This doesn't bide well for the future.....

[moidib]

Hi shaund,

Create a Generic driver!!!!

To emulate key presses, mouse and joystick data? What exactly would a "generic" driver be? We cannot simply dismiss the current installed user base and the range of current 3D apps.

How can you suggest that you're concentrating on what your users want

The fact that you're clamouring for more app support is a clear sign that we are following the right path. The SpaceNavigator -- and its aggressive pricing -- is now accessible to a much wider "audience" than any 3D Mouse was before.

OMG! you guys are just not listening.

As I mentioned in a previous post. YOU ARE REPEATING PAST MISTAKES.

You HAD joystick support 10 years ago with the Cyberman II product, and killed it off in favor of this "3d control device" crap.

Your user base wants a generic driver. Period. It would instantly make the product compatible with HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS of additional applications.

Why don't you get it?

[kitsu]

I think I'm on both sides of this fence at the same time. I think the problem for the 3dConnexion guys is that the device is providing extra data that doesn't map well to any existing programs. I can't off the top of my head think of any program that allows you to simultaneously move in all three axis and rotate arbitrarily at the same time... unless it has an interface to one of their devices. Getting a program to work like this has some very special requirements that don't exist normally - i.e. even if they made a generic driver there would be nothing for it to interface to. It would in effect just act as a funny looking mouse.

OTOH there are a lot of situations where I would like to use it as exactly that, a funny looking mouse. When I first got it I kept catching myself trying to use it to pan/scroll web pages and other documents. A simplified default driver would also be useful for a variety of 2d programs like Inkscape/Illustrator/Photoshop/whatever. Programs where having a quick and simple way to pan/zoom would be very useful. I don't really see why an additional compatibility mode couldn't be added to the current driver to support applications that have no need for all six DOF.

One of the first things I did with my device once I had installed what drivers I could find was to start writing my own interface with the device. It was pretty clumsy, but it did allow me to map input from the device to arbitrary keystrokes. Something as simple as setting the x and y axis movement to generate arrow key events made the thing moderately useful in most of the software I tried it on. The primary problem with it was that the 3dConnexions driver didn't play nice with my program - settings would switch to those of the last application used, no easy way to set sensitivity, etc. If this could have been integrated with their driver though, with settings for each configured app, macro fields for each DOF/button, and a nice graph for setting macro repeat frequency, I think it would satisfy most peoples requests for compatibility.

[dkosburn]

This is exactly what this device needs in order to get more mainstream attention as a viable input device. I own two SpaceNavigators, one for home and one for work, and they're great when you're working in an application that supports them.

However, I constantly find myself trying to use it with Firefox, Office, etc. to scroll, pan, and zoom, and would love to have this functionality. I tried RBC9's driver which seems to no longer be updated, and it worked well except for the compatibility issues with the 3Dx software so I uninstalled it.

In SolidWorks where I need it, it works great. Other than that it's a shiny paperweight taking up space on my desk.

Give us a generic input driver please. Hell, I'd be tempted to upgrade to an Explorer or Pilot if it were more usable outside SolidWorks.

[dkosburn]

Another question:

What prevents 3dconnexion, as a subsidiary, division, or whatever you are, of Logitech from drawing from their resource pool for assistance with writing a generic HID driver?

If Logitech made awesome hardware and then said "We provide an SDK for software developers to add support for OUR devices", I for one would be left using Microsoft inputs..

I've heard the "keyboards and mice are required devices, ours aren't argument" enough, and I'd just like to point out that it should be you taking the initiative to grow the market for your own devices to the point where users like me are saying they ARE required.

Currently I would never go back to modelling without a SpaceNavigator, and I tell everyone I know in the same field about your products if they don't already own one... congratulations, you own a niche market.

What I don't do however, is mention your products to anyone who doesn't specifically use one of your "supported" programs because I know they'd be wasting their money and desk space.

Doesn't that sound like a missed opportunity and something you should be working to change? Help me help you sell more units. Give me a reason to recommend 3DConnexion hardware to gamers and excel junkies.

[avaktar]

Hi shaund,

Create a Generic driver!!!!

To emulate key presses, mouse and joystick data? What exactly would a "generic" driver be? We cannot simply dismiss the current installed user base and the range of current 3D apps.

Yes. Look at Wacom's Intuos3 driver, for example. It gives a plethora of opportunity for configuration to expand upon its behavior for when applications don't have native tablet support. So for instance, maybe some apps won't handle pressure sensitivity, but I can at least configure my pen, puck and buttons to perform a huge number of functions.

My Saitek X52 flight system works with Microsoft Excel. It is fully programmable in every manner, with key-press sequences or joystick axes. It is not unreasonable for my 3D Navigator to be able to act like a mouse by doing something like "When pushed in this direction, emulate CTRL-MMB-Mouse up", for example. This would allow programmable support at least for dragging around the camera.

I do see conflict problems with interoperability of the mouse at the same time - certainly this is a problem. However, programmable repeating key-presses via the 3D mouse could be used with the mouse.

The Wacom Tablet operates both in Pen and Mouse modes. The 3D Mouse could similarly operate in 3D or Mouse mode -- only one mouse device can be moved at a time (or conflicting hardware interrupts result). I have 3 mouse devices + the 3D mouse attached to my PC and everyone works together.

Publishing an API to the driver is one thing, but this only helps in the case of opensource software. Otherwise, allowing people to program generic mouse/joystick/keyboard commands into the driver is a very reasonable thing to do. In fact, I am very surprised you aren't taking the path of a Generic driver to alleviate the limited scope of the hardware at this time.

That said, I think working with vendors of 3D applications and pushing a standard is also very worthy! The graphics market is not slowing down, and demand for these devices is only increasing.

It is indeed a very nice device!

P.S. also check out the Kensington Mouseworks drivers for their trackball devices, which have 4 programmable buttons and combination possibilities.

[moidib]

You guys are all looking at it from a "3D"controller point of view, and I think that is awesome. Clearly this device excels at that, but I think the point I'm trying to make is that it could so easily be much more than that.

If the Forward/Back were mapped to X and Y mouse, it is instantly a very cool mouse.
Take that a step further and make tilt right/left, and tilt forward/back the scrollbar control, and suddenly it is the best mouse on the market.

Then consider the move towards 3d environment on the desktop like in linux, and it boggles the mind.

Now forget that a minute, and consider it as a Game controller.
Well, I hope I don't even need to describe how awesome that would be.

Now imagine any other application that could accept multiple key maps and/ or mouse wheels/buttons and how great it would be if you could make your shiny new controller be the ONLY CONTROLLER YOU EVER NEED.

Now you're looking at it my way.

Now for the griping.....
3dconnexion needs to come off their high horse. I read another post where they instructed a user to contact Microsoft (Yeah, I said MICROSOFT) and ask them to build support into their software for the 3d device. because 3dconnexion had "An open API"

HELLO MS has an open API also, where you need it to be at least. Believe me when I tell you if you want MS software to use your device, you better get to writing it yourself.

[ngomes]

Hi moidib,

We're still here. We're still listening and, I must say, it is really quite something to see our customer pushing for features they consider important.

The remarks about Microsoft elsewhere in the Forum do have a point. Our hardware follows an open standard. It is up to Microsoft and add native support on their operating systems for 3D mice in very much the same way that did when they added support for the mouse wheel and extra mouse buttons.

It is thanks to this open standard (HID multi-axis controller) that others were able to create interesting solutions using our products. OrderedBytes ControllerMate for Mac being one and the alternative Windows driver developed by a user of this Forum being two examples.

In fact, this alternative driver implements an keyboard emulation feature very much along the lines of discussion here.

[moidib]

Hi moidib,

We're still here. We're still listening and, I must say, it is really quite something to see our customer pushing for features they consider important.

The remarks about Microsoft elsewhere in the Forum do have a point. Our hardware follows an open standard. It is up to Microsoft and add native support on their operating systems for 3D mice in very much the same way that did when they added support for the mouse wheel and extra mouse buttons.

It is thanks to this open standard (HID multi-axis controller) that others were able to create interesting solutions using our products. OrderedBytes ControllerMate for Mac being one and the alternative Windows driver developed by a user of this Forum being two examples.

In fact, this alternative driver implements an keyboard emulation feature very much along the lines of discussion here.

You can consider it "up to Microsoft" if you wish, but you need to be asking yourself why they would bother. In the case of a mouse, they sold mice with wheels, so supporting it was in thier own best interest. To my knowledge, they don't sell the types of controllers we are discussing.

But, you do.... get my point?

As far as the "Alternative driver" is concerned, that is EXACTLY what we are saying YOU should do. I mean honestly, who better???

Many people have used the driver you mention, and loved it. But support for it is hit and miss. That could easily be remedied BY YOU!!!
Are you listening now???

Sorry if I'm coming across as frustrated but I am. I fought this battle years ago when you phased out the cyberman II. However it was easier to take back then, because I was able to convince myself that you were loosing money on it.

[ngomes]

Hi moidib,

What I meant to say is that, it is up to Microsoft to decide what is implemented in there operating systems. Obviously, we are trying to have our products to be made as standard as any other current input device (mouse, keyboard) on Windows.

Regarding your comment on us developing a "emulation" solution, I can only add that if we were to do this, there would be other things we would not have the resources to do. That's the same for every company: we try to go where customers want us to go. If there are diverging options, then we are faced with a choice.

[moidib]

Hi moidib,

What I meant to say is that, it is up to Microsoft to decide what is implemented in there operating systems. Obviously, we are trying to have our products to be made as standard as any other current input device (mouse, keyboard) on Windows.

Regarding your comment on us developing a "emulation" solution, I can only add that if we were to do this, there would be other things we would not have the resources to do. That's the same for every company: we try to go where customers want us to go. If there are diverging options, then we are faced with a choice.

This is the same answer you have given in the past, and I hope you will forgive me if I am not particularly moved by it.

Basically you are being an elitest. Rather than leveraging existing mechanisms to accomplish the same thing, you are trying to create a new "category" of device and force MS to support it.

- Well, good luck with that!

A few last thoughts....
1. A member of your user base developed a similar solution in their spare time.
2. You are essentially Logitech. I seriously doubt you have resource allocation issues that could not be overcome for the potential gain this represents.
3. Your past behavior (10+ years ago, as well as recently on these very forums) leads me to believe that this is simply an excuse to drive up the price of your product.

Don't get me wrong. I own numerous Logitech devices and will continue to buy them into the future (Though recently I've been disappointed by a few of them) but what I'm saying is that I believe in the company as a whole.

Thanks for your comments and time, but I'm afraid I'm being left again with that same old familiar feeling that you just don't care. Funny that it only seems to relate to this particular product line.

[ngomes]

Hi moidib,

We strongly believe this to be exactly the case: our products can be defined as separate category, the "3D mouse". They bring a level of multi-axis control that is intuitive, effortless and cannot possibly be done with a keyboard, mouse, joystick or even combination of these.

Microsoft has shown that they can develop and bring to market innovating products and solutions. I can see them doing the same -- once the marked is ready -- for 3D mice. It is not a matter of luck.

Developing new software products is an exciting time for every engineer but that's only part of the problem. In a commercial environment, companies like 3Dconnexion need to provide "solutions" that customers can depend on.

That means that a lot of our resources are allocated -- as they should be -- to maintaining the quality of our solution in a very diverse and dynamic environment. For example, consider the (increasing) number of applications supporting 3D mice and all the updates that are released every year.

We are striving to grow the market. The SpaceNavigator is a good example of our efforts. As the market grows so will the opportunities to provide solutions for all.

[avaktar]

gnomes, we're not a bunch of dumb users without knowledge of the computer hardware industry. Some of us know what we're talking about. I work for a hardware vendor and we're #1 in our market segment. We have a million bells and whistles and our own niche, yet at heart we can still do the most basic things one would expect of network security products. Your responses are simply indicating that your division of Logitech is still maturing, and all indications on these forums seem to suggest that your Product Management is unwilling to consider logical alternatives to your presently (potentially flawed) strategy.

What Moidib is pointing out to you is that your device doesn't do basic things a human interface device should do. MY JOYSTICK ACTS AS A MOUSE. It even has a little mouse button on it, just in case. The thrust control can scroll through pages in Microsoft Word or my web browser. The Saitek Flight Control system is an amazing piece of hardware with an incredible interface and it can do a million things -- but even without the thrust control or digital interface, it does its basic job: joystick with Button 1 and Button 2, because at heart it's a joystick.

On the 3DConnexion devices you have a bazillion axes. Moidib is asking you to assign two of them to act optionally as a mouse. It's kind of obvious in a stupid sort of way. You have completely failed to see how your team's design decisions are limiting market adoption rates. The integration with existing products is so limited, I'm actually border-line disappointed and had considered returning my device, if not for the fact that Blender integration is in active development.

The only supported 3D modeling application outside of the CAD industry is 3DS Max and that application costs $3500 to license! If I could afford that as a "Personal Edition" user, I would have sprung for your $400 device.

Others have suggested that your strategy to generate and provide a driver per product is short-sighted and ridiculous. Essentially you have to go to every vendor on the planet to gain adoption and support 500 different drivers?!My directory for 3DConnexion in my START menu is going to have 500 README files, one for each application supported. THAT is an approach taken by a team of junior programmers. Nobody with ten years of experience would ever consider approaching the wide-market adoption strategy in such a manner. That is a niche-market adoption strategy, where your scope is limited and your devices are $400 and only accessible to large game programming sweatshops like EA or car designers like Chrysler who pay $20,000 for CAD licenses.

I worked for Netscape for years. Do you think Microsoft gives a rats ass about adopting a new standard, if they have nothing to gain? How long have Tablets been around? Vista has *JUST* introduced native support. So we're going to wait 15 years for 3D mouse to have native and custom support? What end-user in their right mind would think they have enough pull with Microsoft that an e-mail is going to carry any weight to get them to dedicate their resources (eaten up with Vista problems) to adopt your driver standard?

It's up to YOU to code to the Microsoft standard. That's how you sell your product to everybody. Then your marketing department can convince every joe shmoe who wants to surf the internet and type his Word documents that he can't live without a 3DConnexxion device. Look at Wacom's driver approach. This is a very good example of something your PM team should at least consider.

But... that's right. You might end up competing against your own parent company.

[ngomes]

Hi avaktar,

Thanks for your passionate comments but I think you may have been somewhat misled.

3Dconnexion devices do not cost "$400". We have a range covering several market segments. The SpaceNavigator PE currently trades at $59.

In DCC alone (that's the category for 3ds Max), there several applications supporting our product. SOFTIMAGE|XSI and Autodesk Maya are two examples. You will find plenty more here. You will also find in there applications for which the license costs nothing.

HID multi-axes controller basic drivers (allowing an application to access the raw device data) already exist in Windows and for quite a while. What is missing -- in our opinion -- is a way to make it easier to use that data in application (much like the fact that modern apps use buttons, menu and toolbars instead of tracking the mouse). A standard UI is also lacking (like the "Mouse Properties" control panel).

Joystick and mice are 2D devices. You can only control two axes. Mapping one to the other is doable, yes. The same is true for 3D mice. It is technical possible to emulate a mouse or a keyboard or a joystick with a 3D mouse. No disputes about that.

At 3Dconnexion we believe customers have more to gain by having the 3D mouse has an extension to the normal mouse. The dexterous hand holds the pointing device, the other the 3D mouse. Point-and-click on one side, navigation on the other. Two hands are better than one.

Yes, the Start menu is increasingly crowded. We will be eliminating most of that. The installation is already very easy and we believe that most customers do not refer to those readme files.

[avaktar]

Hi ngomes,

People want a generic driver to do common HID functions, point and case: 80,000 views of this thread regarding a driver written by one of your very own users using your API: (viewtopic.php?t=336). I don't understand where the debate exists. When you're introducing a new niche to a growing customer base - in this case, the home user and educational markets - it is often not clear what the needs are. But once the basic idea is presented, customers will tell you what they really need and want. When I re-read this thread, the message I receive is that 3DConnexion believes tens of thousands of customers are wrong about what they think they need, generic device support is BS., and we should write our own driver. i.e. the "Will Never Fix" bucket.

Well guess what. I have a full time job (ironically, lately has been fixing/researching broken drivers in FreeBSD). I want to come home and play with my graphics software, not code more drivers.

I like my Navigator and want to use my hardware with more than just the two supported applications I can afford (Poser and Blender). Generic support would alleviate some of the need to wait so long for specific applications.

The only supported 3D modeling application outside of the CAD industry is 3DS Max and that application costs $3500 to license! If I could afford that as a "Personal Edition" user, I would have sprung for your $400 device.

3Dconnexion devices do not cost "$400". We have a range covering several market segments. The SpaceNavigator PE currently trades at $59.

In DCC alone (that's the category for 3ds Max), there several applications supporting our product. SOFTIMAGE|XSI and Autodesk Maya are two examples. You will find plenty more here. You will also find in there applications for which the license costs nothing.

I wasn't very clear when I wrote that. I purchased the $59 PE edition. What I am saying is that if everyone could afford $3500 software like 3DS Max, it would certainly be more likely that we'd be able to afford a $400 mouse (or the $99 if you like). The point is that, assuming the home user didn't pirate 3DS Max or Maya, we are generally going to use more affordable (or free, i.e. Blender) applications. Why I am so passionate is because I own a Navigator. I'm on these forums because I bought one. I am well aware of all of the information on your site regarding what software is and isn't supported, and have also begun studying the API. Is there some information I appear to be missing?

Thanks for your continued efforts.

[ngomes]

Hi avaktar,

Is there some information I appear to be missing?

I think not but you wrote that "
the only supported [...] application outside of the CAD industry is 3DS Max" and I assumed that you had been given only a partial of view of what currently supports 3D mice.

I also want you to know that we take customer input seriously and we revise our priorities according to that feedback. If a decision is made by 3Dconnexion to revert our current position regarding "mouse/keyboard emulation", I will surely let you and the other Forum users know.