Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › Who do people turn off Enhance Pointer Precision
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Who do people turn off Enhance Pointer Precision - Page 10

post #91 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by thuNDa View Post

if i would have, then there wouldn't be a difference between EPP on/off.

Not true, the registry fix does not act the same as EPP off. Google it. But anyway, if that goes for proof, then here is my proof:



BAAM, EPP is more precise. Proven solid. biggrin.gif
My Rig
(14 items)
 
Ex-wife's Rig
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4460 AsRock H81M-DG4 Sapphire Rx470 Platinum KVR 1600 16Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x Seagate 3Tb Samsung 850 EVO 120 Scythe Ninja 3 Rev.B Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Fujitsu Siemens A17-2A Logitech K280e SuperFlower SF-550K12XP Thermaltake Versa H25 
MouseAudio
Logitech G402 Sony MDR XD150 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 750K 4.0Ghz AsRock FM2A75 Pro4+ Sapphire R9 270X Dual-X Kingston 2x4Gb 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 120  Western Digital 320Gb LiteON DVD-RW CoolerMaster Hyper Z600 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro x64 Toshiba 32" FullHD TV Logitech FSP Hexa 550 
CaseMouse
DeLUX Logitech 
  hide details  
Reply
My Rig
(14 items)
 
Ex-wife's Rig
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4460 AsRock H81M-DG4 Sapphire Rx470 Platinum KVR 1600 16Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x Seagate 3Tb Samsung 850 EVO 120 Scythe Ninja 3 Rev.B Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Fujitsu Siemens A17-2A Logitech K280e SuperFlower SF-550K12XP Thermaltake Versa H25 
MouseAudio
Logitech G402 Sony MDR XD150 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 750K 4.0Ghz AsRock FM2A75 Pro4+ Sapphire R9 270X Dual-X Kingston 2x4Gb 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 120  Western Digital 320Gb LiteON DVD-RW CoolerMaster Hyper Z600 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro x64 Toshiba 32" FullHD TV Logitech FSP Hexa 550 
CaseMouse
DeLUX Logitech 
  hide details  
Reply
post #92 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronnin426850 View Post

Stop talking. Just stop.
"This is what those people expect us to be doing" DUUURP.
No, you special, special person.

If you need to click at something fast, you move the cursor fast, of course. And if you have more than 2 brain cells, you can learn a non-linear movement model, so you don't undershoot or overshoot the target. But since that's too difficult for you, keep acceleration off, keep mocking people, and keep using condoms.

Stop being so aggressive towards others when you were wrong in the first place. Your very first agrument was that EPP makes the cursor more precise, which it doesn't, low sensitivity makes you more precise. The rest of your argument with it being utility or convenient is all true, but it is not more precise. That was what got people riled up about your posts.
Fast enough
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 6600k ASUS Z170 Pro Palit GeForce GTX 980 Ti 16 GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung Spinpoint F1 Samsung Spinpoint F1 Samsung SSD 750 EVO Alpenföhn Groß Clock'ner 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Windows 7 x64 BenQ XL2411 Lioncast LK20 Sharkoon Rebel9 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G Pro Zowie G-SR Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium PCI-Express 
  hide details  
Reply
Fast enough
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 6600k ASUS Z170 Pro Palit GeForce GTX 980 Ti 16 GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung Spinpoint F1 Samsung Spinpoint F1 Samsung SSD 750 EVO Alpenföhn Groß Clock'ner 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Windows 7 x64 BenQ XL2411 Lioncast LK20 Sharkoon Rebel9 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Logitech G Pro Zowie G-SR Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium PCI-Express 
  hide details  
Reply
post #93 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjpjimmy View Post

Here's my very own curveball interpretation.

Acceleration actually allows for more Easier precision than without, however it isn't for accurate movement.

All this boasting about 1:1 having more precision is stupid to be honest. 1:1 is about accuracy not precision. What is the second thing typical gamers do after turning off accel? Lowering sensitivity. Why? Because it's too difficult at higher sensitivities to move a 'pixel' amount. Lowering sens is for easier precision. And how low one can go --without accel-- is limited by their deskspace. Probably somewhere along the lines of 1 Pixel for every .063" mouse movement. Ultimately this isn't even close to what is possible with accel. 1 Pixel for every 1" of mouse movement? Heck if you want something like that without accel, you're looking at like 1080in/360. Regardless, it's EASIER to be precise with a lower sensitivity. Only mouse accel allows for a practical application of such low sensitivity.

As for what has MORE/LESS precision, that would be an argument for DPI/Mouse hardware. Technically the name "Enhance pointer precision" is correct. It doesn't say "enhance pointer accuracy"...

There was an article here on this forums... I believe it was a setup guide for CS:S and it had a very thorough explanation between precision and accuracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjpjimmy View Post

Acceleration makes precise cursor movement easier. It makes accuracy more difficult.

You guys are seriously lacking some keywords here and there. Acceleration, or the lack of, doesn't increase/decrease precision of the pointer tool by any bit. It simply makes it more EASIER or less EASIER.

Additionally make the distinction between accuracy and precision... they aren't the same thing. (No time to explain)
But this is fact, Acceleration does make it easier to move the cursor precisely (without resorting to incredibly low sensitivities and large mouse pads).

Your differentiation of accuracy and precision is wrong (no time to explain) and the semantic argument you are trying to make both for this and the "easier to be precise" thing is unnecessary. For your "it makes precision easier" argument. First: Nah. That's the nonsense "trism" wants us to believe this argument was about, when it's obvious that "ronnin426850" literally meant acceleration itself is precise - "more precise" even.
Acceleration makes moving larger distances "easier" as in convenient as in requiring less physical movement. Lower sensitivity is what makes precision "easier"; acceleration actually decreases precision for faster movements. And if your sensitivity is already low enough for you to be able to move 1 pixel at a time, you are at maximum precision and nothing will grant you more.
The idea that "it doesn't increase precision, it makes precision easier" is just backwards linguistic logic rather than making a meaningful distinction. As trism rightfully says, with lower sensitivity you decrease the amount of imprecision your hand introduces to the system. But decreasing the amount of imprecision one variable has on the system makes the system: more precise. Just because that variable happens to be my hand doesn't mean "it is easier to be precise" and "it is more precise" are not synonymous for all intents and purposes.
Quote:
Acceleration actually allows for more Easier precision than without
No. It allows to more conveniently (albeit imprecisely) travel larger distances on your screen.
Quote:
Only mouse accel allows for a practical application of such low sensitivity.
No. If you aren't an alcoholic chances are at 400-800cpi you have no problem moving your cursor by a single pixel, i. e. achieving maximum precision. At these sensitvities nobody absolutely needs acceleration to cover larger areas. Same goes for in-game sensitivity.
Are you telling me you use less than 400cpi?
Quote:
1 Pixel for every 1" of mouse movement? Heck if you want something like that without accel, you're looking at like 1080in/360.
Why would you want something like that? You realize that you need a mouse with 1cpi for that, right? Again: Thresholds. Just because I can decrease my sensitivity by a million times doesn't mean I necessarily get more precision. In 2D I absolutely don't get more precise, in 3D I effectively don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trism View Post

6/11 EPP on at slow speed is literally dropping counts e.g. the same as dropping below 6/11.
Source? That would actually be bad as now your cursor stops being accurate to your mouse movement. And it would also, again, not increase precision if you are already able to move one pixel at a time without it.
Edited by HAGGARD - 2/9/16 at 5:29am
post #94 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAGGARD View Post

Source? That would actually be bad as now your cursor stops being accurate to your mouse movement. And it would also, again, not increase precision if you are already able to move one pixel at a time without it.
That's directly what it does. Mousemovementrecorder. 0x0 movement at slow speed. How else would it slow down your movement? Again, the precision is a wrong word for this as mentioned several times before. My intention was never to argue against that. But if you imagine the typical office scenario where the user has not used a computer for their entire life 10 hours a day, these people might not have as good hand coordination as people here and when you take the typical gear these people use into account, they seriously lack the possibility to control their 1000 CPI mouse at pixel-to-pixel basis.
post #95 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by trism View Post

That's directly what it does. Mousemovementrecorder. 0x0 movement at slow speed. How else would it slow down your movement? Again, the precision is a wrong word for this as mentioned several times before. My intention was never to argue against that. But if you imagine the typical office scenario where the user has not used a computer for their entire life 10 hours a day, these people might not have as good hand coordination as people here and when you take the typical gear these people use into account, they seriously lack the possibility to control their 1000 CPI mouse at pixel-to-pixel basis.
Your argument sounded very different before.

And so no source beyond MMR 0x0? Last I read the MarkC thread that is a quirk of the program, Windows or the polling, not a mechanic of EPP. But surely you can prove otherwise?
post #96 of 108
This is the distance that my mouse has to travel to cross the screen at max DPI, EPP on and off:



Can we Finally agree on the scientific and obvious Fact that EPP reduces sensitivity for slow movement and therefore results in better precision in said slow movements?
My Rig
(14 items)
 
Ex-wife's Rig
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4460 AsRock H81M-DG4 Sapphire Rx470 Platinum KVR 1600 16Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x Seagate 3Tb Samsung 850 EVO 120 Scythe Ninja 3 Rev.B Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Fujitsu Siemens A17-2A Logitech K280e SuperFlower SF-550K12XP Thermaltake Versa H25 
MouseAudio
Logitech G402 Sony MDR XD150 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 750K 4.0Ghz AsRock FM2A75 Pro4+ Sapphire R9 270X Dual-X Kingston 2x4Gb 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 120  Western Digital 320Gb LiteON DVD-RW CoolerMaster Hyper Z600 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro x64 Toshiba 32" FullHD TV Logitech FSP Hexa 550 
CaseMouse
DeLUX Logitech 
  hide details  
Reply
My Rig
(14 items)
 
Ex-wife's Rig
(15 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 4460 AsRock H81M-DG4 Sapphire Rx470 Platinum KVR 1600 16Gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x Seagate 3Tb Samsung 850 EVO 120 Scythe Ninja 3 Rev.B Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Fujitsu Siemens A17-2A Logitech K280e SuperFlower SF-550K12XP Thermaltake Versa H25 
MouseAudio
Logitech G402 Sony MDR XD150 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon 750K 4.0Ghz AsRock FM2A75 Pro4+ Sapphire R9 270X Dual-X Kingston 2x4Gb 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 120  Western Digital 320Gb LiteON DVD-RW CoolerMaster Hyper Z600 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Pro x64 Toshiba 32" FullHD TV Logitech FSP Hexa 550 
CaseMouse
DeLUX Logitech 
  hide details  
Reply
post #97 of 108
Also, I originally just skimmed through the topic and I don't agree with what they said. The first image I got from their argument was exactly what I first posted in this thread. EPP is bad for gaming and it is never good for a person who can control their mouse properly at a CPI step that allows both precise pixel selection while being convenient enough for not making the user less productive or cause physical strain. Povohat's acceleration tool however could possibly benefit players in some games, however but I don't think CS is one of them. However, for a person I described in the previous post, EPP can be a tool for allowing better productivity.

> And so no source beyond MMR 0x0? Last I read the MarkC thread that is a quirk of the program, Windows or the program, not a mechanic of EPP. But surely you can prove otherwise?

Well, that's the only way how you slow down movement in 2D space. By dropping/halving/dividing counts. 0x0 means that the Windows dropped a count entirely and didn't register movement. E.g. if you take 4/11 (0.5), and you move slow at constant speed so that one poll is one count, you'd see 0x0 at every second line. Green indicates slower than 6/11 (1-to-1) and red indicates that Windows adds counts.
Edited by trism - 2/9/16 at 5:52am
post #98 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by trism View Post

Well, that's the only way how you slow down movement in 2D space. By dropping/halving/dividing counts. 0x0 means that the Windows dropped a count entirely and didn't register movement. E.g. if you take 4/11 (0.5), and you move slow so that one poll is one count, you'd see 0x0 at every second line.
And you also see 0x0 if games reset your cursor, and if you hit the resolutive borders of your screen, and if you get a zero report from the mouse or a zero poll from the USB controller, or if the program prints something with an error, and... - how would the program even register this? Are you saying MMR sees: Windows registered a mouse report, but it dropped the report as per EPP, so I will report 0x0 movement? Either you provide evidence that EPP drops counts or I call BS. Not that that would make EPP better by any stretch; quite the opposite actually (admittedly it would give ronin's "perspective" a little more validity), but MMR is no evidence for that I don't think.

I think I applied MarkC at some point, so I will have to undo that and measure my DPI. You should do the same. Use MouseTester. Easy enough to see whether or not we are dropping counts with EPP.
post #99 of 108
0x0 per se isn't a good indicator for this, it's the green/red colours combined.

> Are you saying MMR sees: Windows registered a mouse report, but it dropped the report as per EPP, so I will report 0x0 movement?
Windows registers the mouse movement, yes and it either drops it (dividing and rounding) which is seen at 0x0 in these cases. You can't move (1x1)/2. You move 1x1 and 0x0 in the next received 1x1 count for the 4/11 example.

> Either you provide evidence that EPP drops counts or I call BS. Not that that would make EPP better by any stretch; quite the opposite actually (admittedly it would give ronin's "perspective" a little more validity), but MMR is no evidence for that I don't think.
How can I give you evidence when you dismiss perfectly good evidence? Green = dividing, red = multiplying/adding when you move the mouse cursor at the desktop without hitting screen edges. For EPP: slowish speeds = a lot of green, fast speeds = a lot of red.

> I think I applied MarkC at some point, so I will have to undo that and measure my DPI. You should do the same. Use MouseTester. Easy enough to see whether or not we are dropping counts with EPP.
No need to do anything except remove the MarkC fix. You can literally feel it immediately.
post #100 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronnin426850 View Post


Can we Finally agree on the scientific and obvious Fact that EPP reduces sensitivity for slow movement and therefore results in better precision in said slow movements?

I think you are confusing precision for control. All this animosity seems to be just miscommunication.

Precision in sensor terms would ideally confer the direct control of the cursor in relation to the movement of the mouse. Control, would be the ability to effectively influence the cursor to movement physically where you desire. In all of your examples you are demonstrating that epp is giving you more control over your movements, effectively nullifying undesired movement that would normally be present if the sensor were allowed to be more accurate. You (incorrectly) perceive this as "precision" when in fact it is the opposite.

In your example, software created for consumers with tremors or Parkinson's disease, that smooths out random inputs from their hands shaking, in an effort to make smoother lines (because they lack the physical ability to control the outbursts) would be making their movements more "precise". But it is not, it is effectively throwing out the undesired movements. That may mean that the line they intend to draw is smoother, or it's easier to hit a certain point on the screen, but it also means the sensor is *less* precise, because it is throwing out some of the actual data from the sensor input.

I get that you're trying to say with epp on, you have better control over the sensor's input. But that is not precision.

One thing I think we can all agree on, is that they absolutely named the function in a deceptive way. They should have called it, well, something else.
Edited by boogdud - 2/9/16 at 6:55am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mice
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Mice › Who do people turn off Enhance Pointer Precision