thingy

[ch_123]

So now you're pretending that my prior posts don't exist. I guess the "Big Book of Argumentation Techniques for Four Year Olds" probably represents the cutting edge of your capability...

[chimera15]

So now you're pretending that my prior posts don't exist. I guess the "Big Book of Argumentation Techniques for Four Year Olds" probably represents the cutting edge of your capability...

I'm not going to argue tit for tat, sentence by sentence, and out of context, as you seem to enjoy doing.  Everything you said is meaningless anyway and just trying to waste my and your time.

[ch_123]

See, here we go again "Everything you say is wrong because I assert it so"... You really need to come up with a new trick - I hear rolling over on command and fetching newspapers are the trendy ones these days.

[chimera15]

See, here we go again "Everything you say is wrong because I assert it so"... You really need to come up with a new trick - I hear rolling over on command and fetching newspapers are the trendy ones these days.

Once again you try to claim this because you want me to waste my time and try to prove a negative.  It's your line of argument that is trying to assert something that is ridiculous, and go against the common definition of a Model F.  If you put "model F keyboard" in google, a pcb doesn't come up, a model f keyboard comes up.  If you want to redefine it, it's up to you to prove your point, and give us something else to define that keyboard by, that doesn't conflict with 20+ other relatively common models, vs 2 really super rare ones.

[ch_123]

The common definition that exists inside your head. Show me some proof that this is a common definition.

I also thought this was a waste of time and everything I was saying was obviously wrong? I'm confused now.

[itlnstln]

This thread:



Alternatively:

[ch_123]

I'm here to see which way the train falls into the forest.

[Soarer]

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

Incorrect. There are a lot of boards with the AT layout (or format if you prefer).

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.

He even showed you pictures of actual Model F boards in a variety of layouts, how silly is that!

When people talk about the model F, they're talking about the format, not the switch.

Granted, there are others that make the same mistake as you. But many of them would admit they were technically wrong.

There are probably a handful of people that realized there is a physical difference between the switch in a M and F,

So, you have at least learnt this difference. Don't assume that others did not know.

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.

Well that has been proved pretty conclusively, with multiple boards marked as F sharing the same switch technology, and boards with the same layout but with membranes being marked M. Only a fool would argue against it.

You bringing up all this other nonsense is pointless.

Apart from proving that you are both rude and wrong.

As I've also stated many times now.

Oh well, it must be correct then.

[chimera15]

You all seem to be making the point that because a word has multiple definitions it has those definitions in all its uses.  That is faulty fallacious logic.  You also seem to like to stray off topic and away from the fact that the definition of the board as a Model F type blue alps keyboard is somehow incorrect which it in no way is.  Even if the 122 f and that other board was an F in this context it makes no difference.  If someone google image searched model F, and blue alps switches, they would have a clear understanding of what this board was comprised of.

The common definition of the Model F is the standard Model F, as shown by google image search.  9 out of 10 images are the standard model f.  1 out of 10 is that 122 board.  None of them are pcbs, at least not within the first 10 pages.   That is a source.  Even if the image search showed 9 out of 10 122 key boards as opposed to the 84, my definition would still not be incorrect. To insist otherwise is just idiocy or for no other reason than argument sake.

[Soarer]

If you put "model F keyboard" in google, a pcb doesn't come up, a model f keyboard comes up.

Keyboards of multiple layouts come up, what they have in common is the switches (apart from the Japanese one, no-one seems to know what's in that, but probably beam springs).

[chimera15]

Keyboards of multiple layouts come up, what they have in common is the switches (apart from the Japanese one, no-one seems to know what's in that, but probably beam springs).

The majority are standard model f's.

Even if it wasn't, it wouldn't matter.

This isn't Reductio ad absurdum,
This is Fallacy of a general rule.

A definition of a word isn't dependent on the majority use.   If even one person chooses to define a word in a particular way, it can hold that meaning.   You see this sort of thing in songs and parts of speech in isolated groups all the time. That's how language evolves.

[ch_123]

So it's right because you think it is right. Which contradicts your earlier assertion that your definition was in standard usage. I define you to be perpetually wrong by my own ill defined understanding of things, therefore you lose by your own logic.

I'm still dying to hear why IBM never used the model designations in their official publications, and referred to "Enhanced 101-key layout" and the like.

[chimera15]

So it's right because you think it is right. Which contradicts your earlier assertion that your definition was in standard usage. I define you to be perpetually wrong by my own ill defined understanding of things, therefore you lose by your own logic.

No, I'm right because it's the standard usage, and even if it wasn't, it would still be right because I choose to define it that way, and you should be smart enough to figure out what I meant.  The fact that you can't, or choose not to, and over the last 6 pages argue over something absurd proves your level of intelligence, and probably that you have some psychological problems.

[ch_123]

You've never answered any of the important questions, and everytime they are posed, you insult the intelligence of the person asking them, and claim that you are not going to comment further. Except, you've done this quite a number of times now, and thus your projected levels of retardation are growing at an exponential rate. Keep going by all means, it provides amusement for everyone else.

[Soarer]

No, I'm right because it's the standard usage, and even if it wasn't, it would still be right because I choose to define it that way, and you should be smart enough to figure out what I meant.

I'm going to put a million dollars into your bank account.

[chimera15]

You've never answered any of the important questions, and everytime they are posed, you insult the intelligence of the person asking them, and claim that you are not going to comment further. Except, you've done this quite a number of times now, and thus your projected levels of retardation are growing at an exponential rate. Keep going by all means, it provides amusement for everyone else.

You've never answered any of the important questions either.  Why don't you give me a for instance and I'll answer it.  

I'll give you one.  What do you want to call the Model F format besides the 84 key at?  You want to call it nothing?  Or maybe just a lesser known board with the same format?   As I said before, I could have said dc-2014 type blue alps AT keyboard, but no one knows what a dc-2014 is.  Your qualm is that I use a Model F to invoke a concept of a layout which is just nuts.  See this is where your point breaks down.

Search for 84 key AT keyboard in google and see what comes up, and tell me I was wrong.

http://www.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&biw=1229&bih=542&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=84+key+at+keyboard&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Even the model M spacesaver is an 84key AT keyboard.

[ch_123]

Off the top of my head - the PC/XT (and variants), System/23 Datamaster, 5291, 3178, 122-key and 104-key 3270 keyboards, 4700 terminal keyboard and its keypad. Probably the keypads of the contemporary IBM Electronic Typewriters (the later Wheelwriters had keypads with Model M designations despite not having left hand function keys and no top function keys) and possibly some other stuff I'm not thinking of right now that used capacitive buckling springs. A bunch of stuff with rather disparate layouts and key arrangements.

Ooh, an unanswered question - how come IBM or indeed any other manufacturer never used Model F to describe the layout of the original AT keyboard? Or Model M to describe the 101-key Enhanced layout (as they all called it)

[Soarer]

You've never answered any of the important questions either.  Why don't you give me a for instance and I'll answer it.  

I'll give you one.  What do you want to call the Model F format besides the 84 key xt or at?  You want to call it nothing?

Search for 84 key AT keyboard in google and see what comes up, and tell me I was wrong.

http://www.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&biw=1229&bih=542&tbs=isch%3A1&sa=1&q=84+key+at+keyboard&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Even the model M spacesaver is an 84key AT keyboard.

It's really very simple.

'AT keyboard' means a keyboard compatible with the AT. Of course lots are.

'AT layout' means the layout that was introduced with the IBM PC-AT.

'Model F format' means nothing, it's self-contradictory.

[chimera15]

Off the top of my head - the PC/XT (and variants), System/23 Datamaster, 5291, 3178, 122-key and 104-key 3270 keyboards, 4700 terminal keyboard and its keypad. Probably the keypads of the contemporary IBM Electronic Typewriters (the later Wheelwriters had keypads with Model M designations despite not having left hand function keys and no top function keys) and possibly some other stuff I'm not thinking of right now that used capacitive buckling springs. A bunch of stuff with rather disparate layouts and key arrangements.

Ooh, an unanswered question - how come IBM or indeed any other manufacturer never used Model F to describe the layout of the original AT keyboard? Or Model M to describe the 101-key Enhanced layout (as they all called it)

 Is that what IBM called the format, or are those boards?

I am curious what IBM referred to the format though if it makes sense.  Was it just side function keys? Or was it simply because that's all there was they didn't have a name for it?

They stamped model F and certainly Model M on the tags.  I already answered that.  Those boards are in those formats, therefore they can be used to invoke the definition of the layout.

[chimera15]

It's really very simple.

'AT keyboard' means a keyboard compatible with the AT. Of course lots are.

'AT layout' means the layout that was introduced with the IBM PC-AT.

'Model F format' means nothing, it's self-contradictory.

How is it self contradictory?  It means... the format the keys are in on a model F.  Model F is a type of board, as it has come to be defined, that has been established.  

AT layout is the one that's meaningless.  All keyboards designed after xt's are AT layouts.

[ch_123]

No one has a clue what those are.   Is that what IBM called the format, or are those boards? Ultimately though it doesn't matter what IBM calls them, it matters what people call them today.

Which in this context is the AT keyboard. Which is pretty much what IBM called them anyway. Calling it a Model F is ambiguous because a) there were a number of layouts used by different Model F keyboards and b) this is not an IBM keyboard and no one except IBM used the Model F designation to describe their PC/XT or AT layout keyboards.

I am curious what IBM referred to the format though if it makes sense.  Was it just side function keys? Or was it simply because that's all there was they didn't have a name for it?

They didn't have or particularly need a name for it. Before the Enhanced Keyboard (i.e. 101/102-key Model M) almost all of IBM's keyboards had those side function keys. Their absence on the Enhanced Keyboard layout was probably due to IBM believing that F keys along the top was better.

[chimera15]

Which in this context is the AT keyboard. Which is pretty much what IBM called them anyway. Calling it a Model F is ambiguous because a) there were a number of layouts used by different Model F keyboards and b) this is not an IBM keyboard and no one except IBM used the Model F designation to describe their PC/XT or AT layout keyboards.



They didn't have or particularly need a name for it. Before the Enhanced Keyboard (i.e. 101/102-key Model M) almost all of IBM's keyboards had those side function keys. Their absence on the Enhanced Keyboard layout was probably due to IBM believing that F keys along the top was better.

Right, so now, because they didn't have a name for it.  It's a Model F layout.  Just like an hhkb layout is an hhkb layout, or the minitouch is a minitouch layout,  or any other board can be defined by the board that has the layout. This is getting circular.  I already stated this.

There are a lot of boards that use layouts similar to the minitouch, or hhkb, but no one would know what they were if they were new or rare, so it's easy to describe them by previous well known boards.  The fact that I used an ibm board in this case is meaningless.  If another company had a board with this format that was better known I would have used it.

I find the fact that you take issue with calling a model f, a model f, that everyone uses on ebay, and half a dozen other websites into keyboards use to identify that board, that even if not precisely correct because IBM didn't call it that, pretty insane.

[Soarer]

How is it self contradictory?  It means... the format the keys are in on a model F.

Because it's like saying 'blue alps format'.

Model F is a type of board, as it has come to be defined, that has been established.

It has not been established. This whole 'discussion' is based around disagreement on that point.

AT layout is the one that's meaningless.  All keyboards designed after xt's are AT layouts.

Keyboards 'have' layouts. And certainly not all keyboards since the XT have 'AT layouts', that is truly preposterous.

[ch_123]

But again, which Model F layout? Are we talking about the XT layout? The AT layout? The 4700 Financial Terminal layout? Before you accuse me of being anal, go look at the amount of threads where people think that AT Model Fs are XT Model Fs or vice-versa. Or think that a keyboard like the one you linked IS an IBM Model F because it has the same layout. Making up your own terminology just confuses people who don't know better, and we're all meant to be helping people understand this stuff. So even if everyone uses the term "Model F" to describe an AT layout keyboard (which seriously, isn't the standard thing that everyone calls it), it's still stupid, and Kishy was right in the first place to call you out on it.

[chimera15]

But again, which Model F layout? Are we talking about the XT layout? The AT layout? The 4700 Financial Terminal layout? Before you accuse me of being anal, go look at the amount of threads where people think that AT Model Fs are XT Model Fs or vice-versa. Or think that a keyboard like the one you linked IS an IBM Model F because it has the same layout. Making up your own terminology just confuses people who don't know better, and we're all meant to be helping people understand this stuff.

 

XT F's and AT F's are easy to get confused because they do look very similar.  It's why I don't care and used the term Model F to describe this board.
I'm not making up my own terminology.  I was referring to the imb model f to describe the overall format of the computerland.  That's why I used the word TYPE. That should be obvious to anyone but a total moron.

[chimera15]

Because it's like saying 'blue alps format'.


It has not been established. This whole 'discussion' is based around disagreement on that point.


Keyboards 'have' layouts. And certainly not all keyboards since the XT have the same layout, that is truly preposterous.

No, it really isn't the same, because no one uses Model F to refer to "capacitive buckling spring pc switches".  A model f is a model f keyboard, and I modified it by saying it has blue alps.  Obviously it's not going to have capacitive and blue alps, and I wouldn't have put blue alps if I was referring to the switches, as that also would have been obvious.  You should be smart enough to logic that out even if you believed that "Model F=buckling spring capacitive" and nothing else.  You see, words can have multiple properties assigned to them.  Model F refers to the caps, format, the switch, the case, the pcb, and the springs, and the cord, not just the pcb of the keyboard which you all seem to be arguing, again ridiculously.

All boards since the XT are AT.  They have hundreds if not thousands of formats.  Therefore there are thousands of AT formats.  Defining this board as AT Format would have been meaningless.

[Soarer]

No, it really isn't the same, because no one uses Model F to refer to "capacitive buckling spring pc switches".  A model f is a model f keyboard, and I modified it by saying it has blue alps.  Obviously it's not going to have capacitive and blue alps, and I wouldn't have put blue alps if I was referring to the switches, as that also would have been obvious.  You should be smart enough to logic that out even if you believed that Model F=buckling spring capacitive.

Lots of threads here have discussed the differences between Model F switches and Model M switches, irrespective of what keyboard or layout they are in. So really, how can you say no-one uses the term to refer to switches?

You should be smart enough to figure out what I meant by the million dollars comment I made earlier then...

[ch_123]

Dude I have AT and XT model f's, they're insignificant in their differences in reality.

Let's see - one will work with a modern computer out of the box. One will not. That's a pretty big difference in my book. In fact, that's the sort of confusion that would ruin your day if you got them mixed up while buying them.

You should be smart enough to figure out what I meant by the million dollars comment I made earlier then...

You're making some rather fatal assumptions here.

All boards since the XT are AT. They have hundreds if not thousands of formats. Therefore there are thousands of AT formats. Defining this board as AT Format would have been meaningless.

But everyone, including IBM and everyone who makes keyboards uses this terminology. It's very simple really, it's the layout associated with the PC AT. Just look at any of the vintage computer sites, or any reference which talks about keyboard layouts. No one has heard of Model F, everyone uses AT.

[chimera15]

Lots of threads here have discussed the differences between Model F switches and Model M switches, irrespective of what keyboard or layout they are in. So really, how can you say no-one uses the term to refer to switches?

You should be smart enough to figure out what I meant by the million dollars comment I made earlier then...

I have no interest in your meaning, and guess what, I'm ignoring it, like you should have done to this thread.

[ch_123]

You keep saying that and it's getting a bit repetitive now. I suggest developing some testicular fortitude and just accepting that you're wrong.

like you should have done to this thread.

But I thought I was about to see some very unusual Model F variant that did not use capacitive buckling springs, but Blue Alps instead. Boy, was I disappointed.

[chimera15]

You keep saying that and it's getting a bit repetitive now. I suggest developing some testicular fortitude and just accepting that you're wrong.



But I thought I was about to see some very unusual Model F variant that did not use capacitive buckling springs, but Blue Alps instead. Boy, was I disappointed.

You betray your own statement that model f's are capacitive switches by your very own words.  It is a model F in almost every property, just because it's not made by IBM, or because the click is slightly different, which you accepted because you knew it was blue alps, you're disappointed? Seriously, that makes no sense at all.  You're just another IBM fanboy I guess is what it comes down to?

[ch_123]

Essential reading

You really aren't the sharpest tool in the box, are you?

[chimera15]

Essential reading

You really aren't the sharpest tool in the box, are you?

Irony doesn't express well in writing. If you knew anything about writing you should have known that.

[ch_123]

I must admit it's been a while since my last bestseller.

[chimera15]

I must admit it's been a while since my last bestseller.

Maybe you should spend less time arguing idiocy on message boards and more time working.

[Soarer]

I have no interest in your meaning, and guess what, I'm ignoring it, like you should have done to this thread.

Yep, ignore it. Like you do with anything that doesn't match your world view.

But you threw the baby out with the bathwater:

Lots of threads here have discussed the differences between Model F switches and Model M switches, irrespective of what keyboard or layout they are in. So really, how can you say no-one uses the term to refer to switches?

[Soarer]

Maybe you should spend less time arguing idiocy on message boards and more time working.

At least you admit that's what it is!

[chimera15]

Yep, ignore it. Like you do with anything that doesn't match your world view.

But you threw the baby out with the bathwater:

Lots of threads here have discussed the differences between Model F switches and Model M switches, irrespective of what keyboard or layout they are in. So really, how can you say no-one uses the term to refer to switches?

I can say it because I know not as a fact, but as a probability that the majority of people with these keyboards have never opened them, let alone taken them apart to pcb/ membrane level like I and others on this board have. Likewise the probability is that most of them don't care.

Likewise I'm not interested in your message because the probability of it being rude and or insulting is high.

[Soarer]

I can say it because I know not as a fact, but as a probability that the majority of people with these keyboards have never opened them, let alone taken them apart to pcb/ membrane level like I and others on this board have.

How does that matter? Those people would simply call it a 'keyboard'. If you're lucky, a 'white keyboard'. That's no use at all to us!

[Soarer]

Likewise I'm not interested in your message because the probability of it being rude and or insulting is high.

Well, it wasn't.

[ch_123]

Maybe you should spend less time arguing idiocy on message boards and more time working.

I must admit that I find discussing your idiocy to be quite amusing. One must indulge in one's creature comforts.

[kps]

This thread is awesome!



I must say, for me the canonical ‘Model F layout’ is the one used (with different labels, of course) on the first buckling spring keyboards – small left shift, distant vertical return, double-width keys above the number pad, and triple-size plus:



Since I don't own a PC/AT, I'd forgotten that the AT keyboard also used Model F switches.

[JBert]

Wait, we'r still discussing this model F AT clone keyboard? Great scott!

[ch_123]

3178 Model F

3178 Model M