Justin Edwards
Writing 340
Marc Aubertin
6 December 2013
No Hands: The End of the Handheld Computer Mouse?
Engineers are constantly at work researching and developing the next big revolution that
will improve and simplify the daily human lifestyle. It is safe to assume that as society continues
to advance, these newer technologies will surpass theory and become commonplace, replacing
some older devices for more efficient and convenient models. Many have witnessed this
evolution firsthand with the transition from pagers for the faster, more instantaneous cell phone,
or the CD player for the sleek and far more portable iPod. Computers are no stranger to these
remodeling and design improvements, and the same can be said of a device that has become a
technological necessity: the mouse. The mouse has evolved and has experienced great changes,
and despite its growing age among developing technologies, it has thus far been able to retain its
value to society, shedding only a few technological layers with each redesign. However, have
technological advancements reached a critical turning point in which the computer mouse finds
itself losing its form completely? Based on the ways in which the ergonomics of the computer
mouse have evolved and observing the trends of devices in development, the computer mouse is
on a path of minimalism and will eventually lose its physical form.
Ergonomic Evolutions
In order to understand where the mouse is going, it is important to have a general idea of
where it is coming from. The computer mouse known today hardly resembles that of the original
model. During the early 1960s, Dr. Douglas C Englebart had the vision of creating a user
friendly way of moving across a computer screen in the x-y planes, and in 1968, Englebart
patented a device that he more formally termed the “X, Y position indicator for a display
system” (Englebart). Later on it would take the short hand of “mouse” for the cord that ran out
from the back of the device. As seen in Figure 1,
the mouse he created was little more than a
wooden block with two wheels – one for each axis
– but at the time, showed greater promise than
anything that had been developed. His later
developments to this initial design for the Fall Joint
Figure 1. Englebart Prototype Mouse [photo
courtesy of ComputerHistory.org]
Computer Conference of 1968 would gain his now three button mouse presentation the title of
“Mother of all Demos” (Englebart). Frrom this moment on, the computer mouse would continue
to evolve and develop to become cheaper, more effective, and of course, more convenient.
The mouse in the homes of most today can be attributed to a few key design changes. The
first was the addition of the trackball to the bottom of the mouse to provide greater screen
mobility to the user to move across the screen without needing to move the entire arm. The
trackball mouse was released in 1974, developed by Jean-Daniel Nicoud and became the modern
single-ball, two-button mouse (Telnames). Following the trackball, the development of a cheaper
affordable mouse could be seen as the next advancement in design. Unlike most of the prior
models that had prices in the thousands of dollars, Hovey-Kelley under contract to Apple would
unveil a design that designer and historian Benj Edwards says, “…sets the stage for cheap,
reliable consumer mouses that everyone can afford.” As the 1990’s began, multiple
breakthroughs in technology would change the mouse the world knew forever. In 1991, Logitech
develops the first mouse to use radio frequency (RF) transmissions, a far better alternative than
the use of infrared (IR), which required line of sight and a base station on the computer. In
addition, Carmen Carmack, technical communicator and writer, noted that the RF mouse was
less expensive, light weight, and consumed less power which allowed it to be battery operated
(Brain). The most influential and crucial design change however occurred in 1998 when the
mouse gained the ability to track space without the necessity of a special pad or surface. The
optical tracking sensor having now become LED based, mice could practically and efficiently be
used under a wide variety of circumstances, making an almost essential to computer users.
Reasons Behind Change
How then can the claim be made that the mouse is on the verge of losing its physical
form after having advanced so far in its design as to be usable to everyone, almost everywhere?
Under closer analysis, the revolution presented above addressed three basic needs of the
technological consumer. Primarily, the mouse was the newest piece of technology and served a
function that no other device on the market at the time could perform well. It was the “pointing
device and cursor” as well as “a prerequisite to the windows operating system” (The Importance
of the Mouse), in essence making the first step in any design endeavor: identifying and solving a
problem. From here, the next need met was to make the mouse affordable to the common
consumer. Referencing again the 1974 Mac mouse, the design and materiality of the device
reached a ratio under which it became possible to lower the consumer cost out of the thousands
of dollars to under one-hundred dollar. Finally, with necessity of design and the benefit of new
technologies came the opportunity of ergonomic remodeling: the development of the shape of
the mouse to contour to the hand as well as its wireless capabilities. Considering the form of the
first mouse, mice of today have all taken on a shape that is easy to hold and maneuver, and
without the need of a cord or line of sight, have greatly contributed to the work efficiency and
comfort of the user. These three elements in mind, it leaves significant evidence that as new
problems arise and newer technologies become available and affordable, the usefulness of the
mouse will fall into question, and this process has already begun.
One problem that designers have been facing and continue to work against is the increase
of carpal tunnel and other musculoskeletal malfunctions. According to the National Institute of
Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), carpal tunnel syndrome occurs when the median
nerve, which runs from the forearm into the palm of the hand, becomes pressed or squeezed at
the wrist, and while most prevalent in assembly workers, does occur in those who frequently use
a computer. As many businesses have long since transferred to computers to manage and
maintain business, redesigning the mouse has become necessary to improve the posture of the
hand in order to counteract the risks of developing carpal tunnel. However, according to studies
conducted in International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, a relationship was found between
mouse use and symptoms in the neck, with findings that support the hypothesis that mouse use
may contribute to musculoskeletal injury of the neck and upper regions (Burgess-Limerick,
Cook, and Chang). This being the case, alternatives to the physical mouse begin to show promise
towards the better health of the computer user.
Not only is the modern consumer in search of a mouse that will improve their lives, but
they search to bring the cutting edge of technology into daily interaction. This quest for novelty
has been witnessed at each successive release of the latest iPhone. With the new comes the
promise of the fastest, most efficient, most appealing of its kind on the market to date. In
response to Moore’s Law – the number of transistors on integrated circuits will double every two
years – David House, executive of Intel stated that computer power would double every 18
months, and though this rate is slowing down, new releases do not require dramatic changes in
order to inspire sales (Peckham). And this hunt for the newest product on the market is not bad
for the consumer. In fact, according to C. Robert Cloninger, the psychiatrist who developed
personality tests for measuring the “novelty trait”, said “Novelty-seeking is one of the traits
that keeps you healthy and happy and fosters personality growth as you age” (Tierney). In
terms of computing and the computer mouse, introductions of novelty have been occurring
sporadically, but in recent years have been hastening in development.
Innovative Solutions
Alternatives to the standard computer mouse are making their way out of
developmental stages and onto the consumer market, some which already lose the physical
form of the mouse. Many of these new solutions are getting smaller, such as Logitech’s latest
addition, the Cube mouse. Seen in Figure 2, the Cube fits well within the palm, and
functions with the use of only a few fingers
rather than the whole hand, which according to
Kevin Hall, journalist for Dvice, “ works so well
at your fingertips as that's the point — it doesn't
care that you have a whole hand” (Hall). This
statement is not made in haste, as laptops have
Figure 2. Logitech’s Cube Mouse [photo
courtesy of Kevin Hall of Dvice.com]
done away with the need for little more than a
finger to operate the functions of the mouse by means of a track pad, and with the direction
of touch-based technology, the mouse is becoming less necessary for the average user.
Touch screens have made it possible to interact with the digital environment and navigate
the operating system without anything more than your hands. However, neither minimizing
the mouse nor touch screens will replace the computer mouse. In mineralization of the
mouse, you eventually hit a cap at how small the mouse can be before it loses functionality,
efficiency and comfort. When it comes to touch screens, Mikko Tikkanen mentioned that
“Whereas touch-screen rock the handheld world, computer mouse reigns as the sole
emperor of the desktop computing.” This statement rests on the idea that when it comes to
precision detail and design in the digital space, the touch screen has yet to be able to
function at that level of detail and clarity. For this reason the mouse still remains fixated to
the right (or left) hand of the computer user. However, these designs are leading society
towards a new age of computing, and there are some devices and theories that show great
promise in replacing the mouse.
New technologies now on the market and in development are setting up to replace
the way the average user interacts with their computer. Sensory devices create the first half
of this exploration towards mouse-less computing. Devices like the Microsoft Kinect and the
Leap Motion offer strong solutions of interacting with the digital environment with greater
levels of technicality and precision that your average touch screen. There are those who
would suggest that these devices tire out the body and make long continuous work far more
difficult to perform. Tech reporter James Plafke makes the argument that even an in-shape
person would have troubles with long use of the leap and states “…until the Leap can get
itself sorted out… keep your fancy gaming mouse plugged in.” However, this move towards
hands free devices does solve the issues of carpal tunnel and other musculoskeletal disorder
while introducing innovative technologies. Another such sensory device is vision based
interpretive computers, in which computers are designed with perceptive user interfaces,
where the computer “is endowed with perceptive capabilities that allow it to acquire implicit
and explicit about the user and their environment” (Argyros and Lourakis). This process
translates the 2D and 3D gestures of people and tracks the motions on the screen of the
computer, thus again, eliminating the mouse. Their research concluded that their interface could
be used as a virtual mouse, though the extent to which this could be developed for the general
consumer was not made evident.
The other half of these non-mouse explorations is focused on ways in which thoughts can
be directly transmitted into the action of clicking a mouse. Mind Technologies’ “Mind Mouse” is
a headset that effectively removes the need to click a mouse by using the thought of the click to
control the desired response on the computer screen.
In Figure 3, the mind mouse is displayed on the head
of an individual that is playing a computer game, but
does so without the use of his hands by focusing his
energies into thought of the actions he would have had
to click with a mouse. This alternative boast incredible
potential to change the way we engage with the digital
Figure 3. Mind Mouse in Gaming [photo
courtesy of singularityweblog.com]
environment, but not only for the sole purpose of clicking. The device also allows one to
compose an email and send it via thought, a feature that one blogger observantly notes “…is
especially beneficial to people with disabilities who have problems with communicating. For the
first time in their life, many disabled people will be able to operate a computer and communicate
via email” (“Socretes”). While the technology is still being further developed and adjusted to
better communicate through hair follicles and become more affordable to the consumer, the
Mind Mouse also successfully removes the need for a computing mouse.
Where Do We Go From Here?
So is it time to say goodbye to the computer mouse? Though the trends do predict that
there will indeed come a in which all household rodents will be unwanted, it may be too hasty to
get rid of the mouse. Perhaps Plafke put it best and we should hold onto our computer mice for a
while longer. The technologies are out and developing to replace the mouse, however the time in
between still does not have a set date. Instead, it seems more likely that society continue to move
in the pattern of behavior it is most familiar with and evolve with the technology as it is
developed over time. Keeping current with the latest innovations will provide temporary
solutions to the physical strains of using the device, and in time, may remove the strain
altogether. It is clear to see that the mouse will someday be replaced by an alternative source of
computing that boasts greater ergonomics, functionality and innovation to the user. And from the
projection of technological developmental trends, it does not appear too long from now.
Works Cited
Argyros, Antonis A., and Manolis I. A. Lourakis. "Vision-Based Interpretation of Hand Gestures
for Remote Control of a Computer Mouse." Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Volume
3979, Pages 40-51. 2006. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
Brain, Marshall, and Carmen Carmack. "How Computer Mice Work." HowStuffWorks. N.p., 24
Apr. 2000. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
Burgess-Limerick, Robin, Catherine Cook, and Sungwon Chang. “The prevalence of neck and
upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms in computer mouse users.” International
Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. Volume 26, Issue 3, Pages 347-356. September 2000.
Web. 16 October 2013.
"Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Fact Sheet.”: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
(NINDS). N.p., July 2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Dainis. "Unusual Computer Mice You Probably Haven’t Seen Before." Hongkiat.com. N.p.,
2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
Englebart, Christina. "Father of the Mouse." Doug Englebart Institute. N.p., Aug. 2008. Web. 12
Oct. 2013.
Edwards, Benj. "The Computer Mouse Celebrates Its 40th Birthday." PC Advisor. N.p., 13 Dec.
2008. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
Hall, Kevin. "Hands-on with Logitech's Adorably Tiny Cube Mouse." Dvice. Dvice, 10 Jan.
2012. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.
Peckham, Matt. "The Collapse of Moore's Law: Physicist Says It's Already Happening."Time.
Time, 01 May 2012. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
Plafke, James. "Leap Motion Review: Is It Time to Replace the Mouse?" Extreme Tech. N.p., 22
July 2013. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
"Socretes" "Mind Technologies’ Mind Mouse And Master Mind Thought-Controlled
Software." Singularity Weblog. N.p., 2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
"The Computer Mouse: A Timeline." Telnames. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
"The Importance of the Mouse." ChidoWare. N.p., 2009. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
Tierney, John. "What’s New? Exuberance for Novelty Has Benefits." New York Times. New
York Times, 14 Feb. 2012. Web. 2013.
Tikkanen, Mikko. "Killing the Mouse. And No, It's Not Touchscreens." Mint Usability. N.p., 10
July 2009. Web. 17 Oct. 2013.