Wireless mouse with longest battery life?

[Mitch Crane]

That's not "longest battery life", that's shortest battery
life.

A battery that last more than 3 years has a longer life than one that
ends up in the trash after 1 year.

The OP also wrote "I know that rechargeable batteries are an
option, but would prefer to keep using regular Duracell's,
but with longer life."

I don't understand how there can be any confusion with that
statement.

Because you've taken it too literally and not considered why the OP
might not want rechargeables or that the OP may have meant using
rechargeables with his current mouse wasn't preferable. In other words,
the OP may have thought it likely that someone would suggest if he
didn't like replacing batteries that he get some rechargeables for the
mouse in question, and so he peempted such responses, but he may not
have considered the benefits of a mouse with rechargeables and a
charging stand.

 

[Mitch Crane]

That's a very high drain mouse tho, you only get a few days of
active use.

And then what happens after a few days? Are you supposing that a person
using the maouse won't use the charging stand?

With a mouse or keyboard that does give say 6 months between battery
changes, you are indeed better off not using NiMH batterys because
of the self discharge unless you use the newer eneloop version which
has a much lower self discharge.

Unless of course your mouse charges itself while you sleep, in which
case your point is indeed moot.

 

[Mitch Crane]

yes they do fail, fail at the OP's expressed goal which is
longest battery life.

The battery still works. You don't have to take it out or find/buy
another set. You do have to remember to use the charger and if that's a
problem then the MX700 isn't for you. If you use the charger then the
battery may not become discharged beyond useability for years (long
after your alkalines are dead).

The mouse MUST be returned to the charger every few days,
that is the shortest battery life possible from a cordless
mouse.

No, that's what keeps the battery from dying.

You seem to continually ignore this is NOT what the OP
specifically asked about.

You seem to be ignoring the possibility that the reason for the post in
the beginning was that the OP was tired of changing batteries so
frequently.

You're also ignoring the fact that the remark about rechargeables only
mentioned batteries so quite possibly was speaking to the option of
using rechargeables with the current mouse. It was an ambiguous remark
at best.

If I were having a real conversation with this person I would ask, "Why
do you say you'd prefer not to use rechargeables?" The answer might be
one of the following:

A) I like to pollute the city dump with alkaline batteries.

B) My mom works at a Duracell alkaline battery factory.

C) I don't want to have to remember to keep the mouse on the charger
when I'm not using it.

D) I'm sick of changing batteries and I asked the question because I
want the longest possible time between having to open the mouse and
replace the batteries. Rechargeables would still need to be taken out
for exchanging/charging.

If the answer is D then I'd say, "Well you know if you get a mouse with
a charging stand then you'll get the longest possible time between
changing batteries." To which the reply might (or might not) be, "Gee
thanks, I hadn't considered that option."

 

[Rod Speed]

And then what happens after a few days?

Its recharged.

Are you supposing that a person using the maouse won't use the charging stand?

Nope, I was pointing out that since its recharged every couple of days,
you dont even see the self discharge effect that you get with NiMH batterys.

That is a problem with much lower drain devices where the self discharge
rate can actually be higher than the discharge rate due to the device itself.
So in THOSE devices alkalines can give a dramatically better battery life
and so you need to change the battery less often.

Unless of course your mouse charges itself while
you sleep, in which case your point is indeed moot.

The OP clearly wasnt asking about those.

You dont even know that the OP will even remember to put it on the charger reliably.

 

[kony]

A battery that last more than 3 years has a longer life than one that
ends up in the trash after 1 year.

Not in the normal interpretation, which is how long the
device runs before it's out of power.

Because you've taken it too literally and not considered why the OP
might not want rechargeables or that the OP may have meant using
rechargeables with his current mouse wasn't preferable. In other words,
the OP may have thought it likely that someone would suggest if he
didn't like replacing batteries that he get some rechargeables for the
mouse in question, and so he peempted such responses, but he may not
have considered the benefits of a mouse with rechargeables and a
charging stand.

Until we have any evidence of some other factors the OP
might or might not want, all we have to go on is exactly
what WAS written, which was quite clearly a desire to use
Duracell alkalines _instead_ of rechargables.

I suggest you reread the OP's post if this wasn't clear by
now.

 

[kony]

You seem to be ignoring the possibility that the reason for the post in
the beginning was that the OP was tired of changing batteries so
frequently.

Until the OP states that, it is rather ridiculous to assume
to to continue with a suggestion that is the exact opposite
of what the OP clearly stated.

End of story, it's the OP's thread and the goal was pretty
clear. Until the OP states otherwise, this is a silly
disagreement.

 

[Mitch Crane]

Not in the normal interpretation, which is how long the
device runs before it's out of power.

In that context the rechargeable in a mouse with a charging stand still
has a longer life, because it can go years without running out of
power.

Until we have any evidence of some other factors the OP
might or might not want, all we have to go on is exactly
what WAS written, which was quite clearly a desire to use
Duracell alkalines _instead_ of rechargables.

What was written was that the OP wanted a new mouse so that the
batteries wouldn't need to be replaced as frequently. The comment
regarding rechargeables suggests that they wouldn't be a suitable
option in lieu of a new mouse, but it's an ambiguous comment.

 

[Mitch Crane]

Its recharged.


Nope, I was pointing out that since its recharged every couple of
days, you dont even see the self discharge effect that you get with
NiMH batterys.

In which case the self discharge effect is a moot point.

That is a problem with much lower drain devices where the self
discharge rate can actually be higher than the discharge rate due to
the device itself. So in THOSE devices alkalines can give a
dramatically better battery life and so you need to change the
battery less often.

Who is arguing otherwise? Since the device charges itself when you
aren't using it and the charge will last far longer than anyone is
likely to continually use a mouse then the self discharge effect has no
bearing. You will never need to change the battery until the NiMH
batteries no longer recharge properly.

The OP clearly wasnt asking about those.

The OP clearly never mentioned those at all, which is why it should be
suggested in case the OP hadn't considered the option.

You dont even know that the OP will even remember to put it on the
charger reliably.

I'll give the OP the information and let him/her decide whether that
would be a problem.

 

[Mitch Crane]

Until the OP states that, it is rather ridiculous to assume
to to continue with a suggestion that is the exact opposite
of what the OP clearly stated.

That was exactly what was stated--the desire for a mouse which could go
longer on a set of batteries. The person making an assumption is you. You
assume that the comment about rechargeables wasn't with regard to simply
switching battery type. I make no assumption either way.

End of story, it's the OP's thread and the goal was pretty
clear. Until the OP states otherwise, this is a silly
disagreement.

It's silly to protest the suggestion of a new mouse which recharges
itself, yes.

 

[Rod Speed]

In which case the self discharge effect is a moot point.

You dont know that a rechargable mouse is what he can use.

Who is arguing otherwise?

Who said anyone was ?

Since the device charges itself when you aren't using it and the
charge will last far longer than anyone is likely to continually use
a mouse then the self discharge effect has no bearing. You will
never need to change the battery until the NiMH batteries no
longer recharge properly.

Irrelevant if the OP doesnt want a rechargeable mouse.

The OP clearly never mentioned those at all,

He did however say that he didnt want to use rechargeables.

which is why it should be suggested in
case the OP hadn't considered the option.

But not a good reason for going on and on and on now.

I'll give the OP the information and let him/her
decide whether that would be a problem.

That already happened long ago.

 

[Mitch Crane]

You dont know that a rechargable mouse is what he can use.

I make no assumption either way.

Who said anyone was ?

The person trying to agrue the point that self-discharge has any
relevance.

Irrelevant if the OP doesnt want a rechargeable mouse.

Relevant if he does.

He did however say that he didnt want to use rechargeables.

Which refers to batteries.

But not a good reason for going on and on and on now.

Then feel free to not go on and on.

That already happened long ago.

Good. Now maybe we can argue more about laminar air flow and
turbulence.

 

[Rod Speed]

I make no assumption either way.

He did however say very explicitly that he doesnt want to use rechargeables.

The person trying to agrue the point that self-discharge has any relevance.

Wrong, as always.

Relevant if he does.

He said very explicitly that he doesnt want to use rechargeables.

Which refers to batteries.

You dont know that.

Then feel free to not go on and on.

Pathetic, really.

Good. Now maybe we can argue more about laminar air flow and turbulence.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[Mitch Crane]

He did however say very explicitly that he doesnt want to use
rechargeables.

Which, given the context, probably refers to batteries which would be
used in his current mouse.

Wrong, as always.

Well, at least you're big enough to admit it.

He said very explicitly that he doesnt want to use rechargeables.

Which, given the context, probably refers to batteries which would be
used in his current mouse.

You dont know that.

It's plural, so unless he planed on using multiple mice he was probably
referring to batteries.

 

[UCLAN]

With a mouse or keyboard that does give say 6 months between battery
changes, you are indeed better off not using NiMH batterys because of the
self discharge unless you use the newer eneloop version which has a much
lower self discharge.

If the mouse resides in a charging cradle every night or every other
night, self discharge is of no concern. The mouse lasts for years on
the initial pair of NiMH batteries.

 

[UCLAN]

You seem very focused on trying to argue for the lowest
operating cost over several years time, with the shortest
battery life possible. That's NOT what the OP asked about,

He said he was tired of changing batteries. "Unfortunately the mouse,
which requires two AA batteries, uses up batteries very fast...",
and inquired about a solution that would be more efficient. The
NiMH with a recharging cradle fits the bill, if using the same
set of batteries for over three years is considered efficient.

The funny part is that I somewhat agree with your choice for
my own personal use, I do have most of my cordless mice
running from rechargables, but that doesn't make them
"longest battery life" nor alkalines like Duracell.
Instead of second-guessing the OP, we should assume the OP
has a reason why these are the critera and just provide the
information.

In my opinion, NiMH cells in a mouse that has a charger/cradle
DOES provide the "longest battery life." I choose to try to
provide an answer to the OP's problem. You get too hung up on
how he words the problem. Reading the OP, there is no way to
know if he was even aware that mice with recharging cradles
that totally eliminated battery replacement were even available.
Now, he knows.

 

[UCLAN]

Your mousing needs are not necessarily equal to someone
else's. I'm not the one who set the criteria. This is what
the OP asked, the reason the thread exists. The argument IS
pointless because you continue to ignore the purpose of the
thread.

The purpose of the thread was to provide solutions to the OP's
complaint of changing batteries so often.

My solution was to use NiMH batteries in a mouse with a
recharging cradle. Battery life without changing: 3 years
and counting.

Your solution: A more power efficient mouse with alkaline
batteries which "tend to run for closer to a year" (and I'm
quoting you here.)

So, it's 3 years plus with a charger/cradle, or up to a year
with a business class notebook mouse and alkalines (though I
have yet to hear from the "real world" what battery life is
actually seen.)

Choice is his.

 

[UCLAN]

Incorrect. 2900mAH is derived from a standardized test at a
higher drain rate than seen in an energy conservative mouse.
There is a reason for these standardized test rates- that
the actual capacity goes up, or down, inversely with the
discharge rate.

It's not just rationalizing, it's happening in all your
devices powered by NiMH, though as mentioned previously,
offset by the self-discharge rate which swamps this
difference if a device sips current miserly enough that it'd
run for several weeks, let alone months.

Which translates to 2900 is upwards of 3000...how?

Your original comment, lest we forget:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Some cordless mice ARE power hungry, being in the on/active state
if they are not in the charger. *In these applications*, the 2700-
3000mAh NiMH rechargeables hold their charge just as long as the
alkalines do. Using the cradle, well...NiMH is a "no brainer."

It's doubtful those cells actually achieve upwards of
3000mAH. Even the majors are only now achieving 2700mAH,
and only then when batteries are new which can dismiss as
the point of rechargeables IS to keep using them.

 

[UCLAN]

That already happened long ago.

And there are those that *still* argue that the charger/cradle
option shouldn't be given. The OP gave NO indication that he/she
knew of such an option.

 

[kony]

In that context the rechargeable in a mouse with a charging stand still
has a longer life, because it can go years without running out of
power.


What was written was that the OP wanted a new mouse so that the
batteries wouldn't need to be replaced as frequently. The comment
regarding rechargeables suggests that they wouldn't be a suitable
option in lieu of a new mouse, but it's an ambiguous comment.

Actually, no, read the OP's post.

I think we've both fully expressed our views and there's no
point in further discussion so I'm done.

 

[kony]

He said he was tired of changing batteries. "Unfortunately the mouse,
which requires two AA batteries, uses up batteries very fast...",
and inquired about a solution that would be more efficient. The
NiMH with a recharging cradle fits the bill, if using the same
set of batteries for over three years is considered efficient.


In my opinion, NiMH cells in a mouse that has a charger/cradle
DOES provide the "longest battery life." I choose to try to
provide an answer to the OP's problem. You get too hung up on
how he words the problem. Reading the OP, there is no way to
know if he was even aware that mice with recharging cradles
that totally eliminated battery replacement were even available.
Now, he knows.

Ok, then we've provided all info necessary and are done.