On Sat, 3 May 2008 06:47:15 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
>>>> "aaronep@pacbell.net" <aaronep@pacbell.net> wrote
>
>>>>> I am interested in converting from wired to wireless keyboard & mouse.
>
>>>>> If anyone reading this has experience with wireless, I would like
>>>>> to know if you are happy with them. Are there any negatives?
>>>>> Can you recommend one brand over another?
>
>>>>> Any info on this appreciated.
>
>>>> The need for wireless keyboard depends most on whether you move the
>>>> keyboard off the desk in front of a monitor. I do so I find that useful.
>
>>>> Even great wireless mice lag slightly.
>
>>> Nope, any mouse lags slightly.
>
>> To be reasonable, we'd have to have some reference point that was a mouse,
>
>Nope. We know that any mouse thats serially connected to the PC, and all of the
>current mice are, have to lag slightly due to the speed of the serial connection.

.... and yet, the wireless connection from a cordless to the
receiver is multiple times longer lag - making it by far the
most significant thing to mention since we can't get rid of
the former lag, but can the larger latter lag.



>
>> since even the human "lags slightly".
>
>Nope, what we are talking about is the time between
>when say the button is pressed and the PC registers
>that press. Same with a movement of the mouse.

Which is also what I'm talking about. Wireless is always
significantly worse lag. Always. Take the cheapest junk
old generic 400DPI corded mouse and it easily beats best
modern laser 2.4GHz linked cordless.



>> You may not be able to perceive it yourself, but it's there, others can.
>
>Easy to claim, hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.

No it's not, anybody that knows beans about wireless knows
it's a slower transmission than 0 latency, and the wired
aspect of the serial connection still exists because the
receiver is still plugged into the (usually) PS2 or USB
port.



>
>> Similarly some can't perceive CRT monitor flicker at 85Hz but others can.
>
>Irrelevant to what is being discussed.

Only because you refuse to accept you can't perceive
something that others can. That means for you, wireless has
no penalty and you don't have to consider the difference.
It doesn't necessarily mean that for others who apparently
have more accute senses.

Since you're stuck in argument mode I'll just let you talk
amongst yourself and your mice, it doesn't bother me at all
if you disagree so long as we both have the info needed to
make the choice of the right peripherals for our own
subjective needs.