Logitech MX-1000 Laser Mouse

[n7]

A Description: HIGH PERFORMANCE CORDLESS MOUSE WITH LASER TRACKING
PI DATE : JULY 2004
TECHNOLOGY : Fast RF cordless
SYS REQS : IBM or compatible PC,
Windows 98, 2000, Me or XP,
Available USB or PS2 port, CD-ROM drive
Macintosh system - Mac OS X+,
Available USB port, CD-ROM drive
FEATURES : * MX Laser Engine provides 20 x times the tracking power
of optical
* a built-in lithium-ion battery & rapid-charging base station
* Fast RF cordless delivers cordless performance that equals USB
corded connection
* New thumb-button controls include universal page forward and back
buttons and application switch to quickly move between open windows
* Illuminated 4-level batt indicator precisely monitors batt strength
* Wheel tilts for side-to-side scrolling, zoom with a click of the
wheel
* Cruise Control rocker for speed scrolling up and down
* Deep-sculpted thumb support for incredible comfort,
outside finger grips enhance control
PACKAGE CONTENT : * Logitech MX-1000 Laser cordless mouse
* Recharging base station, * CD-ROM with SetPoint SW
* Installation guide, * PS2 to USB adapter
* 240V AC power adapter

I've seen a picture of it at work, where they were showing pics from a retail fair of sorts, but i cannot find any out on teh intarweb.

I also lost the link i got the description from.

Aug. 21 was one date i saw for release, but i'm not sure?

Anyone one know anything more...or have any pics


Edit: Original Pic here

More Pics! (& review)

Review added thanx to Jaybo for this review!

 

[cw42]

anyone besides me think mice like this, and the MX510 are a bit overkill and a waste of money?

these mice arn't gonna give you magical leet hax0r skillz in counter strike, same with people that buy 40$ mousepads and think they'll be CAL-i.

edit: it's nice to see that they are using lith-ion now

 

[cjsketchy]

MX510 is really the first optical mouse that I can move at any speed and it will be completely accurate. The MX500 had negative acceleration and the MS optical engine just isn't quite as accurate. I think anything more accurate than an MX510 would be overkill. Then again, Logitech has to make money somehow, so they're always going to be improving on their optical design to get us gamer folk to upgrade to their newest designs.

But, maybe this mouse will be the best wireless mouse we've seen. I still don't favour wireless over corded, but with each new generation, wireless seems to improve. If you've seen the pic of this new mouse, what did it look like? Like an MX500/510, the old Logitech style, or something completely new? I've never quite found a perfectly shaped mouse for my hand.... I just get used to certain mice after a while. I become interested in every new mouse release just to see if it will give me that breakthrough "omg, it fits my hand perfectly right away" feel.

 

[n7]

I honestly didn't pay much attention to it; i figured i'd be able to find lots of info on the web, but noes

Tomorrow i will take a closer look at it.

However, from the brief glance i had, it looked very kewl.

 

[nortexoid]

does it come w/ a space suit?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: n7
A Description: HIGH PERFORMANCE CORDLESS MOUSE WITH LASER TRACKING
FEATURES : * MX Laser Engine provides 20 x times the tracking power
of optical
* Fast RF cordless delivers cordless performance that equals USB
corded connection

Here's a question - what good does it matter if the tracking is more accurate, if the update-rate is still bottlenecked by the USB interface?

I think that they need to either start supporting USB 2.0 "gaming" peripherals, or we need some sort of optimized (for low latency) gaming input-device port on PCs. (Parallel port?)

I've noticed, independent of the update-rate of the USB device, a sort of "lag" from my USB optical mouse at times. I assume that is caused because of the fact that on most PC's, USB takes some CPU cycles to process. I actually much prefer using a PS/2-port mouse for gaming, because the PS/2 ports have their own dedicated IRQ, and dedicated micro-controller in the core logic to process data packets. Plus, you can tweak the update rate up to 200Hz, which isn't possible with USB. (At least with the stock OS USB controller and USB HID mouse device drivers, are there 3rd-party ones that can?)

Originally posted by: n7
* Illuminated 4-level batt indicator precisely monitors batt strength

In some applications, those LED power indicators can take more power than the device itself. I sincerely hope that isn't the case here. (Newer GameBoy Color units removed the LED to save power.)

 

[Dug]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: n7
A Description: HIGH PERFORMANCE CORDLESS MOUSE WITH LASER TRACKING
FEATURES : * MX Laser Engine provides 20 x times the tracking power
of optical
* Fast RF cordless delivers cordless performance that equals USB
corded connection

Here's a question - what good does it matter if the tracking is more accurate, if the update-rate is still bottlenecked by the USB interface?

I think that they need to either start supporting USB 2.0 "gaming" peripherals, or we need some sort of optimized (for low latency) gaming input-device port on PCs. (Parallel port?)

I've noticed, independent of the update-rate of the USB device, a sort of "lag" from my USB optical mouse at times. I assume that is caused because of the fact that on most PC's, USB takes some CPU cycles to process. I actually much prefer using a PS/2-port mouse for gaming, because the PS/2 ports have their own dedicated IRQ, and dedicated micro-controller in the core logic to process data packets. Plus, you can tweak the update rate up to 200Hz, which isn't possible with USB. (At least with the stock OS USB controller and USB HID mouse device drivers, are there 3rd-party ones that can?)

Originally posted by: n7
* Illuminated 4-level batt indicator precisely monitors batt strength

In some applications, those LED power indicators can take more power than the device itself. I sincerely hope that isn't the case here. (Newer GameBoy Color units removed the LED to save power.)

I highly doubt it could saturate a USB bus, and I highly doubt you could move the cursor and follow it with your eyes quicker than what can be transmitted. You only have x,y coordinates to deal wtih. This isn't some massive calculation that a Ghz computer couldn't handle.

 

[n7]

Here's a pic:

Logitech MX-1000 Laser Mouse

 

[XplosiV]

I highly doubt it could saturate a USB bus, and I highly doubt you could move the cursor and follow it with your eyes quicker than what can be transmitted. You only have x,y coordinates to deal wtih. This isn't some massive calculation that a Ghz computer couldn't handle.

Thats all well and good, but lets face it, Optical is good enough - someone tell me a 'Realistic' advantage to having this 'mighty mouse'.

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
In some applications, those LED power indicators can take more power than the device itself. I sincerely hope that isn't the case here. (Newer GameBoy Color units removed the LED to save power.)

Are you sure? Nintendo added a power indicator to the Gameboy Pocket, but as far as Gameboy Color units go I have a CGB-CPU-01 (First issue) and CGB-CPU-10 (Tenth revision) and both have the power light. I also have the original silver GB Pocket originally sold retail in a plastic carry-case and a later smoky-clear model originally sold retail in a cardboard box. The much-later version is the only one with a power light. I always thought it defeated the purpose too

 

[Mem]

Thats all well and good, but lets face it, Optical is good enough - someone tell me a 'Realistic' advantage to having this 'mighty mouse'.

I can only speculate,however using a lithuim rechargeable battery means it should last longer between charges then Ni-Mh batteries that`re used in the MX 700,as to the optical laser performance?.. We`ll just have to wait for reviews etc...

One thing we know about Logitech, is they seem to keep squessing extra performance out of their newer models,look at the MX510 compared to the MX500, not a big step but still an improvement .

 

[AWhackWhiteBoy]

"In some applications, those LED power indicators can take more power than the device itself. I sincerely hope that isn't the case here. "

i high doubt its just an LED, its probably a very basic super low power OLED or similar electrophosphorescence based indicator.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: XplosiV

I highly doubt it could saturate a USB bus, and I highly doubt you could move the cursor and follow it with your eyes quicker than what can be transmitted. You only have x,y coordinates to deal wtih. This isn't some massive calculation that a Ghz computer couldn't handle.

Thats all well and good, but lets face it, Optical is good enough - someone tell me a 'Realistic' advantage to having this 'mighty mouse'.

movement smooth as silk at any resolution? should be nice esp on 30" lcds coming out.

as for the usb bus, yea no way it would be saturated. the mouse does the processing, it only spits out the xy stuff over the bus.

 

[littlebitstrouds]

I KNOW I read somewhere, in a mx700 review, that yes indeed the a usb 2.0 port performs worse that a ps/2 slot. Whether it is because of a bad interface or something else... the guy has a valid point. But in the long run I'm sure it's not going to be an issue. Just clearing up one arguement.

 

[PizzaDude]

Originally posted by: cw42
anyone besides me think mice like this, and the MX510 are a bit overkill and a waste of money?

yep. I'll take my mx300 thanks.

 

[EngenZerO]

i will stick with my mx510. knowing me I would end up forgetting to charge my mouse @ night.

 

[darkswordsman17]

If the mouse has native USB support and just has an adapter to PS/2 then I don't see how it could outperform being in a USB port. USB 2.0 offers more bandwidth than PS/2 doesn't it?

I don't understand why people are saying there's no need for a mouse like this. If you don't need it don't buy it. I'm sure there are graphics professionals that this will help. Especially with those new Apple displays coming out.

Its got a decent shape, it just has a few things that bother me. I don't like those huge silver parts (side buttons, part surrounding the wheel).

 

[gunit]

Whats the dpi on it?

 

[biostud]

I wouldn't buy one of those unless it has a cord.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Dug
I highly doubt it could saturate a USB bus, and I highly doubt you could move the cursor and follow it with your eyes quicker than what can be transmitted. You only have x,y coordinates to deal wtih. This isn't some massive calculation that a Ghz computer couldn't handle.

You obviously don't play online/LAN FPS games. Latency is everything, and most USB input devices have (IMO) horrible latency. The fact that the CPU has to be involved at all in polling an input device is a Bad Thing. I want my frames and I want them yesterday!

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
If the mouse has native USB support and just has an adapter to PS/2 then I don't see how it could outperform being in a USB port. USB 2.0 offers more bandwidth than PS/2 doesn't it?

Again, bandwidth is not a question here, the amount of data transmitted is not much at all. (A few X/Y/wheel accumulation counters, and button-click state bits.) But the problem is latency. In order to read that data, the CPU generally has to get involved. Depending on what it is busy doing, that could cause an issue. Another is that often, the USB ports share an IRQ with other things on the system. Generally, the PS/2 port microcontroller gets its own dedicated IRQ, IRQ 12.

Really, none of this *should* be an issue, and perhaps some of it is due more to extra software layers in Windows due to the USB protocol stack than anything else, but in the real world, I definately notice a difference. PS/2 port mouse control gives me less input lag, and greater accuracy/DPI.

The maximum-supported update-rate of a USB mouse could also be limited to the internal chip. Part of the problem is, the USB protocol is time-division multiplexed, and each individual USB device on a bus doesn't get its own interrupt, it has to wait for its appropriate "time slot" in the protocol to signal the host system that it needs attention. The PS/2 port, on the other hand, is a "no lines no waiting" kind of thing. Almost like an express checkout lane. Whereas the USB port also needs to be checked by the CPU and USB protocol stack, almost like having to call the manager over to the register.

I just want a "gaming" mouse with at least a 500Hz update-rate, with 1600-2400 DPI. Is that too much to ask? (Why such a high update rate, compared to normal game frame-rate? Easy, it allows increased input accuracy, due to input anti-aliasing. This is similar to what WinXP does, when you enable "enhance pointer precision". Unfortunatly, that effectively slows down the update-rate and adds latency, so you have to increase the raw input-device update-rate to compensate. As for high DPI, have you ever tried to pull off a shot in UT using the Sniper Rifle, at maximum zoom range, with only a single-pixel target? If you are using a low-DPI mouse, you won't even be able to aim onto that single pixel, because every time you move the mouse one "tick", it moves the crosshair several screen pixels.)

 

[RockGuitarDude]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Dug
I highly doubt it could saturate a USB bus, and I highly doubt you could move the cursor and follow it with your eyes quicker than what can be transmitted. You only have x,y coordinates to deal wtih. This isn't some massive calculation that a Ghz computer couldn't handle.

You obviously don't play online/LAN FPS games. Latency is everything, and most USB input devices have (IMO) horrible latency. The fact that the CPU has to be involved at all in polling an input device is a Bad Thing. I want my frames and I want them yesterday!

Quite honestly, that is absolutely bull... Like he said, there is no way you could saturate the usb bus with a mouse. Any lag or unpreciseness is either a result of another piece of hardware not keeping up (video card or network connection) or good old human error.

 

[Juice Box]

When it says it can replace the MX 700, does that mean it is compatible with the reciever in my MX Duo?

 

[Mem]

You obviously don't play online/LAN FPS games. Latency is everything, and most USB input devices have (IMO) horrible latency. The fact that the CPU has to be involved at all in polling an input device is a Bad Thing. I want my frames and I want them yesterday!

I`ve to disagree with you here,USB mouse is classed as a " low speed USB device" let alone full speed USB 1.1(which is 12Mbps) or even USB 2.0(480Mbps) ,as to CPU resources it`s very low,few facts about USB below.

USB components and peripherals are a tad more expensive, but you get more with USB. Faster information exchange is the primary bonus. Instead of transmitting information one character or byte at a time, USB components transfer pre-determined sizes of packets of information that are typically 8, 16, 32 or 64 bytes in size.

Short for Universal Serial Bus, a new external bus standard that supports data transfer rates of 12 Mbps (12 million bits per second). A single USB port can be used to connect up to 127 peripheral devices, such as mice, modems, and keyboards. USB also supports Plug-and-Play installation and hot plugging.

Do note USB mice and keyboards only need around 1.5Mbits/s to function,info on the newer standard( USB 2.0 )
here..


Btw I play online with my mouse and keyboard(USB) and latency is not a problem, only thing I look for online is low ping servers.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I still don't think that latency would be a problem. Why would they have ever moved mice to have USB connections if it wasn't a better connection?

I think by saying it can replace the MX700, they mean that they would discontinue the MX700 and sell this one instead. It might work with your reciever though, since it seems that they aren't changing it to bluetooth or another technology.