[daniel0731ex]

I remember when I first joined this forum there is a certain mysticism surrounding the notion of "native CPI" and somehow relating the photodiode pixel-pitch to the supported set of CPIs.

Now, after a period of my advocacy, we all understand that subpixel movements are inherently tied to the process of image correlation itself, and moving by "integer multiples of pixels" are completely trivial, that the CPI settings are a purely arbitrary conversion unit internally used by the sensor chip -- reveaing Morier's analogy of "subdividing pixels" as an incorrectly oversimplified illustration, and that the supported CPI sets are just convenient units obtained from subdividing a subset area (i.e. 50cpi step means a reference area of 16x16 pixels at a density of 800dpi).

What are some other examples of these kinds of evolution in our collective knowledge? Things like frame averaging errors, established standard protocol for quantifying sensor attributes, etc. Can you point to the origin of each historic development in this subforum?

 

[equlix]

qsxcv's reverse engineering the 3366 thread for starters and Skylit talking about the differences between the 3310 and 3989. Above8's thread on targeting technologies as well. Theres good stuff everywhere here.

 

[daniel0731ex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by equlix

Above8's thread

Most of us in this forum would laugh at the notion of that thread being of any substance.

 

[equlix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daniel0731ex

Most of us in this forum would laugh at the notion of that thread being of any substance.

Cunningham's Law breh. Many of qsxcv's corrections to misinformation are pure gold. Same thing can be found in the finalmouse threads in reference to firmware and what it should and should not do.

 

[SmashTV]

Once r0ach went nuts around the time data became available at the hands of users. A huge veil was lifted off a certain part of the community.

Not so much hardware related but reduction of carpet bombing a mouse because the shape didn't comply with the user's hand.

Actually ironing out that the MLT04 was more or less the same with the weird serial number voodoo on certain Microsoft mice.

Mouse tester opened up sooo much.

I still remember having Kohler state that when dots on the mouse tester line don't deviate you have better tracking. Or Above8 trying to out the Twin Eye sensor over everything else. They were amusing people.

 

[daniel0731ex]

Don't forget PrincessSlipper.

 

[SmashTV]

If PrincessSlipper were around during the r0ach era they would have been a successful poster.

Letting that sink in, how far the community has come overall is pretty cool.

 

[frunction]

CPate told us what he learned from Francois.

 

[uaokkkkkkkk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmashTV

Once r0ach went nuts

He was always nuts.
Quote:

Originally Posted by SmashTV

Above8

Poor above8, pln zealot and all, but still never figured out that "sensor dampening"(mad catz term) was actually off by default in the srom.

 

[qsxcv]

for myself, http://www.overclock.net/t/1554228/visualizing-smoothing-in-mousetester/0_100

 

[daniel0731ex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qsxcv

for myself, http://www.overclock.net/t/1554228/visualizing-smoothing-in-mousetester/0_100

I disagree, I think the most seminal post on that topic is this:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1554228/visualizing-smoothing-in-mousetester/0_100#post_24210511

 

[qsxcv]

meant the thread; too lazy to find the post but ya

 

[daniel0731ex]

It is the Noether's Theorem of OCN mouse science.

 

[Maximillion]

While slightly tangential to the question, this thread features so many facets that delve into the complexity, shortcomings and overall incongruities of the human mind's inner-workings. The average user/layman would almost unavoidably need to accrue a small wealth of knowledge across several fields (spanning both psychological and technical) to even have an intermediate understanding of just why it's so absurd.

And that's just the initial post, the thread itself has several other gems sprinkled in as well.

 

[Ino.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximillion

While slightly tangential to the question, this thread features so many facets that delve into the complexity, shortcomings and overall incongruities of the human mind's inner-workings. The average user/layman would almost unavoidably need to accrue a small wealth of knowledge across several fields (spanning both psychological and technical) to even have an intermediate understanding of just why it's so absurd.

And that's just the initial post, the thread itself has several other gems sprinkled in as well.

You made me read this again, with my own innocent eyes! Why!?

 

[Alya]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maximillion

While slightly tangential to the question, this thread features so many facets that delve into the complexity, shortcomings and overall incongruities of the human mind's inner-workings. The average user/layman would almost unavoidably need to accrue a small wealth of knowledge across several fields (spanning both psychological and technical) to even have an intermediate understanding of just why it's so absurd.

And that's just the initial post, the thread itself has several other gems sprinkled in as well.

Quote:

This is exactly what Taipan is all about, the sensor is freaky when it comes to performance by that I mean it can track very very high speeds of movement, but to give the gamer more control and command over so much power there is some sort of a smoothing agent incorporated on the mouse chip that gives that different feel, that edge, that authority over your shots.

That is one quote that should never be forgotten.

 

[Ino.]

On topic: this is still the best comprehensive read of mouse tech overall http://www.overclock.net/t/1251156/an-overview-of-mouse-technology

Rightfully stickied