geekhack
geekhack Community => Keyboards => Topic started by: Dihedral on Fri, 28 November 2014, 08:40:30
-
0x3F
Edit: Now with function layer -
Function Layer (http://www.docdroid.net/file/view/m5fr/layers.pdf)
This is a project I have to make a custom board. It's fully symmetrical, and is like an ANSI board with some modifications to make it Brit friendly.
Inb4 non standard keycaps boooo - this is probably only going to be a one off.
http://tinyurl.com/dihedralcustom
(http://tinyurl.com/dihedralcustom)
It has an alt layer, fn layer and alt-gr (fn + alt) layer for extra functions. The specifics of these are on my desktop in a spreadsheet (im on mobile) if there is interest I should be able to get it posted in a few days.
Edit:
Version 2 (http://tinyurl.com/dihedralcustom2) with discrete insert key - delete is now alt + backspace
Edit again:
Version 3 (http://tinyurl.com/dihedralcustom3)
Switched esc and caps to make it more normal.
-
Interesting .
You don't have that much non standard key-sizing .
What are you trying to achieve with this layout ?
-
Interesting .
You don't have that much non standard key-sizing .
What are you trying to achieve with this layout ?
Well I love 60% boards but I need my arrow keys. I dont use right mods so it stemmed from there.
-
Interesting .
You don't have that much non standard key-sizing .
What are you trying to achieve with this layout ?
Well I love 60% boards but I need my arrow keys. I dont use right mods so it stemmed from there.
you could use the poker x layout where the right mods can work as the arrow keys.
-
Interesting .
You don't have that much non standard key-sizing .
What are you trying to achieve with this layout ?
Well I love 60% boards but I need my arrow keys. I dont use right mods so it stemmed from there.
you could use the poker x layout where the right mods can work as the arrow keys.
I prefer discrete arrow keys and I like the look of this layout.
-
Why is ESC where it is.
-
Why is ESC where it is.
Adding a link to V2 now, with some switched around keys.
-
"Escape" tends to be in the far corner for very good reasons. Namely, it's the default keyboard command for Cancel in Windows. You'd only need to hit it accidentally while typing once or twice before you developed an urgent need to move it. I'd especially never put it anywhere near the home row.
-
uhhh
what are you smoking to take esc out of that corner
that's a recipe for disaster if i've ever seen one
and what is backspace doing above left shift
this layout makes the ergo freak in me die
and your arrow keys make no sense, since VIM only works with HJKL anyway
-
uhhh
what are you smoking to take esc out of that corner
that's a recipe for disaster if i've ever seen one
and what is backspace doing above left shift
this layout makes the ergo freak in me die
and your arrow keys make no sense, since VIM only works with HJKL anyway
I think you're right about the escape key. But I want the backspace to be accessible so the home row seems to be a logical place. It feels right when I've tested it at least.
Edit: removed accidental quote
-
i'm not as put off by the ESC as the 4 vertical arrow keys, just doesn't feel right. you can make your layout however you see fit of course, but i wouldn't dare to use this layout if i was given the board for free :D
-
i'm not as put off by the ESC as the 4 vertical arrow keys, just doesn't feel right. you can make your layout however you see fit of course, but i wouldn't dare to use this layout if i was given the board for free :D
I think the arrows will be fine with a bit of getting used to. When ive tested it, it actually feels more comfortable than normal arrows! Personally i don't like the look of the FC660 type arrows so this seemed a better option.
-
i'm not as put off by the ESC as the 4 vertical arrow keys, just doesn't feel right. you can make your layout however you see fit of course, but i wouldn't dare to use this layout if i was given the board for free :D
I think the arrows will be fine with a bit of getting used to. When ive tested it, it actually feels more comfortable than normal arrows! Personally i don't like the look of the FC660 type arrows so this seemed a better option.
Before DEC introduce the inverted T cluster on the LK-201, many boards had arrow laid out this way...I can definitely work, once your used to.
The layout looks nice (very symmetric), but I'm with everyone else on the ESC placement....then again, maybe you use ESC often ;D Version 3 makes a lot more sense.
I'm not a fan of CapsLock in general. Maybe ditch the Caps Lock all together and have custom firmware programmed to use shift double tap for Caps Lock, replace it with Fn and up arrow. Then this layout could work nicely and you'd have the inverted T cluster.
Like this (http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/f05bc90f88c7a2957b724036692dd098):
[attachimg=1]
-
i'm not as put off by the ESC as the 4 vertical arrow keys, just doesn't feel right. you can make your layout however you see fit of course, but i wouldn't dare to use this layout if i was given the board for free :D
I think the arrows will be fine with a bit of getting used to. When ive tested it, it actually feels more comfortable than normal arrows! Personally i don't like the look of the FC660 type arrows so this seemed a better option.
Before DEC introduce the inverted T cluster on the LK-201, many boards had arrow laid out this way...I can definitely work, once your used to.
The layout looks nice (very symmetric), but I'm with everyone else on the ESC placement....then again, maybe you use ESC often ;D Version 3 makes a lot more sense.
I'm not a fan of CapsLock in general. Maybe ditch the Caps Lock all together and have custom firmware programmed to use shift double tap for Caps Lock, replace it with Fn and up arrow. Then this layout could work nicely and you'd have the inverted T cluster.
Like this (http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/f05bc90f88c7a2957b724036692dd098):
(Attachment Link)
THIS
THIS IS SO MUCH BETTER
-
I like the arrow ordering. Left-Up-down-right, unlike Vim which switches the down-up. It makes more sense your way because both left and up move the cursor in the backward direction, and down-right advance the cursor in the document. Thus the left two arrows move back, right two move forwards. So much more intuitive.
I never understood that about the VIM arrows. I think they were chosen arbitrarily.
-
I would go with .25 stagger instead of .5 stagger to achieve more sane keycap sizes. This way you also get the added bonus of getting rid of stabilizers except on spacebar.
http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/a90aeb346d34935636075e4a8bab8321
4x space is a bit odd, but it could easily be changed to a 6x.
-
GON and CTRLALT it may have been were working on a board somewhat like this one with dedicated arrow keys on the bottom, can't seem to find it, forget what it was called.
-
I like the arrow ordering. Left-Up-down-right, unlike Vim which switches the down-up. It makes more sense your way because both left and up move the cursor in the backward direction, and down-right advance the cursor in the document. Thus the left two arrows move back, right two move forwards. So much more intuitive.
I never understood that about the VIM arrows. I think they were chosen arbitrarily.
'Cuz the keyboard of the old computer (ADAM-3A) which VI was developed on has no discrete arrow keys and the arrow keys were just H, J, K, L
http://www.catonmat.net/images/why-vim-uses-hjkl/adm-3a-hjkl-keyboard.jpg
-
i'm not as put off by the ESC as the 4 vertical arrow keys, just doesn't feel right. you can make your layout however you see fit of course, but i wouldn't dare to use this layout if i was given the board for free :D
I think the arrows will be fine with a bit of getting used to. When ive tested it, it actually feels more comfortable than normal arrows! Personally i don't like the look of the FC660 type arrows so this seemed a better option.
Before DEC introduce the inverted T cluster on the LK-201, many boards had arrow laid out this way...I can definitely work, once your used to.
The layout looks nice (very symmetric), but I'm with everyone else on the ESC placement....then again, maybe you use ESC often ;D Version 3 makes a lot more sense.
I'm not a fan of CapsLock in general. Maybe ditch the Caps Lock all together and have custom firmware programmed to use shift double tap for Caps Lock, replace it with Fn and up arrow. Then this layout could work nicely and you'd have the inverted T cluster.
Like this (http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/f05bc90f88c7a2957b724036692dd098):
(Attachment Link)
Nice... but you've lost the symmetry! That's an important part of the board.
-
I would go with .25 stagger instead of .5 stagger to achieve more sane keycap sizes. This way you also get the added bonus of getting rid of stabilizers except on spacebar.
http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/a90aeb346d34935636075e4a8bab8321
4x space is a bit odd, but it could easily be changed to a 6x.
Unless i screwed up badly that should be a 6.25x standard spacebar.
Edit: I checked it's a normal 6.25 bar.
-
I was referring to my own change suggestions. Lately I'm of the opinion that spacebars waste too much space where additional keys would be more useful.
-
I was referring to my own change suggestions. Lately I'm of the opinion that spacebars waste too much space where additional keys would be more useful.
I was thinking about that but boards with small spacebars just look a bit wrong imo. Also, I will use both thumbs for space, and split spacebars also look wrong so classic bars seem the way to go.
-
I'm not a fan of CapsLock in general. Maybe ditch the Caps Lock all together and have custom firmware programmed to use shift double tap for Caps Lock, replace it with Fn and up arrow. Then this layout could work nicely and you'd have the inverted T cluster.
Like this (http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/f05bc90f88c7a2957b724036692dd098):
(Attachment Link)
Nice... but you've lost the symmetry! That's an important part of the board.
I hear you. Your design was nice and balanced, and the side by side arrows work.
-
Unless anyone has any last minute suggestions, V3 seems to be the design yo go for.
-
I don't think it is symmetrical, with respect to standard touch typing technique.
And I see no improvements in comfort compared to the normal character layout. To the contrary, due to the 0.5u stagger of the QWERTY row, at least seven keys (WERYIOP) will be more difficult. That's my guess from experiences with the matrix (ortho-linear) layout versus normally staggered layout.
-
I don't think it is symmetrical, with respect to standard touch typing technique.
And I see no improvements in comfort compared to the normal character layout. To the contrary, due to the 0.5u stagger of the QWERTY row, at least seven keys (WERYIOP) will be more difficult. That's my guess from experiences with the matrix (ortho-linear) layout versus normally staggered layout.
When ive tested the 0.5 stagger it feels fine, as natural as .25
-
How did you tested it?
-
How did you tested it?
Drew out layout on paper and pretended to type. No keys felt hard to reach or hit accurately.
-
Be careful with the non-standard row stagger. That **** is just as hard to learn as any non-standard (matrix, symmetric stagger, column stagger, sculpted with height differences between columns, or whatever) board, except with fewer advantages. Switching back and forth between your proposed keyboard here and a standard keyboard is going to cause lots of annoying mistakes I suspect.
I have a couple of keyboards with non-standard stagger (1/4u each between rows) but an otherwise standard layout, and I find it really frustrating to type on them. (But I’ve never tried for any extended amount of time, so maybe you can easily get used to switching back and forth. YMMV.)
-
Symmetry is an awkward one — is it worth it?
For example, you can't get the colour symmetrical unless you violate the basic colour design principles or rethink at least one key:
http://www.keyboard-layout-editor.com/#/layouts/49f0407972c859c8c37ba535555892d5
-
unless you violate the basic colour design principles
Which principles are those?
-
Personally, I don't see any real benefit of this over something like the FC660M for instance. The different stagger and positioning of the modifiers would take a lot of getting used to not to mention the inline arrow keys. FC660M keeps familiar positions and shapes of zones, so it's immediately usable. And if you get an extra left shift key you can fit almost any standard keycap set on it. Remapping the edit keys to home and end is the only improvement I would make to the FC layout.
-
The rules for which keys are allowed to be an alternative base colour. Not everyone follows them — my OK-100M for example has one of the two (!!) backslash keys in dark beige instead of cream. In the case of the posted layout, I had to leave backtick/tilde in grey instead of blue, as you can see, as that's an entry key instead of a control or modifier key.
Space is typically the primary base colour, but the space cadet design deftly uses blue for space, which works well, but I just can't accept the idea of backtick being blue!
-
The rules for which keys are allowed to be an alternative base colour.
These “rules”, up through 1990, were basically: try to follow whatever colors the most recent IBM keyboard used. (Just like in the last 15 years, the “rules” for everything about computer/electronics design is: make your product look like whatever Apple’s product looked like a few years ago.)
Just like everything else about keyboard design: most of the ideas were totally unambitious and boring.
I say toss these color rules out.
-
Be careful with the non-standard row stagger. That **** is just as hard to learn as any non-standard (matrix, symmetric stagger, column stagger, sculpted with height differences between columns, or whatever) board, except with fewer advantages. Switching back and forth between your proposed keyboard here and a standard keyboard is going to cause lots of annoying mistakes I suspect.
I have a couple of keyboards with non-standard stagger (1/4u each between rows) but an otherwise standard layout, and I find it really frustrating to type on them. (But I’ve never tried for any extended amount of time, so maybe you can easily get used to switching back and forth. YMMV.)
The stagger doesn't seem an issue for me. But I will consider your points.
-
Personally, I don't see any real benefit of this over something like the FC660M for instance. The different stagger and positioning of the modifiers would take a lot of getting used to not to mention the inline arrow keys. FC660M keeps familiar positions and shapes of zones, so it's immediately usable. And if you get an extra left shift key you can fit almost any standard keycap set on it. Remapping the edit keys to home and end is the only improvement I would make to the FC layout.
The improvements in the layout should improve my speed and I don't like the look of the FC660.
-
How did you tested it?
Drew out layout on paper and pretended to type. No keys felt hard to reach or hit accurately.
Paper can help to quickly discard some wrong designs but can hardly help to confirm a correct design. Some disadvantages in speed/accuracy can show up only under hard testing.
I couldn't notice any difference between the standard and the matrix layout -- I can touch type at 40 - 50 wpm on both. Only when I decided to improve my typing to 80 wpm I realized the disadvantages of the standard layout -- ZXCVB and even R and YP are harder to reach.
-
How did you tested it?
Drew out layout on paper and pretended to type. No keys felt hard to reach or hit accurately.
Paper can help to quickly discard some wrong designs but can hardly help to confirm a correct design. Some disadvantages in speed/accuracy can show up only under hard testing.
I couldn't notice any difference between the standard and the matrix layout -- I can touch type at 40 - 50 wpm on both. Only when I decided to improve my typing to 80 wpm I realized the disadvantages of the standard layout -- ZXCVB and even R and YP are harder to reach.
Fair point. Any suggestions for how to test?
-
Now with Function Layers in OP!