The following is an Official Announcement from GeekHack.
In the interest of common understanding, legal niceties, and full disclosure, GeekHack asks that all non-Cherry branded MX-style switches to be labeled, called, sold as, described, and otherwise referred to as:
MX-Compatible
The formal description is...QuoteMX-Compatible:
"While not a Cherry-branded MX switch, it is pin and dimension compatible with keycaps, PCBs, and plates designed for Cherry-brand MX switches."
Cherry Corporation has lost a patent, but they have not lost their trademark(s). Therefore what matters is nomenclature. We ask people to obey the law, and the WIPO (http://http://www.wipo.int/) trademark law treaty very likely says that Cherry USA must defend the Cherry MX trademark filed in Germany for it to apply in the USA, and that they plan on doing this.
HENCE, we take the stance that switches without a Cherry logo on them are not CHERRY MX switches, and we will edit your post if you confuse this issue. if you start arguing about it (meaning the issue of multiple very similar switches), additional measures may be taken.
We will be editing, notifying, and moderating existing threads where the notation above has not been used.
TL;DR If the switch doesn't say "Cherry" on it, you must call it "MX-Compatible on GeekHack. This applies to all threads and forums, and especially to any for-sale posts.
Thank you for your support!
- Ron | samwisekoi
For the Mods, Admins and Keepers of GeekHack.
Is MX part of the branding too? What does MX refer to?MX should refer to the stems compatibility, for things such as aftermarket keycaps.
For example, why say MX compatible instead of just MX switches? Omitting the Cherry seems clear enough from a branding standpoint, no?
p.s. However, in this thread, feel free to call them whatever you like, argue about the terminology, etc. Just not elsewhere. :thumb:
I'm interested in seeing how these clones stand up to the originals. The plot thickens!Show Image(http://img.pandawhale.com/post-12789-A-GIF-to-show-how-Imgur-acted-BPzc.gif)
I'm interested in seeing how these clones stand up to the originals. The plot thickens!Show Image(http://img.pandawhale.com/post-12789-A-GIF-to-show-how-Imgur-acted-BPzc.gif)
People pay a lot of money to get fake.......oh wait..nevermind :P
"Fakes" and "Clones" are going to be the two most argued terms used here...
The term isn't important IMO, they both can be used interchangeably.
"Fakes" and "Clones" are going to be the two most argued terms used here...
The term isn't important IMO, they both can be used interchangeably.
I would say "clones" is a pretty good term. It is fairly neutral unlike "fakes" and still expresses that it's not the original.
Clones seems acceptable, everyone is calling them fakes as more of an insult than description of what they are."Fakes" and "Clones" are going to be the two most argued terms used here...
The term isn't important IMO, they both can be used interchangeably.
I would say "clones" is a pretty good term. It is fairly neutral unlike "fakes" and still expresses that it's not the original.
Any links to these "clones"? Just curious where this is coming from...
Yeah, "fakes" is a bit more harsh, but I wouldn't call them all "clones" either, as some of them have slightly different housing designs (which means they aren't true "clones").
How about "replicas"?
Any links to these "clones"? Just curious where this is coming from...
Any links to these "clones"? Just curious where this is coming from...
http://www.razerzone.com/razer-mechanical-switches
Any links to these "clones"? Just curious where this is coming from...
If we want to go off definitions, "fake" is still a fair description of non-Cherry switches, since they are in fact imitations of what was originally Cherry's design. As far as how proprietary the term "MX" is, maybe we can just call them "looks like a plus sign" :P
If we want to go off definitions, "fake" is still a fair description of non-Cherry switches, since they are in fact imitations of what was originally Cherry's design. As far as how proprietary the term "MX" is, maybe we can just call them "looks like a plus sign" :P
If we want to go off definitions, "fake" is still a fair description of non-Cherry switches, since they are in fact imitations of what was originally Cherry's design. As far as how proprietary the term "MX" is, maybe we can just call them "looks like a plus sign" :P
how about generic MX switches?
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
It will be more manufacturers interested in the future. Again, this is the important part, that now quality, and reliabilty will have more variations. Also, as the design is robust, if the manufacturer uses proper materials, and processes, the final result should be good, and prices are gonna get down. Let's see how this affect the keyboard pricing.
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
Yes, for example some guy at DT has contact with a clone manufacturer that is not Kailh.
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
It will be more manufacturers interested in the future. Again, this is the important part, that now quality, and reliabilty will have more variations. Also, as the design is robust, if the manufacturer uses proper materials, and processes, the final result should be good, and prices are gonna get down. Let's see how this affect the keyboard pricing.
I would say most companies will follow razer in that they will use cheaper switches and still charge the same amount.Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
Yes, for example some guy at DT has contact with a clone manufacturer that is not Kailh.
Interesting...good to know.
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
It will be more manufacturers interested in the future. Again, this is the important part, that now quality, and reliabilty will have more variations. Also, as the design is robust, if the manufacturer uses proper materials, and processes, the final result should be good, and prices are gonna get down. Let's see how this affect the keyboard pricing.
I would say most companies will follow razer in that they will use cheaper switches and still charge the same amount.
Brands that already have their lineups set in Cherry MX like Filco, KBT, DAS, etc would maintain their premium ideals, while the marketing brands will downgrade to cheaper switches and sell their top end boards based on name brand and additional features (backlit, macro keys, special digital screens, fancy designs/shapes, etc).
The only benefit will come where the marketing brands use the cheaper switches and produce bare basic keyboards at lower prices. Similar to the Monoprice MX blue board, which sells for something like $50 bucks. With cheap clones, it could drop to $35-40 instead.
I'd be really interested if any clones start producing alternate switches, like Ergo-Clears, to gain a little bit of an edge over the traditional Cherry switches.
The only benefit will come where the marketing brands use the cheaper switches and produce bare basic keyboards at lower prices. Similar to the Monoprice MX blue board, which sells for something like $50 bucks. With cheap clones, it could drop to $35-40 instead.
And this is why we want to be sure that when keyboards (or switches) are sold or reviewed on GeekHack, the switches are specified as "Cherry MX" OR "MX-compatible" so there is no confusion, especially in the minds of new hobbyists and first-time buyers.
...
For example, a ready supply of high-quality MX-compatible Greens would be very nice to see. And MX-compatible locking switches!
- Ron | samwisekoi
Man, it really sucks for Cherry that their patent expired right when mechanical keyboards are hitting the mainstream.
Man, it really sucks for Cherry that their patent expired right when mechanical keyboards are hitting the mainstream.
I think patents last only 20 years and the MX line exists since 30 years...
I'll retype my response later why clone is not a good term to use. I had typed out a long post on my phone in tapatalk and lost it to the ether.
Man, it really sucks for Cherry that their patent expired right when mechanical keyboards are hitting the mainstream.
I think patents last only 20 years and the MX line exists since 30 years...
Pretty sure the US patent expired in 2003, I think what is making this all a big deal is razer 'making their own gaming switch*) (*just rebranded kailh switches) AND that a community vendor is selling Chinese mx compatible switches.
fake, clone, whatever you want to call it versions of cherry mx switches aren't anything new, there may be some new versions, colors, uses etc but the idea of copying them isn't new.I'll retype my response later why clone is not a good term to use. I had typed out a long post on my phone in tapatalk and lost it to the ether.
stupid tapatalk :(
So what do you think of the term MX-clone then?
MX compatible locking switches exist btw.
Man, it really sucks for Cherry that their patent expired right when mechanical keyboards are hitting the mainstream.
I think patents last only 20 years and the MX line exists since 30 years...
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:
DT Discussion about Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/kaihua-vs-cherry-mx-in-the-words-of-kaihua-themselves-t5285.html)
DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/wiki/Kaihua_PG1511_series)
Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches (http://imgur.com/a/7ujle)
Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video (http://www.neowin.net/news/razer-rolls-out-their-own-cherry-mx-switch-clones-for-mechanical-keyboards)
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:
DT Discussion about Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/kaihua-vs-cherry-mx-in-the-words-of-kaihua-themselves-t5285.html)
DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/wiki/Kaihua_PG1511_series)
Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches (http://imgur.com/a/7ujle)
Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video (http://www.neowin.net/news/razer-rolls-out-their-own-cherry-mx-switch-clones-for-mechanical-keyboards)
May I copy your links to other thread? How I may "cite" your post there?
[url=http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=56406.msg1273453#msg1273453]Check out CPTBadAss' links on some Cherry compatible switches[/url]
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:
DT Discussion about Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/kaihua-vs-cherry-mx-in-the-words-of-kaihua-themselves-t5285.html)
DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/wiki/Kaihua_PG1511_series)
Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches (http://imgur.com/a/7ujle)
Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video (http://www.neowin.net/news/razer-rolls-out-their-own-cherry-mx-switch-clones-for-mechanical-keyboards)
May I copy your links to other thread? How I may "cite" your post there?
The code I used to make hot links like in the post you quoted would look like this:Code: [Select][url=http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=56406.msg1273453#msg1273453]Check out CPTBadAss' links on some Cherry compatible switches[/url]
First, I don't think "clone" covers all of the potential variations. A clone may or may not be fully compatible. Is Razer making a "clone"? They say they are making an improved, but compatible, keyswitch, not just a clone.
I spent some time (at the dawn of time) in what was called the "IBM Plug-Compatible Market", working at Memorex when they were making "large" disk arrays and terminals. We sold MIS departments lower-cost options that would be fully compatible with their IBM mainframes. And engineering for compatibility was one of the big things we worked on.
...
Second, I have a private stock of Cherry MX lock switches, but am very interested in the MX-compatible locking switches you mention. Do you have a source or a link?
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:
DT Discussion about Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/kaihua-vs-cherry-mx-in-the-words-of-kaihua-themselves-t5285.html)
DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches (http://deskthority.net/wiki/Kaihua_PG1511_series)
Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches (http://imgur.com/a/7ujle)
Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video (http://www.neowin.net/news/razer-rolls-out-their-own-cherry-mx-switch-clones-for-mechanical-keyboards)
May I copy your links to other thread? How I may "cite" your post there?
The code I used to make hot links like in the post you quoted would look like this:Code: [Select][url=http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=56406.msg1273453#msg1273453]Check out CPTBadAss' links on some Cherry compatible switches[/url]
Thank you. I did it, but I do not like people have to navigate first to the original post, but I think it works well.
For me the Razer/Kailh switches are clones, since even the inner parts are compatible. Just because they say it is different, it doesn't have to be. I mean see this image:Show Image(http://deskthority.net/w/images/5/5f/Kaihua_PG1511_Yellow_--_disassembled.jpg)
The slider colour is different and the case is also different, but apart from the outside this is a exact copy.
What you used to sell was "compatible", but probably not a clone since you didn't copy parts of their design. If somebody made for example a switch with a different slider or a different mechanic on the inside (say hall effect or simply a rearranged leaf spring), then that would not qualify as a clone, yes, but this is not the case here.
Check noesc' reply for the MX Lock clones/whatever: http://deskthority.net/marketplace-f11/mxlocks-t7654-60.html
Thanks. That is as much of a "clone" as I could imagine. What Cherry stem color is it a clone of?
Thanks. That is as much of a "clone" as I could imagine. What Cherry stem color is it a clone of?
MX Red iirc. Remember, Razers switches are made by the same manufacturer, so they would qualify as a clone as well.
http://www.kailh.com/gb/Newsdetail.asp?Newsid=37
google translate seems to agree
http://www.kailh.com/gb/Newsdetail.asp?Newsid=37 (http://www.kailh.com/gb/Newsdetail.asp?Newsid=37)
google translate seems to agree
There's also Kailhs logo on their switches...
I mean the cherry mx red compared to the yellow clones :D
MX-Compatible covers a wide range of possible [present and future] switches, including those with some palpable differences from the current Cherry MX line up. MX Clone would imply a direct copy of a particular MX switch, which is more specific and doesn't cover all cases.
For example a hypothetical switch made to have the same bottom housing as a Cherry MX externally, but with a difference in the top, reduced travel distance, and a stem with TWO bumps could still be MX-compatible as far as keycaps and mounting go. But it would not be a direct clone of any existing Cherry switch.
Why not use the same terminology as in the ALPS world?
Why not use the same terminology as in the ALPS world?
You mean clones? I've never thought it was a good way to describe Alps compatible switches such as the Matias switch. Matias are definitely not a lesser quality switch than original Alps, IMO.
You mean clones? I've never thought it was a good way to describe Alps compatible switches such as the Matias switch. Matias are definitely not a lesser quality switch than original Alps, IMO.
Something thing produced in imitation of, or closely resembling, another; esp. a microcomputer designed to simulate the functions of another (usu. more expensive) model.
You mean clones? I've never thought it was a good way to describe Alps compatible switches such as the Matias switch. Matias are definitely not a lesser quality switch than original Alps, IMO.
Oxford English Dicitionary:QuoteSomething thing produced in imitation of, or closely resembling, another; esp. a microcomputer designed to simulate the functions of another (usu. more expensive) model.
I don't see anything negative here.
If one considers the term in a different context, it could be seen as negative...
Example: a genetic clone, while being identical to the original lifeform, won't have nearly as long of a lifespan...
Maybe these MX-compatible (ok, that's kind of a mouthful -- MX-compat?) switches will be better than vintage Cherry or modern Cherry switches?
If one considers the term in a different context, it could be seen as negative...
Example: a genetic clone, while being identical to the original lifeform, won't have nearly as long of a lifespan...
I'm quite sure people know that switches are not alive.
If one considers the term in a different context, it could be seen as negative...
Example: a genetic clone, while being identical to the original lifeform, won't have nearly as long of a lifespan...
I'm quite sure people know that switches are not alive.
But they do still have lifespans...
If one considers the term in a different context, it could be seen as negative...
Example: a genetic clone, while being identical to the original lifeform, won't have nearly as long of a lifespan...
I'm quite sure people know that switches are not alive.
But they do still have lifespans...
And they're shorter than Cherry's. What's the problem?
Aristotle switches have been called clones for years AFAIK. What's the difference between Aristotle and Kailh? O.o
But they do still have lifespans...
Aristotle switches have been called clones for years AFAIK. What's the difference between Aristotle and Kailh? O.o
Daniel describes the difference here (http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/kaihua-vs-cherry-mx-in-the-words-of-kaihua-themselves-t5285.html#p102117). In addition to the differences noted in the DT wiki in Daniel's link, it also seems that the Aristotle switches can't support LEDs.
I like the term 'MX-compatible' over 'clone' or 'replica' because the latter two terms have positive connotations that the new switches may not deserve. Using 'MX-clone' or 'MX-replica' could be construed to mean that the switches are identical to the original in quality -- and we don't really know how they would stack up. 'MX-compatible' is more ambiguous -- which is accurate. 'Compatible' means something will work with something else -- but is inherently different.they may not be clones or replicas. however, they are mx-compatible.
This is an interesting development. Maybe we'll see a whole new lineup of new MX-compatible switches. Maybe Cherry will come out with a newer switch technology? Maybe these MX-compatible (ok, that's kind of a mouthful -- MX-compat?) switches will be better than vintage Cherry or modern Cherry switches?
I like the term 'MX-compatible' over 'clone' or 'replica' because the latter two terms have positive connotations that the new switches may not deserve. Using 'MX-clone' or 'MX-replica' could be construed to mean that the switches are identical to the original in quality -- and we don't really know how they would stack up. 'MX-compatible' is more ambiguous -- which is accurate. 'Compatible' means something will work with something else -- but is inherently different.they may not be clones or replicas. however, they are mx-compatible.
This is an interesting development. Maybe we'll see a whole new lineup of new MX-compatible switches. Maybe Cherry will come out with a newer switch technology? Maybe these MX-compatible (ok, that's kind of a mouthful -- MX-compat?) switches will be better than vintage Cherry or modern Cherry switches?
see: the new razer mechanical keyboard switch http://www.razerzone.com/razer-mechanical-switches
it is not appropriate to call this a clone or replica. it is an original design that razer is claiming as IP. it is, however, MX-compatible. this is why we chose this nomenclature. it is as precise as we can get.
it is not appropriate to call this a clone or replica. it is an original design that razer is claiming as IP. it is, however, MX-compatible. this is why we chose this nomenclature. it is as precise as we can get.
What about the 'chinese' switches @ techkeys? We don't even know who makes those other than its not cherry.
Please note: the Red and Brown switches are Chinese made MX-Compatible Switches, and while fitting and functioning the same have a different style housing.
cherry doesn't have a patent on the MX either. the only patent ascribed to the MX1a switch line is basically unenforceable AND it expires this year sometime. i see no reason in this argument. the only IP claims that can be made are trademark and FTC type trade confusion or likeness suits which are a huge mess and not our business frankly.it is not appropriate to call this a clone or replica. it is an original design that razer is claiming as IP. it is, however, MX-compatible. this is why we chose this nomenclature. it is as precise as we can get.
Do they have a patent on it? Don't think so.
cherry doesn't have a patent on the MX either. the only patent ascribed to the MX1a switch line is basically unenforceable AND it expires this year sometime. i see no reason in this argument. the only IP claims that can be made are trademark and FTC type trade confusion or likeness suits which are a huge mess and not our business frankly.
The compatibility can be on two levels: keycaps and housings. Then the switches could have internals similar to Cherry MX (i.e. copied), but lack compatibility with PCB or keycaps.
Therefore, I'm going to use the term MX-like, just like we have unix-like systems (e.g. GNU/Linux).
Depending on typing speed, it may take an extra 100 milliseconds to type "MX-Compatible" I therefore draw your attention to keyboard macros, your local dictionary, the Customizable Shortcuts (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/customizable-shortcuts/) plug-in, and other forms of saving tenths of seconds typing.
On a peronsal note, and just to seed the discussion here, I don't think anyone has yet proposed or debated the term "MX-style"?
we have settled on the (possibly unwieldy) term "MX-Compatible".
The decision is made and even though you advertise discussion I see no movement on your part.
The compatibility can be on two levels: keycaps and housings. Then the switches could have internals similar to Cherry MX (i.e. copied), but lack compatibility with PCB or keycaps.
Therefore, I'm going to use the term MX-like, just like we have unix-like systems (e.g. GNU/Linux).
MX-like, I like that. It's a lot shorter than MX-compatible, too.
wall of text
This thread exists because it might very well come up with a better way to describe these switches than the Mods, Admins and Keepers did.
I wrote the OP on behalf of multiple people. I am commenting in this thread in that capacity. I'm happy to lurk instead or let another Mod or Admin comment.
I think JD and I are going to be calling the these switches MX-compatible in anything we do as Keepers. He seems to like the term and I don't have a problem calling them that.
This thread exists because it might very well come up with a better way to describe these switches than the Mods, Admins and Keepers did.
I didn't see no thread?
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the decision or the term, I just don't like how it is so forced.
I'll stay out of the discussion for now, I feel I've said enough and been too vocal.
I didn't say that that is what makes that term good or relevant. It was just an observation.
Compatible means compatible - it has to work, not only "it should work" or "is likely to work".
Also, how is this connected to "let the buyer beware"?The word compatible (to me) connotes "not OEM" and thus makes me slightly wary. To some people, "non OEM" might make them fall into a defensive crouch, their wallets tucked and covered, and other people may not care at all. But at least the term MX-compatible let's them decide on their own how to react.
There is also a good bit of potential for difference between "MX-style" and "MX compatible"-- a switch that is keycap-compatible with Cherry MX, has a similar internal mechanism to Cherry MX, and, most of all, feels like Cherry MX, but a different pin layout, would be MX-style, but NOT MX-compatible. sometimes, both terms will have to be used
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?
I'm assuming so, judging by the fact that the "clones" featured on Techkeys don't have any branding on them whatsoever, and Kailhs usually have either their branding or their logo on their switches.
I bring this up because I've found an Alps-style knockoff switch on Taobao recently that, following the proposed MX compatible terminology would fit under that term and Alps compatible since the base appears to have the same exact bottom layout as an MX switch, complete with PCB stabilizers, but has an Alps slider (switch in question (http://item.taobao.com/item.htm?spm=2013.1.0.0.3Esyi8&scm=1007.10009.518.0&id=18698639892&pvid=4f9bdecc-1d49-4bf4-b772-181dfd890ca5)). So technically, it's both MX and Alps compatible.
You're free to call it whatever you like.