Boost Technology has developed a simple experiment to test the
accuracy and responsiveness of different computer head pointers.
A user is asked to move ten times as quickly as possible between
two small targets in opposite corners of the screen. The number
of targets successfully hit and the time to complete the task are
measured. Each user tried all five head pointers in a random order
to rid the test of a learning bias (all else being equal, a user
will be better using a head pointer the fifth time compared to the
first). Forty-eight people were tested, and the results clearly
show that the Boost Tracer out performs the NaturalPoint trackIR*,
the Origin HeadMouse, and the Madentec Tracker, and slightly out
performs the PRC HeadMaster.**
|Avg. Target Hit Rate||Avg. Time to Complete Test|
|Boost Tracer||88%||28.8 seconds|
|Madentec Tracker||79%||35.9 seconds|
|NaturalPoint trackIR||74%||34.4 seconds|
|Origin HeadMouse||76%||36.2 seconds|
|PRC's HeadMaster||88%||30.7 seconds|
|Regular Hand Mouse||93%||20.0 seconds|
Click here for complete test results.
* NaturalPoint's newest product, theSmart-NAV 3, uses the same
underlying technology as the TrackIR.
** Compared to PRC's HeadMaster, the Boost Tracer is faster to
a statistically significant degree (28.8 seconds vs. 30.7 seconds).
People were slightly more successful hitting the targets with PRC's
HeadMaster (87.7% vs. 87.9%), but this difference is not statistically