KeyMouse (keyboard/mouse combo) - Your Thoughts?

[KeyMouse]

Hello friends,

We are launching a new keyboard/mouse combo device on Kickstarter, and we're looking for input to shape the final design of the product.

I came across this forum, and it looks like there are a lot of knowledgeable members here who know a lot about keyboards and mice and could offer very valuable feedback.

We exhibited at the CES tradeshow, so we collected some feedback there and made some product changes:
• Switched to Cherry MX Brown keyswitches (we had used Cherry ML switches in our first prototypes)
• With the change to Cherry MX switches we also enlarged the keys
• Added LED backlighting
• Added USB interface for even lower latency (now you can connect with Bluetooth or USB)

Here's a link to our Kickstarter project: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1666150716/keymousetm-the-keyboard-and-mouse-re-invented

If any of you have suggestions or feedback, feel free to reply here or on our Kickstarter project.
We value your input. 

Thanks!
James

[juyanith]

My main question is can the keys be fully remapped? Many folks here use alternate layouts and are very particular about them. Even the placement of the "number shift" and "arrow shift" keys would be important. With that in mind blank and/or movable key caps a possibility?

[KeyMouse]

My main question is can the keys be fully remapped? Many folks here use alternate layouts and are very particular about them. Even the placement of the "number shift" and "arrow shift" keys would be important. With that in mind blank and/or movable key caps a possibility?

Very good points.  Thank you for your input.

Yes the keys can be re-mapped with the KeyMouse software. (Right now, if you re-map the left space, it also re-maps the right space.  In our new prototypes we might change this so the left space can be remapped independent of the right space.) 

We are planning to offer alternate keycap sets (DVORAK, international, blank keycaps)

-James

[FrostyToast]

Will we be able to replace the caps with standard spec ones?
I don't like proprietary stuff.

[KeyMouse]

Will we be able to replace the caps with standard spec ones?
I don't like proprietary stuff.

This is still up in the air - we want to use standard keycaps if we can.  But the device can be a little more compact if we use custom keycaps.  If we do custom keycaps, we plan to make sets available for DVORAK, international, and blank keycaps.

[yirimyah]

This looks great and I'll be backing it.

* Bulky: This device is likely to be unwieldy and heavy compared to a normal mouse, but I don't imagine you can do much about that other than ensure you put some thought into the size and location of the Teflon "feet" of the unit.

* Compatibility: You specify mobile devices as unsupported and OS X as not yet supported. You should correct this, as it's little additional work for you but a substantial selling point. Every single potential customer you have possesses at least one bluetooth-capable mobile device.

* Switchable bluetooth: Kinesis make a Bluetooth keyboard which has a key allowing the user to switch which device the output is directed to. This is implemented easily; the keyboard has multiple Bluetooth controllers, in this case 3, and the switch determines which of them is connected to the keyboard. Without this, the user has to tell one device to unpair from the keyboard and the other to reconnect, which is inconvenient and tedious. This seems like another feature which would be cheap for you to implement but attractive to customers; alternatively I'd be personally quite happy with a button which toggled between using the USB for a connection and just using it for charging. This would allow me to have a Bluetooth connection to my iPad and a wired connection to my computer, and could probably be implemented in your software without any hardware changes. Pulling out and putting in the USB cable 100x/day would eventually damage the device, and it's inconvenient, and it would cycle the Li-Ion battery way too much.

* Keycaps: I understand your position - you feel that for your product standard keycaps are an inferior option and you don't see why you should have to use an inferior option. But your customers are people who are interested in different sorts of keyboards. They will likely have about a million different, sharply divided opinions about what keycaps should look like and feel like and etc etc. If you make your own you will have to either a) use PBT and pass on the substantial cost increase; or b) not use PBT and have that fact mentioned every.single.time your keyboard is mentioned in online discussion forums. If you go for standard keycaps you can use the cheapest, ****tiest ABS around and it won't matter; some of your customers won't notice, and the ones that would notice won't mind because they were already going to use this particular set of thick blank PBT keycaps which they've purchased in some group buy.

* Keyswitches: Browns are just ****, why use them? If you want tactile/non-clicky, get Clears. I'd guess people would prefer those, or blacks, or reds. Or better yet, a few choices; it's no additional work at the factory, next to no additional cost, and people like options.

[Oobly]

I have some feedback for you about the design:

1. The ergonomics could and should be better. The wrists are bent back too far, they key areas are cramped, you can't involve your arm muscles when typing (only your finger / forearms), you can't use your fingers for precise positioning of the mouse cursor (only larger arm muscle groups), etc.

Some of these are simply due to the "reinventing the mouse and keyboard" by combining them. Typing and mouse pointer control require specific movements and muscle groups and you are forcing separate muscle groups per action (larger, less precise upper arm muscle movements for mouse pointer and smaller more precise movements for typing). For both actions you should be involving all muscle groups. Typing needs less accuracy than positioning the mouse pointer.

2. If you're using MX switches you should allow aftermarket keycaps to fit (even if you don't use a standard layout, as long as standard cap sizes are supported people can make up a set to fit).

3. It's bulky and unwieldy. Not likely to be light either if they're wireless.

4. Too many buttons on the fingers, particularly pinkie, not enough on thumbs. Too many buttons overall. With your hand fixed in position on the device there are too many buttons for each pinkie to reach and hold down. The Shift and layer modifiers should be on thumb buttons rather, as it is better at prolonged presses and you have made the same mistake of classic "normal" keyboards by only having the thumbs (both of them) doing space. All the extra buttons could be on the normal key positions, just with different layer modifier keys on the thumbs.

It's a compromise for each of the use cases instead of being better at either of them. For gaming you need to be able to make fast and precise movements from the unit you use for mouse movement, the unit you're not using for mouse movement should be fixed in place and offer as many keyswitches in easy reach without repositioning. I see a dedicated gamepad and lightweight and accurate mouse as best for this scenario.

For typing, both units should be fixed in place so your upper arm movements can be used to reduce the fatigue of the finger and forearm muscles.

I see this and other devices like it (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/70308014/kings-assembly-a-computer-mouse-full-of-awesome) as solving a problem that doesn't exist and ultimately causing more problems than they solve. If you want to make a more ergonomic keyboard, make a more ergonomic keyboard. If you want to make a more useful and ergonomic mouse then make that.

I do see the case for including a mouse pointing mechanism in a keyboard for when you don't need gaming level precision, but there are more elegant solutions that don't restrict the muscle groups used for typing such as a TrackPoint, hall effect joystick or mini trackball. When you need more precision for office use there is also the rollermouse and full size trackball. For gaming, a more ergonomic, but still lightweight mouse combined with an ergonomic half of a split keyboard is a great combination.

[PieterGen]

I like the concept. Full mouse control without taking your hands off the keyboard! Kudos for the creativity and execution 

I'd like to try it, to see if  works in real life. I hope it does not suffer from the "jack of all trades syndrome" like many "all in one" products do. Keyboards and mice seem to have different requierements- keyboards are ideally heavy, stay put on one place. Mice are ideally light, easy to move. Have to see it in real life.

On the other hand, who would have thought that phones could take over some jobs of PC's? Remember Steve Ballmer laughing at the iPhone because "it doesn't even have a keyboard so it will fail"? So I'm not a nay sayer - surprise us!

[PieterGen]

Or... you could build an entire PC into your mouse. 

[Sc0tTy]

For me the weight would be the biggest problem, I really like the idea though and I am watching the kickstarter.

[KeyMouse]

Thanks for the feedback guys.  I'll relay this to the rest of our team here.

I agree "Yirimyah", it should be quite easy to allow people to choose other MX switches - blue, red, clear, etc.
We are already working on the compatibility, and I think it's a great idea to allow fast and convenient switching from computer to iPad connections, etc.

-James

[KeyMouse]

Or... you could build an entire PC into your mouse. 

That's a very interesting concept. 

[hoggy]

How are you mounting the switches?  PCB mounted switches can be opened easily to swap the spring and stem. Plate mounted need to desoldered first (the entire plate).  If you are using a plate, you might find the phantom plate design interesting as it has cutouts to allow the switch to be opened.

[juyanith]

I would very much prefer that both space keys be mapped independently. Having recently mapped shift to my left thumb it would be hard do go back.

[jacobolus]

I have to agree with Oobly. If you really want to make the best thing you can, you should figure out what kind of use case you’re targeting, and what the real requirements are for those uses, and work from there. Just mashing things together without considering the context often yields unsatisfying results.

If you want to have the mouse pointer make small precise movements (for e.g. Photoshop, CAD software, video games, etc.) then you should look at the grips on existing tools people use for precise movements (both the physical shapes and the way people hold them): fencing foils, pens, chopsticks, kitchen knives, ping pong paddles, pliers, files, dental picks, scalpels, etc. The crucial thing to note is that all of these afford a combination of finger, wrist, elbow, and shoulder movements, which gives very precise and accurate control over scales from a few millimeters to a few feet; these use opposition between the thumb and fingers for the grip, and have their center of mass at the fingertips. Less precise tools like hammers, machetes, baseball bats, skillets, etc. ditch the finger control because they only work at the larger scales and require strength along with precision; these use opposition between the the fingers and the palm/base of the thumb for the grip, and often have their center of mass between a few inches and a couple feet away from the hand.

Traditional mice and trackballs aren’t especially great shapes for very precise work (because they weren’t really designed to be super precise), and it takes lots of training for people to get used to them for very fine work. But I feel like you’re moving in the opposite direction, making something bigger and bulkier and harder to precisely control than a regular mouse.

If you want the mouse pointer to be imprecise but convenient (basically, the trackpoint use case), you should consider whether your new design is actually better than a trackpoint, trackpad, or trackball on a standard keyboard. For this type of use case, the important part should be a no-compromises keyboard, with the built-in mouse as an added convenience. Unfortunately, I feel like your design imposes some substantial problems for a keyboard: it’s never locked down in once place, which means that to type on it requires holding it down with the hand while typing with the fingers to keep it from scooting all over the table and generating accidental cursor movement. This is actually very unergonomic for a keyboard which takes mostly standard keyboard-type movements. It reduces finger flexibility and increases tension in all the muscles, and is going to be tiring and possibly lead faster to RSI. On a keyboard, people should ideally have their hands “floating” in the air, so that the big muscles of the upper arm can absorb some of the repetitive shocks.

The advantage you do get is that the hand is always ready to move the cursor at any time with no gap between cursor movement and typing. You should try to figure out in which contexts that’s an advantage, and see if you can target specifically to those. I’m not sure I can think of any use cases currently requiring two hands on the keyboard and simultaneous mouse movement – mainly because all the existing software we have is designed for a regular keyboard and mouse, so any software requiring or substantially benefiting from simultaneous typing and cursor movement is going to be a non-starter on standard input devices. (Basically, you’re put in a sucky position, because there’s a chicken-egg problem w/r/t software that would actually benefit from the keymouse.)

I suspect that you’ll be able to sell some of these (like the King’s Assembly people did), but mostly as novelties to curious people, and after people try using them for a few weeks, they’ll ultimately put them on a shelf somewhere and go back to the traditional keyboard and mouse.

But hey, it’s great to see new experiments, so I wish you all the best! Maybe I’m wrong and in 5 years we’ll all be using keyboard/mouse combo inputs.

[FrostyToast]

Have you ever looked at Matias ALPS?
They can be almost half a cherry unit shorter which would be good for thumb keys I assume.

[KeyMouse]

How are you mounting the switches?  PCB mounted switches can be opened easily to swap the spring and stem. Plate mounted need to desoldered first (the entire plate).  If you are using a plate, you might find the phantom plate design interesting as it has cutouts to allow the switch to be opened.

Currently, the switches are plate mounted.  We'll look into the phantom plate design.

[KeyMouse]

I would very much prefer that both space keys be mapped independently. Having recently mapped shift to my left thumb it would be hard do go back.

In our discussions today with the team, we are planning to make it so you can map the left and right space independently.  So that will be nice.

[KeyMouse]

Have you ever looked at Matias ALPS?
They can be almost half a cherry unit shorter which would be good for thumb keys I assume.

Thanks for pointing those out.  We have looked at ALPS switches before.  We're planning to make all of the keys use Cherry MX if possible for consistency.  But we'll have to see what the space will permit.  We'll keep the Matias ALPS in mind.

[ivanwfr]

you can't use your fingers for precise positioning of the mouse cursor

I agree, but maybe we should not consider the KeyMouse as a replacement for the mouse but rather as another way to control the pointer. It could be like using two mice at the same time, one with a different dpi than the other for fine tuning. It could have its advantages. Left hand (for a right-handed) would quickly warp the pointer near the target and the right one would take over for a precise positioning. Maybe some smart mutual exclusion process could be interesting to investigate.

The Shift and layer modifiers should be on thumb buttons rather, as it is.

This lead to the question of key-mapping. Up to what point these mappings can go. Which are those all-but-these keys are programmable. This is an issue only if some keys are not programmable.

For typing, both units should be fixed in place so your upper arm movements can be used to reduce the fatigue of the finger and forearm muscles.

Here a questions: could that point be addressed with some kind of (possibly integrated) rubber pods or something (just a thought) ?

I have to agree with Oobly. If you really want to make the best thing you can, you should figure out what kind of use case you're targeting, and what the real requirements are for those uses, and work from there. Just mashing things together without considering the context often yields unsatisfying results.

Not that I disagree, but:
- First, a few years spent on this project by some guys clever enough to build this prototype comes to mind when reading this! ... I say this is simply uncalled for without some supporting facts.
- Then, if you take a standard keyboard, I think it qualifies for the worst case scenario... So, if we want to look at the bright side, any sensible project like the KeyMouse is one step in "a" good direction. The only drawback being: it's not a standard keyboard! And this is a real handicap as long as novelty is cool up to the point where you ask people to change some long time unlearned habits. Anyway, we are not looking at an attempt to sell a replacement for those billions keyboard users, we just need a few hundreds more. And if James posted here, I'm pretty sure it's precisely because he is trying to avoid all the pitfalls described here. If he wanted to mash things together, I'm sure he could do it without looking for an approval.

Back to the matter aspect of jacobolus' point, my use cases (talking only of my 10+ hours a day usage for many years, past and to come) are definitely not about producing tons of words as fast as possible. I can even say that letter frequency is quite irrelevant when it comes to optimize a specific keyboard layout. Most of my typing would appear as garbage for the average keyboard user... Meaning: I don't care about where a symbol is on a keyboard - as long as can say that it's there because I put it there! And if that was not such a good idea, I am the one who can do something about it right away.

So, about the satisfaction factor, I don't see how this uneven usage of a keyboard and a mouse (vim-editing, photoshoping, navigating, gesturing, ...) could be taken as a use-case for an ideal input device. That would be a nightmare and there is absolutely no chance whatsoever to come up with something you could safely publish. This means I am ready for compromises and having many programmable buttons is a good start. Turning a keyboard into something else than the current standard device can't go the wrong way from where I'm looking.

I m not sure I can think of any use cases currently requiring two hands on the keyboard and simultaneous mouse movement   mainly because all the existing software we have is designed for a regular keyboard and mouse, so any software requiring or substantially benefiting from simultaneous typing and cursor movement is going to be a non-starter on standard input devices.

- Not talking about  the average user here, as it simply does not apply. After all, a KeyMouse on an office desk is not currently a reasonable prospect:
Maybe there are not so many situations where key-mousing would be really helpful, but, when we are stuck in one of those, we could have quite another opinion.
Every single software we use everyday as a professional works with keyboard shortcuts and pointer motion and click. And, even if you don't use some feature everyday, it can come handy, mostly when you know your way around macro programming and some power tools to make them work as is the case with AutoHotkey and StrokeIt for instance.

As a simple example, in Photoshop, standard shortcut "m" for selecting is on the right part of a QWERTY keyboard, "v" for moving is on the left. How can I manage if I want to keep my right hand on the mouse? There, the KeyMouse compromise could be a better choice than half keyboard, remapping or macros patches!

I suspect that you ll be able to sell some of these (like the King s Assembly people did), but mostly as novelties to curious people, and after people try using them for a few weeks, they ll ultimately put them on a shelf somewhere and go back to the traditional keyboard and mouse.

I have some, graying on their shelf. Still, I don't know why that is but it does not leads me to consider novelties as potential failure without thinking I may be wrong. Look at what people are ready to suffer with their smartphone onscreen keyboard. I'm much less tolerant than most as the only reasonable reaction you would have 10 years ago would have been "You're nuts, people will never be able to enter more than 10 letters this way before giving up, not to say 140!"

And maybe, probably, we're all wrong if you're reading this from your 2025+ perspective? ... No need to answer, I'm not around anymore.

[KeyMouse]

Thanks for your comments ivanwfr.

you can't use your fingers for precise positioning of the mouse cursor

I agree, but maybe we should not consider the KeyMouse as a replacement for the mouse but rather as another way to control the pointer. It could be like using two mice at the same time, one with a different dpi than the other for fine tuning. It could have its advantages. Left hand (for a right-handed) would quickly warp the pointer near the target and the right one would take over for a precise positioning. Maybe some smart mutual exclusion process could be interesting to investigate.

I like this idea to set one KeyMouse to fast mouse motion and the other one as slow mouse motion for precision.

For typing, both units should be fixed in place so your upper arm movements can be used to reduce the fatigue of the finger and forearm muscles.

Here a questions: could that point be addressed with some kind of (possibly integrated) rubber pods or something (just a thought) ?

So far in using our current prototypes, this has not been an issue at all.  When typing, the typing cursor does not move with the mouse.  The mouse cursor sometimes moves slightly when I type on the KeyMouse, but that didn't matter because the typing cursor position is not changed unless I click with the mouse.

I m not sure I can think of any use cases currently requiring two hands on the keyboard and simultaneous mouse movement   mainly because all the existing software we have is designed for a regular keyboard and mouse, so any software requiring or substantially benefiting from simultaneous typing and cursor movement is going to be a non-starter on standard input devices.

The idea is not to make it so you can type at the same time you are moving the mouse.  The idea is to make it so you don't have to physically move your hand back and forth from the keyboard to mouse. 

-James

[jacobolus]

- First, a few years spent on this project by some guys clever enough to build this prototype comes to mind when reading this! ... I say this is simply uncalled for without some supporting facts.

Which part is uncalled for? No one is wishing these guys ill or calling them stupid, we’re just questioning the premise. There are many many many projects in the world where a bunch of extremely clever people spend decades building something based on questionable premises. A few years spent by a clever person is no guarantee of anything.

Anyway, I think all of us here are hoping for the best for this project, it’s a neat idea and I hope they execute their vision as well as possible, (a) so that we can see whether the idea has legs or not, and (b) as inspiration for other people who want to make things.

- Then, if you take a standard keyboard, I think it qualifies for the worst case scenario... So, if we want to look at the bright side, any sensible project like the KeyMouse is one step in "a" good direction.

I think most of us agree the standard keyboard has many severe flaws, but it also has advantages: it’s a ubiquitous standard, most people have learned to use it, most software is designed for it, it makes skills transferrable across machines / people. There have been hundreds of attempts to displace the standard keyboard for >100 years, so it must have at least some design elements going for it.

I absolutely think it’s worth challenging standard keyboards, which is why I advocate various non-standard keyboards to everyone I can, propose layout ideas, work on my own alternative keyboard prototypes, and work to critique various designs (for instance, Matias is adding the ability to use either right or left spacebar as a backspace key to their ErgoPro keyboard, along the lines of the old “erase ease” keyboards, at my suggestion, and I’ve met with the keyboard.io people several times to give feedback on their various prototypes). Pretty much everyone in this “ergonomics” subforum at geekhack is interested in nonstandard keyboards.

Most of my typing would appear as garbage for the average keyboard user... Meaning: I don't care about where a symbol is on a keyboard - as long as can say that it's there because I put it there! And if that was not such a good idea, I am the one who can do something about it right away.

So, about the satisfaction factor, I don't see how this uneven usage of a keyboard and a mouse (vim-editing, photoshoping, navigating, gesturing, ...) could be taken as a use-case for an ideal input device. That would be a nightmare and there is absolutely no chance whatsoever to come up with something you could safely publish. This means I am ready for compromises and having many programmable buttons is a good start. Turning a keyboard into something else than the current standard device can't go the wrong way from where I'm looking.

I find this part hard to understand. Can you try to express your idea more clearly?

As a simple example, in Photoshop, standard shortcut "m" for selecting is on the right part of a QWERTY keyboard, "v" for moving is on the left. How can I manage if I want to keep my right hand on the mouse? There, the KeyMouse compromise could be a better choice than half keyboard, remapping or macros patches!

A keymouse is going to be a really tough tool to use for Photoshop, it seems to me. The mousing part of photoshop is very substantial, and e.g. a trackpoint or trackpad is really tough to use; most of the serious Photoshop users I know stick to a mouse or a pen input, and carry a mouse around when they’re taking a laptop on the go. I agree that Photoshop’s system of mnemonic one-letter keyboard shortcuts (including UIOPJLM) for tools is not ideal for pure left handed use, but few tasks in Photoshop really require two hands on the keyboard: when you need to type a layer name or put some text into a design, switching from mouse to keyboard isn’t too bad.

But if Photoshop is a target use case for the KeyMouse, then the creators should go find some professional designers, photo retouchers, etc., and put a prototype in their hands and see what happens. Which is basically my whole point from before. Instead of designing this thing in the abstract, figure out some concrete use cases, find someone who is very serious about that use case, and get them a prototype and see whether they’d be willing to use it for serious work, and if not, why not.

[ivanwfr]

  I like it when we put everything on the table so we can choose which are the few points worth a debate at the moment. The seriousness of the approach being stated as not questioned here, we can more clearly care of the matter at hand.

How  this new attempt would have a better chance than all the previous ones? Assuming none of the makers being more qualified than all those who tried before, taking advantage of new technology should play a decisive part in this one to maximize the odds, is it the case?

I think most of us agree the standard keyboard has many severe flaws, but it also has advantages: it's a ubiquitous standard, most people have learned to use it, most software is designed for it, it makes skills transferrable across machines / people. There have been hundreds of attempts to displace the standard keyboard for >100 years, so it must have at least some design elements going for it.

I am always tempted to take these exact features as being the reasons why we are stuck with this crazy standard 130 years later, with all these urban legends to emphasize the idea that investigating the rationale for its design is simply irrelevant. The message is don't even try, it's tragic! At this point, it requires no justification to occupy the place and we could find many examples of those unmovable de facto standards getting in the way of progress.

I think there is no need to comment further on this currently, we can just have to look at the news to get an idea. I hate the standard keyboard for the exact reasons you based its justifications on. Dogma impose itself through mind-control, it's the whole idea.

The worst option would be to mitigate new concept with some concession to standard, because the powerful reluctance to change will prevail. People will try to maximize acquired skills at any cost. Short term advantage in also a trait of the time!

About the contribution I pretend to bring as an asset here, it has to be based on personal requirements as long as I have no way to justify talking about the needs of more than myself. I am not entitled in any way for this. What I tried to express here (trying is the word because I'm not an English native), is that I find it difficult to talk about use case scenarios while working with a keyboard the way I do, even if I spend more time with it than most PC users.
Still, I think that the programmable feature is so much a requirement in my case that I may represent a noticeable kind or customer for this device. If we see the KeyMouse as a pioneering evolution, people like me are unavoidable. You always need some geek when you look for guinea pigs to try a new keyboard.

And for my example with Photoshop, it was only meant to pick a simple example of what could easily be addressed if you work with some "really" programmable input device (I use it like I would a CAD tool, not recommended but it's occasionally as I would a Swiss knife (plain wrong, I know) ... currently on this Twiddler 3 wiki page).

What I am mainly looking for is a device with a real dashboard, not one of those shiny customization tool whose author has been hired only for a few months and won't be there for any new release for years after launch (like Ergodex for instance).
What I am not looking for has also to do with poorly implemented configuration files that generate some proprietary format (possibly some simple serialized garbage-out to save, garbage to share, garbage-in to load.)
What I am looking for is something that generates some documented good old XML based configuration that is exportable, editable, extendable and maybe some API or some open source code.

Let's even dream with some LUA extension (the MMO's kind of) that could turn our KeyMouse into something we don't even care to discuss right now...

[jacobolus]

all these urban legends to emphasize the idea that investigating the rationale for its design is simply irrelevant. The message is don't even try, it's tragic! [...] Dogma impose itself through mind-control, it's the whole idea.

I’m really not sure which “urban legends” you’re talking about.

In any event, literally no one here is saying that we shouldn’t investigate the rationale behind designs, or that we shouldn’t try new ideas. Indeed, my entire point is that we should investigate the rationales, and try to design from first principles based on understanding of human physiology and concrete use cases.

The idea that anyone here is trying to control your mind through “dogma” is laughable.

Still, I think that the programmable feature is so much a requirement in my case that I may represent a noticeable kind or customer for this device. If we see the KeyMouse as a pioneering evolution, people like me are unavoidable.

This is not the first keyboard-like device to be fully programmable, and it’s not the first device to combine keyboard and mouse into one piece (indeed, I know of three earlier similar devices, including one which even has a patent on the idea that the KeyMouse probably infringes).

But anyhow, I absolutely agree with several important ideas here:
(1) It’s great to try to reduce or eliminate the slowdown when switching from keyboard to mouse and back again, which slowdown is not only inefficient but also pretty bad for ergonomics.
(2) Keyboards and other input devices should be fully programmable

And we haven’t talked about it much here, but I also agree that:
(3) A sculpted keyboard can make the keys easier to reach than a flat keyboard
(4) There should be several buttons in reach of each thumb

The part that I’m skeptical of is having the entire base of the keyboard move around as a mouse. I’d love to see someone succeed in proving that this idea would work, but I haven’t seen compelling evidence so far, that’s all.

What I am mainly looking for is a device with a real dashboard, not one of those shiny customization tool [...] What I am looking for is something that generates some documented good old XML based configuration that is exportable, editable, extendable and maybe some API or some open source code.  Let's even dream with some LUA extension (the MMO's kind of) that could turn our KeyMouse into something we don't even care to discuss right now...

I think you’re getting a bit ahead of the project here. If the part that’s interesting is the configuration system, you should find someone who is working on that as a generic project, not someone building hardware. Designing and prototyping new hardware and then bringing it to production is a full plate for any team; expecting the same team to also be better than anyone else at making configuration software is unreasonable. Personally I don’t want configuration as XML (bleh!), and I think Lua scripting sounds well out of scope for a keyboard project, but if those are things you want, you should either work on that problem or find someone who is working on it or can be convinced to work on it. It’s an entirely orthogonal problem to hardware building.

[ivanwfr]

I m really not sure which  urban legends  you re talking about.

I know you know what I am talking about - Something I found worth reading on this here:  Smithonian.

The idea that anyone here is trying to control your mind through  dogma  is laughable.

Please don't, I am not here to troll, you know that too.

This is not the first keyboard-like device to be fully programmable, and it s not the first device to combine keyboard and mouse into one piece (indeed, I know of three earlier similar devices (...)

This point is also on my list and that's why I share your concern about how this project is trying to make a difference... And I would like to convince myself and others that something new is happening. Now is the right time and geekhack the right place to talk about it with people who know what they are talking about.

The part that I m skeptical of is having the entire base of the keyboard move around as a mouse. I d love to see someone succeed in proving that this idea would work, but I haven t seen compelling evidence so far, that s all.

This too! And I'm ready to give it a try, with the risk of having to cope with a (partially) failed attempt.

Then, about software, I'm not worried about being ahead of the project, I am certain I am. And that's my point. To make things hapen, we have to think ahread. And I don't believe in generic project when those who did that for more than a century still have to show us something usable. Hardware people can't lie, what they do just has to work or get recycled. And that's why I'm here because debating at no cost is nothing more than some ego fight.

Designing and prototyping new hardware and then bringing it to production is a full plate for any team; expecting the same team to also be better than anyone else at making configuration software is unreasonable.

This is the reason why I spend time here.
- I am not involved into the hardware beyond the contribution welcomed by the makers.
- On the software part, I am also ready to contribute if possible. I'm not certain I can but I have to try, only if it were to address your comment about having to choose either to be effective on the hardware part or the software. As if pretending to take care of both was not an option.

Personally I don t want configuration as XML (bleh!), and I think Lua scripting sounds well out of scope for a keyboard project, but if those are things you want, you should either work on that problem or find someone who is working on it or can be convinced to work on it. It s an entirely orthogonal problem to hardware building.

Thanks for the advice. I wont comment further about what I am going to do with it because I am done replying on this kind of trivial conclusion popping out from nowhere.  Still, I am interested if you care to elaborate.

Here are the reason why I take time to comment here:
- The makers are reading these messages,
- meaning that if we have a say about what will happen, now is the right time.
- If someone comes with an idea that still could be taken under consideration, the more we are to comment on it, the better.

- ivan

[Oobly]

...
I know you know what I am talking about - Something I found worth reading on this here:  Smithonian.

Okay, I just can't let this stand without saying something.

" In theory then, the QWERTY system should maximize the separation of common letter pairings. This theory could be easily debunked for the simple reason that “er” is the fourth most common letter pairing in the English language. However, one of the typewriter prototypes had a slightly different keyboard that was only changed at the last minute. If it had been put into production this article would have been about the QWE.TY keyboard"

And this is their main argument against the concept that QWERTY layout was designed to prevent the gravity returned hammers from jamming. However, they fail to realise that the levers and thus the hammers for letters that appear next to each other on the board are NOT next to each other at all. This is actually the reason for another non-ergonomic feature of the layout, the uneven horizontal stagger. The levers from a column run next to each other and have to be centred under each cap to prevent twisting, so the rows are staggered to allow them all to fit. You will thus note that there are 3 levers between those for E and R.

The Kyoto university article is just so much hot air. Even a slow operater would be faster on a keyboard than even the best morse operator can tap out the codes. It's all speculation and poor speculation at that.

"More recent research has debunked any claims that Dvorak is more efficient"

The article linked to (via Slashdot) is very old and stinks even more than the original and the Kyoto paper. Just look at the jocular nature of the Slashdot comments to get an idea, or if you really want to read it, go ahead, but be prepared to laugh a lot.

Every layout analyzer shows a very distinct advantage to Dvorak over QWERTY. The QWERTY layout honestly sucks, especially compared to the latest, computer-optimised layouts like AdNW, although it is possible to design a worse one if you try

Even so, it's the physical layout that's more of a hindrance and danger to the health of typists hands and wrists, with typing habits and setup / posture  being even more of a factor. You can type healthily on a QWERTY board if you do it properly, but there is a LOT of room for improvement.

My take on the QWERTY layout origin is that it most likely WAS designed to prevent jamming of the gravity-returned hammers by separating the most rapidly-typed character pairs, while still retaining some optimisation features. The existence of the QWE.TY board could lend credence to the legend that the Remington company liked the idea of being able to type the whole name of the product on the top row and thus the R was moved, but that's just pure speculation on my part. Of course, once the mechanical problem was solved and Sholes presented the next model to the company with a more efficient layout, they baulked at releasing a product that would force typists who were already loyal to Remington to relearn the layout (considering the 100,000 or more already sold in the US alone). This is both sad from an engineer's perspective and sensible from a marketer's one.

I should know something about this subject, I have designed and built my own ergonomic keyboard and designed my own character layout for it, based on the physical layout. It is very practical, efficient and comfortable to use. To be honest, I probably spent too much time on the character layout, since it doesn't have as much impact on ergonomics as the other factors I mentioned, but it's still nice to have something you're sure is as good as it can be within practical constraints. If you're interested in my take of what a keyboard should look like, you can read more here: https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=49721.msg1077639#msg1077639

I applaud the makers of the KeyMouse for making something different and attempting to innovate in the field, but I fear their device will be just as jacobolus has said, a novelty which gets a surge of interest at the start, but ultimately ends up on the shelf and not in use for the reasons both of us have mentioned.

[ivanwfr]

Okay, I just can't let this stand without saying something. (...)

You mean it looks this is yet another manifestation of how this urban legend is fueling itself with some more crap at the expense of those who are trying their best to defuse it
I must admit, QWERTY deserves some respect.

I should know something about this subject, ... https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=49721.msg1077639#msg1077639

I'm with you when you applaud this KeyMouse project and I applaud what you have accomplished all the same. About chances for a total failure, this one will not benefit from the consideration reserved to some custom project, it will be a simple and plain 250$ frustration.

[jacobolus]

I know you know what I am talking about [...]
You mean it looks this is yet another manifestation of how this urban legend is fueling itself with some more crap at the expense of those who are trying their best to defuse it

Can you explain more specifically which “urban legend” you’re talking about, and how it has anything to do with the discussion here? I’m sorry but I really don’t know what specifically you are talking about. Just linking to a rambling blog post isn’t very helpful.

(Or don’t if you prefer; this whole conversation is quite far off topic.)

[ivanwfr]

It's definitely off topic but as I also would like we put an end to this side comment, I would say it was a clumsy attempt on my part to say that if this layout heritage is the object of so many contradictions it's simply because people are still trying to make sense where there is none. And I agree, let's simply forget it.

[Lord of Narwhals]

However, one of the typewriter prototypes had a slightly different keyboard that was only changed at the last minute. If it had been put into production this article would have been about the QWE.TY keyboard"

From what I've heard the reason for the QWERTY row was so that the marketing people could write the word 'typewriter' quickly using only that row of keys.

On topic now: It reminds me of the King's Assembly and I think it has the same two problems, weight and precision.
The difference between them seems to be that the King's Assembly is better at being a keyboard than at being a mouse, and the KeyMouse is better at being a mouse than at being a keyboard.
It's a neat idea and I hope it gets successfully funded but I most likely won't get one. If someone figures out a way to make a keyboard/mouse which is light weight, has mechanical switches, and good control as a mouse then I might actually buy one (unless it costs as much as a DataHand ofc).

[KeyMouse]

On topic now: It reminds me of the King's Assembly and I think it has the same two problems, weight and precision.
The difference between them seems to be that the King's Assembly is better at being a keyboard than at being a mouse, and the KeyMouse is better at being a mouse than at being a keyboard.
It's a neat idea and I hope it gets successfully funded but I most likely won't get one. If someone figures out a way to make a keyboard/mouse which is light weight, has mechanical switches, and good control as a mouse then I might actually buy one (unless it costs as much as a DataHand ofc).

Thanks for your input.

With the KeyMouse, because the wrist doesn't rest on the mousepad, it does take some getting used to.  Products like this will have a similar effect:  http://www.fellowes.com/us/en/Products/Pages/product-details.aspx?prod=US-8037501&cat&subcat&tertcat#
And some of our backers on Kickstarter say they use these wrist rests for their mouse, and they really like them.
I personally like having both the left and right KeyMouse laser mouse sensors enabled.  Using both hands to move the mouse has been really nice after getting used to it.  This helps with the precision.

We're definitely trying to hit the product you're asking for.  As light weight as possible, Cherry MX switches, and we're trying to keep the cost down as much as possible too. 

All the feedback is appreciated.  Even when it highlights challenges or issues.  It just helps us make a better product.

[Lord of Narwhals]

I personally like having both the left and right KeyMouse laser mouse sensors enabled.  Using both hands to move the mouse has been really nice after getting used to it.  This helps with the precision.

That would be interesting to try out. For precision games like counter strike you could have a higher sensitivity on one hand than on the other so that you could turn around quickly and still be able to aim.

[chuckdee]

Necro-Thread ARISE!

So, I just found out about it. And it seems to be quite late.  But the updates are backer only (which seems shady when the project is running late).  So I wanted to ask anyone that backed, what's the status on this... and what are they saying?

It looks interesting, but I'm not sure of the feasibility of having the mouse literally in your typing hands.  And the thumb cluster looks pretty unwieldy.

Anyone have any thoughts or information?

[xtrafrood]

Huh. I'm curious if the user can hover and type; looks like the design prevents this from happening.

[KeyMouse]

For those of you who are interested, we now have KeyMouse available at www.keymouse.com

It took us a while and we were delayed by many manufacturing challenges, but we finally just decided to build a 3D print farm and manufacture ourselves.  We also got a lot of good feedback along the way.  The current design reflects the feedback from our own testing and our customers.  It's simplified, and many redundant keys removed to make the design more compact (easier to move around the desk as a mouse).  KeyMouse has been my primary input device for over a year now.  You can see testimonials on our website from existing users as well as comments on our forum.

There are more designs coming, also.  Since we are 3D printing for our manufacturing, we can launch new designs a lot more easily (including a trackball version, which many users have been asking for...we're working on it now).

For those who don't know already, we ended up refunding all our KickStarter backers in early 2016 due to the manufacturing challenges.  It was painful to do this, but we were having too many challenges with production.  Since that time we have not stopped working on it.  Thanks for your patience in the meantime.

Thanks,
Heber
www.keymouse.com

[hoggy]

Congrats on getting your product launched! 

Just bought one.  Looking forward to typing on it.

[kurplop]

It looks like many small improvements were made to improve the design. Best wishes on the launch.

[xtrafrood]

Dang, 150%+ very nice

[KeyMouse]

Thank you for your support

-Heber

[hoggy]

And it's on its way!  I'm impressed with the turnaround timetable for a 3d printed item.