Keyboard symmetry with minimal changes

[batfink]

Don't know if this has suggested before, but it occurred to me it would be possible to introduce symmetry to the standard keyboard with quite a modest change involving moving the top two rows to the right by a quarter key's width:

http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/bcdd220326be3ccda80c92ce02fbd72f

The idea is it would be a less extreme transition than a matrix/ergobox/keyboard.io style design, and would therefore be more likely to gain wider acceptance more easily. Probably the best would be to use index finger to type C (middle for X, etc), so that the motion of both hands is more natural and symmetrical. I think this design could be an reasonable improvement while still looking sufficiently like a standard keyboard to not scare away "normal" people...

[Findecanor]

I'm not so sure. For the right hand, I think that 1/3 staggering (in average) would be ideal.

There are already lots of keyboards that have a uniform 1/2 key stagger. The Commodore 128/D is one example. Some keyboards from Tipro also.

[jacobolus]

It’s definitely been proposed several times (here’s one example https://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=66836.msg1570519#msg1570519), but I don’t know if anyone has built one. Go for it and tell us how it goes! :-)

After you’re used to it, the primary change is going to be to make, on the left hand:
- Q a little less natural for the pinky to reach / a little more natural for the ring finger
- E, and especially R a bit easier,
- T a bit harder to reach
likewise, on the right hand to make:
- Y quite a bit easier to reach
- U, I, and O about the same
- P a bit easier for the pinky / harder for the ring finger.

It’s a fairly minor benefit IMO, but might appeal to some people.

The idea is it would be a less extreme transition than a matrix/ergobox/keyboard.io style design, and would therefore be more likely to gain wider acceptance more easily.

I’ve tried typing on a keyboard where the stagger was a uniform 1/4u for each row, and also on a keyboard where the stagger was a uniform 1/2u for each row. Each time, the slightly different positions for a bunch of keys drove me crazy for the couple hours I was using it. I don’t actually think this kind of seemingly small change is much easier to learn than switching to an Ergodox or whatever.

Probably the best would be to use index finger to type C (middle for X, etc), so that the motion of both hands is more natural and symmetrical.

You should do that on a standard keyboard anyway, in my opinion. :-)

[sypl]

Not quite sure I see the benefit to this. For me the big issue with the number row is that I have to move two rows off home and slide fingers left due to stagger. This decreases the stagger a quarter key, but that's about it. May as well go the whole hog and go full matrix style. I think matrix layout is actually more intuitive for more people. I'm sure some have seen keyboards like that and thought "why aren't all keyboards like that?"

[Oobly]

Not quite sure I see the benefit to this. For me the big issue with the number row is that I have to move two rows off home and slide fingers left due to stagger. This decreases the stagger a quarter key, but that's about it. May as well go the whole hog and go full matrix style. I think matrix layout is actually more intuitive for more people. I'm sure some have seen keyboards like that and thought "why aren't all keyboards like that?"

I agree that it's better to just "go the whole hog", but matrix is far from that. Split or angled vertical stagger with thumb keys is, preferably with a tenting option. Even better if it allows the thumb keys to be on a different plane, too.

I don't like any in between options as I feel they're making too many compromises and not enough improvements over the standard layout to overcome the benefit of familiarity. So, normal layout or full ergo for me.

[jacobolus]

May as well go the whole hog and go full matrix style.

Personally I think a strict rectangular matrix is slightly worse than the OP’s proposal here or a standard QWERTY/IBM keyboard, from a typing comfort perspective. I can see why some people like it from an aesthetic perspective though.

(The Typematrix has some additional advantages, like separating the two hands a bit and adding some more thumb keys, but I still don’t much like the result.)

[berserkfan]

I think all talk of symmetry is insufficient when the basic alphas aren't symmetrical in the first place. (I'm talking about QWERTY and other layouts that don't aim for 50-50 Right and Left hand usage.)  The usage of certain keys eg the capslock sitting in the prime middle row location is another non symmetrical use of the board - your right pinky will do much more useful work than the left pinky because caps lock and tab are much less actuated than return and backspace.

[Sigmoid]

What do you think of this semi-ortholinear approach?

The hole in the middle could be occupied by a trackpoint. (In fact the way I came up with the idea was thinking about how to place a trackpoint without custom or mutilated keycaps.)

I think all talk of symmetry is insufficient when the basic alphas aren't symmetrical in the first place. (I'm talking about QWERTY and other layouts that don't aim for 50-50 Right and Left hand usage.)

I think physical keyboard design and layout are two separate questions more or less.

[jacobolus]

What do you think of this semi-ortholinear approach?

How are you expecting to hold your hands on this keyboard? In my opinion the row staggering here is precisely the opposite of what you typically want. Even if your hands are coming in angled from the side, the pinky and ring finger naturally extend straight away or even slightly out to the sides, and stretching the index fingers to reach your T and Y keys is an annoying uncomfortable reach. By contrast, the bottom row should be shifted away from the center: with the hands coming to the keyboard at an angle, watch where fingers end up when you flex them.

In any event, I think both this and “ortholinear” keyboards more generally are notably worse than the standard keyboard, because they don’t really provide any ergonomic improvement for someone used to them, and they impose a substantial training cost on someone used to regular QWERTY/ANSI/IBM layout. If you want something better for typing on, you should add tenting, turn the two halves, add a column stagger, and make sure to tilt the board to the proper angle depending on the height of your desk and chair, and if you want to get really fancy adjust the vertical key height between columns.

[Data]

What do you think of this semi-ortholinear approach?

Show Image

How are you expecting to hold your hands on this keyboard? In my opinion the row staggering here is precisely the opposite of what you typically want. Even if your hands are coming in angled from the side, the pinky and ring finger naturally extend straight away or even slightly out to the sides, and stretching the index fingers to reach your T and Y keys is an annoying uncomfortable reach. By contrast, the bottom row should be shifted away from the center: with the hands coming to the keyboard at an angle, watch where fingers end up when you flex them.

In any event, I think both this and “ortholinear” keyboards more generally are notably worse than the standard keyboard, because they don’t really provide any ergonomic improvement for someone used to them, and they impose a substantial training cost on someone used to regular QWERTY/ANSI/IBM layout. If you want something better for typing on, you should add tenting, turn the two halves, add a column stagger, and make sure to tilt the board to the proper angle depending on the height of your desk and chair, and if you want to get really fancy adjust the vertical key height between columns.

I've seen you say this a lot, as if many of these efforts don't go far enough for you.  And that's fair, but you have to admit that some of them are at least a step in the right direction.  Some people can't deal with the stress of learning an entirely new way of interfacing with the keyboard -- even an MS Natural board is too much to wrap their heads around, so something like ortholinear might be a stepping stone toward better ergonomics.  Getting people thinking about improvements to the stupid "classic" keyboard layout in ways that might have better mass appeal than a complicated and expensive custom tented ergo is ultimately better for everyone.  Somebody will eventually stumble on a great idea.

[jacobolus]

Sorry, I’m not trying to be a buzzkill. By all means build keyboards in all sorts of different shapes and try typing on them!

The question was “what do you think”, so I was just providing my honest opinion, not trying to shut down discussion or prevent anyone from experimenting and reporting back what works for them.

I’ve actually made acrylic prototypes of a wide variety of shapes, at least a couple dozen different designs, including straight matrix, symmetric row stagger, standard row stagger with an angle between halves, matrix with an angle between halves, several different types of column stagger, split boards supported at all kinds of wacky angles and split distances, and a whole bunch of different thumb section designs. Most of those didn’t get wired up into working keyboards, but even from a quick prototype with switches and keycaps installed, it’s possible to figure out a lot about which finger and hand motions are easy and natural, vs. which ones are cumbersome.

I’ve gotten very side-tracked by several projects unrelated to keyboards in the past few months, so I haven’t yet finished making something I’m ultimately happy with. I’ll try to get back to it hopefully before *too* long.

My main goal with comments like these is to get people thinking about how exactly their hands and fingers will be positioned while at rest, and what kind of movements will be required to press various keys. It’s helpful to read some books about hand anatomy, but even just spending a few minutes (or hours, or days) considering the most comfortable and neutral positions for your own hand, and noting down (e.g. by tracing on paper, or making a plasticine model, or whatever) what the comfortable range of motion of each finger has for positioning it at the surface of keys, and what type of muscle motions are used for actually pressing a key and what direction that motion is aimed in, is very very useful for designing new keyboard shapes.

If someone is going to go to the several hours (at least) of work it takes to build a keyboard from scratch, I think it’s worth considering carefully what constraints are involved, and what the ultimate goals of the design are. For each design decision, there should ideally be some motivating reason. That reason might be as simple as “well I just made some arbitrary design ideas which I don’t think have been tried before, and I want to build it, try it, and compare against other designs to see what I can learn from the experiment.”

And that's fair, but you have to admit that some of them are at least a step in the right direction.  Some people can't deal with the stress of learning an entirely new way of interfacing with the keyboard [..] so something like ortholinear might be a stepping stone toward better ergonomics.

My personal opinion is that ortholinear keyboards in particular are worse than standard keyboards from an ergonomics perspective, and designed mostly for aesthetic rather than functional reasons. An Ergodox, Atreus, ErgoPro, Esrille, Kinesis Advantage, μTron, or keyboard.io (among other examples) are all IMO much better stepping stones to thinking about improved keyboard shapes.

Symmetric stagger keyboards can be a bit better than standard keyboards, but they still should have some more space between the two hands, would be better with some angle between halves (and even better with tenting), and should be carefully designed so that the keys are as close to the direction of finger motion as can reasonably be achieved. Obra’s concepts aren’t perfect but they’re not bad:


If you want something small and in one piece, can afford to give up a number row, and don’t mind a 60% footprint, this design is surprisingly nice to type on:


Cheers!

[Sigmoid]

Sorry, I�m not trying to be a buzzkill. By all means build keyboards in all sorts of different shapes and try typing on them!

Thanks for your input, no offense taken at all. Actually, I totally understand what you say about it being the "total opposite" of the right direction.

Honestly, my personal opinion at this point is that the worst thing about the standard keyboard may not be the keyboard or QWERTY itself, but the way we use it - and that is learned, and in no way suggested by the keyboard design itself. I have started a small experiment, whether I can use a standard macbook keyboard in a way that is significantly more convenient and easy on my wrists just by changing the way I approach typing...

If I look at the optimal resting position, taking into account the size and shape of the keyboard, then my hands are approximately at a 45 degree angle with the rows! The "natural" home positions are AERF JIO;! (QWERTY has gotten a whole lot less sucky just by reorienting my hands, now both I and E are on home keys.) My experience so far is that it's not worse than using "orthodox" hand position and fingering - I'm not saying it's "better", but at least I'm not forcing my wrists into unnatural positions, and I move my hands a lot less.
All without changing either the layout or the physical form factor of the keyboard.

The "step in the wrong direction" keyboard design was slightly influenced by this experience. T and Y are not index finger keys, they are middle finger keys in this position, and pretty easily accessible. That said, this looks much better.

[jacobolus]

My personal typing style on a standard layout keyboard has my forearms angled inward at about a 20–30° angle, with my wrists nearly straight (maybe a 5° outward turn, and as little flexion/extension as possible), with the outside edges of my wrist slightly lower than the inside (middle-facing) edges.

In neutral resting position I place my index fingers roughly above the near inside corners of the F and J keys, my middle and ring fingers approximately in the seam between the QWER and ASDF rows, and my pinkies roughly at the near outside corners of A and ; keys. On QWERTY, I type the Z key with my ring finger, the X key with my middle finger, and the C, V, and B keys with my left index finger. Otherwise most of the letter keys are typed as “standard” technique would dictate, but I use my right ring finger for P.

It’s definitely faster and more comfortable than the way most people are taught to type, but it’s still not great compared to a custom keyboard shape and a custom letter/function arrangement.

[Sigmoid]

Hm I think I may be trying too hard...

[naz]

The minimal way to do this is using an iso board and move zxcvb on space to the left, than way you can stop typing "c" with the index finger and "b" is no longer a stretch (on qwerty and colemak layouts). You can go even further and move all the letters for the right hand one space to the right, that way you can get some distance between hands all give your wrists a brake. Here is an example:



Pay no atention to the letters, you can do the same thing on qwerty, dvorak or any othe layout. This is way ISO is much better than ANSI, not because of the vertical enter key, but because you can improve symmetry and distance between hands (if you are willing to).

By the way, this is call a wide-angle mod. It started on the Colemak forums. I been using it for over a year and is great.

Regards.
 

[PieterGen]

Or this one....

[PieterGen]

Hm I think I may be trying too hard...

Nice.

[Sigmoid]

Nice.

Here's the next evolution, this time I added some extra clusters, drawing inspiration from the early IBM PC keyboards.

[steve.v]

This would really fix only half of the problem. Typing qwerty sucks.

[Sigmoid]

This would really fix only half of the problem. Typing qwerty sucks.

It's a well-established best practice to have the keyboard return scan codes according to qwerty, and leave the actual layout to the OS. Changing the position of some keys, like square brackets in hardware is made necessary by the symmetric layout and the home row indicators, but generally the layout should be a software thing,

[PieterGen]

Nice.

Here's the next evolution, this time I added some extra clusters, drawing inspiration from the early IBM PC keyboards.

Looks good :-)

[Sigmoid]

Speaking of symmetry, does anyone have recent experience with uniform .5u keyboards (like the Commodore 128)... My first computer was a Plus/4, which had the same uniform staggering, but I didn't properly type then (I was like 6 years old).

I'm wondering if it's any good, or if it's inferior to the standard.