Author Topic: thingy (Read 16404 times)

chimera15 · « **on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 02:34:20 »

Pretty pricey, but looks like it'd be AT functional, and blue alps. Interesting to know it exists if nothing else.

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-COMPUTERLAND-IBM-KEYBOARD-BLUE-SLIDER-SN-972-/290528313921?pt=PCA_Mice_Trackballs&hash=item43a4d64241

chimera15 · « **Reply #1 on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 09:25:52 »

Cause that's the type of layout it is.

chimera15 · « **Reply #2 on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 13:44:07 »

Shouldn't you want them more since you know they're higher quality and more solid?

kriminal · « **Reply #3 on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 20:42:59 »

meh looks exactly like the leading edge i destroyed for its switches, same layout, housing different name...

chimera15 · « **Reply #4 on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 21:35:27 »

Quote from: kriminal;295180

meh looks exactly like the leading edge i destroyed for its switches, same layout, housing different name...

Yeah, cept the leading edge board is xt only. The thing that's unique about this is that it's a working board in the f format.

Pretty much the only model f layouts that work with modern systems are a few zenith models which have crap switches in them, an ultra rare northgate, the at f, and this one.

It's really rare to find this format in a working board, which is why it's a model f type. That's it's selling point.

Before I became familiar with the minitouch and a few other rare mini mechanicals I thought this was about as compact mechanicals got, so it is pretty rare as far as this goes and even working boards in this format are rare.

It's an exact clone to an f, cept it uses better switches imo. Blues are my favorite switch and feel 100 times better than buckling springs to me.

It's not just some at/xt alps board in a standard format. It's much more compact. If you don't want to call it a model f type, you should tell me what the name of this format is. Semi compact, or side function key style maybe?

Soarer · « **Reply #5 on:** Mon, 14 February 2011, 22:53:52 »

AT layout.

Or 84-key AT layout, but the 84-key is redundant since the 101/102-key is the enhanced AT layout (and besides, for those you'd probably just say ANSI or ISO, depending).

Model F is a type of switch.

chimera15 · « **Reply #6 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 03:50:38 »

Quote from: Soarer;295213

AT layout.

Or 84-key AT layout, but the 84-key is redundant since the 101/102-key is the enhanced AT layout (and besides, for those you'd probably just say ANSI or ISO, depending).

Model F is a type of switch.

Almost no one knows the difference between at and enhanced at anymore. The number of keys a board has isn't descriptive of it's layout. F type is much more clear. 83 or 84 AT also describes minitouch's, and full minis.

Also anyone looking for an F AT may find this which they may prefer like I would. Given that F AT's go commonly for around this price, blue alps boards sell for $40-50 just for their switches on xt boards, I don't think It's overpriced at all.

Lenny_Nero · « **Reply #7 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 05:32:28 »

Looks like the smaller version of my Panasonic business boards.
IIRC the 286 versions, but I dont think they are switchable only my 500's are.
Could be a good reason to go and find them to check, but they dont have the knobby bits on the end like the 'F' (and that one does) does.

No I'm wrong, I checked my sig as this is the only other one I have seen...
http://www7.ocn.ne.jp/~hisao/image/bp286.htm
Was going to use it for the switch swap into my Zero, because I was sure it was XT only ?

I dont think that is such a bad price for that board, you sure have the good crop of boards over there.

Soarer · « **Reply #8 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 05:43:21 »

Quote from: chimera15;295290

Almost no one knows the difference between at and enhanced at anymore. The number of keys a board has isn't descriptive of it's layout. F type is much more clear. 83 or 84 AT also describes minitouch's, and full minis.

Also anyone looking for an F AT may find this which they may prefer like I would. Given that F AT's go commonly for around this price, blue alps boards sell for $40-50 just for their switches on xt boards, I don't think It's overpriced at all.

Noone needs to know the difference between AT and enhanced AT any more. They usually call the latter regular / full size / ANSI / ISO.

I disagree that F type is clearer. If anything, most people would think of the XT layout then. I have a Model F with 122 keys on the way!

The only thing AT about a minitouch is the connector and signalling, which has nothing to do with the layout. WTF are full minis? Do you mean that which everyone else on the planet calls either tenkeyless or space saver (sic)?

I'm sure people would've known what you meant if you'd described this board as: 'AT layout with blue Alps'.

I would quite like an F-type...

chimera15 · « **Reply #9 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 13:35:50 »

Quote from: Soarer;295322

Noone needs to know the difference between AT and enhanced AT any more. They usually call the latter regular / full size / ANSI / ISO.

I disagree that F type is clearer. If anything, most people would think of the XT layout then. I have a Model F with 122 keys on the way!

The only thing AT about a minitouch is the connector and signalling, which has nothing to do with the layout. WTF are full minis? Do you mean that which everyone else on the planet calls either tenkeyless or space saver (sic)?

I'm sure people would've known what you meant if you'd described this board as: 'AT layout with blue Alps'.

I would quite like an F-type...

Show Image

The XT F type is exactly the same as the AT F type except for the enter key and a few other keys, 1 extra key, and a separated numpad, so they're both f types. The layout is almost exactly the same. That one that was linked to with an extended middle set of keys is an extended f type in my mind. It's the best way to describe it in a title, because there are other formats for AT 84 key keyboards these days.

A full mini is a fully compact board with no extra set of keys other than the main keyset on the right, like the mck-84, or minitouch. A tenkeyless or spacesaver usually just has the numpad or middle arrow key set cut off, which is not a full mini.

Boards like the hhkb I would consider a super compact, or just hhkb type.

Think of it like ship types. It's the first ship of that configuration that the class is named for. It should be the same with keyboards or at least best known. That's the clearest way to do it when describing the layout to other people because it invokes an image.

In order of progression.

The M type is the standard.
The side function keyed board is an F type.
A tenkeyless is like the Filco/Majestouch Tenkeyless.
The Mini is the MINItouch type.
The super mini is the hhkb type.
Ultraminis would be anything under that with either shrunken keys like thumb boards, or one handed worn/ non standard key layouts, for instance a chordite might also fall into this category, although that might even be another one.

All keyboards that work with modern machines are AT type, so the minitouch and ortek boards are also 84 key AT boards. Neither of those terms are descriptive of the layout. AT is only a description of the technology and interface the board uses(bidirectional as opposed to unidirectional in xt) and means "Advanced Technology", nothing else.

The terms you're trying to impose on them only had significance when there there only those two types of AT boards in existence. These days there are a lot of other formats, and F type is the easiest way to describe the format, unless you can come up with a better one, which imo you really haven't.

quadibloc · « **Reply #10 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 13:49:51 »

Quote from: kishy;295157

I'd call it what it is - an 84-key AT/XT switchable keyboard.

You have a point. After all, the term Model F, as it's used here, does refer to the switch type - capacitative buckling spring - not the layout, since there are XT model Fs and 122-key model Fs.

chimera15 · « **Reply #11 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 14:37:21 »

Quote from: quadibloc;295612

You have a point. After all, the term Model F, as it's used here, does refer to the switch type - capacitative buckling spring - not the layout, since there are XT model Fs and 122-key model Fs.

There are xt f's, 122 key f's, and the f does refer to the model having function keys on the left side of the main keys. The 122 key model f is a perfect example of that. The AT F type still uses buckling springs, and I believe the same function type. I know it at least has a pcb and doesn't use membrane like the M.

Are you saying you think the difference between the Model M, and the F is not the layout, and the reason for the distinction, is that the Model M uses a membrane instead of capacitive?

You think they wouldn't still have kept calling it a model F if they had kept the same layout but switched the pcb out and put membranes instead?

http://lowendmac.com/thomas/09tt/ibm-model-f-keyboard.html

This person is describing an 84 at as a model F, and it still uses capacitive according to him.

Personally to the user I don't see how the difference in the pcb could make a slightest difference, certainly nothing compared to the complete shift of the layout. The layout is the most important thing, not the switch type. The difference between a capacitive F, and a membrane buckling spring M is very minimal, as is the difference between blue alps and buckling spring, compared to the layout, and the rarity of that early design.

If you're a person that loves the F layout, that is how you're going to describe this board. Obviously the ones complaining care more about the switch than the layout which is where we have the problem. Describing the switch has nothing to do with this board or the unique selling point however.

Soarer · « **Reply #12 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 14:38:54 »

Quote from: chimera15;295598

The XT F type is exactly the same as the AT F type except for the enter key and a few other keys, so they're both f types. The layout is the same. That one that was linked to with an extended middle set of keys is an extended f type in my mind.

A full mini is a fully compact board with no extra set of keys other than the main keyset on the right, like the mck-84, or minitouch. A tenkeyless or spacesaver usually just has the numpad or middle arrow key set cut off, which is not a full mini.

Boards like the hhkb I would consider a super compact, or just hhkb type.

Think of it like ship types. It's the first ship of that configuration that the class is named for. It should be the same with keyboards or at least best known. That's the clearest way to do it when describing the layout to other people because it invokes an image.

In order of progression.

The M type is the standard.
The side function keyed board is an F type.
A tenkeyless is like the Filco/Majestouch Tenkeyless.
The Mini is the MINItouch type.
The super mini is the hhkb type.
Ultraminis would be anything under that with either shrunken keys like thumb boards, or one handed worn/ non standard key layouts, for instance a chordite might also fall into this category, although that might even be another one.

All keyboards that work with modern machines are AT type, so the minitouch and ortek boards are also 84 key AT boards. Neither of those terms are descriptive of the layout. AT is only a description of the technology and interface the board uses(bidirectional as opposed to unidirectional in xt) and means "Advanced Technology", nothing else.

The terms you're trying to impose on them only had significance when there there only those two types of AT boards in existence. These days there are a lot of other formats, and F type is the easiest way to describe the format, unless you can come up with a better one, which imo you really haven't.

In your mind, that may be so.

I specifically said 'AT layout', not just AT, because that is what it is. I know what AT stands for, and it encompasses not just the technology and interface of the keyboard, but the whole IBM PC-AT computer system, which introduced the layout we've been debating. There is your ship.

Absolutely nobody (apart from you) has ever referred to a regular 101/102 key layout as a Model M type.

I don't need to come up with a better term, when one already exists.

Soarer · « **Reply #13 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 14:47:22 »

Quote from: ripster;295632

Switch type is irrelevant...

bless

JBert · « **Reply #14 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 14:48:39 »

If we're going to discuss semantics, I'd call this a Model F AT clone with blue Alps.

chimera15 · « **Reply #15 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 15:07:25 »

Quote from: kishy;295644

Rounding the corner of 5000 posts, and look what I did. Brilliant!

"F type" doesn't even make any sense. It's a Model F, or a Model M, or something that is something else...sure, these keyboards pretty much defined industry standards, but that doesn't mean everything derived from them is named the same...

Finally some (bunch of) people agree with me when I argue semantics

Saying that they defined the industry then saying I can't use them as definitions is contradicting yourself. I could have called it a zenith zb-150 type, or dc-2014 type or whatever as well, but not everyone knows what the heck that is. I called it an f type because most people know what that board looks like. No one knows what a COMPUTERLAND 972 is.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #16 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 15:33:33 »

I think this has turned into an "ALPS vs. Buckling Springs" argument. I support kishy on this one... It is not an IBM made keyboard, therefore it shouldn't be classified as a "Model F type."

itlnstln · « **Reply #17 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 15:41:29 »

I have a better question, "who really gives a ****?" Sure, it's not really a Model F, but noobs might be able to get a better idea of the layout.

At the end of the day, I still have to go to work, I still have to take ****, and I still have to pay my bills no matter what the Hell this keyboard is called.

chimera15 · « **Reply #18 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 15:47:45 »

Quote from: ripster;295632

I always think of Model M as normal keyboards.

Model F are the weird ones.

This one is weird hence Model F applies.

Switch type is irrelevant as illustrated below.
Show Image

Needs a better layout.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #19 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 16:06:03 »

Quote from: itlnstln;295665

I have a better question, "who really gives a ****?" Sure, it's not really a Model F, but noobs might be able to get a better idea of the layout.

At the end of the day, I still have to go to work, I still have to take ****, and I still have to pay my bills no matter what the Hell this keyboard is called.

Touchè...

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #20 on:** Tue, 15 February 2011, 16:20:42 »

Take the negative terminal of a AA or AAA battery to the screen of your iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch, it will work as a stylus.

chimera15 · « **Reply #21 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 04:59:07 »

Quote from: Computer-Lab in Basement;295691

Take the negative terminal of a AA or AAA battery to the screen of your iPad/iPhone/iPod Touch, it will work as a stylus.

So will aluminum foil, but you have to remain in contact with the foil. I was actually able to get the best precision for drawing this way because it was fairly easy to predict where the cursor would be and you could arrange the foil in such a way that the cursor would be visible, which it's not with standard capacitive styluss.

You can buy capacitive stylus's though. I use a pogo art one. It's nice, they really figured something out, and you can use it and not have to remain in contact with the stylus, like you can use gloves, and it doesn't use a battery or anything. It's got nothing to do with heat sensitivity. http://hubpages.com/hub/Buy-An-iPad-Stylus-Online I have big fingers and hate capacitive screens, but the stylus makes it almost tolerable. Still really imprecise though and doesn't compare anywhere near a wacom with pressure sensitivity. Oqo wins my pocket over my itouch any day of the week just because of that, let alone the other limitations.

I bought a mad hatter hat with pockets sewn into it so I can wear my ipod and not have the headphone cord interfere while I'm working on lawnwork though. It's much smaller and lighter than an oqo. That's the only time I use my itouch these days.

There are also alternative keyboard layouts for the ipod touch, or at least other mobile devices like the blackberry, that use a layout like an old telephone dialing that I guess people have set most of their speed texting records with. Not sure if it's out for a non jailbroken iphone. There's also little keyboards you can turn your ipod/iphone into a blackberry.

http://www.appletap.com/2010/01/15/alternative-keyboards-for-the-iphone-and-ipod-touch/

http://www.mobilemechatronics.com/itwinge.html

And of course the newest 4.0 os allows bluetooth keyboards to be connected on gen 3 devices or later.

chimera15 · « **Reply #22 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 05:32:56 »

Quote from: ripster;295700

Awesome. Always on the lookout for party tricks and carrying a Model F around doesn't cut it.

What's odd is the hammer isn't conductive (at least according to my fluke).

Another on an Android phone site.

http://www.instructables.com/id/Cheap-Ipod-Pogo-Stylus-not-aluminum-foil/

That looks awesome. Electrically conductive clay. Really cool. Still have to touch the stylus though I guess, so not as good as a pogo.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Apple-Iphone-4-Mini-Wireless-Bluetooth-Keyboard-Case-/180595649206?pt=PDA_Accessories&hash=item2a0c56eab6

untra tiny bluetooth board.

itlnstln · « **Reply #23 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 06:35:48 »

Since when don't stylii work on iPhones?

ch_123 · « **Reply #24 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 06:41:58 »

Quote from: chimera15;295290

Almost no one knows the difference between at and enhanced at anymore. The number of keys a board has isn't descriptive of it's layout. F type is much more clear.

Model F layout like this, amirite?

Quote

There are xt f's, 122 key f's, and the f does refer to the model having function keys on the left side of the main keys. The 122 key model f is a perfect example of that. The AT F type still uses buckling springs, and I believe the same function type. I know it at least has a pcb and doesn't use membrane like the M.

So, if I pick a Model F at random, I can be guaranteed that it has function keys on the left hand side?

Ehh-err.

Also, plenty of Model Ms with left hand function keys - see here. There is no pattern in regards to the various layouts used on the Model M and Model F keyboards.

Quote

Personally to the user I don't see how the difference in the pcb could make a slightest difference, certainly nothing compared to the complete shift of the layout. The layout is the most important thing, not the switch type. The difference between a capacitive F, and a membrane buckling spring M is very minimal, as is the difference between blue alps and buckling spring, compared to the layout, and the rarity of that early design.

If you're a person that loves the F layout, that is how you're going to describe this board. Obviously the ones complaining care more about the switch than the layout which is where we have the problem. Describing the switch has nothing to do with this board or the unique selling point however.

Well, for one, the difference is quite substantial between the membrane and buckling spring implementations, which is why many will prefer one over the other (usually the F over the M). The Model M designation corresponded to their membrane buckling spring keyboards, and the F was the capacitive buckling spring implementation. If this wasn't the case (as you seem to claim) then how come IBM made Model F and Model M versions of the exact same keyboard that only differed by which implementation of the buckling spring they used?

chimera15 · « **Reply #25 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 07:32:50 »

Quote from: ch_123;296005

Model F layout like this, amirite?

Show Image

So, if I pick a Model F at random, I can be guaranteed that it has function keys on the left hand side?

Show Image

Ehh-err.

Also, plenty of Model Ms with left hand function keys - see here. There is no pattern in regards to the various layouts used on the Model M and Model F keyboards.

Well, for one, the difference is quite substantial between the membrane and buckling spring implementations, which is why many will prefer one over the other (usually the F over the M). The Model M designation corresponded to their membrane buckling spring keyboards, and the F was the capacitive buckling spring implementation. If this wasn't the case (as you seem to claim) then how come IBM made Model F and Model M versions of the exact same keyboard that only differed by which implementation of the buckling spring they used?

Oh that's interesting. Well that's what I wondered if that's what you were saying the designation was based on, and why everyone was so mad. However generally the layout is still the same. That model F you show has no function keys at all, and would be on the left if they were there. The 122 key terminal board is interesting in that it is both model m and f. I have to wonder if those are specifications actually written on the board, or if that's an enthusiast term though. Either way, the standard that everyone knows about is layout based, and my description as the board as a model F type is only to bring a keyboard to mind. Are you saying that you picture that 122 terminal key F before you picture the standard xt at layout? I think that's pretty odd if you do. Show me a standard model F, non 122 key terminal board with model M stamped on it, or vice versa a model m layout type with F stamped on it and you may have won your argument. I would be greatly surprised by that though. Even if you managed to find one, it doesn't invalidate my definition of the Computerland board as a Model F type.

Technically based on layout only those 122 terminal boards are a combination of M's and F's having function keys on the side and top, so it doesn't surprise me to see them stamped either way.

Others have agreed that the language model F clone is suitable, which is the same thing and how I intended the term, type, so my point of defining the board as such has proven justifiable one way or another.

I swear this is some real ocd geek going on right here. lol

Soarer · « **Reply #26 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 08:10:20 »

There is clearly no persuading you!

This is an F:

This is an M:

chimera15 · « **Reply #27 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 08:13:56 »

Quote from: Soarer;296026

There is clearly no persuading you!

This is an F:

Show Image

This is an M:

Show Image

Not sure what plane that is, but it's unlikely it's an F since women can't be combat fighter pilots.

Nevermind, I guess they changed that relatively recently. Wonder what kind of plane that is..hmm.

Oh is that the girl thunderbird pilot?

Oh nope, she's not a blond.

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,SS_070605_Pilot,00.html

Ah Belgian f-16 pilot.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/damopabe/2926956561/

Hot. If I had an air force I'd attack Belgium just to get in a duel with her. lol

This is an f type too. There can be more than one you know?

We're talking about keyboards here. There's only two real f types, and they both look pretty much the same.

Soarer · « **Reply #28 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 08:48:11 »

Quote from: chimera15;296029

Hot.

Yes, very.

Actually, she's a decoy... as is the fact that those are an F16 and an M1A1... the pics were clumsy analogies of how Model F and Model M switches feel to type on... it's all about the switches ;-)

chimera15 · « **Reply #29 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 09:03:28 »

I have an AT F, I think I might even have an xt F, and had a model M before I destroyed it.

I'd say they're more like:

EverythingIBM · « **Reply #30 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 09:46:09 »

Quote from: kishy;294807

Why does 'model f' belong in the title of this?

And yeah, it's AT/XT switchable as the photos show.

I actually agree.

The title is also misleading because he's basically saying it's an IBM keyboard...

THAT IS NOT AN IBM KEYBOARD!!! It's a "computerland" one.

Of course, we know that IBM is placed in the title to get more hits... and maybe some sucker will be convinced it really is an IBM 'board.

itlnstln · « **Reply #31 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:05:16 »

Wow, check out the modem in that pic.

chimera15 · « **Reply #32 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:19:17 »

Quote from: EverythingIBM;296075

I actually agree.

The title is also misleading because he's basically saying it's an IBM keyboard...

THAT IS NOT AN IBM KEYBOARD!!! It's a "computerland" one.

Of course, we know that IBM is placed in the title to get more hits... and maybe some sucker will be convinced it really is an IBM 'board.

Please. I'm not selling this board. I have no interest in it other than bringing it to the attention of this message board, for someone who might like a rare blue alps board. I would have bought it, but I can't afford it. I was hoping someone would buy it to keep it in this community, and that's the most interest I have in it. I couldn't care less if no one saw as most of my posts here relating to ebay get almost no comments. I doubt there's many people besides you who would care if it's an ibm board or not. If I wanted to be misleading I could have gone a lot longer way than that. What ibm board used blue alps? They stopped making quality boards and computers after everyone started coming out with clones.

ch_123 · « **Reply #33 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:24:04 »

Quote from: chimera15;296009

The 122 key terminal board is interesting in that it is both model m and f. I have to wonder if those are specifications actually written on the board, or if that's an enthusiast term though.

As you can see in the eBay link I posted, the 122 key Model Ms had Model M stamped on the back.

Quote

Either way, the standard that everyone knows about is layout based

Inside your head maybe, for everyone else, no.

Quote

Show me a standard model F, non 122 key terminal board with model M stamped on it, or vice versa a model m layout type with F stamped on it and you may have won your argument.

One of those two 3178 boards is a Model M. I've also seen 5291 and 3290 terminal keyboards that were originally Model Fs but were later converted to Model M, often keeping the same part number.

Quote

I would be greatly surprised by that though. Even if you managed to find one, it doesn't invalidate my definition of the Computerland board as a Model F type.

The IBM Model designation was a manufacturing designation. IBM never mentions Model M or Model F in any of its literature describing the keyboards. The AT Model F is the AT keyboard. The 101-key Model M is the Enhanced Keyboard, and so on.

Quote

Technically based on layout only those 122 terminal boards are a combination of M's and F's having function keys on the side and top, so it doesn't surprise me to see them stamped either way.

Except for the fact that that the ones using membrane buckling springs are stamped M, and the capacitive ones stamped F

chimera15 · « **Reply #34 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:30:30 »

You're still not showing me an f m, or vice versa though are you. Those 122 terminal boards are anomalies, and as I said, are either way, so the fact that the switch difference is dependent on the pcb or membrane is pretty insignificant in meaning, since the standard is layout isolated.
Whether they mention them in the literature is pointless as it's stamped on the underside of the boards and what everyone has come to define them as.

In other words I yield that it you're right that the m and f designation is switch based, but it doesn't make any difference, because in the end the F's all use side function key format, and the M's all use the top function key format, and only the 122 which uses both switch types and has both top and side switches. The definition is still proper.

I state it's a model F type blue alps. It's clear I'm not talking about the switch in the description because I'm stating the switch type is blue alps. AT 84 isn't descriptive of the layout, and is more confusing. If I had used that people would be complaining thinking it was a full mini.

ch_123 · « **Reply #35 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:42:59 »

So, a Dell AT101W is a Black Alps Model M?

Feel free to demonstrate a Model M that has capacitive buckling springs, or a Model F that has membrane buckling springs.

chimera15 · « **Reply #36 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:52:18 »

Quote from: ch_123;296114

So, a Dell AT101W is a Black Alps Model M?

Feel free to demonstrate a Model M that has capacitive buckling springs, or a Model F that has membrane buckling springs.

Yes. Black alps model m type. The only thing wrong about that is that enough people know what a bigfoot/at101w is, so it can have its own definition. If the format, and brand was super rare like this board, as well as the switch type I would describe it just like that because that's what makes it worth looking at.

ch_123 · « **Reply #37 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 10:55:00 »

Here's a Model M that was originally a Model F design

You still haven't explained why IBM never used the Model designations to describe layouts in their official discussions.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #38 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:00:57 »

I think there should be a sub-forum designated for pointless arguments.

chimera15 · « **Reply #39 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:02:36 »

Quote from: ch_123;296128

Here's a Model M that was originally a Model F design

You still haven't explained why IBM never used the Model designations to describe layouts in their official discussions.

If you actually read the thread you'd find those are Model C's and the Mod M's are stamped on boards that are capacitive, which according to all your theories should be a F. You're the only one that put forward the theory that it's a Model M CH, based on your theories. But the Mod M is on a capacitive board, so explain that?

It's hardly hard and fast that what I even agreed to is right based on that thread.

At any rate, you're talking about non pc boards. There's no reason to believe they used the same nomenclature, nor does anyone these days know or care about that junk except maybe some of the people here.

Computer-Lab in Basement · « **Reply #40 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:04:12 »

Quote from: chimera15;296135

If you actually read the thread you'd find those are Model C's and the Mod M's are stamped on boards that are capacitive, which according to all your theories should be a F.

Model C's? What???

chimera15 · « **Reply #41 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:11:56 »

Quote from: kishy;296133

The whole thing about this isn't just correcting you (yes, you are wrong) chimera, but...geekhack is considered a reference for information. If this kind of crap is allowed to be spread, it really discredits us as a community.

Refer to things however you want in your head, but try to make at least a minimal effort to be right when you declare something as fact.

Please, I'm not declaring anything is fact. This isn't the wiki. I'm pointing out a keyboard with an unusual design and rare switches, and trying to describe it the best way I know how. That's all. I could have called it an old format thingy with blue pushy thingies.

Alright, mod, please change the title to Cool old formatted thingy with blue pushy thingies to make everyone happy, cause I'm not sure I can do it.

You have some sort of chip on your shoulder Kishy, you pulled that fact bs before.

chimera15 · « **Reply #42 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:24:45 »

Now everyone who's into thingies will tell me there's no such thing as blue thingies.

chimera15 · « **Reply #43 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:26:25 »

Quote from: kishy;296146

May god forbid I try to encourage factual accuracy! Oh no!

I'm out of here - life's too short to waste it debating things with you when it has been overwhelmingly proven that you're wrong and what I say is at minimum agreed with.

I'm not wrong, my description is totally valid. There isn't a better one in reality, to describe this board, because I've asked and no one has given me one. I would accept f clone, as someone else suggested, but it's not significantly different than f type in reality. It's the nitpickers who want to dismantle every word and start flamewars that are wrong.

Everything is arguable if you want to argue.

Look who the primary ones that I've had endless arguments before with are... Kishy and CH..wow what a surprise.

didjamatic · « **Reply #44 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:41:09 »

That Model F auction is hawt!

Actually, it is useful because some people like the Model F layout and want other boards of the same layout, and would like to try different switches.

chimera15 · « **Reply #45 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 11:47:49 »

Quote from: didjamatic;296157

That Model F auction is hawt!

Actually, it is useful because some people like the Model F layout and want other boards of the same layout, and would like to try different switches.

I already made that point, but they didn't seem to care. lol They're basically trying to argue that there's no such thing as a Model F, and anyone using that term is wrong. That it's only referring in essence to a switch type. It's pretty ridiculous if you think about it. Even if it's true, anyone searching or referring to a Model F AT or XT would be wrong because it wouldn't be specific to that board. They could be talking about some 122 key board, or some weird terminal board. That we should only refer to that model as an 84 key xt or at, not caring that there's about 20 other boards that are 84 key at's and xt's in different layouts. It's just insane. They're just looking to argue at best.

ch_123 · « **Reply #46 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 12:46:22 »

Quote from: Computer-Lab in Basement;296136

Model C's? What???

On some keyboards made around the turn of the 80s, IBM would give the model as being the sub-model of the terminal or computer it was designed to be attached to. Often the Model F label would be hidden away on the back of the keyboard assembly inside the casing.

Quote from: chimera15;296135

If you actually read the thread you'd find those are Model C's and the Mod M's are stamped on boards that are capacitive, which according to all your theories should be a F. You're the only one that put forward the theory that it's a Model M CH, based on your theories. But the Mod M is on a capacitive board, so explain that?

But it isn't a capacitive board. Webwit has a Model M-stamped 3178 board and he said that it was most definitely a membrane buckling spring board. For reasons unbeknownst, Webwit's posts have been since deleted. I'm sure I could point Webwit in your direction though, I'm sure he'd get a chuckle out of your wild conspiracy theories.

Quote

At any rate, you're talking about non pc boards. There's no reason to believe they used the same nomenclature, nor does anyone these days know or care about that junk except maybe some of the people here.

So the stuff that proves you wrong is magically invalid. Right...

Quote

They're basically trying to argue that there's no such thing as a Model F, and anyone using that term is wrong.

Where was this claimed?

You've also never explained why beam spring keyboards are not stamped as being Model Fs. Pretty much any of the ones I can think of have function keys on the left hand side and yet none have been spotted with Model F markings either on the inside or the outside of the case.

chimera15 · « **Reply #47 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 13:02:41 »

Quote from: ch_123;296186

On some keyboards made around the turn of the 80s, IBM would give the model as being the model of the terminal or computer it was designed to be attached to. Often the Model F label would be hidden away on the back of the keyboard assembly inside the casing.

But it isn't a capacitive board. Webwit has a Model M-stamped 3178 board and he said that it was most definitely a membrane buckling spring board. For reasons unbeknownst, Webwit's posts have been since deleted. I'm sure I could point Webwit in your direction though, I'm sure he'd get a chuckle out of your wild conspiracy theories.

So the stuff that proves you wrong is magically invalid. Right...

Where was this claimed?

You've also never explained why beam spring keyboards are not stamped as being Model Fs. Pretty much any of the ones I can think of have function keys on the left hand side and yet none have been spotted with Model F markings either on the inside or the outside of the case.

Stop being so ridiculous. There are a lot of boards in the model F format. The F is the best known, that is all. You arguing that there is no Model F or that model F applying to other boards is silly. I've said this many times now. When people talk about the model F, they're talking about the format, not the switch. There are probably a handful of people that realized there is a physical difference between the switch in a M and F, and even then, you trying to prove that Model F refers to the capacitive nature of the switch just so you don't have to admit your wrong is just insane. You bringing up all this other nonsense is pointless. As I've also stated many times now.

ch_123 · « **Reply #48 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 13:08:10 »

Ah, so because I've found enough holes in your argument to drive an Abrams tank through, I'm ridiculous.

I just wonder why this wasn't nonsense when you were accusing Kishy of having a chip on his shoulder...

Quote

There are a lot of boards in the model F format. The F is the best known, that is all.

What the deuce does this even mean? Get some English lessons son!

Quote

You arguing that there is no Model F or that model F applying to other boards is silly. I've said this many times now.

You made some blanket assertions about the Model F corresponding to keyboards with a particular physical arrangement detail. I've demonstrated a wide array of examples that does not hold at all. This is called "reductio ad absurdum" the last I checked.

Quote

When people talk about the model F, they're talking about the format, not the switch. There are probably a handful of people that realized there is a physical difference between the switch in a M and F, and even then, you trying to prove that Model F refers to the capacitive nature of the switch just so you don't have to admit your wrong is just insane.

Unlike you, I like to be proved wrong because that way I learn something. You haven't come up with anything to show that I'm wrong.

chimera15 · « **Reply #49 on:** Wed, 16 February 2011, 13:37:20 »

Quote from: ch_123;296196

Ah, so because I've found enough holes in your argument to drive an Abrams tank through, I'm ridiculous.

I just wonder why this wasn't nonsense when you were accusing Kishy of having a chip on his shoulder...

What the deuce does this even mean? Get some English lessons son!

You made some blanket assertions about the Model F corresponding to keyboards with a particular physical arrangement detail. I've demonstrated a wide array of examples that does not hold at all. This is called "reductio ad absurdum" the last I checked.

Unlike you, I like to be proved wrong because that way I learn something. You haven't come up with anything to show that I'm wrong.

Reductio ad absurdum is a fallacy when turned into a Fallacy of a general rule, which is what you are doing. You haven't found any holes in my argument that my title is descriptive of the keyboard in question.

News:

Author Topic: thingy (Read 16404 times)