Who here uses the vendor supplied software with their mouse?
In my experience it's almost entirely useless, except for remapping buttons maybe.
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
516 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
59598 readers
3263 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Buttons mapping is the exact reason to use the software. There are only a rare few models that fulfill my requirements for a mouse... Currently I'm using a Razer, the software is heavy, clunky and obnoxious, yet I need it to properly function.This is also unfortunately one of the main obstacles for me to switch to Linux, because it's not supported.
Insanity. I spend $5.00 or so on $eCommerceSite and am perfectly happy with the result.
I make that expenditure maybe every four or five years. I don't need a 'forever mouse,' they already last practically that long.
I used to always say I want the cheapest mouse I can find. That was about $20 the last time I bought one like that, many years ago.
I think it's time to stop with subscription bullshit.
I understand that they prefer that, but it quickly becomes the only purpose fulfilled by these devices which is not fulfilled by more normal ones, while the main purposes suffer, looking closer to an excuse.
Also the argument of businesses going bankrupt when something is done too well - that's by design. Progress works via removing bottlenecks one after another. Businesses which were located at those bottlenecks die. It's fine, the society doesn't need them anymore. Management and employees have mostly transferable skills and experience. If they earn less, then maybe their work is worth less, since the business failed. Investors lose money, and that's fine, it's the purpose of investment - judge wisely and win, judge poorly and lose.
It still irritates me how sometimes socialist-minded people say that it's bad that in capitalism businesses (and whole industries) fail, and this should be fixed, but then blame capitalism for the results of preventing businesses (or whole industries) from failing.
I have internalized all the leftist arguments heard here, some are fundamentally and practically very true, but sometimes fixing the thing you have would yield results just as good or better as looking for that better thing you don't know where.
OK, I've diverted from the point.
Somehow businesses making nails and screwdrivers don't complain about making too good a screwdriver. Because, well, the good screwdriver still dies after sometime, and the amount of people who need tools grows, yadda-yadda.
This should work the same way in computing, but hype-scamming customers is such a norm there, that doing business the normal way seems the way to bankruptcy to them. They should all fail. We are doing - for the real-life useful output, not for FLOPS and IOPS, - just a bit more than in 90s, but for orders of magnitude bigger cost.
load more comments
(2 replies)