Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Logitech Bluetooth Cordless Presenter Review 121

securitas writes "Many Bluetooth devices have (deservedly) received dismal reviews and we were prepared for the phaser-like Bluetooth Logitech Cordless Presenter to be another toy headed for the trash-heap of history. Instead we were surprised (some might say stunned :) ) at how well it performed. The Presenter combines a laser pointer, an electronic presentation remote control and a wireless optical mouse in one elegantly designed package."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Logitech Bluetooth Cordless Presenter Review

Comments Filter:
  • $200!!! (Score:5, Informative)

    by kwerle ( 39371 ) <> on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:05PM (#4581154) Homepage Journal
    Damn, the keyspan USB remote [] is just $79.

    • and has to have an available USB port for the reciever

      The point of Bluetooth is that in the future it could work with other things besides just a computer w/ the right drivers.

      For instance. A bluetooth TV could let you use it for volume/channel control. A bluetooth projector could let you use it to control its features. A bluetooth system could let you lower/raise the screen. A bluetooth dvd player could give it control...etc. Any bluetooth enabled device that would have a use for a remote or mouse interface could use this.
    • I've been very satisfied with the Powr Pointer. []. If it had a built-in timer it would be perfect.

      (Only real complaint is that they came out with a longer range model a few weeks after I bought the first model!)

  • Hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MarcoAtWork ( 28889 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:07PM (#4581169)
    for a second I thought that this device was able to function as a mouse while being held by the presenter (via some sort of inertial sensor presumably) but it seems that the mouse function is just a standard 'put it on the desk and move it' type of thing...

    Pity, because if you're in the middle of a stage giving a presentation, I doubt you'd want to have to trek to the sides if/when you have to move the mouse pointer on the screen.
    • Re:Hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JUSTONEMORELATTE ( 584508 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:15PM (#4581232) Homepage
      But it's an optical, so you can move the mouse on any surface around (pants leg, lecturn, your other hand, forhead of audience member, you get the idea)
      • Which is great until said audience member develops a brain tumour and sues your ass 10 years down the road when it is proven that Bluetooth has been mutating genes in people's pants, other hands, and foreheads since day one.

        Forgive my mid-atlantic spelling, for I am confused. Perhaps it's my bluetooth phone, or my microwave helmet.
  • by Hayzeus ( 596826 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:07PM (#4581174) Homepage
    One often-overlooked part of a battery-operated device is the design of the battery compartment door. On most devices, the door is secured at only one point. Invariably, that part of the device breaks and one is forced to resort to other methods of keeping the batteries secured.

    "Other methods" indeed. What the hell to these people have against duct tape? It's both stylish AND waterproof! No real geek should ever be without at least three rolls.

  • Does the USB bluetooth adapter funtion with other pluetooth products, such as the Palm Tungsen T or Ericsson bluetooth enabled phones?
    • That's the idea of bluetooth. A wireless kind of USB.

      Assuming you have a correct Bluetooth stack.
      Most companies provide one with their adaptors.
      Windows XP will include one with the next SP. Linux has the BlueZ-Stack (integrated), Axis Stack and another one I can't remember.
      • Yes, but some receivers are keyed to certain devices, and can't be used as general purpose receivers.
        • I've read the Bluetooth specification and the only thing that could be interpreted to your "keying" is that a two devices can be paired up.
          Both must share a common secret (a PIN-code) to enable communication between those two.
          But any two devices can (with human intervention) be paired up.
          They could conceal the PIN to the user, but why should they?
          Another possibilty is to hard code the Bluetooth device address from the Reciever in the sender. But again, why should they do so?
          This would only increase the work and costs as they had to flash different programs on the controllers for the benefit of a disgruntled user.

          Could you provide a link to back up your statement?
          I can't imagine that the Bluetooth SIG would approve this, as it would be detrimental to the goal of Bluetooth.
  • by DraconicFae ( 600508 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:14PM (#4581218)
    "In our tests, the Presenter was able to send a consistent signal through two floors until substantial metalwork began to interfere with the signal." So, what.. one guy is in an empty room, moving the cordless mouse around, and two floors up, another guy is talking to him on the phone saying "yes, it's moving up.. try left now! Woo! That works too!"
  • Why bluetooth? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by redfiche ( 621966 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:14PM (#4581221) Journal
    I thought bluetooth was fairly short-range, and for higher bandwith type applications. Seems like this device could easily get by with regular wireless. Is there something I'm missing?
  • The reviewer seems overly worried about the laser pointer. I read about a study recently where eye cancer patients had a laser pointer shone into their eyes for 15 minutes, with no ill effects.
  • by airrage ( 514164 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:15PM (#4581235) Homepage Journal
    If ever, I repeat ever, see a consultant/vendor/salesperson enter the room with this device I know I am in for a 30+ powerpoint presentation; if only the laser were powerful enough to stun me to minimize the pain...
  • by jukal ( 523582 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:18PM (#4581260) Journal
    At first glance, the device looks like something out of a science fiction movie. Its ovoid, finely flecked metallic blue body, encased in a colorless, transparent shell and accented by matt silver buttons is reminiscent of one of Star Trek's handheld phaser guns. The blinking LED lights atop the device and the embedded red laser -- activated when you press a trigger on the Presenter's blue-smoked translucent plastic underside -- reinforce the futuristic impression

    I think the "reviewer" just may have succeeded even better than the original market-droids of Logitech.

    • ... the embedded red laser -- activated when you press a trigger on the Presenter's blue-smoked translucent plastic underside ...

      Reminds me of a lame patent claim, 4,387,297 [] in which Symbol Technologies claimed a trigger that activated a laser.

      They patented a switch to turn on an electrical device.

      Good thing the patent expires next year so that Logitech won't get sued...

  • alternatives (Score:4, Informative)

    by g4dget ( 579145 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:19PM (#4581263)
    It's good to see that some Bluetooth devices are coming out, but for now, there are cheaper and simpler solutions.

    For under $80, you can get the Keyspan Presentation Remote [], which is smaller, comes with a carrying case, includes a laser pointer, and looks just like a USB mouse from the PC side (no drivers). And, yes, it works with Linux.

    Another choice is the Gyration [] wireless mice. But their receiver is a bulky box and requires a wall wart. And if you want to be able to use standard AAA batteries, you have to pay $100 extra for the "Pro" version.

    • You can get the AAA battery clip for $13 as an accessory; you don't need to buy the Pro mouse.

  • by autopr0n ( 534291 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:22PM (#4581278) Homepage Journal
    The ability to use it as a mouse by pointing it at a screen. For $200 I figured they ought to be able to do it, I mean how much did the NES Zapper cost back in the day? $25?
    • How the fuck did that thing work? No one has been able to tell me to this day :)
      • Easy. When you pulled the trigger, the screen flashed a different single frame that was white with a pinkish dot where you could successfully "hit". If the gun saw the dot while the trigger was in you hit what you were shooting at.
      • How it worked. (Score:5, Informative)

        by wowbagger ( 69688 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:45PM (#4581419) Homepage Journal
        The zapper worked exactly like a light pen works.

        Oh, you don't know how a lightpen works.

        A CRT based screen "paints" the image by scanning an electron beam over the display surface. The graphics chip that generates the display knows where the beam is at any time (it has to, since it has to know what pixels to be sending out.)

        The light pen (or gun) is a lens that focuses the display down to a point on a fast image sensor (typically a phototransistor). So, when the electron beam paints the part of the screen that the pen/gun is focuses on, the photosensor fires.

        This signal is tied back to the graphics controller, which says "AHA! the electron beam is at 234x421 when the sensor fires. I'll record that into these registers".

        After that, it is simplicity itself to set up a cursor.

        Now, that technique won't work for a liquid crystal display, since they aren't "scanned" in the conventional sense - there is no pulse of light as the system writes the data to the LCD. Therefor, there is no way a light pen or light gun could work on an LCD display like a modern projector.

        Now, in theory you could use a camera to sense a laser pointer's spot, and then move the pointer there. But then you would need a fairly high resolution camera, plus a calibration proceedure so the system would know what points on the camera corrisponded to what points on the display. You would also need a fairly narrow band filter to allow the camera (once calibrated) to see only the laser pointer spot - otherwise it might respond to other objects on the display.
        • actually, the zapper was much less sophisticated.. when you pulled the trigger, the NES switched the image to be a different color on different regions of the screen -- black except where "active." So you pull the trigger, first it puts a hot spot over duck #1 and reads the gun, then it puts a hot spot over duck #2 and reads the gun, etc. That's why the screen always had to flash when you pulled the trigger.
      • How the fuck did that thing work? No one has been able to tell me to this day
        It had a little camera in it that looked at the screen and determined what object it was pointed at.

        It's just that simple.

        Okay, it so happens that I just came back from a seminar on computer vision, so I know that a certain contingent of Slashdot's audience may be... uncomfortable with that explanation. :-) Relax. I left out one important trick: When you pull the trigger on the gun, the screen very briefly changes to a much simpler image -- probably just a white box on a black background. That way, all the gun really has to do is detect white light. If you think about it, that also explains why Zapper games never had many targets on the screen at the same time. (Although they did sometimes have more than one... I'm not sure how they did that. Perhaps they used more than one frame.)
        • Thats what everyone says, but it doesn't fit the facts. In games like operation wolf there were multiple targest on the screen, sometimes 5 or 10. How would the gun know which white box coresponded to which enemy? It's got to be a *bit* more complicated then that.
      • Your comment got me curious, I found this after a little looking
      • It usually uses a light sensitive device. It is able to tell where on the screen the device is pointing by using the scan lines of the display. When the device sees light from the screen, it knows it is pointing at the same place that the CRT is creating an image.
  • by Anonvmous Coward ( 589068 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:24PM (#4581294)
    My cat loves laser pointers. And now there's a mouse built in? Whoah... I wonder if I can torpedo her into a wall again.
  • Musicmatch? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nogoodmonkey ( 614350 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:25PM (#4581302)
    "The installation CD also comes with MusicMatch, a digital music software package that helps the user organize and rip digital audio files from music CDs."

    Why does it come with Musicmatch? I wonder what Microsoft will bundle when they release a product to compete with this one (as they always do).
    • Because musicmatch is the kind of software that gets tossed onto driver discs to fill up space.

      It's totally useless and unrelated, but people see it as a 'feature' anyway.
      • My DVD player (Not DVD-ROM, just kind of DVD player that goes under a TV) came with a CD that has MusicMatch on it (It plays MP3s from CD).

        I wonder how many calls RCA got asking why the included disk doesn't play in it.

  • by fisgreen ( 568052 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:29PM (#4581324)

    I work in a training facility that may have several different powerpoint presentations going at the same time, sometimes 4-5 classrooms in use on the same floor alone!

    I love the idea, but what if several are in use within range on one another? Is there any provision for channel selection?

    • by Hayzeus ( 596826 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:33PM (#4581347) Homepage
      Bluetooth should handle this automagically. It's not just a remote control protocol, it's really more of a short-range networking protocol which assumes multiple nodes in close proximity.
      • So if I swap mice with room next door bluetooth magically senses the swap and starts using the correct mouse? Since it goes through walls, what if the computer in the presentation room next door is closer. What then?
        • Nope.

          Each bluetooth device has an ID, like a network card has a MAC address. In order to get most devices, and I assume the mouse here is the same, you have to pair them up. Once they are paired, they work together, otherwise I'd be on the train on my notebook leeching someone elses bluetooth GPRS connection via an unpaired phone.

        • Yes -- it will also add inches to your penis and bring instant riches.

          My point is merely that two devices shouldn't interfere with one another. And -- assuming that the two devices have different addresses -- yes, each mouse should talk to its designated node, although this may depend on how Logitech actually implements the device and drivers.

  • by blowdart ( 31458 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:31PM (#4581337) Homepage

    So, this little toy comes with a blue tooth adapter to plug into the USB port. The Microsoft bluetooh keyboard and mouse also have their own adapter.... except some of us have laptops with bluetooth built in, or seperate cards. Why are we ending up with a seperate USB adapter for every piece of hardware?

    • by Yokaze ( 70883 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @07:06PM (#4581529)
      It is not custom. Otherwise it would not be a Bluetooth adaptor. It would be just a device using the ISM-band.

      This one and the Microsoft devices have a Bluetooth adaptor of their own, because most people don't have one. Not because they need their own.

      It's just a matter of marketing. No technical reasons.

      I guess they had to make a choice:
      Either the disaproval of those few people who have already a bluetooth adaptor and have to pay for the unwanted extra.
      Or the disaproval of the people who buy the device and discover that they have to buy another device to make it work.

      Or maybe they just thought that there may be people with integrated Bluetooth. Or maybe they didn't think at all.
  • Please... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Palshife ( 60519 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:33PM (#4581346) Homepage
    Can someone honestly tell me why this is a significant product? I mean, as far as I can tell this is a cordless mouse with a laser pointer attached. Why is the use of bluetooth so necessary?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:43PM (#4581407)
      All I want is just some freaking mouses with freaking lasers attached to their freaking heads, is that too much to ask?!
    • Range. (Score:3, Interesting)

      by billbaggins ( 156118 )
      Why is the use of bluetooth so necessary?
      Range. This thing can talk to the receiver at something like 10 meters. I've tried doing a presentation with a non-Bluetooth (IR) cordless mouse; it wasn't terribly pretty. The geography was such that the receiver could only hear the mouse if I extended my arm directly toward it, and even then it sometimes took a few tries. I would've loved to have something that could work at 10 meters.
    • The most significant advantage with using bluetooth is the marketing value of bluetooth and the fact that 2.4GHz devices may be sold all over the world. Other ISM bands differ i different regions.

      There is also a potential benefit for the consumer that they might use a common reciever to hook up several bluetooth devices, I doubt if this advantage will be particularly significat in this product's lifetime though.
  • by u19925 ( 613350 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:41PM (#4581400)
    Toyota has come out with a car CD player which doubles as a coffee cup holder.

    Frankly, what is the advantage of combining mouse with a laser pointer? I can get laser pointer as cheap as USD-10 and size of a small key-chain. Besides, during presentation, I don't run the risk of draining mouse battery power, which if exhausted would put me in more trouble.

    It would have been great, if they had come out with two separate devices but with some mechanical coupling, so that they can be held together as if it is 1.

    • I actually got to play with one of these last Tuesday while giving a presentation - the advantage is significant, but not the mouse/laser-pointer combo - it's the presentation remote/laser pointer that's slick. But that's been done. Combining that with a mouse, however, was a stroke of shear brilliance. When someone asks you a question and you need to go back to a specific slide, you can easily set the thing down on a surface and use it as a mouse, 30ft from the laptop running the presentation. Want to replay the movie on a page? Piece of cake. My only real qualm was the location of the trigger for the laser pointer - it wasn't in a particularly convenient location - too far back on the device. Chris
    • Toyota has come out with a car CD player which doubles as a coffee cup holder.
      How would one use a SLOT LOADING CD player as a cupholder?

    • "If they had come out with two separate devices but with some mechanical coupling"

      You are a disgrace to all geeks! My $25 solution involves a laser pointer, an optical mouse and a roll of duct tape. I call it my "Enterprise"

  • by gouldtj ( 21635 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @06:42PM (#4581403) Homepage Journal
    Does anyone know why Logitech is so windows based? I e-mailed them a while ago to find out about their pocket digital camera, to see what protocol it used on the USB. I mentioned that I used Linux, and I was interested in their product. The support tech practically flamed me! All I really wanted to know is if it was USB mass storage.

    They seem to have some good products (that pocket digital camera looks really cool) but it seems like they are violently interested in being a MS only company. That doesn't make sense to me.

    I understand that MS has the majority of users, but pushing off potential customers doesn't seem like good business to me.

    • It's very good business when you have to support drivers. Every time you try to support another platform the company gets people like YOU tying up the phones.

      Sad but true.
      • They probably end up getting a lot more phone calls because they don't let people write Linux drivers. If companies like Logitech simply put the Windows driver source and/or some of their engineering documents on the web, Linux users wouldn't bother to call them.
    • Actually, they have pretty good Mac support, too. You're the one using a non mainstream operating system, you know what you're getting into. I use a Mac, I know I don't get everything either. Why don't you go write a driver? :)

      • Actually, they have pretty good Mac support, too.

        Oh, yeah? Well I've got two questions for you:
        1)How many webcams has Logitech offered in about the last year?
        2)How many of them support Mac OS X?

        I've got two of their cameras that are less than a year old, but will be paperweights once I migrate to OS X. Thanks a lot, assholes. By the way, you've just guaranteed that I'll only buy/recommend a Logitech product again as an absolute last resort.

        • They did the exact same thing for webcams on Windows. I have one sitting on my shelf that works in the Windows 9x, but not the NT/2000/XP series. Assholes. Luckily, I was able to find a driver under Linux -- and someone also hacked up a working win2k driver. I'm still mad, though.
    • I guess this is crazy talk, but how hard would it be to modify OS X drivers [] to work with Linux or Beos?

      I am NOT a programmer, but the impression that I have is that unix, linux, beos and the like are some modifications and a recompile away from working with OS X. Is this true in the reverse?

      If this is correct (or somewhat) why not release the drivers or source 'support free'? I would happily forego tech support for the promise of using devices with other OS's.

  • Why Bluetooth? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by whterbt ( 211035 ) <> on Friday November 01, 2002 @07:43PM (#4581730)

    One of my favorite bits from the article:

    In some ways, the most significant feature of the Cordless Presenter is that it relies on the Bluetooth communications protocol for its wireless connection to your PC...Why is that significant? The Bluetooth protocol is likely the most hyped communications standard in recent memory, with thousands of companies joining the Bluetooth industry group., to paraphrase, it's significant because it's hyped. Apparently, there's no reason for it to use Bluetooth, other than the hype. As many others have noted, you can get products that do the same thing for less than half that price, and that don't use Bluetooth.

    • Your post takes that quote completely out of context and conveniently ignores the rest of that paragraph and the one that follows, which clearly explain why it's significant that this device uses Bluetooth:

      It was supposed to revolutionize the way people use computing technology and consumer electronics by freeing us from cables. The reality was somewhat different.

      Instead, the group was initially unable to decide on what should and shouldn't be included in the standard and the first version of Bluetooth was delayed and flawed; some would say it was sloppily put together. The result was that the manufacturers of the scant few early devices using Bluetooth included proprietary communications "extensions" or add-ons, which effectively made devices from different companies unable to communicate with one another, completely defeating one of the key reasons for creation of the communications standard. Add to that the high cost of the early Bluetooth microchips, which made it extremely expensive to produce Bluetooth-enabled products -- a cost that would be passed on to the consumer. But with time, prices fall and technologies improve. And that brings us to Logitech launch of its Cordless Presenter.

      In other words, this is one of the first commercially available devices that has gotten past all of the problems and implemented the Bluetooth standard.

      Either you chose to ignore the explanation for some reason or you need to brush up your reading comprehension skills. Either way, read thoroughly and include the context before posting next time.

      And as someone else posted here, the reason to use Bluetooth is its range -- have you ever used a 900mHz remote? The signal is inconsistent and anyone with a cordless phone or even a minidisc player can throw off interference that disrupts its operation.

      Based on this review, I'm going to check this out.

  • by abhikhurana ( 325468 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @08:01PM (#4581819)

    I still wonder why this device is so expensive. It is possible to get a Bluetooth []
    baseband controller for 4$ in quantities of 100K pieces (and logitech must order much more than that) with a spec which reads an ARM7 core, 64KB SRAM, 384KB flash and many more things, I cant really comprehend what makes this device so expensive. I mean surely they are using a configuration which maybe costs only half as much. I dont have experience with mouses but I have some experience with more complilcated bluetooth devices, like bluetooth watches with Mpeg4 decoders and stuff like that, and even they cost about 50 USD to make even though they use much more flash and SRAM. So I will say wait for a year before contemplating buying something like this.

    • It's expensive because marketing believes that those kinds of devices are being sold to upper management types with lost of disposable cash. Of course, a lot of Logitech's products seem similarly overpriced.

      Competition will drive this down to reasonable levels pretty soon.

    • The price is naturally set to what logitech thinks the market is willing to pay, however with regard to your comment: Remember that a baseband controller does not a bluetooth device make. You also need the housing, RF tranciever and antenna. Which will propably drive total parts cost up towards $10-15. Considering that devices costing at retail around $30 will typically have to keep parts cost below $3 (if it is a high volume device), you'd expect a higher price on this device.
    • It's what the market seems to be willing to bear. It's obliquely explained on page 4 of the review []:
      The Presenter's price might initially induce sticker-shock but upon consideration it's not as high as it first appears. checked prices on standalone presentation remotes, wireless mice and laser pointers. As far as we could determine, the total price of any combination of these three devices from a variety of manufacturers cost at least as much as the 3-in-1 Presenter, if not more. By choosing the Logitech device over three standalone devices, the user effectively receives the benefits of a good implementation of Bluetooth and good design for free.
  • it ROCKS (Score:4, Informative)

    by Emugamer ( 143719 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @08:02PM (#4581828) Homepage Journal
    I bought one, not with my own dime and have been beta testing it for quite a while and I have to say this is one smooth device... it works great in every test Ive thrown at it and it does work much further then 30 ft. I don't know if it is worth $200 but everyone has a different idea of what something is worth to them. to my company it is worth 200 in the hassle of what earlier presenters have cost us.
  • Ah hah! (Score:4, Informative)

    by ethnocidal ( 606830 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @08:20PM (#4581906) Homepage
    Imperial Department of Computing [] lectures will never be the same again, now we know what this thing is and where to buy it :) Since we've had two lecture theatres refurbished, with obligatory automation (windows, fans, a/c, lighting all controlled from a single panel by the controlling computer), the lecturers just haven't been able to resist pulling this puppy out and playing with it.

    The good news, for prospective purchasers, is that the range on this thing is pretty decent. Not sure what the bluetooth spec quotes for range, but it works perfectly in the 50 - 60ft length of the theatres. The bad news is that this means lecturers feel far more confident about walking around and asking questions of the insomniacs catching up on some much needed shuteye at the back.

    Has anyone had any experience with two of these devices in the same bluetooth hotspot? Not that I've got anything planned, at all...

  • "Bluetooth" and "cordless"? sounds like greetings from the redundancy-department-of-redundancy
    • If you're not a techie then "Bluetooth" doesn't mean cordless.

      It's like going to some isolated village in Africa and saying you want McDonald's. They'll ask what that is. Then you'll explain you want a hamburger and they'll ask you what that is. Then you'll say you want ground meat between two pieces of bread and seasoned with spices, and then they'll understand.

      It's all about cultural context, and the fact is that most people have never heard of Bluetooth, let alone know what it is.
  • Against Powerpoint (Score:4, Insightful)

    by hopbine ( 618442 ) on Friday November 01, 2002 @10:13PM (#4582214)
    This seems a neat toy, but as I'm getting fed up with powerpoint presentations, I hope I never see one. Most presenters come loaded with far too complicated presentations, each slide with too much data (that's why they need the laser pointer) and they spend all there time driving the computer not telling the story.CBC [] had a story on Monday about this, andTom Creed [] from Saint John's University has some more insite.
  • Crimony, instead of linking to's page on it only, why don't they link to Logitech's page [] too so that we can see what the stupid thing looks like when gets slahdotted? Think, people!
  • Okay, so lately I've noticed a lot of cyncism and general angst about damn near every topic, so I'm going to make mine something worthwile. I'd really be interested in testing this new "toy" out. We have a an NEC projector which we also bought the presentation kit ec.pdf [] to go along with it. I am by far more impressed with thhan the projector. wireless mouse/tv remote... hmmm... The remote's line of sight is awesome, the batteries last forever (so long as you're not a laser pointing junkie) and the fact that I can control both the tv, projector and the pc as though it were a mouse/remote makes life sooo much easier. The laser pointers nice too, i guess.. For fucking with my cat seems like much more fun.. But seriously though, I would love to have a screen where I could merely point at where I want to goto and use more natural motions to control things. This remote has a trigger for your normal left-click and the directional pad clicks for a right click.
  • The only justification for our concepts and systems of concepts is that they
    serve to represent the complex of our experiences; beyond this they have
    no legitimacy.
    -- Albert Einstein

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.