×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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!

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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?

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

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

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
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!

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Hi SouthernDrafter:
Sorry I don't mean to be had on you, but for a 37 year old your starting to sound more my age of 54.  Yes any and all of the (Kids) young people coming out of school, know it all but don't have any idea how a drawing was made in the old days, it was and still is a fine art thats been lost with the computer but does not have to be so. Drawings where and can still be a personal piece of work that shows I made this drawing.
Iam getting long winded, put simply the pride of workmanship has been lost and or never learned.
Quote "Frustrated drafters in my office are letting "no-no's get by". Question, do you have any authority in the office, and if so, my response is have them fix the dam thing or find another job. History of Acad, small no-no's today are major screw ups down the road when you do a lot of cut and paste (import from old drawing files), they multiply over time in about the same way a mouse breeds.
Take care and stay calm it's not worth the ulser.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Hi, ...interesting discussion. I would only add that there is no right or wrong in this. Each individual works differently. I have seen users with a mouse and quick keys fly while detailing, and I've seen the same for digitizer users. The main advantage for mouse use (2,3,4,5 button..) is that they user does not have to take their eyes away from the screen. With "Windows based AutoCAD" came the "virtual tablet" you might say. You could click on a icon and 8 new commands were presented to you (your tablet is rolled up on screen you might say). Some of the new 3D software even has "smart toolbars" which only show up when you need them. I can see where a multibutton "puck" would be nice, it would act like a mini-keyboard of sorts once you learn it. Digitizers are a matter of taste. I enjoyed the nicer feel of the drawing area with them, but aiming and picking commands become less cohesive to me once Windows AutoCAD came around. The neat thing about AutoCAD is that it accomodates all of these ways, so each person or business can find their "best" way. Thanks for starting the thread.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Geomar-
no offense, but for a 37 year old, I feel like a 54 year old! Thanks for the replies, and I'll keep trying to stay calm.....it aint easy sometimes, but I reckon I get a little better at it with each day.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

I was one of the first to reply to your post and would also like to add why I'm more in favor of the standard mouse over a digitizer.  When I first started out I used a 4-button puck for about 4 yrs. until it wore out and the company didn't want to replace it.  Then I went to a mouse and was lost for a few weeks but been using it ever since. To expand a bit more, I'm a computer nut..... when I leave work in the evenings I go to college for programming, then when I get home I'm on the computer till 1:30 am every night.  At school and at home I'm use 2-button mouse and it was difficult switch to a 4 (or more) button puck when I was spending the same amount of time away from work using a mouse and then to change to a puck at work was frustrating and slowed me down quite a bit.  I'm now a mouse person for the 15 hrs a day I spend infront that monitor.  It you think the 16 button puck it God's answer, more power to you.

Stephen E. Motichek
Project Consulting Services, Inc.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
God's answer to....tens of AutoCad commands at the fingertips of one hand, yes. But that's where it stops. While I make it an imperative part of my life to stay away from computers after work (8+ a day is plenty for anyone) I still have a home computer for surfing the net and making CD's and stuff. I use a mouse, a standard mouse with a wheel.

This topic regarding pucks pertains ONLY to AutoCad, not your everyday computer work, in which case, a tablet and puck would be nonsense.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Once again I whole heartedly agree with Southern.  I don't think a 12 button (or 16 for that matter) is at all helpfull in other programs.  It just makes sense in a CAD inviornment when fractions of seconds can add up to hours of work, not to mention the frustration when you know of faster ways but can't implement them.  

Think of how you move that curser across the screen to pick a button on a menu then back again to use the command (pick) on an object.  I feel like I'm on a trapeze, swinging back and forth all day.  Other tools while in a command helps tremendously too; turning on and off osnap, ortho, snap, canceling out of a command (esc key - use to be cntrl-c) or tabing through osnap handles.  I use to have our most used commands; copy, move, line right at my fingertips.

If my left hand could be permantly affixed to the keyboard like my right hand is to my mouse, I may not have a problem with it.  But even still you can't tell me you can use your left hand on the entire keyboard without taking your eyes off the screen.  Maybe, if all of the keys on the keyboard that you use most often were centrally located so that your left hand could reach them without taking your eyes off the screen (hum, that kinda describes a multi-button puck) would you be as fast (possably faster) as you would be if you used a multi-button puck.  Maybe that's what we all need is a small keypad that we could program the buttons to be what we like, where we like it and be used by either hand....  hummm...  The only drawback to that would be that, once again, both hands are tied up.  I'll still go for the 12 button optical mouse with the wheel, thank you.

By the way, to me, a 4 button puck doesn't fall into the catigory of multi-button.  That's the way we started out using our tablets, with 4 button pucks.  My current mouse has 4 buttons plus the wheel (not enough options and my fingertips for me).  Its was only when we got the 12 button did we take notice of the effeincy.  

I agree that the tablets are a pain, but the usefullness of 12 buttons on the puck can't be beat for CAD work (in my opinion).  

Hey Microsoft... Bring on the Buttons!

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Yeah, 4 buttons wouldn't cover near as many possible commands as 16. It is also very good finger practice for me when I hit the club circuit on the weekends with the band. You can still get those from CalComp for about $250-$300.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Naw..  Don't want the headache of the tablet or the space it takes up.  Just want the 12 buttons....
Thanks anyway!

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

I tried to tell you guy's before, I also used the 16 button puck for years....years and LOVED It. Customize your PGP file, you get 21 commands not 16 with the left hand on the keyboard plus four on the intell. optical wheel mouse plus transparent pan and zoom.
Know please tell me how a 16 button puck is better?????
The problem is you die hards don't want to change.
Sorry, not meant to offend anyone.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Geomar- READ the previous posts, I have already customized my .pgp file. And if you used a 16 button puck and only got 16 commands from it, something is amiss. The osnaps and commands come from (2) button combos. This permutates into many, many more commands than the 26 letters on your keyboard and includes ALL osnaps. I work in a sharply divided office of approx. 70:30 in favor of the 16. I am perfectly capable of change, and I welcome it IF....IF it has a clear advantage over my current method. That is not the case. You have your opinions, as well as anyone else on this thread. However, the final statement of your post was inflammatory to myself and others who feel the way I do.

Like I said, 70:30, in favor of the puck. If this raises your dander, then just ignore this thread. There's no need to get snippy with those of us who draw faster with our pucks (not to mention, using more commands than 16).

Perhaps you could explain how you can do all your commands, osnaps, block insertions (that's PARTICULAR SPECIFIED blocks on command), set variables and control virtually every aspect of AutoCad from your keyboard. Do the math-
You have 1 pick and 1 enter button, so excluding those for command permutations, that leaves 14, which is 196 possible commands, snaps, variables, you name it.

Incidentally, I do know some folks who have spent YEARS....years and never fully exploited the full potential of 200 commands all in the palm of one hand, including the all versatile CURSOR. If refusing to diminish my options makes me a dinosaur, then so be it. Excuse me, a "Die hard".

Sorry if I came off like a jerk this time, but that's not the first reply you have been less than friendly about.
IMHO, one fo the biggest reasons the puck got lost in the fray was the shear dedication it took to master one. Let's face it, one of the biggest drawbacks from computers is the unspoken issue of making it possible for someone to draw, who knows nothing about drawing in the first place. I see it with EIT's as well. There are a lot folks out there who think computers enable them to do anything, whether they have actually mastered that skill or not. Meanwhile, I will continue to diligently redline and fix their mistakes and stress the importance of using one's head instead of assuming the computer is all powerful and all knowing. It's still only as smart as its user.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

The size of 12 x 12 digitizer had more to do with me not using the 16 button puck, takes up to much space.
The combination of 21 keys, shift+key, ctrl+key and the  use of double keys if you really what to get carried away, is 63 commands with one hand excluding the double keys.

One die hard dinosaur to another seeing you admit being one, snippy was not intended either although I do have a way of comming across that way sometimes.

This string is a opinion of personal pref. every one has his or her own the way it should be.

Good bye

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
I sometimes come across the same way myself. No offense intended, and thanks for your contributions to the thread.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Excuse me, one more thing...

I didn't say I did every thing to control virtually every aspect of AutoCad from the keyboard. However most of the basic drawing commands are the rest come from the toolbars.

Setvars, dimstyles, layers, txstyles, plot styles, osnaps - - - - and on are all common between drawings, they are setup in a standard border drawing with attributes for the title block.

Because I use over 600 standard blocks, steel shapes, sprockets, cylinders, motors - - - mech. components, I elected to use the pull down menu with branches (flyouts) for the different types of items. Found it a lot easier than trying to remember the file names.

Statement, the speed that one works at is dependent on thier personal work habits, the knowlege they have in Acad and the end product they are trying to draw. The rest is only a tool, the better your tools the easier your work. The only tool that involves speed of work is the CPU, if you trying to work with a boat anchor its upgrade time.

Good bye, stay calm

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Agreed- 600 blocks is a bunch of blocks! .....

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

SouthernDrafter:
Give me your email address I'll send you menu for block management.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Geomar-that sounds great. Thanks. Put SouthernDraftsman in the topic somehwere, so I don't accidentally delete it.

Glenny_2u@yahoo.com

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

It's been some time since I last visited this forum. This is one topic that I just had to chime in on. I've been drawing with acad since r10. I have always used a mouse. back when I started the puck and tablet were definiatley faster than I was. One of my best friends always gave me a hard time about not using the tablet. I guess at the time I was intemmidated. I also didn't want to give up the realestate on my desk. I now use a Logitech thumb scroll that has two buttons and a wheel. I'm not the fastest, but I am fast. Modifying my .pgp file, custom lisp commands and custom toolbars, allom to compete with almost anyone for speed. I also keep my running osnap on, so the osnap menu is not a problem for me. Like several others have commented on, use what ever works best for you. My friend is still using a 16 button puck. Oh, one other thing that
turned me off against the tablet and puck, was that I had a bad habit of tossing my floppies next to the puck. Not a good thing.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

I couldn't resist adding my thoughts.  As a CAD manager I've seen lots of people work lots of ways.  About the only definitive trend I've seen is that no two people work the same way.  For me, 16 buttons is fastest, hands down.  Yes, I had to learn it, but there's no faster way for me.  Like SouthernDrafter I don't pick off the tablet, too slow.  I gave my best effort to an Intellimouse at one time, and the zoom/pan on the wheel was terrific, but alas I just couldn't work fast enough with it.  I have seen others work amazingly fast with a mouse, but the "full time two-handed" approach just isn't for me.  To each his own I suppose.  Oh, there is one other trend:  puck users seem to be much more passionate about the issue, I suppose cuz we're in the minority.

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

Ok SouthernDrafter... this one's of you!

HOORAY FOR 16 BUTTON PUCKS!!!

I LOVE MY PUCK AND ALL 16 OF ITS TEENY TINY LITTLE BUTTONS!!!

Like sslavik I just couldn't pass the urge to comment on this topic. SouthernDrafter, like you, I began using AutoCAD when you had almost no choice but use the 16 button puck way back in the R10 era. I had watched those with experience use the 16 button cursor like it was some kind of toy, making it do things that I thought were impossible. I never imagined I could ever remember what might exist on 14 user defined buttons nevermind the possibilities of multiple button menus. After my initial indocrination into "digitizer land" I was extremely uncomfortable with the multi-button environment. Indeed I was highly intimidated. It has been some 12 years (geez it don't seem like that long) and before I left my last job I was perhaps the fastest of 15 drafters simply because I had developed and customized my puck to have 8 button menus, each had only 12 items because I used 2 buttons exclusively to toggle between button menus. I NEVER EVER touched the keyboard except to type something in an edit box or to further develop my menus. Of course 0 and 3 were pick and enter (Calcomp DBIII) and 1 & 2 were "top menu" and "next menu" (on my Numonics it was 0 & 1 and 2 & B) anyway to make this shorter. I had my top 96 commands on my mouse and never had to look at it or the keyboard. I want to move an object then I press 4,0,0,3,0,0 Sure it seems like alot of buttons presses, I could press that faster than anyone could press M and enter then select the objects and move them. Essentially the strokes were the same but the movement was reduced. If I needed to trim multiple items, it was 2,2,4,0,0,0,3,0,0. Well enough nostalgia....

A co-worker and I have now moved to a company where the 20 somethings have scorned us from day 1 for bringing our digitizers into the office. The office manager said that they were cumbersome and slow. Well, we initially did not have the button menu customized and have slowly began to customize the digitizers and button menus to meet our needs. Of course never having used a mouse (geez... I need those buttons) I was sloooowwww getting started. However... the two of us with digitizers and 16 button pucks have done something that no one ever does... We use BOTH the mouse in the left hand for zooming and panning (I must admit it is great) and the right hand on the puck for commands. It takes getting used to.. but can you imagine the look on the boss' face when he walked in and saw us using BOTH concurrently. He nearly flipped out. I must admit though, we only did it because they said it was slower. I wonder if they think that now after 6 months we (my partner and I) are producing twice the amount of work as the other 3 draftman put together in the previous year!

I know it sounds farfetched, but I LOVE MY 16 BUTTON PUCK and I will carry it to the grave with me!

So... Come on Microsoft... develop me a cordless optical 16 button mouse with the scroll button, and I will buy at least 3 of em.....

HOORAY FOR 16 BUTTON PUCKS !!!!!!

RE: 16 Button mouse vs. Standard mouse

(OP)
Great reply, Striker! I think I had mentioned earlier that my acad.mnu has undergone extensive customization over the years, but for the most part, the BUTTONS menu portion has remained relatively unchanged. If I went to another company I would definitely bring my menus with me.

I couldn't help but notice how many clicks you mentioned for, say, the move command. Mine is like 7,4= move, 7,5= copy, and so on. Each command is no longer than 2 clicks. There are 3 or 4 toggle numbers, though most of us rarely need more than 2. I am summarizing, but it's like the first menu (single button only) is the draw things, second menu (all following menus are, of course 2 click) is osnaps, third is modify/edit, and the next couple are combos of block insertions and what have you. If you moved something using osnaps, I guess that would account for the amount of buttons (4) you'd click, instead of (2). But, like you well know, it all happens so quickly, you'll miss it if you're watching and trying to learn.

And next- "cumbersome"....I suppose I'd say that when talking about one of those huge digitizers (larger than 12"x12") My 12" tablet fits nicely next to my monitor, always has, and takes only a few inches more space than my standard mouse needs to navigate (unless I pick the mouse up over and over in limited space area).

In any event, I have a relatively new tablet and puck on my home system also, use the same menus I helped write for my company, and though it seems routine to me, you can see the jaws drop from clients, friends, even family. I do a little work for whoever needs it, generally.

Thanks for the input, Striker, and good luck in your newer job. You guys show 'em how it's done!

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources