I love this mouse in Mac OS X, but it was a bit of a hassle getting it to work in Windows 7. It's also a headache to reconfigure the mouse after switching back and forth between Mac OS X and Windows. Hopefully, some updated drivers will fix this.
Your results should speak for themselves but not in the way an engineer might think. Your technical expertise or the virtuosity of your software is not relevant to the business at large (though it is relevant to the business at hand).
What matters is the value that your work delivers to the business. If you write software that consistently delivers value and has significantly positive impact, it should speak for you. If you work on unimportant projects with little or no benefit or impact to the company, it will not help you, and you should also wonder why you're wasting your time on it anyways. Certainly when it comes time for the business to execute cost-cutting measures like in times like these, they will wonder why.
Then there's politics which can render all of the above moot. It's unfortunate, but that's how humanity rolls. If you work in a large company and wonder how some totally useless and unimportant projects that cost the business money hand over fist manage to survive even during tough times like these, well, now you know why.
The problem with implementation as design is that the implementation can be imperfect (underspecified, overspecified, or just plain broken) and thus can result in a difference between intent ("what you wanted to say") to reality ("what you actually said").
Then you get into the curious scenario where people trying to implement something whose design document is an implementation (e.g., the Ruby programming language, IE 7 "compatibility" mode) have to reproduce everything in the implementation, even the bugs, to be consistent with the design.