16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

[SouthernDrafter]

I have read several different forums, and it has often been a topic within our own office- a lot of newbys would swear they are just as fast and proficient with a standard mouse than someone using a 16 button mouse and tablet. I just wanted to test some opinions about this.

I have been to a number of seminars with the advent of Acad 2002. While these instructors show and taut their new software as being "the ultimate", I watch them struggle with such simple and repetitive commands as "move", "rotate", "scale", etc.

It is my opinion, as a 16 button mouse user since version 12, that the single fastest, and overall best improvement in Acad continues to be the 16 button mouse. You can invent all the lisp routines you want to, but move for move, pressing your commands while your eyes never leave the drawing simply cannot be beat. Clicking on a tool bar, pull down, or screen menu still requires more effort than simply pressing a couple of buttons.

Those in our office who say a regular mouse is just as fast, has yet to prove it by drawing faster than me, or others who use the 16 button method. I should add that the ones who advocate the standard mouse are either much younger than me, came from using MicroStation, and in many cases, never even took a "drafting" course. Anyone remember those? Pencil on velum or ink on mylar? In which event, one had to know how to "draw", not just key in some info and "voila"! Drafting is fast becoming a lost art.
Many young people who are adept at computers think this can easily transfer to Acad. One still needs the "visualization" that was nurtured back in the older days with good old fashioned drawing.

Am I alone on this opinion? God, I feel old, and I'm only 37!

 

[SEMott]

I've tried a 16 button mouse for a few weeks and never got the hang of it. I spent most of my time trying to memorize which buttons were assigned to what which meant having to look at the mouse instead of the screen. Some people swear by them, but I'm more into a 2 or 3 button mouse. The few folks I've worked with that swore by 16 buttons were still pretty slow. I'm not saying that they wouldn't speed up after a few years but we don't have time to wait for that. I don't blieve in toolbars either. I'm all about single/double stroke shortcuts loaded via a lisp file so if I get moved to a different computer for some reason I don't have to worry about how many buttons it's mouse has. I just load up the lisp file and I'm shortcutting away.

The department head at my company believe in keeping the acad.pgp file the way it came from Autodesk that's why I went to just putting the shortcuts into lisp. I don't agree with Acad's default pgp file. The keys should be in the same proximity. An example is the shortcut "LTS" for "LTSCALE". "TS" are close but that "L" is clear across the keyboard.

Anyway that's just my opinion,
SEMott
Stephen E. Motichek
Project Consulting Services, Inc.

 

[diamondjim]

Do not question whether a 12 button mouse
would be faster. We had them around for
awhile but soon one button would fail and
on and on. We eventially scrapped all of
them.

 

[SouthernDrafter]

I appreciate the responses thus far, though both have been less than tolerant of the 16 button. I suppose I should have noted that such a mouse needs to be "mastered" in order to see any advantage. Naturally, I have had to service my mouse on occassion to keep it working nice. To me, that's a small price to pay for the efficiency of commands at your fingertips.

We do have newer employees who use a standard mouse. Their slower production and less profit speaks for itself. Tablets and 16's are warranted for life, so I cannot buy into the broken button problem. Personally, I just think something very crucial got lost along the way in the "supposed" progress of Acad.

Based on my experience, it appears that the biggest problem with 16's is shear intimidation. It looks like a handful to master. But after about 3 months, no one can touch you in speed and quality.

Nontheless, I still appreciate your feelings on the matter.

 

[pedarrin]

I agree with you that the 16 button are intimidating. I do not think I could master it. I commend you that you can.

I personally prefer a customized system which includes a combination of the wheel mouse, keystrokes, toolbars, menus. I am not the fastest, but I am fast enough which is good enough.

I once knew a designer who used a similar system set up as mine and he sometimes had to wait for the computer to catch up to him. He did not have a slow computer either. He was a speed demon. I have also known designers who used the multi buttons, tablets, etc who were no slouch in the speed department. I think if you use what works for you and you are good with it, keep doing it.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

[smcadman]

I've used a tablet and puck since r13, and I prefer the 5 button-wheel mouse over it. No matter what you are using, there may be times when there is someone faster than you, or you may be faster than someone else. Not to blow my own horn or brag (cough-cough), but there have been many a time that I was faster with a wheel mouse than a fellow drafter was with a 16 button puck. There was one guy who was faster in AutoCAD and Mechanical Desktop than I was who used a puck, but I attribute his speed more to him having more years of experience than I. He also came from the construction field, so his years as a blue-collar worker helped him visualize things a little quicker. Since my experience includes about 12 years as a sheet metal fabricator, I can visualize sheet metal projects faster than others can. I am faster than some, but it has to do with my experience rather than the mouse I use.
A fellow employee brought his own track-ball and swears it is faster than the 5-button wheel mouse. It is to cumbersome for me, maybe you can call me intimidated by it, but I say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Don't try to reinvent the wheel.

You have mentioned that you were a user of a puck since r12. That may have been a necessity for speed back then because the graphic user interface didn't come around until r13.

Flores

 

[ohiocad]

From my own experience, I tend to use a lot of single and double quick keys, on a 2 or 3 button trackball, and that seems to be fast enough for me.

I tried a mouse with a lot of buttons before, and can see where it would have a lot of advantages, but never worked with it well enough to become proficient. So I can't really offer an opinion either way on them.

My biggest increase in speed was re-organizing the hot-keys in the pgp file. I agree with the earlier comments about putting the keys closer together, and have done so myself. After working with it for a while, I have it set so I can run them left handed, and never need to take my right hand off the track-ball, eyes never leave the screen.

That seems to be a lot faster than on-screen buttons, and pulldowns. For a mouse with a lot of buttons, can't say.

Digitizer? Have nasty thoughts on them, but that was because when I first started CAD drafting, I used one, but the cursor jumped all over the screen when you touched the puck. Took about 3 months for the digitizer company to admit it, and send a grounded puck. By then, I was biased, and likely won't ever change on that one.

 

[rKeyTek]

Just to jump in here and put my "cents" in ....
.
You stated that "newbees" swear they're faster with your average mouse. (But you didn't admit if they were faster than you or anyone else w/ the 16 button puck).
.
Not to bust chops, but I'd like to hear the end of that thought.
.
And you stated that "seminar" presenters struggle with simple commands.
To play devil's advocate here, usually presenters won't customize their commands so people don't complian about ... "HEY!!! where did you pulled that command!!!!" or "complain to the host that the presenter withheld some steps"....
You can't expect people to read his mind about PGP files and personal LISP routines.
.
Anyone with a 2 or 3 button mouse will almost always cutomize the "ACAD.PGP" ***AND*** add a "ACAD.LSP" (which adds custom LISP routines ... similar to a digitizer.)
Together, all 3 elements make a CAD user efficient. Not to mention that he/ she uses 2 hands to draft. One hand on the keyboard for "2 key strokes" to initialize commands. And the other hand on the mouse. With those elements in play ... a person can be more efficient than a 16 puck and a tablet.
.
I've seen veteran "Puck" users go head to head with veteran "mouse" users and the "mouse" user have always beat the "puck" user.
.
Anyway,
I favor the mouse over the 16 puck.
And I'm sorry in advance if I've offended anyone. It wasn't my intention.
Later..
R.

 

[SouthernDrafter]

Of course you haven't offended me. I only wanted some input into the matter. To finish me statement, as per your request, here goes. I have been using (and still use) my 16 button for over a decade now. This requires the digitizer also, but I do not use it for commands. Most all commands are handled through my puck and some hotkeys. We have 2 veteran teams left at my company who use the same, and swear by the same. Though we don't actually have contests (head to head) we have had CONVERTS from the mousers who have chosen to spend the necessary time to learn a puck.

Think of like this- playing a piano with your fingers, vs. using pulldowns and macros to strike the keys. I say that because I also play piano, however no one else on my teams do and they equally adept. I should note the mouse "converts" who are swapping to learn the puck are young (early 20's) and have the time. Most all of my employees who learned it for the first time usually takes 4-6 months to get really good. But after about 9-10 months they are ALL incredibly fast.

I have gathered by these replies that using a 16 has become a lost art. The older guys who use the mice have acknowledged the awe-inspring speed of my veteran techies, but as I mentioned earlier, have exclaimed they were just too old and set in their ways to take on something like that.

My conclusion: the folks who invented all this stuff apparently thought the 16 was just too darn tough for people to master. And these days maybe they're right, as patience has dwindled with the coming generations. I don't mean to sound condescending, I'm just speaking on what I have seen.

 

[mwiniasz]

My 2 cents...
I use a 16-button puck with a 3x5" tablet. Each button (aside from the 'pick' and right-click buttons) can bring up any of four commands, depending on whether the shift or control keys are held down - a total of 56 commands. I also use about 30 1- or 2-character keyboard macros, designed to be quickly input with my left hand. And then I have about 60, less frequently used commands on the tablet overlay.

All of my co-workers are comfortable using 3-button mice, and I wouldn't try to change that. My setup did take some commitment, and I had to accept an initial drop in overall speed for a few months before I became really fluent with it. But in the end, I find it hard to imagine anything faster.

 

[SouthernDrafter]

mwiniasz: Thank you for that reply! I feel a little less lonely in the world now.

 

[cadtechr]

Finally!

I thought I was alone. I used a 16 button Summagraphics III tablet about 7 years ago and was whipping fast with it. Problems with the tablet and drivers forced me to use a mouse and I've never been as efficient since. I've looked around for a multi-button mouse and came up with nothing that would come close to the 16 button puck. It did take a couple of months to get efficient with the puck, but once I got going I was flying! I miss my 16 button puck. Anyone know of a good mouse replacement to the puck?

 

[SouthernDrafter]

They still make those things. I am still using a Drawing Board ll, and I know they have a lll also. Try this link:

http://products.consumerguide.com/cp/office/review/index.cfm/id/22249

 

[Geomar]

My 1/2 a cents worth, Canadian equal of 2 cents.
I used a 16 button Summagraphics III for years, loved the thing untill I tried the Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer. It's 4 buttons with a wheel, the key board gives you all the short cuts, the mouse lets you pan and zoom while in a command with out touching anything other than the wheel. Loved the 16 but like the new better, and I think it's faster.
Point of view from a old timmer, been using Acad since rev 4, which makes me 18 going on 55, and I still have the callis on my finger from the drawing board.

 

[SouthernDrafter]

Perhaps the total number of commands have a lot to do with things, when considering the speed and ease of a 16. While I have seen the innovations of Intellimouse, mostly the view, pan, zoom. They have helped a lot. However, from my puck I can instantly command all osnaps and virtually all commands with a single hand. I can drink a cup of coffee or use the phone and never miss a beat. I will concede only one point- like the last poster said, your hand gets a major workout, but you get used to it. I remember in the days of ink and mylar when the hardest physical problem to get through was your neck hurting from sitting in a chair over a large desk all day.

 

[Geomar]

I know the ease of the 16 puck, like I said, I loved it.
But, you get stuck in your ways as to how you use Acad, (ie) keep using the same commands, offset, trim, extend. The key board gives you all the instant one touch commands the same as the puck plus a few you probably are not using.
The ones your probably not using are the ones that speed your work. The Intellimouse Optical, still gives the possition acuracy of the tablet, plus four buttons to program as you like, ie: pick, enter.
As for the drawing board, Cad is faster and a lot more accuate, I don't miss it at all.

 

[cadtechr]

A friend of mine swears by the wheel mouse for it's zooming capabilities. I think I still would want the customizable features on my right hand - not the keyboard or on screen. It would be nice to see a wheel mouse with 16 buttons. A few years ago a company, who's name I can't remember, had back orders of multi-button mice. I asked to be put on the "Notify me when they are ready for shipping" e-mail list and haven't heard back since.

 

[SouthernDrafter]

As far as the wheel zooms go, I fail to see it as any better than zoom dynamic. Dynamic zoom puts you anywhere you want with a couple of clicks. I do use my keyboard a lot and I have customized my .pgp file to replace many features that are not needed for civil work. After all, we long term users all had to use DOS for many years.

I guess it's just a matter of preference, when it comes down to it. I just wanted some outside opinions and I gathered many. Thanks to all who have responded.

 

[DraftsmanDave]

Sorry that this became long but I REALLY take this one to heart and totally agree with SouthernDrafter on this one!! I've been drafting for 12 years and amature drafting since high school in the early 80's. I've done a lot of hand drafting and Autocad drafting since Ver. 2. Remember the big jump from 2 to 9? What happened to the ones in between?

Anyway, I started out using a mouse at school and home, then when I got into the work field they had this ominous looking 12x12 Kurta tablet with menu areas, drawing field and a 12 button puck. Pretty scarry but very cool. I got the hang of it in a very short time and became very quick. Our tablets slowly became phased out because of their size and driver/port issues. Along the way we tried other things like a drawing pen and a multi-button mouse (that thing must have had 30 buttons on it), but nothing compared to the 12 button puck. The owner did a little drafting also and was one of the first to get rid of his because it took up too much room on the desk, had some other com port issues all the time and with the advent of windows version of Autocad, he figured there was no need for the tablet (he had only a 4 button puck). He thought we were idiots for keeping those dinasaures on our desks. I was even accused of not "Getting with the times"!!! I'm sorry but the 12 button puck still kicks butt (for drafting in Autocad) over any mouse I've used since. I could draw with one hand and have the other free to mark off red lines, keep my place on the plans, etc. Just moving that mouse across the screen to click a menu button or take my hands off the plan (and eyes off the screen) to use the keyboard takes way too much time! For those of you who think I can't type, I'm no speed demon but I can type simple 40 words/min. It's a matter of moving your hands from the plan to the keyboard and your eyes from the plan to the screen to the keyboard at the same time. Most all of the ppl who I've talked to who prefer the mouse draft differently anyway. In our office the ones that converted to the mouse first were the engineers who were thinking between commmands anyway. My drafting use to consist of transfering an engineers hand scetches to CAD. Not much thinking involved just fast paced drafting. I could really blow-and-go. Only drawback it had was the space it took up, the compatibility issues and it had and no wheel (the best thing that has happened to the mouse since rat poison).

I now use a Intellimouse Optical with 4 buttons and a wheel. Its better, but still not as fast as the 12 button I use to have. When I really need to get some drafting done I wish I still had 12 buttons! If only they made the Microsoft Wireless Optical mouse with 12 buttons and, of course, the wheel.

If anyone knows of such a thing, please let me know! dweikle@pattonac.com

 

[SouthernDrafter]

Draftsman Dave! Thanks for the enthusiastic reply. Yes, an Intellimouse with 12 or 16 buttons (let's just say a puck that did not require a tablet, that would be heaven) would be fabulous as long as there was a way to digitize....??? Perhaps there is, I don't know.

In addition to the preferences over which is better, what do think about this phenomenon that has occurred over the years- there is a definite change in what "drafting" actually is. A set of plans is consisting more and more of cutting and pasting, x-reffing, and the like to a point to where very little drafting is taking place. Drawings are more/less "generated" than they are drawn anymore. In many cases this is a terrific time-saver. But all too often it is getting in the way of well drawn, clear to read plans. Frustrated drafters in my office are letting "no-no's" get by because it is beginning to be too time consuming to fix the smallest conflict without having to go through several drawings that are referenced into the user drawing.

I don't know. I just think this whole concept of using a computer to virtually replace good common drafting knowledge is leading to worse and worse looking plans. Now, I am straying a little, so I'll leave it at that.

Sorry this thread got so long, but it has had, at the least, a good stress-reducing effect on me and my job. BTW Dave, like you, I began drafting in 6th grade on through high school and right into the work force. Indeed, a lot has changed....YIKES!