From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) In-Reply-To: <34D4933C-7C2E-4B31-A448-D630C8A699E1@orthanc.ca> References: <34D4933C-7C2E-4B31-A448-D630C8A699E1@orthanc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <45152E5A-A73D-4297-B0D1-AE169FC14E8E@orthanc.ca> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Lyndon Nerenberg Subject: Re: [9fans] Samterm up down key patch Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 21:28:47 -0800 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Topicbox-Message-UUID: e05bcbd2-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Nov 14, 2006, at 8:43 PM, I wrote: > Where is the research data that backs the claim that navigating via =20= > the mouse is more efficient than navigating via the keyboard? I =20 > know my own experience says this is nonsense. My physical context =20 > switch time between the keyboard and mouse is at least 300 ms; my =20 > fingers move quite a bit faster than that on the keyboard. I know =20 > that when I'm in one of the two modes =96 kbd vs. mouse =96 I'm very =20= > quick in that context. But as soon as I have to switch between =20 > them: yikes! I need to clarify this. I'm not trying to claim that mouse and =20 keyboard are exclusive. What I notice are the patterns of behaviour =20 of how I use the mouse/kbd vs. what I'm trying to accomplish. To shoot down the claim in my last message, I find mouse-B3 in the =20 compiler diagnostics window combined with a left-hand-on-the-keyboard =20= attack to be *very* efficient. I'm trying to understand why. It's =20 as if there is overlapped context (ala overlapped I/O) going on, it =20 works for me. But as soon as I have to shut down both hands, well, =20 to quote Boyd: I'm fucked. I'll note that I can't play piano (two handed) either, so maybe this =20 is just a mental block. Asking for the research data isn't rhetorical. Having read the P9 =20 papers, and having experienced the underlying environment, I'm =20 conflicted. Some of it works (for me), and some doesn't. I just =20 want to know why (and why not). And I do know where to find emacs, Russ. But thanks for asking :-) =20 (I too no longer know where to find the 3-button Logitech's. I =20 stopped at London Drugs on the way home from work today. They've =20 never let me down before, but today, alas ...) --lyndon=