no it doesnt
Its not that bad, as far as notebook mice go, I wouldnt use it for extended periods or gaming, but it works as it is meant to. Of course my Razer Orachi got here today, and I can already tell its a much more comfortable notebook mouse. Notebook mice are gimmicks though, its not like the average wireless mouse is much less portable or anything.Finray wrote:
Looks insanely uncomfortable.
I disagree. I've got a small mouse for my laptop, and I greatly appreciate the reduction in footprint, as well as the ability to just pocket it and go.Nic wrote:
Notebook mice are gimmicks though, its not like the average wireless mouse is much less portable or anything.Finray wrote:
Looks insanely uncomfortable.
Case in point:
Also, while I'm in this thread, I might add that I got one of these the other day, I guess it's tech, too.
(My old man for size reference)
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
I was more referring to the complete arc of the mouse. Not the size.
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
I was more referring to the complete arc of the mouse. Not the size.
Hey, don't speak down on the 205! Little guy does 0-100 (km/h, that is, for you Americans) in under 10 seconds.Finray wrote:
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Not after 20 years of being driven it wont . Nice little cars tho, fun to throw around.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Hey, don't speak down on the 205! Little guy does 0-100 (km/h, that is, for you Americans) in under 10 seconds.Finray wrote:
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
Yeahh... no it won't, not anymoreFreezer7Pro wrote:
Hey, don't speak down on the 205! Little guy does 0-100 (km/h, that is, for you Americans) in under 10 seconds.Finray wrote:
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
I was looking at a 106. Prefer the post 1999 model.
TheEternalPessimist wrote:
Not after 20 years of being driven it wont . Nice little cars tho, fun to throw around.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Hey, don't speak down on the 205! Little guy does 0-100 (km/h, that is, for you Americans) in under 10 seconds.Finray wrote:
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
Don't be so sure, it hasn't even gone 100 000 km. It used to belong to an old lady who basically just drove it to church every summer Sunday.Finray wrote:
Yeahh... no it won't, not anymoreFreezer7Pro wrote:
Hey, don't speak down on the 205! Little guy does 0-100 (km/h, that is, for you Americans) in under 10 seconds.Finray wrote:
What a shed
(I'm in the same position gonna get a crapper too ...)
I was looking at a 106. Prefer the post 1999 model.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
They struggled to meet their stated 0-100 times brand new, 20 years of being driven by an old biddy, probably in the wrong gear half the time wont improve things Sitting idle for 6 days a week is a fkin bad idea too.
If you up the sensitivity on a wireless regular mouse the footprint wont matter as much, I guess it would be a toss up of comfort vs footprint, I think in the future I will probably go with regular mice.Freezer7Pro wrote:
I disagree. I've got a small mouse for my laptop, and I greatly appreciate the reduction in footprint, as well as the ability to just pocket it and go.Nic wrote:
Notebook mice are gimmicks though, its not like the average wireless mouse is much less portable or anything.Finray wrote:
Looks insanely uncomfortable.
Case in point:
http://i880.photobucket.com/albums/ac7/ … ssbf2s.jpg
Also, not really in the habit of walking around with a mouse in my pocket. If you have a laptop bag, the mouse size does not affect portability at all.
Last edited by Nic (2010-10-10 12:45:22)
Samsung BX2335
Another screen??
Screen? Fucking monitor/display. Jesus christ, show some self respect. Fuckign screen... FFSFinray wrote:
Another screen??
1 screen is seriously all you need.
"Raise the flag high! Let the degenerates know who comes to claim their lives this day!"
I have 2
Only use one
Only use one
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Once you go dual monitors you can never go back.
I didRacoon_Flyer wrote:
Once you go dual monitors you can never go back.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
three. i hooked a third up at work as well, fuck yeah.Blade4509 wrote:
1 screen is seriously all you need.
Racoon_Flyer wrote:
Once you go dual monitors you can never go back.
That monitor I got is not for my main computer, its for a different one. I don't have anymore videocards to run more monitors.
You knew what I meant, qq harder.SonderKommando wrote:
Screen? Fucking monitor/display. Jesus christ, show some self respect. Fuckign screen... FFSFinray wrote:
Another screen??
ok
Screen
Monitor
Notice the former is an analog device containing no electrical components.
Screen
Monitor
Notice the former is an analog device containing no electrical components.
what?SonderKommando wrote:
analog device containing no electrical components.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
Projection screenBeduin wrote:
what?SonderKommando wrote:
analog device containing no electrical components.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
how is that an analog device? and how come an analog device has no electrical components?FloppY_ wrote:
Projection screenBeduin wrote:
what?SonderKommando wrote:
analog device containing no electrical components.
Last edited by Beduin (2010-10-12 09:52:24)
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic