Full Review: Apple Magic Mouse makes big splash, can't tread water
Apple's new Magic Mouse
(Credit: Sarah Tew/CNET)At first glance, Apple's new Magic Mouse might change your thoughts about love at first sight. The curvature of the soft white shell paired with the speckled silver underbelly is enough to make any Applehead salivate, but we warn prospective buyers to head out to your local Apple Store before taking the plunge, because you might be disappointed.
The first issue we raise with the Magic Mouse is its size and shape. While there's no way anyone can dispute its simple hotness, we struggled through a difficult learning curve due to its uniformly narrow profile that sits too low for comfort. It might be because we're so used to the Logitech MX 1100 cradling each of our fingers with a designated resting point, while the Apple Magic Mouse just feels like a chunk of finely carved polycarbonate.
Next, we also had a problem with the multitouch functionality. Specifically, we felt awkward and unnatural sliding our middle and index fingers across the flat surface of the shell to navigate through several Web pages. Even worse, if you don't have a uniform grip on the sides of the mouse with your thumb, ring, and pinky fingers, the shell can easily get away from your hand--this is why a touch surface with no hard buttons just doesn't make sense on a mouse. Although Apple's instructions tell you otherwise, we did find it easier to use our middle and ring finger to swipe from left to right.
Finally, the Apple mousing preferences don't allow you to reassign the action that happens when you swipe. We'd love to be able to direct the mouse to open a program or advance a track in iTunes with a simple finger gesture, but as it stands, the custom preferences for the Magic Mouse only include check boxes to turn off the secondary click, momentum scrolling, and screen zoom, as well as options to alter tracking, scrolling, and double-click speed.
Want to hear more? Check out our full review of the Apple Magic Mouse.
Justin Yu covers desktop computers, printers, and peripherals for CNET. When he's not scouring eBay for useless ephemera or eating hot dogs for breakfast, he spends his time making fun of Internet culture every morning on The 404 podcast. E-mail Justin. 
Another area where people will need to have an open mind (and therefore accept a certain learning curve) is use of the two-finger scroll. If they get caught up in the idea of needing to hold the mouse in some rigid way, they'll miss the simplicity. Contrary to what the author of the article contends, there is no need to have a "uniform grip" on the mouse while performing the scroll. I am surprised that the testers did not pick up on the fact that you can scroll quite easily with only 3 fingers touching the mouse. If you're scrolling to the left (using your right hand), only the thumb along with fingers one and two need to be touching the mouse, with the thumb serving as the balancing stop that keeps the mouse from moving to the left. Similarly, when scrolling to the right, only three fingers are required. More exploration is in order. At present, some people seem to be making it harder than it needs to be! Perhaps that's just because this mouse is very different.
As time goes along, I do think that we'll see welcome improvements in terms of customizability from the preference pane. I'm looking forward to that.
So any review that starts off with singing the praises of the MX 1100 will immediately throw its whole credibility into question. I highly doubt a company like Apple will spend months or years of research for a mouse that this reviewer quickly dismisses without giving it a serious try. CNET also gave the Mighty Mouse a mediocre review, and after three years of steady use, I can confidently state that my Bluetooth Mighty Mouse is the best mouse I've ever owned.
It might be useful if those contributing to these posts actually use a Mac and evaluate the Magic Mouse based on real experience, not conjecture and speculation. If you haven't touched it, dare I say "shut up and have some cheese with that whine".
If it's bashing and Apple-hating you prefer, isn't there a site out there for that? I came here to get honest and useful reviews to help in my buying decisions, not this childish "mine is better than yours" waste of time. Some of you must be politicians, huh? Just hating the other just 'cause...
"The "eraser button mouse" on the IBM Thinkpads? The worse muscle cramping feature you can ever design."
yeah and a damn touch pad makes more sence?
"It is like saying a BMW M class is bad because it can't go off-road."
Well if its about an X series, then yeah it is bad because it cant off road, even cars go off road.
Have you ever heard of rally?
When you're comparing mouse to mouse, then yeah its a fair comparison.
Yeah lets consider spinners the next evolution of the wheel?
LMAO
that's all this mouse is, like spinners.
Neither Microsoft nor Apple invented the mouse and it even predates the personal computer. Douglas Englebart patented and named the mouse in 1967 although he said it was based on a device he and others had developed several years earlier. There is a myth that he never made any money on it but in more recent years it has been revealed that he licensed it use to Apple in the 1980's for $40,000. I do not know if any PC manufacturers ever licensed it but they certainly used it. The first commercial use of the mouse was on the Xerox Star in 1981 which was a system of business workstations. As they cost $75,000 they were a niche product. The first instance of a commercially successful consumer personal computer with a mouse was the Apple Macintosh of 1984 and this is the first time the general public saw the mouse and despite some bad reviews of the "new-fangled device" (as Dvorak called it in his scathing review) it proved extremely popular with the public and that popularity was the reason for its adoption by all other manufacturers within a short time.
The optical mouse (as opposed to the earlier trackball and wheeled mouse) is difficult to attribute to a single inventor as there are several methods for producing the light source but credit is generally given to Steve Kirsch at MIT and Richard Lyon at Xerox.
Now where is Microsoft in all of this history? Not there? Hmmm...
At some point MS made a mouse and have never lost thier ablity to make a good one. MS is to the mouse what Apple was to the touch interface with their phone.
I loves me some Logitech.
If I would like to improve anything on the mighty mouse, it would be to allow right and left click to be used simultaneously.
For years I worked in offices, and always used the standard beige mouse with two buttons and a scroll wheel. Don't know who made it. My right wrist always hurt, and sometimes a lump would appear at the side of the wrist joint. I had to wear a special glove a lot of the time.
My last job that had me working at a PC, I quit in 2003. I have had hockey pucks for ten years, and have used them almost constantly. Never had a problem with my wrist since. Recently, I purchased a Macally mouse that had hockey puck colors but two buttons and a scroll wheel. I've been using it with one of my Macs. The wrist is aching a bit, I think the mouse is too tall. The puck I can hold with my fingertips or like I am holding a stick of RAM. I have five pucks. I am very glad that I do, because I would have needed surgery by now most likely, using one of the massive mice so many of you MEN (with your man hands) are raving about. I think the puck is superb, and really don't see what the problem is.
By the way, do you know who made every single puck for Apple? LOGITECH!
It is doubly funny that when Apple became the first mainstream computer maker to introduce the mouse back in the early days of personal computing there were many tech people who were certain that it would never catch on because they were used to keyboard commands and thought the mouse felt unnatural. Fortunately the public loved the mouse and now they are ubiquitous.
So Apple continues to innovate and many reviewers continue to judge things based on a few hours of use and pronounce doom...
Apple's mice designs have always been perfectly symmetrical left-to-right, and in the last ten years have not featured any physical details that allow one to orient the hand to the device (am I pressing in the right place?). Imagine a keyboard without the little nubs that tell you when your hands are in the right place. I give Apple full props for visual design, and for pushing the envelope as regards the physical interface, but a mouse that is not contoured to fit the hand is like a shoe that's not contoured to fit the foot. I view Apple's mice as I do concept cars -- fun to look at, but totally impractical for everyday use, at least in comparison to the competition.
For the record, my wife's iMac has a Mighty Mouse, and she doesn't mind it, but then again she doesn't use it for hours and hours a day. I've gotten to the point where I can use it without grimacing, but what's the point? Why should I get used to a non-standard when it isn't any better, just different? Bragging rights may have been enough for me 20 years ago, but not now. Contrast Apple's mice with their OS -- looks better *and* works better. It pains me to think what an amazing mouse Apple could come up with, if they let go of their obsession (symmetry and minimalism) in this particular case. Heck, they gave up minimalism in their OS a long time ago (e.g., Aqua, Leopard dock) and nobody died.
San Francisco Examiner, John C. Dvorak, 19 Feb. 1984
The nature of the personal computer is simply not fully understood by companies like Apple (or anyone else for that matter). Apple makes the arrogant assumption of thinking that it knows what you want and need. It, unfortunately, leaves the ?why? out of the equation ? as in ?why would I want this?? The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a ?mouse?. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I dont want one of these new fangled devices.
"reviewers were complaining about the virtual keyboard"
They still are!!!!!!
"phones with keyboards - they are so slow and inflexible in comparison"
Even a windows mobile phone has easier access to menus if you know the function you want, thanks to a real keypad in place. If i want to go to my messages from Internet explorer i just hit the message key. In Iphone you hit the home key then find the message somewhere on the screen, that's if it responds.
Heck in my samsung i can go the settings just by hitting menu+ # + 9 + 2 then i am in the language setting within 2-3 seconds. Try doing that on the iphone settings.
There are several usability problems with the iphone, but you have become accustomed to them, its like people with out a leg.
You don't have an iPhone do you because your comments indicate a general unfamiliarity with an iPhone in everyday use? I am impressed that you studied the manual long enough to know a whole lot of keyboard shortcuts to do things. I remember those days too. Of course most people never did use them because they seem to not be as well informed as you and so navigation around the phone remained a mystery to them and smart phones remained a niche market. The iPhone is popular because despite shortcomings it is really easy for people to navigate to what they want - no manual needed.
However, the point I was making was in the typing speed when using the virtual keyboard. Sure you are probably a speed demon with two thumb typing on a physical keyboard with tiny keys but most people never were as good as you and for the average user typing on the virtual keyboard becomes a very fast experience and whole lot less tiring than using older physical keyboards. I know we are not as clever as you and lack experience with your "technically superior" Windows Mobile. I am sure we are all wrong and the plummeting sales of Windows Mobile devices is an illusion because a device as good as yours must surely be very popular amongst the general public.
:-) Yes there are those who complain about multi-touch phones but with 7.4 million iPhones sold last quarter and 5.2 million the previous quarter don't you think that there are quite a few people who actually prefer it?
Only time will tell whether or not people actually like the Magic Mouse for daily use but don't be surprised if it becomes quite popular.
Mice remain an ineffecient (but easy) method of input. Anytime you can use a keyboard short cut it's a heck of a lot faster. What's really annoying to me about Apple (and others) is when you can't find or easily learn those short cuts becasue they are either missing or a PITA to figure out.
There are many of us who do not have any need for a mouse that matches the contours of our hands (even if manufacturers were able to produce a wide enough variety that hand sizes and anatomical variations could be taken fully into account). For our purposes (i.e., for those of us in that group) it is easier and just as ergonomic to hold the mouse with our fingertips than to cup it in the palm of our hands. Perhaps we are a little more flexible than others, or perhaps we've just been more willing to try a different approach. But we've found that manipulating the mouse with one's fingertips allows for a lot more versatility in routine operation.
If you wish to extend your shoe analogy, consider what it would mean to produce mice that fit every variety of hand in terms of size and actual shape! You would probably agree there's usually some harm in trying to wear a shoe that's too small or too large for the foot. Would it make sense for Apple to produce several different sizes and configurations of a mouse to meet all conceivable needs in terms of fit? Why should a manufacturer take on that task when it's clear that most people don't need to hold the mouse in a way that puts it squarely in the palms of their hands?
In my opinion, it makes more sense for Apple (who know that customers can buy more specialized mice when needed) to fit their machines with a single, simple starter mouse that anybody can use with their fingertips without violating ergonomic principles (unless they choose to grip the mouse in a rigid way).
Those of us who insist that the mouse must be cupped in the palm of our hands should by all means go out and find a mouse that fits, whether it needs to be, for example, size 6 or size 8 in narrow or wide variety (to get back to your analogy!) It's a cute analogy, but it really does NOT "fit." Shoes are meant to be worn; computer mice are not. And if you do try to wear them, you'll probably end up with some serious problems.
Finally, regarding lack of physical clues regarding orientation, you are incorrect in saying that "in the last ten years have not featured any physical details that allow one to orient the hand to the device." On the Mighty mouse, the position of the scroll wheel provides adequate information for positioning the mouse and positioning the hand. Simple and elegant. On the Magic Mouse, there is an Apple logo that clearly provides the front-back orientation that one might need, and it is very simple to locate upper left and right hand corners to differentiate click locations. Again, simple and elegant. That's what I like about Apple. It need not be complicated, and it need not be ugly!
(Corrercted)
For the sake of discussion, we can take Splashes' shoe analogy one step further:
A manufacturer of exercise bikes (stationary exercise bikes) decides to supply a pair of flip-flops with the machine instead of a fitted pair of athletic shoes because he lives in a world where his clients have access to a range of fitted athletic shoes from other manufacturers and, besides, there is no real evidence that most people need fitted shoes anyway.
Apples Magic Mouse makes a lot of sense from that point of view. In truth it's much better than flip-flops, but it can be thought of as a starter mouse that is both useful and harmless unless you happen to be a graphic artist (or other specialist) who needs to grip the mouse tightly in the palm of your hand.
A manufacturer of exercise bikes (stationary exercise bikes) bikes decides to supply a pair of flip-flops with the machine instead of a fitted pair of athletic shoes because he lives in a world where his clients have access to a range of fitted athletic shoes from other manufacturers and, besides, there is no real evidence that most people need fitted shoes anyway.
Apples Magic Mouse makes a lot of sense from that point of view. In truth it's much better than flip-flops, but it can be thought of as a starter mouse that is both useful and harmless unless you happen to be a graphic artist (or other specialist) who needs to grip the mouse tightly in the palm of your hand.
Apple continues to succeed in the face of people who just want so bad for it to fail... I'm always amazed at how articles about new Apple products are met with a stream of comments about how it sucks just because it's Apple (Crapple? Really?). No direct experience with the product, just bias. Lame.
I've ordered two of these for my office, and we'll see how it goes. It's gotta be better than the Mighty Mouse. The trackball on mine hasn't worked for over a year. But this thing still looks head and shoulders above the run of the mill junk sold by Microsoft and Logitech.
I appreciate Apple's visual design, and I appreciate the fact that in most cases, they don't let form get in the way of function -- instead the two go hand-in-hand. That's what's so perplexing and infuriating about their mice -- it's entirely obvious that the visual design was determined first, and the functionality tacked on. I can picture SJ in a meeting, holding up a sketch and saying, "This is how it's going to look. Now figure out how to make it work."
BTW, my wife's Mighty Mouse scroll ball still works, but we have to clean it often or it gums up and stops working until we clean it. (Here's how to clean it: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1537) Another example of form over function -- having to clean a mouse, in 2009? Puh-leeze.
We are all agreed that the Mighty Mouse had some practical issues and did not prove to be hugely popular. The Magic Mouse, however needs to be assessed on its own merits and not be tied to its predecessor since it is such a new approach. I am looking forward to trying the new mouse not because of its appearance but because of the multi-touch buttonless concept. I fully expect it to have a similar learning curve to the iPhone keyboard (so 2 weeks of getting used to it) but if I were to base expectations on an earlier product then I would say that the iPhone experience would suggest I will grow to love the buttonless form factor.
However - none of us are going to know until we use it for a while before we know whether or not it is just about appearance over substance.
My old Belkin faithful is on its last legs so it is a good time for me to get a Magic Mouse and find out what it is really like.
My husband bought me the bluetooth Mighty Mouse and Keyboard two years ago. I didn't like it either. I don't like wireless keyboards and mice because the battery inevitably dies at the wrong time, and when there are no batteries in the house. If I am already sitting at a desk, I really don't mind the wire. (My husband bought them for me knowing how I felt beforehand.) I got rid of the mouse, and the keyboard is in a box somewhere. (Amazingly, my husband thought I would like a Logitech bluetooth mouse instead. Also in a box somewhere now.)