← Back to context Comment by eviks 8 days ago Pedantic, you don't know the distribution, so the chance could be higher 7 comments eviks Reply odie5533 8 days ago The reduction was specifically to the in-window side of the edge, so it's definitely greater than 14%. Nition 7 days ago Interesting, I've always approached from the outside in. rezonant 7 days ago I approach from whatever side the mouse happens to be on... 2 replies → adammarples 6 days ago We can safely assume they're more likely to be close to the edge they're trying to grab than some random location on the window eviks 6 days ago Aim wider: why window and not screen?
odie5533 8 days ago The reduction was specifically to the in-window side of the edge, so it's definitely greater than 14%. Nition 7 days ago Interesting, I've always approached from the outside in. rezonant 7 days ago I approach from whatever side the mouse happens to be on... 2 replies →
Nition 7 days ago Interesting, I've always approached from the outside in. rezonant 7 days ago I approach from whatever side the mouse happens to be on... 2 replies →
adammarples 6 days ago We can safely assume they're more likely to be close to the edge they're trying to grab than some random location on the window eviks 6 days ago Aim wider: why window and not screen?
The reduction was specifically to the in-window side of the edge, so it's definitely greater than 14%.
Interesting, I've always approached from the outside in.
I approach from whatever side the mouse happens to be on...
2 replies →
We can safely assume they're more likely to be close to the edge they're trying to grab than some random location on the window
Aim wider: why window and not screen?