From poup@mic.atr.co.jp Tue Jun 16 10:01:11 1998 Received: from burdell.cc.gatech.edu (root@burdell.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.3.207]) by lennon.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA16456 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:01:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wheaten.hitl.washington.edu (I3UHNUjBPrMtb30nfYFMiVABRQQ8/7B9@[128.95.73.60]) by burdell.cc.gatech.edu (8.8.4/8.6.9) with ESMTP id KAA00492 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:01:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailhost.mic.atr.co.jp (mic.atr.co.jp [133.186.20.201]) by wheaten.hitl.washington.edu (8.8.8/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA13828 for <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu>; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 07:00:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop.mic.atr.co.jp by mailhost.mic.atr.co.jp (8.9.0+3.0W/3.6W) id XAA10357; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:00:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from mic.atr.co.jp by pop.mic.atr.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.6W04/07/98) id XAA07052; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 23:00:22 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <35875A21.D834FBB4@mic.atr.co.jp> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:54:41 -0700 From: Ivan Poupyrev Organization: MIC Labs, ATR International X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 3D UI list <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: input devices References: <199806160038.RAA05735@umbilicus.artsci.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO One of the problems with gloves is ergonomics: you have to put them on which can be a hassle if you are also doing something else. Simple 6DOF sensor with a button, like the one which Chris described or the ball shaped sensor with one button which Polhemus makes, seems to me the best 6DOF input device for desktop virtual reality since you can repeatedly pick it up from your desk, do whatever you want to do and then put it away. I would definitely get one for my PC if it cost less then $200. > Doug wrote: > > How do we choose devices based on task? Will the most profitable > interaction techniques use very domain specific input devices or > general ones? I would vote for trying to squeeze as much as we can from existing devices by developing good interaction techniques. Besides, it seems that evolution of general input devices is far from over. We have had the same mouse for years, the number of buttons was the only variable. But recently we have got several new breeds of mice: Microsoft wheel mouse, IBM "force stick" mouse, new Logitech mouse. The reason for their developing was the need to support extensive browsing of the documents. I would guess that when we need extensive browsing of 3D worlds then new devices will be introduced or current will be enhanced. Still, I am leaning toward extension of the existing devices, simply because of the user base. If we could effectively incorporate 6DOF capabilities into keyboard or mouse it would be the best. On the last CHI there were few papers that pushed the limit of what can be done with mouse. Any comments? Ivan