't need to save money on the engineering process because they are not hurting for money. They sell themselves as being a design-forward company that prides itself on making bold, not expedient, choices. To take a shortcut like that shows a lack of respect for the customer to whom they are charging premium prices for these items.
    • benj111 8mo ago
      So if they're reusing the shell, they passed the savings on to customers right? If this were a £10 mouse then this excuse might be valid, but it isn't.
• opan 8mo ago
  How many generations of that mouse design have there been now? Any changes to it? Wireless charging support could be a nice bandaid on that terrible design.
  • gandalfian 8mo ago
    Modern wireless mice from logitech and microsoft last for a year or two on a pair of aa batteries. There is no point making them rechargeable any more. You can always use rechargeable aa nihms if you really want to, but personally I just have 50p of alkaline aa's and in two years I will have to change them again. Some things do get better :)
    • expedition32 8mo ago
      AA batteries have also immensely gone down in cost compared to the 1990s.
    • f1shy 8mo ago
      The only point IMHO to built in battery, is if it very convenient to recharge, which is not the case. I have an HHKB which uses 2 AAA, with rechargeable Li batteries which I can reload with usb, while still using the keyboard with cable (once every 6 months or so)
• sandermvanvliet 8mo ago
  Let me introduce you to the world of _devices for keeping small kids asleep_. For whatever reason they won’t work when hooked up to a charger and of course the moment you need them most the batteries have gone dead so you must charge… At this point I can’t help but think that the people who design these things really hate parents
• askvictor 8mo ago
  I believe that was intentional, to prevent people using it plugged in, which would mean most people would keep it plugged in all the time, so it wouldn't be a wireless mouse anymore, but also degrade the battery lifespan.
  • fainpul 8mo ago
    I also believe that was intentional. But the reason was the typical Apple / Jobs hubris of knowing better than the users. The desktop looks cleaner with fewer cables, so they wanted to enforce use without the cable plugged in. I don't have a source for this, but I'm pretty sure I've read something like that a long time ago.
    • expedition32 8mo ago
      As someone who doesn't give a flying fuck about design this is exactly what bothers me with Apple. Computers are not fashion or status symbol they are a tool. Although I do have a "ice" motherboard..
  • treyd 8mo ago
    Maybe they should have made the batteries replaceable and make it operable without batteries installed. Or just ship a wired version for the people who want that.
    • bombcar 8mo ago
      That wired hockey puck mouse was an abomination
  • chocochunks 8mo ago
    It was intentional to recycle the design of the Magic Mouse 1 which used AA batteries. The Magic Touchpad and Keyboard came out the exact same day as the Magic Mouse 2 and they don't share the Magic Mouse 2's stupid design. They both have perfectly usable ports on the front and even work when wired without pairing.
  • 8mo ago
• userbinator 8mo ago
  Where should a cord on a mouse be when it's charging? The same place as any cord on a mouse should be, i.e. the tail, would be the commonsense answer. Indeed this is how all other dual-mode mouses do it.
• specialist 8mo ago
  Their laptop touchpads are the only Apple "pointer" input device I've ever liked. (And by extension, the iPhone and iPad.) I hate myself every time I settle for yet another disposable Microsoft mouse. Though, I would have killed for an Apple Pencil, back when I was a CAD jockey. For me, the butterfly keyboard was Apple's mostest worstest user interface design decision. (Doubly so because it persisted for so long. I love that Apple (and others) try new things. But I don't understand commitment to design failures.) Source: I've been an Apple partisan since the Apple ][. Even stubbornly resisting Amiga's siren call.
  • jaffa2 8mo ago
    > For me, the butterfly keyboard was Apple's mostest worstest user interface design decision. I really liked the butterfly kb. It was responsive, and you could hit the key cap anywhere and it would register.* Subsequent mac book keyboards imo are all terrible and suffer from the terrible issue of sponge-ness that means i can literally press a key cap in a slightly off centre location and it Does Not Register. Its like the key movement is separate from the actuation. I have way more mis key and missing letter using later post butterfly kbs than i ever did. The worst part is this is ‘normal’ and not a fault. You just have to press harder and in the centre. * except when it was in for work i had 3x top case replaced on my old mbp
    • specialist 8mo ago
      Ya, you're right. When it worked, it worked well. A point worth remembering, thanks. Alas, they just weren't robust enough, interferring with my work.
      • just6979 8mo ago
        "when it worked, it worked" is one of the weakest excuses possible, and one Apple themselves railed against many times. Not working at all (ie: broken) is quite worse than not working beyond perfectly. Who cares if you can't press a key on the very edge, as long as pressing in the proper spot _always_ works? The one that did accept blatant mis-presses was broken often enough to completely overwhelm any benefits, because it can't accept _any_ presses when it's in for repairs! "I like the keyboard that let me be a bad typist, even though I had to get it replaced 3 times, and that lack of robustness actually interfered with my work." Are you listening to yourselves?