Related articles

• Logitech MX Mice: The Weapon for Quakers!

  The optical mouse is about to completely take the place of the trackball mouse, and that is not a bad thing. No maintenance, no wear and no mechanical parts ensure lifelong, constant precision. But optical mice do have some inconvenient aspects. While they can be used on most surfaces, some, like glass or plain gloss, can be a problem. And players of fast action games like Quake or Unreal Tournament find they don't have the same level of precision and responsiveness as a good trackball mouse. Last year, Microsoft and Logitech started improving their optical sensors to bring speed and precision in line with Quaker requirements. Our tests revealed that they had succeeded (see the article: Optical Mice: The Fall/Winter Collection ). However, at the time there were two technologies in the game and we were not able to decide between them on the theoretical basis of their technical features. With the MX range, Logitech has made things even more complicated by introducing new specifications and measurement criteria for their more powerful sensor.

• The Score... And The Conversion

  Now for the tests, to see whether all this technology really makes a difference in real life. We compared the laser mouse with the MX 510, the most precise mouse available as of today. We tried both models on the latest FPS games - UT 2004, Doom 3 and FarCry. First off, I gave the mouse to several players to try with these games and the reaction was unanimous: the MX 1000 is better. It's not just a matter of precision in movement, but overall precision. This mouse reacts to your every movement. Your hand movements correspond very exactly to those of the character on the screen. The traditional test - making a half-turn followed by aiming through the scope in FarCry - confirms the impression. You gain in speed because targeting a point just after a rapid movement is astoundingly easy. We then tested the MX 1000 on retouching a picture in Photoshop, and the conclusion is the same. Zeroing in on a spot with millimeter precision is uncannily easy. And Faster To Boot An interesting corollary of this diabolical precision is that it's possible to use a higher resolution than with another mouse. As soon as you increase the pointer speed (CPI), the mouse moves across the screen faster, but you lose preciseness on small movements. But since the MX is fundamentally more precise, you can move faster without problems. I moved the cursor almost to the maximum (not far from 800 CPI) with a 1280x1024 resolution. Compared to other mice, you'll have less physical distance to cover while maintaining the same precision. This means you'll be faster on games and other graphics-based applications. Another argument Logitech uses is the surfaces on which the mouse can be used. The laser's preciseness lets you use it on uniform, single-color and even reflective surfaces up to a point. Only glass and mirrors are ruled out. And in fact, the MX 1000 does operate perfectly on all types of surfaces; but that was already true for the earlier MX generations. In any case we recommend that you use a mouse pad to provide the best possible contact for the Teflon pads and keep them from getting dirty too quickly.

• Back To The Source

  LED optics Laser Optics Logitech's starting point in further improving precision was to work on the light source, since the sensor was already perfected. A more intense, precisely targeted light source would make it possible to get better pictures of the surface. As in photography, you can have the best imager in the world, but if the light isn't good, the final picture won't turn out well either. So the Logitech engineers decided to see what happened when a more precise light source which the laser offers, was used instead of an LED. The laser projects a contained beam that is always identical and can be reflected without alteration. That, incidentally, is why lasers are used in CD players, for example. The laser and the sensor can be positioned at an ideal angle of 90 degrees. The sensor receives an image that's much more detailed and has higher contrast. It can perceive differences in the structure of the surface that don't show up with LED technology. According to Logitech, beyond the mouse's improved precision, it will work on any surface, even the most uniform, except for glass and mirrors. You have to admit that theoretically the demonstration seems to make sense. But does it work in practice? LED image of surface Laser image of surface