geekhack

geekhack Projects => Making Stuff Together! => Topic started by: ironpup on Thu, 04 June 2015, 19:35:56

Title: "LayerCake39" A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: ironpup on Thu, 04 June 2015, 19:35:56
My keyboard obsession has grown and I have decided I want to build my own board. I went with a 40% design for it's portability as I will be taking the board to classes with me. I wanted the QWERTY layout and standard staggering to stay untouched, so I add two layers for all the other functions. Whether a function is on the top or bottom layer depends both on the amount of use it receives as well as what side of the board it's on, to make the most used functions easily accessible through standard touch typing form.

I present to you my 40% design(LayerCake39)
(http://i.imgur.com/jbbtZoB.png)

Feedback would be greatly appreciated :)

EDIT: fixed staggering and layer placement for some things
Title: Re: A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: jdcarpe on Thu, 04 June 2015, 20:23:01
Layout looks good. There should be JD40 kits for sale on [CTRL]ALT soon, when their store comes back online.
Title: Re: A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: suicidal_orange on Fri, 05 June 2015, 13:03:20
Looks good but you have slight deviated from "standard" stagger if that bothers you - the bottom row should be half a key.

The only thing that would frustrate me for a while is -_ switching to the other side of the board as I use it a lot.  And maybe \| being right in the middle.  And no one-hand ctrl-alt-delete or "Windows" key for quick screen locking?  40% is always going to have compromises :)
Title: Re: A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: ironpup on Fri, 05 June 2015, 14:15:53
Looks good but you have slight deviated from "standard" stagger if that bothers you - the bottom row should be half a key.

The only thing that would frustrate me for a while is -_ switching to the other side of the board as I use it a lot.  And maybe \| being right in the middle.  And no one-hand ctrl-alt-delete or "Windows" key for quick screen locking?  40% is always going to have compromises :)
Okay thanks, I fixed the stagger, and switched Del and -_, and as for \| I put in under ,< and move the brackets over and the `~ up.  I'm a long time mac user so correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the command key act as the windows/ctrlaltdel key on windows?

Title: Re: "LayerCake39" A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: yehoshuaf on Sat, 06 June 2015, 10:11:32
May be easier to just get a jd40. Personally I couldn't hand the lack of columns on the right hand so I made a 40%ish layout like

http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/5665ed38ac6f85bca419a7021328ccd3

(Titles on the buttons are wrong)

Extra thumb button is nice for modifying since you'll be doing it all day. It wo egg ked out pretty well.
Title: Re: A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: suicidal_orange on Sat, 06 June 2015, 10:25:44
Looks good but you have slight deviated from "standard" stagger if that bothers you - the bottom row should be half a key.

The only thing that would frustrate me for a while is -_ switching to the other side of the board as I use it a lot.  And maybe \| being right in the middle.  And no one-hand ctrl-alt-delete or "Windows" key for quick screen locking?  40% is always going to have compromises :)
Okay thanks, I fixed the stagger, and switched Del and -_, and as for \| I put in under ,< and move the brackets over and the `~ up.  I'm a long time mac user so correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't the command key act as the windows/ctrlaltdel key on windows?
Non Mac user here, I thought CMD was the right click menu key but I'm happy to be wrong!

Now you've put Delete on the wrong side so I'll complain about that, and =+ is randomly in the middle too - I don't think it's possible to design a 40% I won't have problems with so I wouldn't bother trying, it's you that will have to use it so whichever keys you use need to be find-able by you :)
Title: Re: "LayerCake39" A New 40% Design I Came Up With
Post by: azhdar on Sat, 06 June 2015, 10:27:27
the spacebar is labeled 6.26 instead of 6.25