On the availability of ISO in GB

[the pokemon kid]

Speaking in terms of the UK community we are a growing group. I was the admin of Mechanical Keyboards UK. Our first meetup was ten of us in a small cafe in London showing off our hand made and customised OEM boards. We have gone from strength to strength. Our last meetup was just under 100x people, with multiple vendors, Groupbuy runners and one of the hosts of Topclack.

As far as I can see it, we (EU Crowd) are a growing market which is calling out for more keycap sets, however we are being shut down for what is the cost of a coffee. I understand that an extra $5 for the extra caps which an ANSI user wont use is a bit of a liberty. However the extra price breaks which the base set might get because of the Extra ISO support surely is worth while.

Surely a 3% price increase at the lowest MOQ is worth it for the 10-12% (and growing) community?

[rxc92]

ISO isn’t the global standard, but neither is ANSI. About 50/50 use in wider world and 80/20 in mechanical keyboards.

 
 
You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU, and South Korea is a bigger ANSI user than UK is for ISO, as well as the US/Canada/Australia all using ANSI. 
Also, the UK kit is different than every other ISO kit. It would be absolutely foolish to include a UK-specific kit when there are many more ISO users in other European countries. UK really isn't significant in terms of numbers; it would make more sense to include a Korean kit than an ISO GB one, but UK ISO seem really really vocal about this compared to other ISO users.

[Surefoot]

the people you know must not be buying GMK because like a majority of times there are side kits like NordeUK or UKiso in a side kit, they don't reach MoQ.

Read again what i said - potential buyers are turned off right away from here due to the elitism and gatekeeping and wont even come back. Not to mention that NorDeUK support is quite thin actually, or even non existent on most interesting sets.

This is the only way to fairly do compatibility for non standard layouts (like iso or 40%).

... ISO is actually *the* standard, it's even in the name.

No, none of this assumes that. It does assume that less people use iso of any layout variant. A fact I believe has been pretty clearly backed up by the lackluster support for iso kits in the past.

And circular argument, here we go again for the catch-22..

[depletedvespene]

ISO isn’t the global standard, but neither is ANSI. About 50/50 use in wider world and 80/20 in mechanical keyboards.

 
 
You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU, and South Korea is a bigger ANSI user than UK is for ISO, as well as the US/Canada/Australia all using ANSI. 

 

Can you PLEASE both get your facts straight and NOT cherry-pick data? First, the standard Canadian keyboard is ISO, not ANSI (of course, not few Canadians away from the French areas use the US English keyboard). But even if Canada were a strictly ANSI country... your rant lists: China, EU, South Korea, UK (still part of the EU), USA, Canada and Australia... and based on that, you assert that the 50/50 divide is wrong.

This might come off as a surprise to you, but there are more countries in the world! ALL of Spanish-speaking and Portuguese-speaking America uses ISO keyboards. Europe and the EU are not the same. Africa seems to have sunk into the sea, and so seems to have all of non-China, non-Korea Asia, and with it has gone New Zealand and the (admittedly marginal) rest of Oceania.

If you tally actual numbers, the results of the global ANSI/ISO divide are, indeed, close to 50/50.

Also, the UK kit is different than every other ISO kit. It would be absolutely foolish to include a UK-specific kit when there are many more ISO users in other European countries. UK really isn't significant in terms of numbers; it would make more sense to include a Korean kit than an ISO GB one, but UK ISO seem really really vocal about this compared to other ISO users.

If you take a few minutes and actually read what has been proposed in this thread, you'll see we've taken pains to ask specifically for US ISO support (4 keys) in the base kit, not UK ISO support (9 keys) and made explicit that the latter should be taken into an international kit. Please answer to what we're actually saying, not to what you believe we're saying.

[Acereconkeys]

Welp what a degradation of interaction quality on this thread. At the beginning it felt like people were generally being pretty accomodating/understanding now you got people saying dumb **** like how iso is somehow special just because it's a standard. That's crazy and just as rude/dismissive to users of alternative layouts as you're accusing people of being towards iso users. And you wonder why people are so strong against their dislike of iso? It's because y'all won't shut up about it and won't stop thinking yourself some special group of endangered keyboard users that deserves special treatment.

[depletedvespene]

Welp what a degradation of interaction quality on this thread. At the beginning it felt like people were generally being pretty accomodating/understanding now you got people saying dumb **** like how iso is somehow special just because it's a standard. That's crazy and just as rude/dismissive to users of alternative layouts as you're accusing people of being towards iso users. And you wonder why people are so strong against their dislike of iso? It's because y'all won't shut up about it and won't stop thinking yourself some special group of endangered keyboard users that deserves special treatment.

All actual arguments in this discussion were presented in the first three pages and now the thread is, indeed, degrading. Then again, those of us (like you and me) that CAN present arguments and understand what the other is saying *and* refrain from entitlement (or of, in the case of a couple of users, underhanded tactics or outright lies) need to be above that low-hanging crap and at least reach an agreement on what the problem actually IS (even if the solution is being lost right now, thanks to the noisy jerks).

[nguyenhimself]

Welp what a degradation of interaction quality on this thread. At the beginning it felt like people were generally being pretty accomodating/understanding now you got people saying dumb **** like how iso is somehow special just because it's a standard. That's crazy and just as rude/dismissive to users of alternative layouts as you're accusing people of being towards iso users. And you wonder why people are so strong against their dislike of iso? It's because y'all won't shut up about it and won't stop thinking yourself some special group of endangered keyboard users that deserves special treatment.

This thread has turned from “Let’s put a few ISO keys in the base kit for the sake of inclusivity” into “ISO is the #1 global standard and nobody outside of America uses ANSI wait China and the rest of Asia what’s that”.
I came in support of ISO keys in the base kit (I really did), and now I’m so turned off by the ISO elitist attitude here I don’t even care anymore. Let this be the containment thread for all ISO complaints and leave the rest of us be.

[depletedvespene]

This thread has turned from “Let’s put a few ISO keys in the base kit for the sake of inclusivity” into “ISO is the #1 global standard and nobody outside of America uses ANSI wait China and the rest of Asia what’s that”.

While the level of discourse has undeniably gone down, it was to be expected. After all, EVERY main argument was made in the first half of the thread, and the rest has gone down hill, as is wont to happen with ANY thorny issue in any forum. And is not just a couple of idiots on the "ISO side" - look at the thread for the exact same bad behaviour from some others on the ANSI side as well.

(I guess we should be thankful BAE fans haven't showed up... yet?)

I came in support of ISO keys in the base kit (I really did), and now I’m so turned off by the ISO elitist attitude here I don’t even care anymore. Let this be the containment thread for all ISO complaints and leave the rest of us be.

Now you're making a blatantly false accusation. While it IS true that some people in the latter part of the thread have had what could be called "ISO elitist attitude", some of us have insisted on keeping the discussion focused on what it is supposed to be. And you can NOT deny that some people have had what can be called "ANSI elitist attitude" as well, stooping as low as to making patently false assertions to present the "clear" and "undeniable" fact that ANSI is "best".

Heck, the “ISO is the #1 global standard and nobody outside of America uses ANSI wait China and the rest of Asia what’s that” paraphrasing you've done... actually describes better the attitude of the posts of some people on the ANSI side (see rxc92's post for the clearest example of this: cherry-picking countries to stack numbers in "his side"'s favor).


Let this thread show that the ISO issue is, indeed, THORNY and a solution NEEDS to be found, and leave the elitist idiots of either side away.

Or should we start another thread, where we block those on either side that have shown an elitist attitude?

[lewisflude]

Welp what a degradation of interaction quality on this thread. At the beginning it felt like people were generally being pretty accomodating/understanding now you got people saying dumb **** like how iso is somehow special just because it's a standard. That's crazy and just as rude/dismissive to users of alternative layouts as you're accusing people of being towards iso users. And you wonder why people are so strong against their dislike of iso? It's because y'all won't shut up about it and won't stop thinking yourself some special group of endangered keyboard users that deserves special treatment.

This thread has turned from “Let’s put a few ISO keys in the base kit for the sake of inclusivity” into “ISO is the #1 global standard and nobody outside of America uses ANSI wait China and the rest of Asia what’s that”.
I came in support of ISO keys in the base kit (I really did), and now I’m so turned off by the ISO elitist attitude here I don’t even care anymore. Let this be the containment thread for all ISO complaints and leave the rest of us be.

Show Image

Where has anyone said ISO is the #1 global standard? Again, it’s more like 50/50 in the wider world.

ANSI is important too, the main argument here is making a set 3% cheaper while cutting out 10-12% of buyers isn’t a good idea, isn’t forward thinking, and cuts out a significant portion of this community.

Again, there’s a big enough chunk of ISO users that this is a real issue that we need to find a solution to. “Just use ANSI” or “just don’t buy sets” is not really the preferred option for a lot of people.

I get from a sort of capitalistic point of view why optimising does the majority does seem fair, and does make sense. I can also see why people find this issue annoying or don’t quite agree with some of the arguments made.

It all comes down to “is ISO special”, and in my opinion it is, being one of the two default keyboard layouts that exist in the wider world, I absolutely think the mech community needs to continue to support that.

This hobby was built on preference and it’s becoming more and more international every day with thriving meet-ups and events happening outside of the US and China.

[tobiasvl]

Of course ISO is special compared to alternative layouts like 40%, ortho, Iris etc. People grow up using ISO, and it's extremely common outside enthusiast/mech circles.

For that reason, bad ISO support is a large threshold for ISO users entering this hobby. In addition to all the other stuff people need to get used to to get bit by the mech bug, they also have to settle for boring keycaps (with ISO support), learn to touch type (because even if there's ISO support there's likely incorrect legends), or learn a different layout (ANSI). They're not dealbreakers for many of us, but they are significant hurdles for general adoption of mechanical keyboards in ISO countries and a self-fulfilling prophecy for the low GB support.

Is ISO special to those who don't use it? Is it special when you're first within the inner circle of mechanical keyboards? Well, not really. Well, not really. But should changing layouts be a de facto prerequisite to joining the hobby?

I think I made a similar comment earlier in the thread but it's hard to recall since it devolved into a cess pool. I was happy to see the light hearted IC thread though!

[rxc92]

Where has anyone said ISO is the #1 global standard? Again, it’s more like 50/50 in the wider world.

ANSI is important too, the main argument here is making a set 3% cheaper while cutting out 10-12% of buyers isn’t a good idea, isn’t forward thinking, and cuts out a significant portion of this community.

 
Just repeating lies at this point. 90/10 or higher gap, making a set 10% more expensive or cutting out 2-3% of the buyers, as those using other ISO kits can't buy the proposed one. No thanks.

[lewisflude]

Where has anyone said ISO is the #1 global standard? Again, it’s more like 50/50 in the wider world.

ANSI is important too, the main argument here is making a set 3% cheaper while cutting out 10-12% of buyers isn’t a good idea, isn’t forward thinking, and cuts out a significant portion of this community.

 
Just repeating lies at this point. 90/10 or higher gap, making a set 10% more expensive or cutting out 2-3% of the buyers, as those using other ISO kits can't buy the proposed one. No thanks.

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

[depletedvespene]

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

Dude, don't reply to rxc92 — he's just spreading false data while accusing "the other side" of doing so (and I already called him out for it, and once is enough). We NEED to stop the derailment of this discussion if we want to get anywhere.

[lewisflude]

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

Dude, don't reply to rxc92 — he's just spreading false data while accusing "the other side" of doing so (and I already called him out for it, and once is enough). We NEED to stop the derailment of this discussion if we want to get anywhere.

Like you've said before, I think this discussion is about.

* Why basic ISO should be in base kits (5 caps)
* What is basic ISO, and what are the next steps (UK-ISO, NorDeUk, Colevrak)
* Why optimising for the majority is a bad idea for this community
* What ISO users think about the recent trend of sets not including good ISO support
* What the mechanical keyboard community looks like in places other than North America/China

[Acereconkeys]

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

Dude, don't reply to rxc92 — he's just spreading false data while accusing "the other side" of doing so (and I already called him out for it, and once is enough). We NEED to stop the derailment of this discussion if we want to get anywhere.

Like you've said before, I think this discussion is about.

* Why basic ISO should be in base kits (5 caps)
* What is basic ISO, and what are the next steps (UK-ISO, NorDeUk, Colevrak)
* Why optimising for the majority is a bad idea for this community
* What ISO users think about the recent trend of sets not including good ISO support
* What the mechanical keyboard community looks like in places other than North America/China

Agreed on 1,2, 4 and 5. Though I think having iso in a side kit is also a valid choice not only base. Also i thought it was only 4 caps? (1.25u r4 shift, r4 \|, r3 #~ and iso enter?)

Regarding 3, most people are aligned only so far as supporting minimum level iso compatibility. However, as even this thread provides evidence for, many iso users invite vitriol by demanding more.

Personally, what I hope people get out of this thread is an alignment /agreement among users of iso to demand only basic level of compatibility in base kits, and to act less entitled in the way they demand it (Because as i've said earlier in the thread regardless of global adoption to me iso isn't any more special/deserving of special treatment than any other alternative layout).

[depletedvespene]

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

Dude, don't reply to rxc92 — he's just spreading false data while accusing "the other side" of doing so (and I already called him out for it, and once is enough). We NEED to stop the derailment of this discussion if we want to get anywhere.

Like you've said before, I think this discussion is about.

* Why basic ISO should be in base kits (5 caps)
* What is basic ISO, and what are the next steps (UK-ISO, NorDeUk, Colevrak)
* Why optimising for the majority is a bad idea for this community
* What ISO users think about the recent trend of sets not including good ISO support
* What the mechanical keyboard community looks like in places other than North America/China

Agreed on 1,2, 4 and 5. Though I think having iso in a side kit is also a valid choice not only base. Also i thought it was only 4 caps? (1.25u r4 shift, r4 \|, r3 #~ and iso enter?)

Yes, it IS supposed to be four caps (but the R3 key is \| —— #~ is part of the UK layout). More caps MAY be OPTIONALLY added (namely R4 <> and accented ISO Enter keys), but four caps is the "standardized minimum".


This is, of course, subject to further discussion, but the numbers shown earlier in the thread tell us that getting these four keys in a separate kit (whether they're on a kit by themselves or in an agglomerate of several form factors, like GMK 9009 R3 is doing now) isn't the best solution.

Regarding 3, most people are aligned only so far as supporting minimum level iso compatibility. However, as even this thread provides evidence for, many iso users invite vitriol by demanding more.

Regarding 3, I actually disagre with lewisfldude, albeit it's more of a nuance: kits NEED to be made by optimizing for the majority in their core BUT then accomodations must be made for minorities that are generally regarded as worthwhile additions (insert complaint about how certain relatively obscure form factors get added to the base without fuss while ISO support is treated like the plague and resisted).

Personally, what I hope people get out of this thread is an alignment /agreement among users of iso to demand only basic level of compatibility in base kits, and to act less entitled in the way they demand it (Because as i've said earlier in the thread regardless of global adoption to me iso isn't any more special/deserving of special treatment than any other alternative layout).

Yes, this is what the goal is: agree on a compromise (starting off the one I wrote down earlier), have everyone satisfied with it (or at least have everyone mildly dis-satisfied with it), get everyone to calm the f*ck down, and have later complaints from either side referred to this page. 



By the way, I am heavily tempted to write down an article detailing what ISO *is* (and *isn't*) to try and dispel some myths and erroneous concepts about it.

[Acereconkeys]

Agreed! We're on the same page

Regarding the r4 \| and r3 \| wouldn't it be annoying to have the same legend on the keyboard twice?

[depletedvespene]

Agreed! We're on the same page

Regarding the r4 \| and r3 \| wouldn't it be annoying to have the same legend on the keyboard twice?

Yes... especially since that key is also present in R1 (and in R2 as a 1.5U key), but there IS a good reason for it — maximum flexibility for (ANSI and) ISO layouts AND both the ISANSI and ANSISO hybrids. As shocking as it may look, this is no different than, say, the End key, which is in present in R2, R4 and R1 in most base kits (and even in R3 sometimes).

[HoffmanMyster]

Holy ****, this thread really took a turn. 

I really don't understand all the hatred and "entitlement" claims that ISO-haters are throwing around.  On the one hand, I can see why it appears that way, but I disagree based on the context of our hobby.

It used to be the case that EU and other ISO users were grossly under-represented on geekhack in particular, and most likely in the hobby as a whole too (though perhaps they were all just in other communities that we weren't aware of - however, with many keysets coming from this side of the pond, it makes sense to consider the vocal community here).  Naturally, a very ANSI-centric viewpoint took hold, and almost all keysets were ANSI only or offered very minimal ISO support.  The ISO users were vocal, but ultimately the numbers won out and ISO was more of an afterthought.  Not amazing, but it makes sense.

Now, the hobby has absolutely exploded and more and more ISO users are popping up and asking for some ISO support.  It is not unreasonable to start this discussion again.  Hobbies ebb and flow as trends grow and die, as does the userbase.  We've seen increased support for ISO addon packs lately.  Yes, ultimately the bottom line comes down to the economics of it (vote with your wallet, etc), but there is nothing wrong with users creating a thread to garner support for what they want. 

I don't see anyone asking for any more support than the other handful of obscure layouts get, and no one calls foul when we decide a new layout has enough traction to add to a base kit.  The whole idea of starting an argument on the internet about this is just absurd.  If you don't want to support ISO layouts, don't buy the kits and ignore this thread.  It really is that simple.

[lewisflude]

Where are you getting your 2-3% number from? Typically we see 8-12% of sales of base kit in NorDeUk sales. Many more ISO users than those who buy NorDeUk kit.

Dude, don't reply to rxc92 — he's just spreading false data while accusing "the other side" of doing so (and I already called him out for it, and once is enough). We NEED to stop the derailment of this discussion if we want to get anywhere.

Like you've said before, I think this discussion is about.

* Why basic ISO should be in base kits (5 caps)
* What is basic ISO, and what are the next steps (UK-ISO, NorDeUk, Colevrak)
* Why optimising for the majority is a bad idea for this community
* What ISO users think about the recent trend of sets not including good ISO support
* What the mechanical keyboard community looks like in places other than North America/China

Agreed on 1,2, 4 and 5. Though I think having iso in a side kit is also a valid choice not only base. Also i thought it was only 4 caps? (1.25u r4 shift, r4 \|, r3 #~ and iso enter?)

Regarding 3, most people are aligned only so far as supporting minimum level iso compatibility. However, as even this thread provides evidence for, many iso users invite vitriol by demanding more.

Personally, what I hope people get out of this thread is an alignment /agreement among users of iso to demand only basic level of compatibility in base kits, and to act less entitled in the way they demand it (Because as i've said earlier in the thread regardless of global adoption to me iso isn't any more special/deserving of special treatment than any other alternative layout).

You know what, I agree with you there. Basic ISO is enough I think. I would expect to see the accents in there personally, but anything more than that is really a bonus. With some sets like 9009 where the accents really make the set what it is, I think it would make sense to include them (especially as numpad return get's accented versions).

As long as the keys physically fit on the board, I'm happy! I don't mean to seem entitled or anything, I think this is just quite a contentious issue. Some people feel passionately about one side, and some feel passionate about the other. It sort of makes it difficult to talk about at times!

[depletedvespene]

I just realized something. Part of the discussion has focused so much on whether a base kit should support US ISO versus UK ISO, that we've forgotten one thing. Basic facts first:

1) Base kits, by default, support US ANSI.
2) US ISO support requires adding 4 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R3 \| and R4 \|.
3) UK ISO support requires adding 8 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R1 `¬, R1 2", R1 3£, R3 '@, R3 #~ and R4 \|.

Turns out that if you take the eight keys required for UK ISO support and add one single key (R3 \|), you can have full support for UK+US ISO!

Now, I am NOT saying this should become the new default — I still think that the US ISO compromise (four keys into the base kit, and UK support on a separate one) is the best solution. BUT if a kit designer should choose for whatever reason to include full UK ISO support on the base kit, the addition of one single key, to complete US ISO support as well, should be trivial and highly recommendable.

[HotRoderX]

I just realized something. Part of the discussion has focused so much on whether a base kit should support US ISO versus UK ISO, that we've forgotten one thing. Basic facts first:

1) Base kits, by default, support US ANSI.
2) US ISO support requires adding 4 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R3 \| and R4 \|.
3) UK ISO support requires adding 8 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R1 `¬, R1 2", R1 3£, R3 '@, R3 #~ and R4 \|.

Turns out that if you take the eight keys required for UK ISO support and add one single key (R3 \|), you can have full support for UK+US ISO!

Now, I am NOT saying this should become the new default — I still think that the US ISO compromise (four keys into the base kit, and UK support on a separate one) is the best solution. BUT if a kit designer should choose for whatever reason to include full UK ISO support on the base kit, the addition of one single key, to complete US ISO support as well, should be trivial and highly recommendable.

That still doesn't really work because the Majority of consumers doesn't want/need ISO and the amount of kits coming out means that 10-15 dollar differences is enough for someone to go with the competition. Until ISO has the support and numbers to eat the cost. This will continue to be a a poor choice for group buy runners. Regardless of how upset or bad people want it. Group Buy runners are trying to move/sale as much product as they can. I made that point several times, and if people really think ISO has the support. Then go make a ISO only set and see if it hits MOQ, if it does then you have so much more wiggle and argument room as to why ISO should be included.

[depletedvespene]

That still doesn't really work because the Majority of consumers doesn't want/need ISO and the amount of kits coming out means that 10-15 dollar differences is enough for someone to go with the competition.

The lingering myth of the "10-15 dollar difference" in price for ISO support in the base kit was dispelled earlier in the thread. I'll quote e11i0t23's comment about this:

I know im late replying however, to spread some light on the cost argument using a recent quote i collected from GMK of including iso support and in this case full iso-uk support. For 150MOQ of base it adds arround 4€/set reducing to 2€/set for 500MOQ. This is less than the cost of a coffee out.

Four euros per set for UK ISO support!

What is being asked here is even less: four keys for US ISO support instead of eight (for UK ISO support) or nine (for UK+US ISO support). Assuming this might imply three euros per set (instead of two), this is a quite lower price hike, and well within the bounds of what's reasonable to add. As stated earlier in the thread, too, things have changed and what in the custom keycaps' days of yore (2016) was or may have been true in regards to the price difference, today it is not. So let's not keep considering as correct "general knowledge" that has been proven to not be so.

[HotRoderX]

That still doesn't really work because the Majority of consumers doesn't want/need ISO and the amount of kits coming out means that 10-15 dollar differences is enough for someone to go with the competition.

The lingering myth of the "10-15 dollar difference" in price for ISO support in the base kit was dispelled earlier in the thread. I'll quote e11i0t23's comment about this:

I know im late replying however, to spread some light on the cost argument using a recent quote i collected from GMK of including iso support and in this case full iso-uk support. For 150MOQ of base it adds arround 4€/set reducing to 2€/set for 500MOQ. This is less than the cost of a coffee out.

Four euros per set for UK ISO support!

What is being asked here is even less: four keys for US ISO support instead of eight (for UK ISO support) or nine (for UK+US ISO support). Assuming this might imply three euros per set (instead of two), this is a quite lower price hike, and well within the bounds of what's reasonable to add. As stated earlier in the thread, too, things have changed and what in the custom keycaps' days of yore (2016) was or may have been true in regards to the price difference, today it is not. So let's not keep considering as correct "general knowledge" that has been proven to not be so.

They really don't dispel anything since GMK quotes prices based on colors chosen and if there custom. I mean if they ran a basic set with just white keys black modifiers then sure it might have been 4 bucks.. but if you run a custom color set which 99.9% of people do then suddenly cost goes way up.

[nappis]

That still doesn't really work because the Majority of consumers doesn't want/need ISO and the amount of kits coming out means that 10-15 dollar differences is enough for someone to go with the competition. Until ISO has the support and numbers to eat the cost. This will continue to be a a poor choice for group buy runners. Regardless of how upset or bad people want it. Group Buy runners are trying to move/sale as much product as they can. I made that point several times, and if people really think ISO has the support. Then go make a ISO only set and see if it hits MOQ, if it does then you have so much more wiggle and argument room as to why ISO should be included.

This guy Trumps

People praise base kits with good compatibility. But somehow including few keys for standard layout that is used on multiple continents is somehow bad idea. What the hell?!

[depletedvespene]

That still doesn't really work because the Majority of consumers doesn't want/need ISO and the amount of kits coming out means that 10-15 dollar differences is enough for someone to go with the competition. Until ISO has the support and numbers to eat the cost. This will continue to be a a poor choice for group buy runners. Regardless of how upset or bad people want it. Group Buy runners are trying to move/sale as much product as they can. I made that point several times, and if people really think ISO has the support. Then go make a ISO only set and see if it hits MOQ, if it does then you have so much more wiggle and argument room as to why ISO should be included.

This guy Trumps

People praise base kits with good compatibility. But somehow including few keys for standard layout that is used on multiple continents is somehow bad idea. What the hell?!

And if we ISO users have the nerve of making a complaint about being targeted this unfairly, out comes the "You're so entitled!" accusation. Yeah.

[nappis]

This guy Trumps

People praise base kits with good compatibility. But somehow including few keys for standard layout that is used on multiple continents is somehow bad idea. What the hell?!

And if we ISO users have the nerve of making a complaint about being targeted this unfairly, out comes the "You're so entitled!" accusation. Yeah.

Gatekeeping is real.

[HotRoderX]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does... Prove me and everyone else wrong. PLEASE prove us wrong otherwise let it go. I am not trying to be rude but this seems to be how some people think society works. Complain complain complain, and expect everyone else to pick up the slack. I promise if you make a ISO only kit and run it. I won't be in the thread complaining about Lack of Ansi. I will in fact wish you the best of luck with the set.

[depletedvespene]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

[nguyenhimself]

I just realized something. Part of the discussion has focused so much on whether a base kit should support US ISO versus UK ISO, that we've forgotten one thing. Basic facts first:

1) Base kits, by default, support US ANSI.
2) US ISO support requires adding 4 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R3 \| and R4 \|.
3) UK ISO support requires adding 8 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R1 `¬, R1 2", R1 3£, R3 '@, R3 #~ and R4 \|.

Turns out that if you take the eight keys required for UK ISO support and add one single key (R3 \|), you can have full support for UK+US ISO!

Now, I am NOT saying this should become the new default — I still think that the US ISO compromise (four keys into the base kit, and UK support on a separate one) is the best solution. BUT if a kit designer should choose for whatever reason to include full UK ISO support on the base kit, the addition of one single key, to complete US ISO support as well, should be trivial and highly recommendable.

And people wonder why I said “this kind of escalation for more and more from ISO users is just crazy”.
See how we’ve moved the goalpost from “4 extra US-ISO keys in the base kit” to “8 extra UK-ISO keys” and now freaking NINE keys.
Give it a couple more days and I bet people will start asking to add NorDe kit into the base one too. Let’s make $200 base kit the new normal, why not?

[nguyenhimself]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

GMK Paperwork was a 40%-only set that ran and reached MOQ and shipped.
And you don’t see people complain about separate 40% kits, do you?
“Run an ISO-only GMK set (not kit) to prove the user base size” is a great idea that nobody will do because it’s more work than just typing “ISO users are huge believe me. Huge!”.

[depletedvespene]

I just realized something. Part of the discussion has focused so much on whether a base kit should support US ISO versus UK ISO, that we've forgotten one thing. Basic facts first:

1) Base kits, by default, support US ANSI.
2) US ISO support requires adding 4 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R3 \| and R4 \|.
3) UK ISO support requires adding 8 keys: ISO Enter, R4 1.25U left Shift, R1 `¬, R1 2", R1 3£, R3 '@, R3 #~ and R4 \|.

Turns out that if you take the eight keys required for UK ISO support and add one single key (R3 \|), you can have full support for UK+US ISO!

Now, I am NOT saying this should become the new default — I still think that the US ISO compromise (four keys into the base kit, and UK support on a separate one) is the best solution. BUT if a kit designer should choose for whatever reason to include full UK ISO support on the base kit, the addition of one single key, to complete US ISO support as well, should be trivial and highly recommendable.

And people wonder why I said “this kind of escalation for more and more from ISO users is just crazy”.
See how we’ve moved the goalpost from “4 extra US-ISO keys in the base kit” to “8 extra UK-ISO keys” and now freaking NINE keys.
Give it a couple more days and I bet people will start asking to add NorDe kit into the base one too. Let’s make $200 base kit the new normal, why not?

Kindly READ WHAT IS WRITTEN instead of reading what you want to read. I clearly said: I am NOT saying this should become the new default — I still think that the US ISO compromise is the best solution.

Some entitled gatekeepers really stoop low to defend their position when they (presumably) see it has become untenable. 

[nappis]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does... Prove me and everyone else wrong. PLEASE prove us wrong otherwise let it go. I am not trying to be rude but this seems to be how some people think society works. Complain complain complain, and expect everyone else to pick up the slack. I promise if you make a ISO only kit and run it. I won't be in the thread complaining about Lack of Ansi. I will in fact wish you the best of luck with the set.

Yes but you probably would complain if every non-US designer creates ISO-only group buys of hot keyset designs. Oblivion would be ISO-DE and Dracula would ISO-SWE/FI...

GMK Paperwork was a 40%-only set that ran and reached MOQ and shipped.
And you don’t see people complain about separate 40% kits, do you?
“Run an ISO-only GMK set (not kit) to prove the user base size” is a great idea that nobody will do because it’s more work than just typing “ISO users are huge believe me. Huge!”.

Are you comparing minimum ISO support to 40% keyset? That's like saying Alice users should have their own gb if they want extra b key.

So what next? You going to compare ergodox support to minimum ISO support? Goalposts....

[lewisflude]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

GMK Paperwork was a 40%-only set that ran and reached MOQ and shipped.
And you don’t see people complain about separate 40% kits, do you?
“Run an ISO-only GMK set (not kit) to prove the user base size” is a great idea that nobody will do because it’s more work than just typing “ISO users are huge believe me. Huge!”.

I’d love to see numbers on GMK Paperwork. Not saying you’re wrong, but I was under the impression it failed to reach MOQ but evansgs bought a bunch to put on the MiniVan store! I’ve got Paperwork, it’s a weird esoteric set and I’m not sure I agree with the philosophy behind it.

[depletedvespene]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

GMK Paperwork was a 40%-only set that ran and reached MOQ and shipped.
And you don’t see people complain about separate 40% kits, do you?
“Run an ISO-only GMK set (not kit) to prove the user base size” is a great idea that nobody will do because it’s more work than just typing “ISO users are huge believe me. Huge!”.

One kit, out of... how many, back in January? The IC thread does have several posts questioning the decision of going 40% only and even about which 40% layouts are or are not covered. It's even pointed out explicitly, using the same central argument about covering ISO in the base kit:

…
I mean, you're arguing for smaller boards but this doesn't actually cover any other staggered 40%, just the minivan. Expanding it to do so would be trivial and would expand the user base substantially.

The disingenous argument of running an "ISO only kit" to see "how it goes" is still disingenous — GMK Paperwork was one single GB, and did not take place within an attitude of "40% support is eeeeeevil!" from some people. And even if running an ISO kit were to be done, the simple factor of adding ANSI support (in the form of three keys at minimum: 2.25U R4 Shift, R4 2.25U Enter and R2 1.5U \| key) would expand the user base substantially.

[HotRoderX]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

Then you shouldn't have issue getting least 100 people willing to buy in. I mean thats 5th of what a normal set can reach, and a 10th of what some popular sets have hit. Anything else you have to say is invalid and just comes off as lazy. There is nothing that will change my opinion on that. I am typically a very open minded person but you are unwilling to prove me wrong. Instead you just want to throw up what ever to distract from the fact you most likely can't find 100 people willing to buy a ISO only set. In a community that supposedly got enough ISO users to support raising the cost for everyone.

[depletedvespene]

i don't know how many times I can mention this, run a ISO only kit see how it does...

It's been stated FROM THE START that ISO is, indeed, currently a minority, yet nowhere as small as some make it to be, nowhere as small as some niche form factors that are supported in the base kit without fuss, and for whom actual support in a base kit is nowhere as expensive as it's made to be.

"Run an X-only kit and see how it does." is a disingenious argument that would be quickly shot down if X were, for example, "65%" instead of "ISO". So why is it considered valid here? As per "picking up the slack", please read the early posts in the thread about how many differing form factors are supported in a base kit, and note that this is generally considered in the best interests of the whole hobby (except for some people who still insist on treating ISO like the plague... for reasons that are, in the best case, obsolete).

Then you shouldn't have issue getting least 100 people willing to buy in.

Because the presence of the ISO Enter key is the only deciding factor? Nope.

If GMK HELLOKITTYHASBREAKFASTWITHBARBIE were to come in, with perfect US ISO support (plus an R2 Back Tab key, a second R1 Home key, and even a numpad with an R1 = key), I wouldn't buy it, because I don't like Hello Kitty and I don't like Barbie, either.

…
I am typically a very open minded person but you are unwilling to prove me wrong.

We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

Instead you just want to throw up what ever to distract from the fact you most likely can't find 100 people willing to buy a ISO only set. In a community that supposedly got enough ISO users to support raising the cost for everyone.

Disingineous argument still disingineous. Let's see you pulling the same in IC threads, asking the extra B for TGR Alice keyboards to be dropped.

[nappis]

Then you shouldn't have issue getting least 100 people willing to buy in. I mean thats 5th of what a normal set can reach, and a 10th of what some popular sets have hit. Anything else you have to say is invalid and just comes off as lazy. There is nothing that will change my opinion on that. I am typically a very open minded person but you are unwilling to prove me wrong. Instead you just want to throw up what ever to distract from the fact you most likely can't find 100 people willing to buy a ISO only set. In a community that supposedly got enough ISO users to support raising the cost for everyone.

I'm sure you have never joined a group buy.

1) Do you know how group buys work? More people join and price goes lower. Either that or you get extra keys/novelties. Or price is set low for high MOQ.

You need lots of people to join for good prices. How you do that? Good compatibility.

2) Have seen what is currently in the base kits? Don't f*cking tell me you use every single key cap of the base kit and pay for them gladly.

[lewisflude]

Then you shouldn't have issue getting least 100 people willing to buy in. I mean thats 5th of what a normal set can reach, and a 10th of what some popular sets have hit. Anything else you have to say is invalid and just comes off as lazy. There is nothing that will change my opinion on that. I am typically a very open minded person but you are unwilling to prove me wrong. Instead you just want to throw up what ever to distract from the fact you most likely can't find 100 people willing to buy a ISO only set. In a community that supposedly got enough ISO users to support raising the cost for everyone.

I'm sure you have never joined a group buy.

1) Do you know how group buys work? More people join and price goes lower. Either that or you get extra keys/novelties. Or price is set low for high MOQ.

You need lots of people to join for good prices. How you do that? Good compatibility.

2) Have seen what is currently in the base kits? Don't f*cking tell me you use every single key cap of the base kit and pay for them gladly.

I think what it comes down to is someone from North America might think "I might use 40% one day" so they don't care about those extra caps or "I guess some people don't like Tsangan, so I'm fine with having an extra spacebar" or "it's nice to get novelties in base kit so I can save some money" but at the same time they'd look at the ISO keys and say "I'll literally never use those keys". I think this is why ISO in particular is target, because it's a regional change as opposed to a preferential change.

A lot of people only look at this issue from their own US/China/Other ANSI using country-centric perspective and are willing to skew the numbers, gloss over the facts and refuse to listen because they feel they have nothing to gain and something to lose from including ISO support.

• UK-ISO support used to be common in base kits
• Sets began to be broken up, removing numpad, ISO and other keys and putting them in separate kits
• More and more price is assumed to be a defining factor in whether a keyset makes MOQ
• The idea is that splitting kits creates a bigger price drop than reaching a higher MOQ
• Most set designers were from ANSI-using communities, and made the base kit TKL ANSI-compatible out of the box
• As the broken up sets got shuffled around, sometimes caps were missing, or minorities became uncatered for
• Not having physical ISO support is an issue for a significant and growing portion of the community
• Not having access to correct legends is an issue for a significant and growing portion of the community

Like I said before, this issue isn't going away anytime soon. The non-US/China based mechanical keyboard community is here, it's growing and it certainly hasn't decided it wants ANSI to be the global standard.

[depletedvespene]

I think what it comes down to is someone from North America might think …

Good outline. You've missed one factor, though.

Part of the resistance to ISO support from some ANSI users is that pretty often, "ISO support" is conflated with "UK ISO support", making for an heavier reason for this resistance (as it's "eight keys I'll never use" instead of "four keys I'll never use"). Even on some ICs right now (not naming names!), ISO support has been asked for, and the runner has added the keys for UK ISO (*), instead of US ISO or even physical ISO.

This is why I've been so insistent on talking explicitly about making the distinction between "US ISO" and "UK ISO" and why I've spelled out that the compromise should be to include the former in the base kit (after all, pretty much every single extant base kit is US ANSI, and that's an starting point no one even thinks of changing) and move the latter to an extra kit.


(*) Whether the "UK ISO" support has been done correctly or, as has happened plenty of times, it's been added partially (what I've taken to call Atlantis ISO).

[lewisflude]

I think what it comes down to is someone from North America might think …

Good outline. You've missed one factor, though.

Part of the resistance to ISO support from some ANSI users is that pretty often, "ISO support" is conflated with "UK ISO support", making for an heavier reason for this resistance (as it's "eight keys I'll never use" instead of "four keys I'll never use"). Even on some ICs right now (not naming names!), ISO support has been asked for, and the runner has added the keys for UK ISO (*), instead of US ISO or even physical ISO.

This is why I've been so insistent on talking explicitly about making the distinction between "US ISO" and "UK ISO" and why I've spelled out that the compromise should be to include the former in the base kit (after all, pretty much every single extant base kit is US ANSI, and that's an starting point no one even thinks of changing) and move the latter to an extra kit.


(*) Whether the "UK ISO" support has been done correctly or, as has happened plenty of times, it's been added partially (what I've taken to call Atlantis ISO).

If we put ISO in the base kit, I expect physical ISO. Return, accented return, pipe, tilda, at, left split shift. So 6 caps at the bare minimum. Anything short of this isn’t acceptable IMO.

If we put ISO in it’s own kit, I expect the above, and UK-ISO in the event there isn’t a separate NorDeUk being run. It’s a compromise not having the NorDe in there, but I feel like being only 2 caps that have a much larger userbase than the Alice B for example, it’s a compromise that’s worth making.

For context, I think the latest 9009 R3 ISO kit is pretty great now! It’s actually 20 caps, and includes some other esoteric caps like stepped control and OSX bottom row caps.

[depletedvespene]

If we put ISO in the base kit, I expect physical ISO. Return, accented return, pipe, tilda, at, left split shift. So 6 caps at the bare minimum. Anything short of this isn’t acceptable IMO.

I'm gonna have to mark my disagreement here. But first, let's make sure we're talking about the same thing.

If I understood correctly, "pipe, tilda, at" above refer to the keys R4 \|, R3 #~ and R3 '@. If so...

1) Mod-colored ISO Enter must absolutely be present. Accent-colored ISO Enter keys should also be present, in the same quantity as the accented ANSI Enter keys (same goes for numpad Enter, SUE Enter for ortho kits, etc.). But if the need is too pressing, keep just one ISO Enter key, which needs to be the mod-colored one.

In the case of GMK 9009 R3, the accented ISO Enter keys absolutely had to be present, because it's the accents what "make" the set — I'm glad the runners saw it this way too and corrected that omission.


2) As alphas go, you seem to have fallen into the "Atlantis ISO" error. R4 \| is common to UK ISO and US ISO, while R3 '@ and R3 #~ are only for UK ISO (taking the place of R3 '" and R3 \|, which are only for US ISO). The choice has to go one way or the other, but not fall into the "middle of the pond", which is the worst option of all.

I still favor making the base kits US ISO compatible, meaning the bare minimum of four keys (plus whichever accented Enter keys the designer decides to include, as long as that number is not -1  ) ).

If we put ISO in it’s own kit, I expect the above, and UK-ISO in the event there isn’t a separate NorDeUk being run.

If all ISO support goes to a separate kit, then I think that UK+US ISO should be the no-brainer option (exactly one more key than simply UK ISO). But that's assuming the designer hasn't added an 1.25U Shift key to the base kit to support 40% keyboards, in which case ISO support (US ISO, specifically — three keys at this point) must totally, completely, inarguably be included in the base kit as well.

I'm not naming names here, but a particular popular recent GB did that: the base kit had no support for ISO, but did have a 1.25U Shift key, for 40% support; ISO was half-assedly done in a separate kit, where several glaring errors were easily found. The devil is in the details, they say... and there was a lot of "devil" in that keycap set. 

[rxc92]

Is there a way to unfollow this thread so I can get away from the barrage of two circlejerkers doing their business?

[tobiasvl]

Click the "Unwatch" button

[lewisflude]

Is there a way to unfollow this thread so I can get away from the barrage of two circlejerkers doing their business?

Don't have anything to add to the discussion then?

[Findecanor]

You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU

You are incorrectly assuming that ANSI would be the standard in China.

There are lots of Chinese keyboards that have a vertical (ISO-style) Enter key but a long left Shift.
By not including a vertical Enter key and the key beside it in a kit, you are locking those Chinese keyboards out.

[Surefoot]

2) As alphas go, you seem to have fallen into the "Atlantis ISO" error. R4 \| is common to UK ISO and US ISO, while R3 '@ and R3 #~ are only for UK ISO (taking the place of R3 '" and R3 \|, which are only for US ISO). The choice has to go one way or the other, but not fall into the "middle of the pond", which is the worst option of all.
My view is if the 2 and 3 are not present either, i am paying $200+ for a keyset where key legends are wrong. It's like saying to Colemark or 40% users "suck it and put the wrong legends you just touch type anyway" or "just get blank caps". If i were to get blank caps, i'd get one of those Chinese PBT sets and not bother with a very expensive, 6 month wait group buy... Which is the reason why there are so few ISO users here.
My view is ISO UK is the minimal set that provides no redundancy (like R1 2" and  R3 '@ instead of R1 2@ and R3 '@...) and correct legends, along with native international support in any modern OS (through ALT or dead keys). Having the correct legends when i pay more than $200 is not an exotic demand.

[rxc92]

You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU

You are incorrectly assuming that ANSI would be the standard in China.

There are lots of Chinese keyboards that have a vertical (ISO-style) Enter key but a long left Shift.
By not including a vertical Enter key and the key beside it in a kit, you are locking those Chinese keyboards out.

 
 
Is that so? In a couple years of living there, I have never seen a non-ANSI layout keyboard. Perhaps they exist in some special region.

[depletedvespene]

You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU

You are incorrectly assuming that ANSI would be the standard in China.

There are lots of Chinese keyboards that have a vertical (ISO-style) Enter key but a long left Shift.
By not including a vertical Enter key and the key beside it in a kit, you are locking those Chinese keyboards out.

 
 
Is that so? In a couple years of living there, I have never seen a non-ANSI layout keyboard. Perhaps they exist in some special region.

I won't say anything about keyboards IN China, BUT... where I live, the majority of the cheap-ass mechanical or pseudo-mechanical keyboards manufactured in China and sold here, are indeed of the ANSISO variety (even with the legends made to be the Spanish (Latin America) layout in most cases).

[ideus]

You can't possibly think that after realizing that China exists and dwarfs the entirety of the EU

You are incorrectly assuming that ANSI would be the standard in China.

There are lots of Chinese keyboards that have a vertical (ISO-style) Enter key but a long left Shift.
By not including a vertical Enter key and the key beside it in a kit, you are locking those Chinese keyboards out.

 
 
Is that so? In a couple years of living there, I have never seen a non-ANSI layout keyboard. Perhaps they exist in some special region.

I won't say anything about keyboards IN China, BUT... where I live, the majority of the cheap-ass mechanical or pseudo-mechanical keyboards manufactured in China and sold here, are indeed of the ANSISO variety (even with the legends made to be the Spanish (Latin America) layout in most cases).

What other type of KB should be in Chile? But the Spaniard one.