Mouse Economy

[ipaps]

Pretty much every mouse(pointer device) I've used is broken because one of it's clicking buttons stopped responding. When the pads on it's downwards side is worn out, a mouse gets difficult to move but it's still usable. When the buttons are broken it has to be thrown away. These parts are cheap compare to the optical module and should have no problem been made replaceable. The question is: why have them not already been made replaceable?

By making it replaceable, we can keep the optical module alive, saving resources and work time needed to re-produce them. This should greatly increase the efficiency regarding to what we input and what we get.

My sister says that sometimes even if we find a more efficient way of doing things, we can't do that because people will lost their job. Those saved cost usually end up meaning less work time is needed. This is indeed very true in life. My colleague did tend to get angry when I find better ways of doing things, they want the old ways even if a much efficient one is just out there, no one want's to lose their job.

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable. Because if they do, they end up won't profit enough. It pretty much sounds like as a whole we just have to wast a lot so we can make a lot.

What's the reason behind this? Selfish? Lack of good regulations? Or is it actually MORE EFFICIENT and I'm just blind?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable.

dear, we have made progress since the stone age!! If a company sells a less durable product or a more expensive product they will go out of business thanks to Republican capitalist competition!!

Got it now??

 

[BillSPrestonEsq]

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable.

dear, we have made progress since the stone age!! If a company sells a less durable product or a more expensive product they will go out of business thanks to Republican capitalist competition!!

Got it now??

Fuck you

 

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Pretty much every mouse(pointer device) I've used is broken because one of it's clicking buttons stopped responding. When the pads on it's downwards side is worn out, a mouse gets difficult to move but it's still usable. When the buttons are broken it has to be thrown away. These parts are cheap compare to the optical module and should have no problem been made replaceable. The question is: why have them not already been made replaceable?

By making it replaceable, we can keep the optical module alive, saving resources and work time needed to re-produce them. This should greatly increase the efficiency regarding to what we input and what we get.

My sister says that sometimes even if we find a more efficient way of doing things, we can't do that because people will lost their job. Those saved cost usually end up meaning less work time is needed. This is indeed very true in life. My colleague did tend to get angry when I find better ways of doing things, they want the old ways even if a much efficient one is just out there, no one want's to lose their job.

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable. Because if they do, they end up won't profit enough. It pretty much sounds like as a whole we just have to wast a lot so we can make a lot.

What's the reason behind this? Selfish? Lack of good regulations? Or is it actually MORE EFFICIENT and I'm just blind?

I would say that it is more profitable to sell a whole mouse for $25 more or less rather than sell parts. The operating costs to run that side of the business I don't think would be worth it since most people can't or don't want to repair their own mouse.

 

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Pretty much every mouse(pointer device) I've used is broken because one of it's clicking buttons stopped responding. When the pads on it's downwards side is worn out, a mouse gets difficult to move but it's still usable. When the buttons are broken it has to be thrown away. These parts are cheap compare to the optical module and should have no problem been made replaceable. The question is: why have them not already been made replaceable?

By making it replaceable, we can keep the optical module alive, saving resources and work time needed to re-produce them. This should greatly increase the efficiency regarding to what we input and what we get.

My sister says that sometimes even if we find a more efficient way of doing things, we can't do that because people will lost their job. Those saved cost usually end up meaning less work time is needed. This is indeed very true in life. My colleague did tend to get angry when I find better ways of doing things, they want the old ways even if a much efficient one is just out there, no one want's to lose their job.

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable. Because if they do, they end up won't profit enough. It pretty much sounds like as a whole we just have to wast a lot so we can make a lot.

What's the reason behind this? Selfish? Lack of good regulations? Or is it actually MORE EFFICIENT and I'm just blind?

Another thing is if people wanted a mouse that didn't break but costs more there would be more on the market, though I'm sure you could find a few. It's like asking why there are so many McDonalds out there. People want to buy cheeseburgers for cheap, and they want them NOW.

 

[ipaps]

I would say that it is more profitable to sell a whole mouse for $25 more or less rather than sell parts. The operating costs to run that side of the business I don't think would be worth it since most people can't or don't want to repair their own mouse.

Another thing is if people wanted a mouse that didn't break but costs more there would be more on the market, though I'm sure you could find a few. It's like asking why there are so many McDonalds out there. People want to buy cheeseburgers for cheap, and they want them NOW.

Those buttons are already in standardized size and shape, they don't even need to be changed much to be both soldiering and socket compatible. They can be supplied by electronic stores that also supply resistance, LED, etc. It's not easy to replace them right now, but once it's made easy, I think ppl will prefer these kind. I can even shoot for a high-end ones if i know it can last much longer.

I have never ever seen a single mouse with replaceable button. Shouldn't A high accuracy wifi 2d wheel one worthwhile to be durable? Instead, there are tutorials on internet that teaches how to replace buttons by soldiering.


I think I get your point now, it's just not profitable. But can a company sell a mouse with replaceable buttons 1.5 the money of a normal one? It's still wierd. I mean, if replaceable buttons is incorporated early in the history of the mouse design, is it possible that we'd all be used to mice with replaceable buttons now?

 

[SteadyMercury]

The reason mice don't have buttons that can be replaced is right here:

V7 M30P10-7N Standard USB Mouse - Walmart.com

When the consumer can go to the nearest mass merchandiser and buy a new mouse for less than someone earning minimum wage takes home for an hour's work, they aren't going to be interested in taking it to a repair shop or buying parts to fiddle with.

It is the same way for many consumer goods. People used to repair toasters, now we just drop $20 on a new one. People used to get scissors sharpened, now most people will just throw away old ones and buy another cheapo three pack. Even computers, I'm typing this post on a chromebook I bought new for $250, if it broke past the warranty I'd probably just throw it out and buy a new one.

There is always a price point where the toss vs. repair decision favors tossing, both from a practical sense and a general laziness sense. The manufacturer of a product is aware of this and won't waste resources attending to a consumer need that just isn't there.

 

[SteadyMercury]

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable.

dear, we have made progress since the stone age!! If a company sells a less durable product or a more expensive product they will go out of business thanks to Republican capitalist competition!!

Got it now??

Fuck you

Heh dude just look at it as entertainment. With people like Special Ed you have a window into the sad existence of someone who can only see the world in shades of political spectrum and ideological posturing. Observing his behavior is kinda like being at the zoo.

OP made an interesting thread, don't let pathetic mental case derail it.

 

[ipaps]

The reason mice don't have buttons that can be replaced is right here:

V7 M30P10-7N Standard USB Mouse - Walmart.com

When the consumer can go to the nearest mass merchandiser and buy a new mouse for less than someone earning minimum wage takes home for an hour's work, they aren't going to be interested in taking it to a repair shop or buying parts to fiddle with.

It is the same way for many consumer goods. People used to repair toasters, now we just drop $20 on a new one. People used to get scissors sharpened, now most people will just throw away old ones and buy another cheapo three pack. Even computers, I'm typing this post on a chromebook I bought new for $250, if it broke past the warranty I'd probably just throw it out and buy a new one.

There is always a price point where the toss vs. repair decision favors tossing, both from a practical sense and a general laziness sense. The manufacturer of a product is aware of this and won't waste resources attending to a consumer need that just isn't there.

I guess I'm eccentric then. I'd tear down the buttons on those cheep mice and soldier them on the one I'm using. lol

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is also a saying that corporations don't want to make their products too durable.

dear, we have made progress since the stone age!! If a company sells a less durable product or a more expensive product they will go out of business thanks to Republican capitalist competition!!

Got it now??

Fuck you

you have the IQ of a liberal!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, we have made progress since the stone age!! If a company sells a less durable product or a more expensive product they will go out of business thanks to Republican capitalist competition!!

Got it now??

Fuck you

Heh dude just look at it as entertainment. With people like Special Ed you have a window into the sad existence of someone who can only see the world in shades of political spectrum and ideological posturing. Observing his behavior is kinda like being at the zoo.

OP made an interesting thread, don't let pathetic mental case derail it.

typical violent liberal who knows he lost debate reduced to personal attack!! pathetic!!

 

[ipaps]

I don't think consumers has no need at all for mouse with replaceable buttons. The tutorial for replacing buttons is just out there. A $5 mouse don't need replaceable buttons. What about this one? That's a lot of cheeseburgers for 1 button replace. Who don't want to save money if it's like a replace battery SOP.

I don't really know if it's true that supplying mouse with replaceable buttons is completely not profitable, or it end up costing as much as normal ones.

If the reason is that start making these mouse any time will not profit as much as before, then it does look like lack of profitability is causing waste. ("Selfish" is too heavy a word, my apology. Why should any one do things like that?) Although it's a waste on consumers, but consumers are also workers that produce goods. A waste is a waste.

 

[ipaps]

I think I got it now.

It's way better to just make buttons... durable. Almost fooled my self.

 

[waltky]

So far, Google has struggled to generate mass consumer interest in the Chromebook line...

Google unveils its first touchscreen Chromebook Pixel
21 February 2013 - Google has unveiled its first touchscreen-enabled laptop.

The Chromebook Pixel runs Google's Chrome operating system and has been "largely built" by the web giant. The laptop has Intel's Sandy Bridge processors, fast 4G LTE connectivity and a high-resolution screen aimed at challenging Apple's Retina Display. Analysts say the move represents a fresh bid to build market share for Chromebooks against machines running Microsoft and Apple operating systems. Unlike PCs that use installed software such as Microsoft Word, Chrome OS computers run their applications through the firm's web browser and store their files in the cloud. The internet giant told the BBC the device was "largely built by Google, with components that are manufactured globally".

The laptop's display resolution is similar to the so-called Retina Display of Apple's MacBook range, aimed to have pixel density high enough for the human eye not to notice pixelation when looking at the screen at a typical viewing distance. "This Chromebook has the highest pixel density (239 pixels per inch) of any laptop screen on the market today," said the company. "Packed with 4.3 million pixels, the display offers sharp text, vivid colours and extra-wide viewing angles. "With a screen this rich and engaging, you want to reach out and touch it — so we added touch for a more immersive experience."

Embracing the cloud

The first Chrome-powered laptop, built by Samsung, went on sale in June 2011. Chrome laptops that followed were made by Acer, Lenovo and HP. But so far, Chromebooks have had difficulties challenging Windows-powered computers, said CCS Insight analyst Geoff Blaber. "Chromebooks have struggled for relevance to date, stuck between comparably-priced but entertainment-centric tablets - many of which run Android - and more functional PCs," he said. "[The new computer] won't transform its prospects but Google will hope it serves as a flagship device that has a halo effect for the broader portfolio."

Windows 8, Microsoft's latest operating system launched last year, has touchscreen capabilities. Mr Blaber said: "Touch is now pervasive across every computing category from phones to high-end PCs. "The challenge for the Chromebook is that computing is shifting towards tablets whilst most consumers lives are not yet fully embracing the cloud versus local storage."

BBC News - Google unveils its first touchscreen Chromebook Pixel