The famous/infamous one button mouse.

[hughvane]

I appear to have been castigated, and quite rightly so.

No way Jose! It's refreshing to find a post from someone who wants - genuinely - to know 'why'.

Despite all the protestations ^^^ there, I still think that the ability to "right click" with the mouse alone is far, far superior to a keystroke + a mouse click.

Right on the button - left or right actually.

That would take both hands so what would you do with your beer?

A dual-armed, voice-activated mechanical 1) bottle tipper and 2) swivel and tilt glass holder.

 

[KítscheñÇinqµe]

used a 3 button (no scroll) in 1988 (DOS, 286). (on current mice, the scroll wheel is also the middle- button, btw.)
I suspect hubris prevents the "hubritic" from "reverse imitating" ("back from ya!") more often. Just cuz u invented the wheel mouse (which apple did not invent, nor did they invent the internet, but anyways), doesn't mean you can't copy someone else's better wheel mouse.
but if you really need to know the real reason, the one-boutonniere mousse was a hardware engineers easter egg. bwaaa ha haaaaa.

why would a 1 button mouse need a tail? that tail provides rotational stability as the mouse flies through the air.

http://www.google.com/search?q="100...tton"+|+"1+button"+|+"hockey+puck"+mouse+-aol

 

[jodelli]

Older users will remember that all Mac mouse functions were controlled by different gestures, such as press and hold for contextual menus, as well as clicks.

PARC initially designed three button mice, with the innovation of the upside down trackball. Xerox commercial products that preceded the Lisa had two buttons.

Doug Engelbert or Bill English (or somebody) designed a device something like a court stenographer's. It was complex but apparently quite fast when used by a skilled operator. For those complaining about the number of mouse buttons, well, it could have been much worse!

 

[mysterytramp]

The concept behind the mouse in terms of the way it was designed to interact with the Mac was for pointing, clicking and dragging. The idea that it should be able to invoke other functions is an additional concept. Useful perhaps, but not one that's inherent to the mouse.

Agreed ... sorta ... The mouse has always be the primary tool for invoking functions from the menubar. But the Mac OS didn't recognize the concept of a "pop up menu" until maybe System 7 (maybe earlier, but definitely not the original OS). Without that, it's hard to imagine Apple engineers figuring out what to do with an extra mouse button.

Didn't the Amiga have a multibutton mouse? I think Digital (or a VAX OEM) was selling workstations with possibly five button mice. (Wasn't there an option for a two-button mouse for the IIc? I remember some talk of internal strife over the issuue.)

As revolutionary as many of the original Mac design elements were, some were bonehead mistakes. The first keyboards lacked cursor keys, because you were supposed to use the mouse for EVERYTHING. They touted the ergonomic design of the original toaster boxes, but forgot that as soon as hard drive makers realized how easy it was to put a drive UNDER the box.

The one-button mouse (and the lack of a fan) are still sparking debate. I do miss the original mouse; it fit nicely in your hand. And I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft came out with the two-button mouse just to have something to argue with Apple over.

mt

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

Exactly. I suppose the only question really is why two-button mice came on the scene afterwards. Who thought that was the right way to do it, and why?

This is where my point was being focused. Apple made a mouse, good for them, but then someone elsewhere decided that its more efficient to put 2 functions on one mouse instead of forcing the user to use both the keyboard and mouse to do simple tasks. The rest of the worl followed the 2-button mouse for its ease of use and logical design. Did apple? No. Why, you may ask? Because they wanted to be different. Apple still thinks that they dont copy any ideas from any other OS and are to arrogant to admit when someone else has a better design then them. So in order to remain unique they sacrificed functionality.

 

[Flynnstone]

The best reasoning for the one button mouse (that I know of) is in the book "Humane Interface" by the late Jef Ruskin. One of the main guys behind the original Mac. He wasn't a programmer. I generally agree with his philosophies, but I like more than 1 button on my mouse.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Agreed ... sorta ... The mouse has always be the primary tool for invoking functions from the menubar. But the Mac OS didn't recognize the concept of a "pop up menu" until maybe System 7 (maybe earlier, but definitely not the original OS). Without that, it's hard to imagine Apple engineers figuring out what to do with an extra mouse button.

Didn't the Amiga have a multibutton mouse? I think Digital (or a VAX OEM) was selling workstations with possibly five button mice. (Wasn't there an option for a two-button mouse for the IIc? I remember some talk of internal strife over the issuue.)

As revolutionary as many of the original Mac design elements were, some were bonehead mistakes. The first keyboards lacked cursor keys, because you were supposed to use the mouse for EVERYTHING. They touted the ergonomic design of the original toaster boxes, but forgot that as soon as hard drive makers realized how easy it was to put a drive UNDER the box.

The one-button mouse (and the lack of a fan) are still sparking debate. I do miss the original mouse; it fit nicely in your hand. And I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft came out with the two-button mouse just to have something to argue with Apple over.

mt

I believe contextual menus did first appear with System 7, to the best of my recollection anyway. Prior to that time, an extra mouse button would have been completely useless since it could invoke nothing functionally.

Microsoft's design philosophy (assuming you could say they had one) was to cram as many features as possible into the OS with little thought or organization, which is why we often see their software as bloated and disorganized. Apple started out with the concept that the Mac should be simple as possible to operate -- "the computer for the rest of us." The one-button mouse was an element of this approach.

This is where my point was being focused. Apple made a mouse, good for them, but then someone elsewhere decided that its more efficient to put 2 functions on one mouse instead of forcing the user to use both the keyboard and mouse to do simple tasks. The rest of the worl followed the 2-button mouse for its ease of use and logical design. Did apple? No. Why, you may ask? Because they wanted to be different. Apple still thinks that they dont copy any ideas from any other OS and are to arrogant to admit when someone else has a better design then them. So in order to remain unique they sacrificed functionality.

The design philosophy behind the one-button mouse has already been referenced, so it probably doesn't require repeating. It wasn't "arrogance" it was deliberate.

 

[Phil A.]

You could ask "why was it" but that is really here nor there anymore as there have been 2 buttons on the mouse for years. Unless you talking laptop, then my response would be that would be one extra button that could break.

Personally, I think the two finger + click on the trackpad for a "right click" is much, much better ergonomically than having two buttons - you just have one big button to aim for