Have you seen the yogitype keyboard? The right side keeps the staggered layout, but the left has a matrix. If you used that approach then you could keep the small width and have a more comfortable layout.
No, I haven't seen it. Thank you for reference. I still don't get how could I apply its approach as from pictures, it looks like a 3D keyboard. And from what you said, it is asymmetrical and thus less convincing for many users (although I admit it may be more efficient).
I'd say you might want to consider having two numpads per user, that way the use can arrange their desk according to how they are using their computer at the time.
Do you mean additional dedicated numpads? The total size could be bigger than a standard full size keyboard then.
The penny has finally dropped, you want to go the matrix route because the embedded numpad is very important, and having a matrix numpad is better than a staggered one?
Yes, I think the embedded numpad is important. No, I don't think matrix is the best arrangement for the numpad and, generally, I don't think matrix is optimal for the alphanumeric array. And no, I don't follow the matrix road for that reason.
In general, I think matrix is the arrangement that has the best chance to be widely accepted because matrix layouts are sought more often than other layouts. Many peoples around me have seen it "in action", e.g. as POS keyboards in supermarkets. Some may even have had opportunity to try it, e.g. with my TypeMatrix 2030. I, myself, have used it for a few years and I know surely it works. I know it is much better for the left hand and it is *not* worse for the right hand, provided that the issue with the corner keys under pinkies (Z/=\ and Shifts) is resolved. Although I have little evidences to predict users' acceptance, I think matrix is the right balance between tradition and, well, innovation.
In particular, embedded numpad is not new. Many laptop and TKL keyboards have it embedded. But I know nobody uses it, I know why, and I with the present proposal I fix it.
Also, you might want to take a look a the posturite mini arch keyboard with a pull out number pad.
I'll do. Thank you very much.
I think it's a good idea but I think it would be better if we line it up based on typing technique:
Show Image
So it would be something like:
1 2 3 4 5
Q W E R T
A S D F G
Z X C V B
Do you mean to place the entire right-hand numpad so that 5 is placed at K instead of J, i.e. under middle finger (like jacobolus's arrangement), and similarly for the left-hand numpad? Surely, it sounds very reasonable, because a user would be then able to touch-type numbers without moving the hand off the usual home position (of the typing mode).
However, there are two potential problems: the position of the zero key and the position of the "tactile dots" (I'm sorry for my English), i.e. the dots on keycaps that touch-typists use as anchor points. For the alpha numeric array, the dot is placed at J (and F), for the tenkey of a standard keyboard, it is placed at 5. So, when 5 is placed at K, the usual look and feel are no longer preserved.
Besides the version 5 = J (my version) I've sketched a version with 5 = K (yours and jacobolus's) and asked peoples which one they're willing to use. They saw no problems with 5=J (even if they're aware they have to reset the home position every time they touch-type a number). But with 5=K, they're unsure until they have tested it.
So, I've selected 5=J for better certainty.
having a matrix numpad is better than a staggered one?
It’s really not. The ideal one-handed numpad shape (assuming you always use the same hand for it) is pretty similar to half the ideal split keyboard shape.
For a keyboard where each hand is on one flat PCB/plate, I recommend something like this:
Show Image
(Actually I recommend arranging the numbers in two rows of five, so that low numbers (0–4) are on the "home row", starting with 0 on the thumb up through 4 on the pinky, and then 5–9 are on the next easiest to press key for each finger; probably the row below.... but that’s a bit more radical compared to a standard numpad, so the one proposed above should be a bit easier to learn for someone with prior numpad experience.)
Yes, both your layouts sound more reasonable than mine. I'll certainly try them all should the keyboard is implemented with programmable function layer(s). For the reasons said above, however, I don't think they can improve my chance at this time.
