Quote:
Originally Posted by IloveKuchen 
OPtical works better with cloth, laser works better with hard pads.
Some laser work on glass, no optical works on class.
Usually laser work on more surfaces, thats why they are researching laser sensors.
Laser sensor have trouble with hardware positive acceleration, thats why people dont like g500 and alike and prefer optical sensor.
Laser have a higher dpi thats why a lot of idiots will tell you its more precice for "pixel precice aiming" but thats bull dump if you dont (literally!) play on a cinema size fullHD(lots of pixels:D) screen.
That means optical is better since its overall better with max tracking speed.
OPtical works better with cloth, laser works better with hard pads.
Some laser work on glass, no optical works on class.
Usually laser work on more surfaces, thats why they are researching laser sensors.
Laser sensor have trouble with hardware positive acceleration, thats why people dont like g500 and alike and prefer optical sensor.
Laser have a higher dpi thats why a lot of idiots will tell you its more precice for "pixel precice aiming" but thats bull dump if you dont (literally!) play on a cinema size fullHD(lots of pixels:D) screen.
That means optical is better since its overall better with max tracking speed.
-There are LED based optical tracking methods that do work on glass. The more common ones don't.
- The Idea that all laser sensors have hardware acceleration is false. The 9500/9800 architecture suffers from this and being a CMOS based sensor, it would also have trouble with a standard Optical LED.
- Current Laser sensors offer a bit more cursor stability at higher CPI ranges. This is due to the higher framerate/cmos size or even different tracking methodology. This isn't without "issues" like you say though.
- Current VSCEL and PTE designs exceed the common optical sensor when it comes to "max speed" or IPS. (Multiple surfaces)
Edited by Skylit - 6/16/12 at 11:54am
