Hardware Analysis - Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

Gerritt — 2008-05-16T21:31:20-05:00

I've had wireless mice that incorporated auto-shutoff, and this didn't seem to work.
I've had to remove the batteries at the end of the day in order to retain some life.
Evidently the jostling within the backpack kept turning it on.
Now when I'm on the road, I'm working something between 12-16 hours a day as well.
The newer mice actually allow for logical turn off and physical (if the mouse hasn't moved it goes to standby/off, but then needs a second or so to start back up).

Gerritt

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

McFly — 2008-05-16T21:18:44-05:00

A week? I would bet that's due to the Bluetooth more than anything. Like I said, I've been using the MS Optical 5000 since they came out about 5 years ago, and I just bought my 3rd one today to replace the second one (which I've been using), which you also might remember from this thread from 2 years ago:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/topic/58690

The battery life has been great. Probably 2-4 months on a set (two) of freshly recharged NiMH's.

That one (that I bought 2 years ago) is still functionally working just fine, it's just that the pads wore off the bottom, the rubber "gripping" wore to the bare plastic, and it's just generally been abused. I'll keep it around as a backup.

Since it seems the new mice coming out aren't offering me much, I think I'll probably just keeping buying a new Optical 5000 every couple of years for however long they stay available. Or maybe I should just buy three more now ...

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

Gerritt — 2008-05-16T20:25:32-05:00

My biggest problem with the MS 8000 is the battery life out of the cradle.
Historically I've had cordless mice last a long time, a month or more with 8 hour usage/day.
I've found with the MS8000 that I get about a week or even less before I have to plug it into its charging cradle. One of the issues here may be the single battery vs dual battery configurations in most if not all of my other wireless input devices. When properly charged, and using the built in Blue tooth reciever in my laptop, I've not seen any of the stutter, though with the MS supplied reciever, I've had more than my share of problems.

I actually like the wireless laser mouse that came with my Logitech 700 series KB/Mouse set. I'm left handed, so can't use the "ergonomic" mice, so the generic shaped, small mouse that came with this setup is working like a charm.

The reason I prefer laser mice is that even under wired optical mice, I had movement issues when used on slick, monochromatic surfaces, they didn't seem to sense the movement as well. Also laser mice do support a very high "dpi" sensing, so under very high sensitivity allow me to keep the mouse on the pad for a pan across both of my screens, or a 360 degree pan in most games....the optical mice weren't capable of doing that.

Gerritt

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

McFly — 2008-05-16T18:08:31-05:00

Well, I couldn't really find any others that I liked, and since I keep hearing

Stay the hell away from the 8000

I'm just going to order another Optical 5000. A great mouse if you ask me, for $20 at least.

* McFly dreams of a non-stuttering 8000 *

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

john albrich — 2008-05-14T22:19:21-05:00

By the way, in wireless mice, I've found the best batteries to use seem to be rechargeable alkaline AA or AAA cells. (I've recently been using Ray-O-Vac rechargeable alkaline cells. Not my preferred battery company, but they have been doing great for over a year)

The rechargeable alkaline cells provide a much higher voltage for a longer period of time than rechargeable NiMH or NiCd cells.

That definitely improved mouse reliability and they also (so far) seem to last longer per charge.

Downside is that rechargeable alkaline cells generally can't be recharged as many times as NiMH or NiCd cells.

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

FordGT90Concept — 2008-05-14T17:32:14-05:00

They can work on almost any surface (far more than optical); however, since optical has been around longer, circuitry has been made that processes the signals much faster and therefore, has much better response time. If your surface is already rough enough to handle an optical mouse, there really is no need to look at laser mice. A laser mouse would work just as well on the same sufrace. Performance may not be as good with the laser mouse but seriously, that difference would probably only come out in a benchmark--not normal use.

Mouse benchmark (old):
http://www.esreality.com/?a=post&id=1265679

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

McFly — 2008-05-14T17:28:09-05:00

So what then is the laser advantage? I was under the impression that they could handle themselves on top of almost any surface, so they were aimed (at least) for laptop users.

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

FordGT90Concept — 2008-05-14T17:22:15-05:00

McFly said:

Second, is laser all that better than optical? I know an advantage of laser is that it can be used on almost any surface, but I don't really need that feature. So what is it then? Better precision? I've never really had precision problems with my optical mouse, and considering the cursor can only move a pixel at a time anyway I'm not really sure where that precision argument is going.

Lasers are only for very smooth surfaces (think backside of a CD). Lasers do, however, have a slower response time (at least since I last checked). So, if the surface you are using works fine with an optical, it is best to stick to an optical.

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

Beavis Khan — 2008-05-14T15:20:29-05:00

Stay the hell away from the 8000 - I had two of em, and returned them both. Total pieces of crap - definitely prone to stuttering, as well as dropping connection all the damn time (and this was with the mouse and transceiver about two feet apart). I really loved the shape and feel of them, but that doesn't do much good when they're not working.

I don't much get into the Optical vs Laser debate, but I can tell you that the Logitech G9 is the finest mouse I've ever owned (and I've owned a s**tload of them...). Ugly as sin, but I recommend it highly.

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

McFly — 2008-05-14T15:00:13-05:00

Range is pretty much not an issue for me. My mouse is rarely if ever more than 1-3 feet away from my computer. And I certainly don't want to mess around with missed clicks. I wish they would make an RF version of that 8000 now, because hot damn, it's sexy.

Re: Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

john albrich — 2008-05-14T14:53:30-05:00

Bluetooth has multiple power levels, which I think contributes to the problems. Low-power bluetooth I believe is susceptible to interference from too many other devices that share the frequency range used by bluetooth. I think the low-power units are even susceptible to RF interference from the system itself. Blue-tooth mouse range is often limited to 2 meters, and I usually have trouble reaching 1 meter reliably. Some spec'd a 10 meter range, but again, I found the claims unreliable.

I've tried bluetooth and have much the same problem with stuttering, missed mouse clicks, and when I click the mouse once, the computer gets "stuck" and thinks I'm continually pressing multiple mouse clicks (e.g. I click on PgDn, and the computer just keeps executing PgDns until I interrupt the action. Either that, or I think it 'misses' the button release packet from time to time. Doesn't happen often, but often enough to be irritating)

As for LASER v. standard LED optical resolution, LASER provides higher precision, but I haven't seen anything that makes a practical difference in how I use the mouse. Perhaps if I had a super-large display screen...24" or above...? However, I'm not a gamer, so can't talk to how it applies in those applications.

edit-add comment on bluetooth mouse range

Mice: RF v Bluetooth, Optical v Laser

McFly — 2008-05-14T14:36:01-05:00

So I'm looking for a new mouse. I've been using a trusty Microsoft Wireless Optical 5000 off and on for about 5 years now and and it's starting to wear out. If I can't find a good replacement I'll probably just buy another one of these, since they're only about $20 now.

I've been looking at the latest incarnations of wireless mice (I have absolutely no desire to go back to wired mice). One I've been looking at specifically is the MS Wireless Laser Mouse 8000, which is Bluetooth and Laser. The problem is I've been hearing that it (and other similar mice) suffer from slight stuttering, which can make things like precision Photoshop work next to impossible. Is that due to Bluetooth or the Laser tech? Or both?

Second, is laser all that better than optical? I know an advantage of laser is that it can be used on almost any surface, but I don't really need that feature. So what is it then? Better precision? I've never really had precision problems with my optical mouse, and considering the cursor can only move a pixel at a time anyway I'm not really sure where that precision argument is going.

Anyways, what say you?