# All wireless all the time



## tajjohnson (Jan 17, 2002)

While watching Steve Job's keynote at Mac World and the introduction of the cool new iMac I could not help thinking how cool it would be of the mouse and the keyboard were wireless without requiring an external transceiver. This seems like an obvious step to me and I have not been able to determine in my own mind why Apple has not done it. 

Apple, I ask you, take the next step and make the mouse and the keyboard wireless - it would just be soooooo clean.

Thanks,
Taj Johnson
Longtime Mac enthusiast and owner


----------



## Noc (Jan 17, 2002)

Heh that was one of my first thoughts, too, when I read about the new iMac.  However, the problem is that presumably, many people would prefer "wired" mouse and keyboard, for various reasons.. they are faster and better suited for games.  Also, there is the issue of replacing batteries all the time.  

Personally, I use a wireless keyboard and love it...


----------



## iFunk (Jan 21, 2002)

I don't know if this is possible or not, but wouldn't it be cool if the mouse and keyboard drew power from the main base wirelessly?

That means no batteries and will always be charged. This might be possible cause I know USB can charge power through a cord, but then again, I am no electrical engineer.

iFunk


----------



## symphonix (Jan 21, 2002)

Did you know those Bluetooth headsets used on mobile phones draw power wirelessly from the phone? That is very cool, but ridiculously expensive.
Frankly, I'm happy with a wired keyboard for a desktop. Why should you want to go wireless if its going to cost you $100 or more?


----------



## iFunk (Jan 22, 2002)

> But what would you call such a revolutionary computer...



I'd call it a pain in the ass!

Voice-recognition in nothing like you would want it to be. Do it now, open up speech control panel and try and work with that. (never tried on mac os x though) 

Its very cool, I admit that... but its still limited.

iFunk


----------



## roger (Jan 25, 2002)

It would require a massive antenna to enable power to be drawn over a radio connection. Some scientists actually did it for tiny, tiny robots but it would not be feasible for a keyboard/mouse unfortunately.

So we would be stuck with batteries.


----------



## Koelling (Jan 26, 2002)

Wasn't Tesla doing these experiments in the 1900's? He was a super genius who came up with things in his head with perfect measurements (like AC power and the AC moter that we use today) He had lots of other ideas and according to the story, he had a lab in Colorado springs (not far from where I live) that he had fully wireless lightbulbs and stuff but Edison (competing power company) shut him down and now we are still trying to recreate what he did.


----------



## suzerain (Feb 5, 2002)

I thought I'd reply to two unrelated things in this thread at the same time.

(1)

The thing no one ever seems to realize when they think of voice controlled computers is that you'd have to talk ALL THE TIME.  Personally, I think that would massively suck if I was watching TV, or in an office full of people (noise factor?  hello?).

Plus, have you ever done any public speaking, or gone out with friends where you were all talking a LOT?  Your throat hurts, you need to drink water constantly, and you end up with a headache.

I think we have our hands for a very good reason.  Let's keep using them.   Now had you guys said MIND CONTROL, I'd be with you...

(2)

I'm too lazy to look for links right now, but there were in fact two competing electrical transmission ideas in the late 1800s.  And we chose the one with the wires, for whatever reason (sinister or not).

However, this was prior to the work of the Curies et al., and it turned out to be a very good choice, because had we as a civilization gone the wireless route with electricity, we'd probably all be a bunch of tumor-having ugly MF's right about now, because there would have been serious radiation problems.  I'm no expert on the subject; this is what one of my science-type friends told me.

Wires are a probably a good thing for electricity.


----------



## apb3 (Feb 5, 2002)

sign me up for the first mind-jack. Ever since my first Gibson book, I wanted one.

I see voice control as a supplement to other forms of input. The gesture recognition of that "Stealth" keyboard that just went on sale is a nice touch. sorry don't have the link but it's only available to those who signed up for pre order AND it's like $400!

In the Army we had several systems that scanned our eye movements for computer control/weapons selection/ etc... I always thought the sight linked heli mounted gatling gun was cool and put the fear of the gods into anyone you looked at... simple eyeglass type devices could accomplish this.

That, in combo with the previously mentioned items and a few others, would be/ is a nice component to an overall re-vamping of the computer interface as most consumers currently see it. I see no reason to rely on one form of interface. As you said, different situations/environments call for diffent input methods.


----------



## googolplex (Feb 6, 2002)

I really think that voice recognition will not work for constant use. I wouldn't want to have to talk to do everything i do on my computer... you would run out of breath! I think that the keyboard (maybe not in its current form) is the most efficient way to input information. Handwritting recognition wouldn't be that great either because it is just as tiering and annoying as writing. 

The eye thing wouldn't work either, because what if you look somewhere else, or you look at something else while trying to do another thing.

Good luck with mind control. If we can't even figure out the brain how can we use it to control things.


----------



## suzerain (Feb 7, 2002)

Oh come on...I'm a luddite because I don't want a speech-controlled computer?  OK...I had to bite:

First, I notice you ignored my comments about noise.  I STILL don't want to be sitting in an office full of people talking to their computers. How obnoxious.  I also don't want to have to talk to my computer while I am on the phone (how will it differentiate from me talking to it vs. me talking to someone else?), or while I am trying to watch a TV show (again, it must differentiate my voice from others, PLUS I'll have trouble hearing over my own voice), or while I'm listening to music at 100 watts (I don't see how that would work at all).

That's a good thing about hand-based input:  it doesn't interfere with other communications mechanisms.

Second, about the throat pain thing.  I use my computer about 10 hours a day, and I've not once had a problem with repetitive stress disorder.  I read a pamphlet once about proper ergonomics (that's about all it takes), and I take breaks.  If you follow good ergonomics, you don't get RTS, it's as simple as that.  If you're too lazy to follow good ergonomics, you do.  It's your fault, not the mouse's.

But speaking?  You can't possibly NOT put strain on your throat. Yes, you can take breaks, but you can't improve the "ergonomics" of talking.

Third, how come someone gets credit for eye control and I get no credit for bringing up mind control.    After all, mind control would be a hell of a lot more efficient than any of these other input mechanisms.  You might be able to type 60 words a minute, but I can think about 1000.

Which brings me to my last point.  your point about words per minute is well taken.  But computers are used for far more than typing words. Personally, I think voice input is good for specialized operations (like word processing...say if you are a writer), but it would royally suck for programming.  I can definitely type ";" faster than i can say "semicolon".

Switching to Eudora right now takes me less than a half a second (click on the dock).  Saying, "Switch to Eudora" takes two seconds.  That's not an increase in efficiency from where I sit, even IF you could flawlessly get the computer to differentiate my voice from the loud music playing in the background right now, which will be a feat in itself.

I'm not opposed to technological innovation, and I'm happy if voice recognition allows access to computers for people with physical challenges, but for most of us, I just think it's not suited as a primary control mechanism, that's all.  It's supplemental, and "fun" at best.


----------



## googolplex (Feb 7, 2002)

I have to aggree with suzerain. voice recognition is not practical and it never will be. testuser, I think you are overlooking the real huge problems with it.


----------



## vitaboy (Feb 13, 2002)

Going back to the original point, Apple should take the next logical step and standardize wireless keyboards and mice. Apple did a great service for Mac users by standardizing on the optical mouse.

The small bu great innovation would be to get rid of the transceiver that's present in current wireless devices. It sticks out like a sore thumb. 

I can imagine the benefits of being able to mix up your iTunes songs from the comfort of your bed, without having to get up and walk over to the desk.


----------



## thisbechuck (Feb 27, 2002)

I started a thread about wireless stuff... http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13857
http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12961


----------

