> On 2019-01-09, at 14:47, Gerrit Heitsch <gerrit@laosinh.s.bawue.de> wrote: > > On 1/9/19 2:27 PM, smf wrote: >> On 09/01/2019 09:23, silverdr@wfmh.org.pl wrote: >>> Even mouse worked far better than the serial mice connected (in absence of a better choice) to modem port in other PC machines, >> The first PC mice used ISA cards and used a similar protocol to the Amiga & ST mice, the Amstrad PC1512/PC1640 had a similar port on the keyboard. I personally would have preferred a mouse port like that. > > Those were known as 'bus mouse'. The downsides of those are, of course, that you lost a slot and were limited to 3 buttons max and no scroll wheel due to lack of connections. > > I don't have a problem with a mouse that uses a serial protocol, but RS232 had the problem with the power supply, they had to use the DTR and RTS lines as power supply for the mouse and you can't draw much from them. And it was only once they managed to build one low enough power requirements that could run off those lines. The first one I recall had an additional power socket in the serial plug. > PS/2 and USB are much better in that respect. Also, encoding the inputs inside the mouse and then using a protocol to talk to the computer has the advantage that you can easily add new features like the scroll wheel or more buttons. I don't exactly know what was causing it but the bad part of the serial mice experience was for me that it never ran smoothly. You take Amiga mouse, it runs smooth, you take Apple mouse it runs smooth, you take PS/2 mouse (even under Windows) and it runs smoothly too. You take the serial one under Windows and it's all jerky. Not like completely jerky but far from having smooth movements. Originally I thought it was due to slow transmission speed but now I am not sure anymore. -- SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/Received on 2019-01-09 18:00:04
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.