meh looks exactly like the leading edge i destroyed for its switches, same layout, housing different name...
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.
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(http://www.fantasycars.com/derek/cars/images/jaguar/ftype_1.jpg)
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.
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.
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.
Switch type is irrelevant...
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 :D
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(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5171/5440478476_f11f3535d5_b.jpg)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Model F layout like this, amirite?Show Image(http://geekhack.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=14997&d=1295742496)
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(http://geekhack.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=10637&stc=1&d=1275718333)
Ehh-err.
Also, plenty of Model Ms with left hand function keys - see here. (http://cgi.ebay.ie/IBM-Vintage-1390702-122-Key-Terminal-Keyboard-3192-3191-/150551842083?pt=PCA_Mice_Trackballs&hash=item230d96cd23) 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?
There is clearly no persuading you!
This is an F:Show Image(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/2926956561_53e5a42622.jpg)
This is an M:Show Image(http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/military/m1a1abramstank/M1A1_abrams_tank_4.jpg)
Hot.
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.
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
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.
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.
Here's a Model M that was originally a Model F design (http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?t=6512&page=4)
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.
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.
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.
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.
Model C's? What???
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?
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.
They're basically trying to argue that there's no such thing as a Model F, and anyone using that term is wrong.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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).The majority are standard model f's.
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.
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 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= (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.
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)
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Dude I have AT and XT model f's, they're insignificant in their differences in reality.
You should be smart enough to figure out what I meant by the million dollars comment I made earlier then...
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.
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...
like you should have done to this thread.
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.
Essential reading (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony)
You really aren't the sharpest tool in the box, are you?
I must admit it's been a while since my last bestseller.
I have no interest in your meaning, and guess what, I'm ignoring it, like you should have done to this thread.
Maybe you should spend less time arguing idiocy on message boards and more time working.
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 I'm not interested in your message because the probability of it being rude and or insulting is high.
Maybe you should spend less time arguing idiocy on message boards and more time working.