For pc users, keyboards, mouse, etc., are almost non-existent every minute, but at the innovation level, they remain low. In relative terms, the development of mechanical keyboards has matured, from early welding, hard-to-modify keyboards, to programmable typing additions that today support heat-plugging, free-rotation axes; even the most heavy aircraft boxes that used to evolve in the direction of modularization and disassembly. However, as a core off-site mouse, it has been stagnant for 30 years since the win95 era became fully popular in the pc area. Once a failure occurs, they are discarded like a one-off lighter, and both manufacturers and consumers appear to have acquiesced in the waste-cycle pattern of “throwing away when the mouse fails”。
Maybe it's easy to replace a failed double-click mouse in the warranty period, with consumers spending no money and branders taking no care, but such after-sale agreements often require you to submit the old mouse first. Behind this is a mountain of electronic waste. In fact, mouse failure is mostly due to minor problems: it can be cheap micro-switch damage, roller coding frames, or battery continuous decay, while non-core sensors fail. These components could have been replaced by the user itself. Of course, i don't expect every mouse user to be skilled in handling electrical maintenance, but for those of us who use iron, manufacturers are deliberately blocking maintenance -- mouse maintenance parts are supposed to be as easy as mobile phones and laptop parts. But for the time being, our only life-saving straw is only a few third-party shops that specialize in the omron axis, the ttc encoder; but even with spare parts in their hands, every move to untangle the mouse is like breaking off。
Threads hidden under the mat: most annoying design defects
From the point of view of the most aggressive, and most desirable, design defect of the mouse: the manufacturer hides screws and screws under the paste of the paste tefron (ptfe), which creates an unnecessary barrier from the outset for users who want to remove the mouse. You know, the screws are almost all embedded in the mouse shell, they don't touch the mouse pad at all, and they cover the screws with a teflon foot pad that guarantees the slide of the mouse, with no functional meaning at all。
Every time i want to take off the mouse, the first step is to take the mat off carefully, fearing to bend it or to deform it — but almost every time i screw it up. Because these scripts are designed to be a one-time waste material, they can't be put back in flat. The adhesive layer of the foot pad is used only once, and when an angle is lifted, it is completely destroyed. This will inevitably result in the carton, unevenness of mouse slides, and eventually the purchase of third-party replacement pads. The only effect of this puzzling design is to hinder or complicate the maintenance process。
The manufacturer may argue that the flat bottom of the mouse looks better. But you know, the bottom of the mouse is the least visible aspect of the user's view, and the fact that a few screw holes are out there doesn't affect anyone's judgment of design beauty. A simple solution is at hand: to place a screwhole anywhere except below the tfl foot mat. If the manufacturer is really unwilling to change the design, it is at least responsible for selling the official replacement pad directly to the consumer or designing the pad as a reusable form。
Dismantling difficulty: optical microactivity is tightly sealed
For the first time in 2019, a thunder snake carried a smart-wing shark optic micromovement, which is now in the third generation, and for the first time on g502x in 2023. As optical microactivity spreads, the problem of double-click failure caused by metal shrapnel oxidation has become a matter of history - this is a great step forward for the extension of the mouse life, but there is a new slab for optical components: very afraid of dust and shredding. Optical micro-activation works by pressing the key to block the beam, thereby recognizing that input, even if a small piece of chips is stuck in it, can cause the key failure or trigger anomalies。
Cleaning up optical microactivity should be simple: open the shell and blow with a compressor tank. But in reality, it has become a torture. Most of the mouse designs are like forts, and the shell is sealed with a hidden card button, plus a one-time pad, and no action is taken. What we need is an easy-to-maintenance mouse design: for example, fix it with a common screw, and the shell is designed in a card button so that it can be easily removed with a plastic crowbar. Since manufacturers promote millions of hits on the optical axis, this commitment should be fulfilled by supporting infrastructure maintenance designs, which are necessary to reach the “millions of hits” of life. And this design change is no problem for the mouse industry。
Thermal interpolation micro-motion and encoder: why not the mouse
With the rise of mechanical keyboards, almost all of the users interested in outside access to these products have been to a greater or lesser extent. In the area of mechanical keyboards, thermal plug-in axes have completely changed user maintenance difficulties. With it, we can change our own axes without even taking the iron. This logic is perfectly applicable to the mouse, and there is no valid reason to exclude it. The mouse clicks three lures, which can be inserted directly on the pcb plate of the welded axis, as is the case for the keyboard's cavallax axis。
It might be countered: “this makes micro-movement unstable, loose micro-movements have a cheap feeling and affect precision.” i understand this concern, but it is not difficult to solve it for mouse manufacturers who have the capacity to customize pcb and components. The encoder, for example, has already been designed with a long-metal-led package of pcb, and this structure has been used to secure it, and similar lines can be fully used for mouse micromovements; a step back can also be taken to avoid loosening by optimizing the mass of the mouse's shell, with its own axis. Think of it: without a hot iron, a smoother omlon micro-motion can be replaced in a few minutes with a lighter, quieter cavalier silent micro-motion, which not only opens up the new dimensions of the mouse's personalization, but also significantly increases its useful life。
Replacement of batteries and cables: should have been achieved but deliberately omitted
The problem with the wireless mouse is even worse. Batteries are consumables with a limited number of recharge cycles, but manufacturers still insist on the direct welding of batteries on pcb plates. Once the battery is aging, you have to throw away a very well-functioning and expensive outlet that is both wasteful and unfriendly to users. In fact, a simple jst interface solves problems: it is standardized, simple and inexpensive, and users can break the interface in seconds and replace malfunctioning batteries. Of course, it also requires a willingness to sell replacement batteries directly to consumers。
In addition, manufacturers should endeavour to use standard-sized lithium polymer batteries. As a result, third-party batteries are easily available to users even if the original plant no longer supplies replacement batteries. The problem of wired mouse is similar: cable wear and tearing of skin is common, but most manufacturers use undiscovered cables. Instead of using poor quality cable designs to reduce drag resistance, consumers have to learn how to repackage cables with wire。
It's time to stop the waste cycle
The mouse's living environment is bad: long-term exposure to grease on hand, frequent frictions; micro-moved parts bear millions of hits and rollings. The loss of skin coatings, the wear and tear of the rubber slides, and the slight failure of action mean normal wear and tear, but this in no way means that the manufacturer can force the user to phase out the mouse. If the mouse supports maintenance, the vendor will have to process fewer after-sales applications and will no longer have to do anything that calls into question the integrity of the user and destroys the environment。
Shell, wheel, encoder, cable, wireless receiver, pcb... These components should be supplied on demand and are particularly important for high-end flagship mouse. If i had spent more than a thousand dollars on a high-end mouse, when the skin coating fell after a year, i should have spent dozens of dollars on a new top, instead of being forced to change the whole mouse。
The mouse should not be expendable
For a long time, we've been domesticated by rotor snakes, by default using the computer mouse as a consumer, as if every few years after a high-intensity game or long office hours. This mentality is essentially the product of the design concept of manufacturers ' repugnantness, increased marginality, light durability and repairability. The industry as a whole is pursuing lighter weights, higher dpis and faster rates of return, while ignoring the fundamentals of building sustainable, long-lived products。
Making the mouse easier to maintain is not forcing each user to take a screwdriver, but rather to provide a choice - respecting the user's consumption inputs and the user's right to maintain its own product. Given that the mouse still plays a key role in human interaction, these minor changes to the product can create a group of faithful users. After all, a mouse that can be repaired and used longer is much more valuable than a nice, short-lived mouse。
