+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Raw Input: in_dgamouse 1 Linux vs in_mouse 2 Windows

  1. #1
    *nrkist
    Guest

    Raw Input: in_dgamouse 1 Linux vs in_mouse 2 Windows

    My question is why the two feel different. I hadn't experimented on Linux for a while, but booted up the other day, and mouse is definitely finer and more accurate vs Windows raw input.

    Both running at 1000hz polling rate (usbhid.mousepoll=1 Opensuse 11.4, polling rate confirmed). Shouldn't the two be 1-to-1?

  2. #2
    Senior Member Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,763
    On Windows, check in_mouseMode. It's possible that something isn't configured properly and even with in_mouse 2 it still has to fall back to dinput or even worse. Otherwise really should feel the same, maybe it's just placebo from the usual frame drops in Windows? ;)

  3. #3
    *nrkist
    Guest
    in_mouseMODE is read-only and set to (win32)RAW as has been the case since the major mouse input update over a year ago? Maybe you have never played on linux and have no idea what you are talking about? ; )
    Last edited by nrkist; 01-24-2012 at 03:43 PM.

  4. #4
    Senior Member xwind is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    152
    Accorging to different forums over the internet, on linux there is no and moreover there was no Raw input, never. It was emulated using some libraries of X server. So one can set in_mouse 2 for linux but it isn't raw input. Maybe developers in QL somehow implemented it, it was neither affirmed nor disproved. But as for Q3 all Q3 engines (Quake3 vanilla, CNQ3, ioquake3) have no real Raw input in Linux.
    mouse is definitely finer and more accurate
    could you provide some statistical data to prove that?
    Last edited by xwind; 01-24-2012 at 04:41 PM.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,763
    nrkist, what? I've never played on Windows properly... But if in_mouseMode says it's raw, that means in_mouse 2 works as it should, hence should really feel the same.


    xwind, in_mouse 2 isn't really raw input either, it goes through mouse drivers and then some additional API. It's just a different API compared to DInput.

    Meanwhile Linux doesn't have any equivalent for in_mouse -1 (polling cursor movement), in_mouse 1 + in_dgamouse 0 is "direct" in the sense that it grabs mouse moves directly, but depends on X acceleration settings (but not the gnome mouse speed settings), meanwhile in_mouse 1 + in_dgamouse 1 is "raw" in the sense that no speed/acceleration/deceleration settings can influence that.

    So this is the equivalent of what you call "raw" probably. Oh, and this uses old DGA interfaces, while nowadays XInput 2 is the fashionable one. More stuff for you to read about :)

  6. #6
    Senior Member xwind is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    152
    Thanks Lam, gotta read some stuff, because very often this topics occur on forums, and I also was interested in that (I don't play under linux though got some servs running it)

  7. #7
    *nrkist
    Guest
    Lam,

    Your first reply is that it is in my head. Your second reply is the Linux implementation is infact different than the windows implementation and not infact 'raw'. I can't believe you are a moderator in the tech forum. So first I am an idiot for believing there is a difference between the two 'raw' input styles, because it is placebo. Then when I call you out, you correct me by admitting there is a difference between the raw input interfaces and that Linux raw input isn't nescessarily 'raw'?...But *I* am a moron for not knowing this? Even when a QL moderator in the tech forum told me it wasn't so? Which is it? I guess you get to win either way, but just reveals A) you did not know what you were talking about when you claimed there was no diff it was in my head B) Someone corrected you and now you call me a moron for not understanding that the DGA interfaces are not 'raw'. Your second post should have been your first and then you wouldn't look like you are backpedaling.

    Edit: it also would have avoided all this antagonism. And with this wealth of information you clumsily and smugly throw out there and profess to understand...why didn't you just admit in the initial post that there IS a difference between the two 'raw' inputs and they ARE NOT 1-to-1. You of all people, have demonstrated that you KNOW they are not 1-to-1. Then why did you suggest I was a moron when I noticed this and try to attribute to placebo effect. Backpedal some more. They should lock you from the tech forum if this is the way you act.
    Last edited by nrkist; 01-25-2012 at 04:31 AM.

  8. #8
    *nrkist
    Guest
    Quick Recap for everyone:

    Lam says: in_dgamouse 1 is 1-to-1 with in_mouse 2 in windows and you are a moron suffering from placebo effect if you notice a difference.

    Lam says: in_dgamouse 1 is not 1-to-1 with in_mouse 2 in windows and you are a moron to think it should be because of some stuff he cut and pasted from an ubuntu wiki which he doesn't understand.

    Lam, I know this 'techy' stuff is hard for you. But even if you're faking it, you need to pick a position to sell it. You don't even know what side of the fence you are on...you just don't even understand the fence...
    Last edited by nrkist; 01-25-2012 at 04:46 AM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam has a spectacular aura about Lam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,763
    What in the world are you even talking about?

    1. in_mouseMode is INFORMATIONAL, it tells you if Windows is using so-called "raw" input or not. As I said in the first post, you settings in_mouse to 2 doesn't guarantee it will use it on all systems. So I advised you to check if your in_mouse 2 is really working on that system. I wrote the same thing twice using different words with good intentions, meanwhile you have a need to attack me? Why?

    2. None of the input schemes are really "raw". Raw input would be polling USB port for signals straight from the mouse. Instead, both in_mouse 1 and in_mouse 2 use the exact same data, just encapsulated in two different APIs (DirectInput vs WM_INPUT; DirectInput internal implementation uses WM_INPUT under the hood, so it's "less raw" in the sense that it's something "on top off" the "more raw" API, adding some unneeded overhead).

    3. For some people, in_dgamouse 1 works better than 2 because DirectInput works in separate thread, which of course is perceived as the evil thing to do for handling input events, but on some systems still gives better feeling for whatever reason.

    4. in_dgamouse 1 is just another API, but it also aims to give you same untranslated results. It's not any less "raw" than other methods. It operates on "counts" reported by the mouse. Read my explanation for xwind again if you don't understand my claims (you wrote "you correct me by admitting (...) that Linux raw input isn't nescessarily 'raw'" - to the contrary, I explained which one is "raw").

    5. Moderators are supposed to keep forum clean from inappropriate language, harassment and other prohibited behavior, we're not supposed to know the code.

    6. I only said it should feel the same, I'm not calling you a liar. In my first post, please note the semicolon followed by a parenthesis, should I explain in technical terms what that meant?

  10. #10
    *nrkist
    Guest
    Elephant in the room: Please explain why you said I was delusional for noticing a difference between the two 'raw' interfaces given your breadth of knowledge. xwind had the only interesting input, but take credit for your own as you see fit. Please explain why you said the substantial difference I detected was placebo, and then later recanted and claimed OF COURSE there is a difference. First you say I am wrong and that there is no difference other than 'placebo'. Then you say I am a moron, because OF COURSE there is a difference due to DGA interface. You got me scratching my head.

    Smug winky face following some poorly thought out and incorrect information is what it is...

    I don't need to follow my post with that...
    Last edited by nrkist; 01-25-2012 at 05:12 AM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts