@prdlm2009 - do you feel that DCS has the best "typability" ?
@Dorkvader: Looks like a 1 row LCD display - is that right?It is a VFD but yes, one row.
Oobly, I think this is a great little project. Much more practical than that Hemingwrite, and with the features of a (smaller) Qwerkywriter.
I like your non-rectangular layout just fine, but for some reason I am partial to this layout (http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/88175a676b24608cebd5e34dec04cfe5):Show Image(http://i.imgur.com/u8LVtCJ.png)
;)
By the way, proper old-school typewriter emulation shall not include symbols on the first layer, except punctuation marks.
By the way, proper old-school typewriter emulation shall not include symbols on the first layer, except punctuation marks.
Oh, you and your rules. :))
http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/1f7ad32d2ef4bd6b661564449dbffd07
It’s weird to me how many suggested split-spacebar layouts (or keyboard layouts in general) have the spacebars not centered with the home row hand positions. The center of a keyboard as most people use it is between G and H, but few keyboards align the spacebar with that.
How would the modifiers be positioned for a Mac OS user?
By the way, nice list from Richard Polt's website. I met him at the International Typewriters Collectors Convention in August. He's an interesting guy with plenty of information in his head.
@jacobolus: Using spacebar / Fn keys larger than 1,5x makes the Alt and EDIT just a little too awkward to be used with the thumbs comfortably, but I do like the overall design of your layouts.When using a split spacebar, if each spacebar is any smaller than 2u then the spacebar becomes uncomfortable to reach for many people. I would in general recommend either 2u or 2.5u split spacebars (assuming the split is centered under the G/H boundary). 2.5u split spacebars also work pretty well with an extra column added in the middle of the keyboard between TGB / YHN.
@jacobolus: Using spacebar / Fn keys larger than 1,5x makes the Alt and EDIT just a little too awkward to be used with the thumbs comfortably, but I do like the overall design of your layouts.When using a split spacebar, if each spacebar is any smaller than 2u then the spacebar becomes uncomfortable to reach for many people. I would in general recommend either 2u or 2.5u split spacebars (assuming the split is centered under the G/H boundary). 2.5u split spacebars also work pretty well with an extra column added in the middle of the keyboard between TGB / YHN.
Speaking only for myself, I find it’s comfortable to use my thumbs for any keys that are directly below A or semicolon (in ANSI/QWERTY layout) or closer. Keys directly below caps lock / apostrophe are a bit too far over to reach comfortably.
From a brief poll at the office it's mainly the people who press space with their left thumb that press it further out and could require a larger key or perhaps swapping the 1x and 1.5, since they seem to centre their press around 0.25 into the posiition of "V" from left to right, directly under the divider between "R" and "T".I press the spacebar directly under the center of the F key. I know people (just from looking around at what parts of the spacebar are shiny) who press the spacebar directly under the center of the J key.
From a brief poll at the office it's mainly the people who press space with their left thumb that press it further out and could require a larger key or perhaps swapping the 1x and 1.5, since they seem to centre their press around 0.25 into the posiition of "V" from left to right, directly under the divider between "R" and "T".I press the spacebar directly under the center of the F key. I know people (just from looking around at what parts of the spacebar are shiny) who press the spacebar directly under the center of the J key.
You liked the GMK better, because your Nuclear Data SA set is uniform Row 3 profile. :)
Nice little board you have there, Oobly.
I know some people aren't going to like this idea, but I am seriously considering using ML switches for the next prototype. Considering the use case of this being as compact as possible so it is easy to carry around for those moments of inspiration while still being mechanical and really nice to type on, lubed ML switches are hard to beat.
They feel somewhat like short-throw ErgoClears with the tactility starting right near the top of the stroke. Of course the keycap options are very limited, but SP are able to make keycaps with ML mounts, although the only profile I know of that definitely fits is LP. Their LP caps can be made in PBT with dyesub legends, too. I will enquire if DSA profile can be made to fit ML switches, too. I think they can since the profile document mentions they can be made with 11 different switch mount styles. Just wish they were semi-matte or gloss and not just matte.
The switches would need to be lubed, though, as unlubed new ML switches are even more scratchy than the current batches of MX switches and you can feel it more when typing, too.
There is one style of gloss/semi-matte spherical top keycap for ML switches made by Cherry for the Tandberg company which I would LOVE to use, but I don't think they sell them to the public :( One thing the spherical top caps would help with is off-centre hits which ML seems to be a little more sensitive to than MX (although I'm not sure it's still an issue with lubed switches). And of course it's more typewriter-like:Show Image(http://deskthority.net/w/images/2/21/Cherry_ml_switches_with_foam.jpg)
As always, feedback is welcome. What do you guys think about using lubed ML switches?
the "." key shows both "." and "/" instead of "." and ">", "T" shows "T" and "5" which means you have to remember what will show when you use Shiftworries me slightly - shouldn't shift and t be T and an FN key be used for 5? Can you get layer 2 legends top left and layer 3 top right (assuming layer 1 is no FN key used) of the top of the cap? That would be clearest, if they can make it.
There are regular-size (i.e. designed to be spaced 3/4 inches apart) ML keycaps, if you do decide you want normal key spacing.
For some reason, I'm really attached to 2x backspace and enter. I can't seem to find those keys unless they're that size. Other than that, I could get adjusted to that layout.
...Actually, they don't even need to be 2x. 1800 right shift key size would work for me.
Ugh...that website doesn't show up on my work computer. All I get is the numpad. :(
Thanks for the reply though :)
Thanks!! I'd prefer option 3 as it has the larger keys but still a smaller formfactor. But I think option 2 is the compromise I had in my head. I agree the first option is a bit large for this purpose.
Slow progress in figuring out the pinout and signalling:Is it based on ADBS-A350 (modular type is ADBM-A350) or relative?
Slow progress in figuring out the pinout and signalling:Is it based on ADBS-A350 (modular type is ADBM-A350) or relative?
I like this topic and what you've done, I think optimizing for a writer would mean rearranging the keys the most common characters could be typed with no modifiers.
If you analyse the English language the vast majority of writing is encapsulated in letters, numbers and these punctuation symbols: , . ( ) ' " - ? ; : !, in about that order of usage. The layout should be optimised such that I shouldn't have to hit shift to get to ? (no writer uses / more than ?) or have to use brackets.
So I would maybe arrange a keyboard (not compact, but for writers) a little bit like so:
(Attachment Link)
http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/2466a4b5e1130e81683eb068d536296e
Numbers would be accessed via Mod modifier, probalby in tenkey block arrangement, or just keep the number row up top, which would be more in line with the modless key philosophy.
So far nobody has posted a datasheet, proper pinout or signal chart, but I have figured out most of the pins and some of the signalling, so I may do that once I get further. I think they're better than the IBM TrackPoint device and the little trackball previously used by Blackberry.I've never used this type of device but it if good, we could have another choice.