I&#x27;m very comfortable with the Apple mouse.<p>But that&#x27;s a single data point. The problem seems to be that the industry has decided that everyone has the same standard pair of hands.<p>Which is nonsense, obviously. It&#x27;s like selling shoes or clothes in a single standard size.<p>So what happens in practice is people keep trying different mouse models until they find one that happens to fit. For me, the Magic Mouse works fine. For someone else, it won&#x27;t fit at all.<p>This is also a problem with design. In spite of a century of theory and history there&#x27;s really no such thing as an ideal standard design, because everyone&#x27;s cognitive needs&#x2F;skills are different.<p>So what happens in practice is that &quot;design&quot; means &quot;looks polished and expensive, and confers accessible social proof&quot;. This attracts a price premium, and that&#x27;s where the feedback loop is in the market.<p>The feedback loops for usability are more diffuse and not nearly as strong.<p>The problem with Google&#x27;s Material is that it doesn&#x27;t understand the social proof element. It&#x27;s purely utilitarian. (IMO it&#x27;s not brilliant for usability either. But that&#x27;s a different issue.<i>)<p>Apple&#x27;s design language has been much better at creating social proof through aesthetics. As long as it keeps doing that, usability can be good-but-not-great and it will still be a commercial success.<p></i>Never mind Windows 8&#x2F;10 - the less said about that, the better.