Originally Posted by zekron
Well some people read with their eyes shut and assume things in a weird way.
May I ask you what in the FM strived for it to be in the same spectrum as a DA4g and to be in a remote way close to a MLT04?
What about DA3.5g or DA3g?
Check the FM and DA reviews: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ2riVNLJly0KG7Z8albMETEmbRB8bCzd
Originally Posted by popups
I won't buy every mouse to subjectively "test" them with the intent of spreading my opinion as gospel.
Jesus christ man, you're already doing that without even testing the mice for yourself. You constantly state as fact misinformation based off the fact that you haven't even tested the mice you're talking about.
Could it be your opinion about the Kone Military feeling better than the FK1 was purely down to the CPI bug? That you got fooled by the difference in CPI?
From what I remember, I never came across that bug because I think it required you to install the drivers, which I don't do. And the majority of people in the KPM thread were in agreement with me regarding the sensor performance.
The amount of post processing the FM has and your opinion about the FM leads me to think you can't differentiate between sensors/mice like you think you can. You didn't notice it in the FM, Avior 7000 or the DA 4G. Nor do you notice the behavior of the MLT04 that I stated earlier.
Ok, this is just a boatload of misinformation and is a perfect example of what I just said about people not comprehending anything that's discussed on these forums.
These have been addressed tens of times. Clearly it's a waste of time.
Originally Posted by trism
"when the implementation is messed up"
That's a useless statement to make then. Because in that case virtually every implementation is "messed up".
this would be seen in odd mousetester behavior.
I have shown odd/unique mousetester behavior in a variety of mice, and used that behavior to support my conclusions.
I've yet to see any tests where you do ABX blind testing.
That's more or less a ridiculously high bar to set. No one has the means to do that. But I'm more than willing if I'm given the tools.
Assuming the mouse works fine, how have you proven it?
Mouse tester graphs. Check my most recent reviews: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ2riVNLJly0KG7Z8albMETEmbRB8bCzd
No? That's what the mouse feels like and you prefer it over the mice that do not feel like it (PMW3366). Facts back this up.
No. We JUST got done discussing this YET AGAIN. Please go back and read the last few pages in this thread that you seem to have missed.
Pretty sure that applies to you much more than to anyone else in here. You have no facts about anything and are just assuming and going by feel which is incredibly susceptible to subjective bias and placebo. You clearly do not seem to notice small imperfections in mice sensors if you don't notice the smoothing in the FM/PMW3310 (which most of us probably don't feel). I am not saying your subjective opinion is wrong, by all means prefer the sensors you do. However, using words like "raw" "best" "most accurate" etc. is nonsense when it's factually proven it's not the case.
Blah blah blah. I've taken the time to prove these same accusations wrong over and over. Clearly there are a lot of people on here who have horrible
reading comprehension and thus taking the time to explain and discuss things on here is a complete waste of time.