SGI: Hardware

Does anyone know if this is compatible http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/111735464799?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT with Octane? (Or any other SGI)

uunix wrote: Does anyone know if this is compatible http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/111735464799?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT with Octane? (Or any other SGI)

Yes. that one will work.

But it's missing half its handle.

They all work as long as you get the serial model. At some point they went strictly to usb, there's no driver for those but anything older than that should be fine. The real early ones also work fine and might be a little more "in the mood" for an Indigo ...

Not too many applications use the spaceball tho. It's too bad because they are ideal for 3d modelling.

Cheers Hamei, but you say half is missing.. PAH!!

Is what is available usable in SMOKE etc do you know?

the pictures aren't very good on that one.
the missing piece is the wrist rest. It looks like you'd use the device with the lettering straight on, but that isn't how it was designed. You use it from the side, and the wrist rest attaches to either side so you can choose left or right handed. (the numbered buttons would be under your thumb.)

not sure there is anything that a spaceball would control in IFFFS; you mainly just drag and drop things.

Thanks for the response, I think I'll give it a miss, would be a cool addition, but no point if it's missing bits and wouldn't get used anyway.

"If you're livin' in a bubble and you haven't got a care
Well, you're gonna be in trouble, cause we're gonna steal your air
Cause what you got is what we need and all we do is dirty deeds
We're the Spaceballs, Watch Out! Cause we're the Spaceballs
We're the master of space
Hey, Don't mess around with the Spaceballs
Uh"

uunix wrote: Is what is available usable in SMOKE etc do you know?

definitely not. this device requires application developers to write a plugin to make it usable within their software, it's not a general input device available to the OS you could map functionality to. few application devs bothered. as i recall on SGI all that was usable were a few particular versions of old software, some CAD tools and a really old version of maya, according to the driver interface.

i used it with custom software that required it to even start up and it is technically a cool, fancy and very accurate multi-axis joystick, just woefully under-supported due to the way they require application-specific plugins. same issue exists today for the current crop of these devices.

the one shown is in pretty bad shape btw. also, you'd want the space-mouse, not the -ball i think. the latter is just plastic, on the flimsy side and puts extra stress on your forearm because when pulling the ball up on Z axis it is so light that you constantly have to fight the base to stay put. no such issue with the mouse which is much heavier (i used both, obviously).

The general class of these devices are "space balls", and that was also the trade name of the original models by Spacetec. The company went through some type of acquisition (I don't know the details), and emerged as 3Dconnexion. The Space Mouse is a specific older model from the 3Dconnexion era. At around the same time they seemed to have dropped the rubber sphere for shapes with flat tops. I don't know exactly why, maybe they are cheaper to make or cause less RSI. It is true that when gripping the classic ball, your hand is flexed around it and motion comes from the wrist, whereas with the new shape, you can control some of the movements with only the fingers.

all well possible my comment is only in regards to which device is preferable in my opinion. i originally got the 4000 FLX as pictured in that ebay auction and traded it quickly for the much better space mouse (classic). never used the original space ball but have seen it. perhaps gluing the space ball base to the table might solve the main issue i had with it. that was no option back when i used them though.

GIJoe wrote: the one shown is in pretty bad shape btw. also, you'd want the space-mouse, not the -ball i think. the latter is just plastic, on the flimsy side and puts extra stress on your forearm because when pulling the ball up on Z axis it is so light that you constantly have to fight the base to stay put. no such issue with the mouse which is much heavier (i used both, obviously).

I used this one

with an Indigo, now have a 5000-series which works basically the same. I don't have any problems with the unit rising off the desk but don't use z much, more twisting and rolling in x and y. You can swap axes around but then, everyone has their own preferences and use patterns, so ....

I did see a photo somewhere of an actual SGI space mouse, that would be cool but not worth any more money unless you are a collector.

Robespierre - I think all the changes since the very first one were either to

1) cheapen it to make more money
2) jack up sales through marketing schmutz

the model 2003 seemed just as good as the model 5000.

And the guys there are pricks. Some guy on their forum with an old HP was asking for the driver, the company rep told him to go pound salt. "We don't support those old units, buy a new one." Like it would cost them so much to keep a 50k file on their server. Or like they even have a serial-connected new one you could buy. Officially-designated rude, avaricious, ignorant jerks.

Designs change with the seasons, that's part of progress for what it's worth. I do remember that a lot of people preferred the "Cadman", which was sort of like the Space Mouse but much flatter and lower to the desk. Kind of like people who prefer smaller mice for ergonomic reasons.
Then there was the Space Pilot with its LCD displays: I guess there's some use case for that, like moving your palettes off the screen?
It would be nice to have the official drivers, but the protocol isn't so complicated that you can't just roll it yourself. Like with the Wacom tablets.

they still do displays on their more recent top end models. i have not used any of these but an input device should not require you to glance at it IMO. less is more here. wacom also had customizable button displays in the previous generation, glad to see they dropped them again. maybe in the next iteration they will drop tablet buttons completely and sell it as the new wave of simplicity? then they'll have come full circle.

speaking of buttons - these were no good on any of the 3d connexion devices i have used. squishy little things without proper feedback, badly placed. not suited to map frequently used functions to for my purposes. they should have put the buttons on the actual 'joystick'. plenty of space on that ball for starters.

there was a game controller from microsoft called the 'strategic commander' - basically some sort of joystick in the shape of a mouse on a fixed base - i found way superior to the space mouse as an input device for working in 3d apps to fire off commands using gestures and map functionality onto the buttons, replacing the keyboard.
also a lot cheaper.

robespierre wrote: I do remember that a lot of people preferred the "Cadman", which was sort of like the Space Mouse but much flatter and lower to the desk. Kind of like people who prefer smaller mice for ergonomic reasons.

Speaking of ergonomics, I dunno ... I've always found a spherical shape to be more instinctive, a better, more natural fit to the hand ...