How's the remapping capabilities? The first thing I see as problematic as a UNIX admin is the relocation of both the -_ and `~ keys. I'd honestly leave them in their typical ANSI spots and move the Esc key to the center area or possibly down by the left Win key.
How's the remapping capabilities? The first thing I see as problematic as a UNIX admin is the relocation of both the -_ and `~ keys. I'd honestly leave them in their typical ANSI spots and move the Esc key to the center area or possibly down by the left Win key.
Tenting... this is all for naught.. without tenting..
Tenting... this is all for naught.. without tenting..
It's not necessarily outside of the realm of possibility. Though, it wasn't really something I planned on. Do you think the angle would need to be adjustable or could there be a fixed position?
I like the layout -reminds me heavily of the Maltron 2D
The problem with keycap compatibility is not that sets are not supporting it but that the 1.5 wide keys are not manufactured for all rows. If there is an option for 1×1 keys in the outer columns then users could just use blank keys for those columns.
I think also that people do like the extra keys that the ErgoDox has on inner columns and thumb clusters. Those could be more important than having the function keys in the middle of the keyboard.
Edit:
That said, I once did a survey about what people did want in an ergo keyboard, and function keys was one of the options that got some of the most votes.
BTW. If you plan to offer PCB, there are a few other things you can do to improve on the ErgoDox design:
* Make the thumb cluster in its own small little area on the PCB that can be broken away and reattached with a ribbon cable. That way custom cases for the keyboard could support it at a different angle. Look at how the Transformers DD and Red Scarf series work.
* Not too small offsets between columns.
* Options for 1×1 keys in outer columns and on thumb keys (bugs in some revisions of the ErgoDox)
* PCB-mount support throughout on PCB. (not in every revision of the ErgoDox)
The problem with keycap compatibility is not that sets are not supporting it but that the 1.5 wide keys are not manufactured for all rows. If there is an option for 1×1 keys in the outer columns then users could just use blank keys for those columns.
I think also that people do like the extra keys that the ErgoDox has on inner columns and thumb clusters. Those could be more important than having the function keys in the middle of the keyboard.
Edit:
That said, I once did a survey about what people did want in an ergo keyboard, and function keys was one of the options that got some of the most votes.
BTW. If you plan to offer PCB, there are a few other things you can do to improve on the ErgoDox design:
* Make the thumb cluster in its own small little area on the PCB that can be broken away and reattached with a ribbon cable. That way custom cases for the keyboard could support it at a different angle. Look at how the Transformers DD and Red Scarf series work.
* Not too small offsets between columns.
* Options for 1×1 keys in outer columns and on thumb keys (bugs in some revisions of the ErgoDox)
* PCB-mount support throughout on PCB. (not in every revision of the ErgoDox)
This is all very solid info. Any PCB design is way down the road, but with the suggestion of adding tenting, I was thinking that something like that would have to come into play.
As far as keyset compatibility, you're absolutely right.. it's not really not hard to fill in empty spots with blanks. That's how I do it with my doxShow Image(http://i.imgur.com/KNq2epd.jpg)
I'm excited for the GMK Terminal child buy because it means that there will finally be some cherry profile 1.5 R3 caps out there ... AFAIK, those did not exist previously, but I wouldn't swear by it.
I think the motivation for using standard(ish) modifiers is more about keycap aesthetics than anything else. I know that matters to a lot of folks, myself included. When I was running my 'standard ergodox keyset' IC, the feedback I got from a few keyset designers was that larger universal kits are the most cost effective way and to run a GB and there's no way they are jacking up prices to accommodate ergodoxes. So, this is a different approach at that problem.
Tenting... this is all for naught.. without tenting..
It's not necessarily outside of the realm of possibility. Though, it wasn't really something I planned on. Do you think the angle would need to be adjustable or could there be a fixed position?
adjustable.
it must be adjustable..
No single angle is going to accomodate all typing surface heights, because they change relative to person / habit / technique / chair / desk / slouching angle /
I'm building (attempting) a board with an adjustable tent. What range of angles would you suggest I should accommodate?