geekhack
geekhack Community => Keyboards => Topic started by: Meyvn on Mon, 12 March 2018, 09:49:04
-
I’ve been wondering for some time: if you’re going to the trouble of building an expensive, fancy, high end keyboard, why build a TKL? It seems easily the second most popular layout behind 60% for builds, and I can’t fathom it. It’s the most well-represented layout among commercial products by far already, making builds seem less necessary, and it’s a far from optimal layout.
If you want dedicated arrow keys in minimal space, surely a 65% is superior. If you want F-keys as well, 75% is smaller. And then of course there’s the 96-key and 1800 layouts, both of which offer more functionality than TKLs with minimal size increase. Also, with rare exceptions (read: M SSV), it’s the least visually appealing. What is it? What am I missing? Why is there such a thing as a Cherry MX-based $800 TKL?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
different people like and use different things, for me it is familiarity - the TKL layout is tried and true.
-
The bezels and spacers look nicer and step rows differently so you can better locate the keys
Also memorizing the fn layers is annoying and I prefer having more keys to use as macros
-
this sounds like a big fat opinion
tkl is the original custom form factor, it's a classic for many people. at least for me and some others i know, 65 and 75%s are actually less visually appealing, being either very asymmetrical or a giant brick of keys with no spacing respectively.
-
TKL looks the best. I've designed and built a 60% and 65%, but there is no doubt they're not as good aesthetically.
-
Functionality and aesthetic.
Might seem ridiculous to have aesthetic as a requirement, but it is also the main reason why we spend such money on expensive boards in the first place.
-
There are two questions here:
1. Why TKL?
A: I can fly on this layout since I have it burned into muscle memory, and in my job I often have to use other people's keyboards.
2: Why high end custom?
A: I haven't built one, at least not yet. Currently I prefer to mod QFRs to my preferred switch type, since they're plentiful and cheap and have a media key layer built in. If I do build a full custom one day, though, it will be TKL for the above reasons.
-
It's also really easy to get fully compatible keycap sets for TKL without having to find fix-kits or buy add-ons.
-
TKL looks the best. I've designed and built a 60% and 65%, but there is no doubt they're not as good aesthetically.
WKL 60% > All
imo
-
TKL looks the best. I've designed and built a 60% and 65%, but there is no doubt they're not as good aesthetically.
WKL 60% > All
imo
You're the exception :))
-
I'm currently using a Matias Laptop Pro which is a 65% (I think). It's nice and small, but unless you just have a microscopic desk you aren't saving that much space by using a 65% over a TKL anyways. I have more desk than I do keyboard, I honestly wouldn't mind a full size if not for the fact that all of my full size have clicky switches. Still the only "custom" I have is a TKL because it's the form factor I like best.
-
Correct..
Ergodoxx > all other keebs..
-
Correct..
Ergodoxx > all other keebs..
:confused:
-
I’ve been wondering for some time: if you’re going to the trouble of building an expensive, fancy, high end keyboard, why build a TKL?
Most people don't use a numpad, but they like having a nav cluster. The standard TKL form factor is a reasonable compromise between size and functionality. And while alternate layouts like 65-75% boards provide much of the same functionality in a (slightly) smaller footprint, it is harder to find aftermarket cases for them, making the classic TKL the better choice if you want to accessorize it easily.
I don't care for the TKL personally. I prefer full-size boards because I use the numpad enough to want it around all the time, and I like having a numpad to display more of the beautiful keycaps that I own. Now, it is true that I have some Novatouches, but whenever I use one I always put a standalone numpad next to it. You might ask why I even have Novatouches at all then, and that's a fair question. Well, the combination of Norbauer aluminum cases and Topre switches is an unbeatable combination, but Ryan Norbauer won't make aluminum cases to replace the stock cases of my Realforce RGB boards. The "Norbatouch" (plus numpad) is the next best thing IMO.
-
I assume you aren't trolling so here is the honest truth:
Muscle memory.
It is possible to become ambidextrous and master multiple layouts, but you will never be as dextrous on multiple layouts as you would be on a single, unchanging layout. In a firefight or gun battle your fingers will default to what they know.
For many, the keyboard they use at work cannot be exchanged for a personal device. Many large companies prohibit employees from bringing their own devices. That gives you two options if you want to use the same layout at home that you use at work: TKL if you never use the numpad or Fullsize if you do.
Trust me, if I could use a 60% at work then I would use a 60% at home as well. That just isn't an option. I'm not going to use a TKL for 8 hours a day and then be able to efficiently/ambidexrously switch to a different layout once I get home. I find my hands going to the wrong places, especially after a few beers.
-
I assume you aren't trolling so here is the honest truth:
Muscle memory.
It is possible to become ambidextrous and master multiple layouts, but you will never be as dextrous on multiple layouts as you would be on a single, unchanging layout. In a firefight or gun battle your fingers will default to what they know.
For many, the keyboard they use at work cannot be exchanged for a personal device. Many large companies prohibit employees from bringing their own devices. That gives you two options if you want to use the same layout at home that you use at work: TKL if you never use the numpad or Fullsize if you do.
Trust me, if I could use a 60% at work then I would use a 60% at home as well. That just isn't an option. I'm not going to use a TKL for 8 hours a day and then be able to efficiently/ambidexrously switch to a different layout once I get home. I find my hands going to the wrong places, especially after a few beers.
Thanks for assuming good faith. So far this is the most compelling case I’ve heard made to explain it.
To be clear, I have no trouble whatsoever understanding why a ton of people *use* TKL generally; they are by far the most popular and most affordable layout of mechanical keyboard, so it stands to reason. It’s just the super high end ones that I find head scratching. This would certainly explain some of it, though; thanks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I just plain love TKL layout especially when its a custom keyboard
-
To be clear, I have no trouble whatsoever understanding why a ton of people *use* TKL generally; they are by far the most popular and most affordable layout of mechanical keyboard, so it stands to reason. It’s just the super high end ones that I find head scratching. This would certainly explain some of it, though; thanks.
I don't understand your confusion.
If people like the TKL layout (which you acknowledge) then why wouldn't they want a custom TKL with a high-quality case and whatever switches they prefer? Honestly the switch selection in most commercial keyboards is pretty limited. I guess you could get one with hot-swappable switches and put what you want in there, but even then it's not guaranteed to have a nice case, keycaps, etc. And if you're going to replace all of that you might as well just do a custom build to begin with.
-
60% is also modular and standardised for Poker-compatible cases with its port location and spacers
TKL is somewhat standardised around the Filco's and Cooler Master's TKL keyboards.
... and both have a set of keys that is a subset of the "full size" layout which means that you don't have to look around so much for keycaps.
For 75% and 65% there is no clear standard. There are several different bottom rows and even different nav columns and position of the Del key (if it even exists. I need my Del key!) .
The trend for cases seems to go for extended 60% though.
The bezels and spacers look nicer and step rows differently so you can better locate the keys
Also, individual function keys are easier to locate as part of groups than by number.
-
Every layout stinks tbh... Getcher act together.
-
It is possible to become ambidextrous and master multiple layouts, but you will never be as dextrous on multiple layouts as you would be on a single, unchanging layout. In a firefight or gun battle your fingers will default to what they know.
+1000 to this. I'm a relative OG to the computer game. Right around 1990 I had a white Alps board with big ass enter key at home (loved it), and a crappy ANSI rubber dome at work. There were only two keys that were really different: backspace and backslash. I was constantly working in DOS at the time, so backslash was used all day every day. Having to constantly stop and think about the position of that one key drive me absolutely bonkers. I vowed from that point on to stay with as generic a layout as possible, and that's TKL, since I don't need the numpad and value the space.
-
+1000 to this. I'm a relative OG to the computer game. Right around 1990 I had a white Alps board with big ass enter key at home (loved it), and a crappy ANSI rubber dome at work. There were only two keys that were really different: backspace and backslash. I was constantly working in DOS at the time, so backslash was used all day every day. Having to constantly stop and think about the position of that one key drive me absolutely bonkers. I vowed from that point on to stay with as generic a layout as possible, and that's TKL, since I don't need the numpad and value the space.
The worst is when the layout has backslash on the bottom row! Of course back then, keyboards were much less standardized (which I see as a good thing, especially for vintage collecting).
-
My TKL easy to buy keycaps, my TADA68 pain in the ass.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
-
The worst is when the layout has backslash on the bottom row! Of course back then, keyboards were much less standardized (which I see as a good thing, especially for vintage collecting).
Many argue that the Focus layout was one of the best vintage layouts. Tsangan bottom row? Check. A Big Ass Enter? Check! A regular sized backspace? Check!!!
Its like vintage with no compromises, except that pesky backslash had nowhere to go so they usually stuck it where the right winkey was on the bottom row. I guess that made sense when we were all using MS-DOS. I think I preferred the split right shift on the Focus FK-2001 where the backslash was an extra key to the right of the short right shift. Would be nice to see more modern boards with this layout. :)
-
I'm a big fan of 65% layouts. Yet, at home I need the extra F-row and other keys for gaming, which is what I mainly do at home. At work, the 65% is perfect for keeping a tidy workspace and it's all I need for coding and cruising around the terminal.
-
65% layout may be more space efficient, but for me, a TKL layout enables me to "feel" around the navigation cluster effectively. i'm sure with time you would be proficient with alternative layouts too, HHKB layout is one of them, and i'm using it for work right now
-
aesthetics. and also, you have a bigger amount of space to play with you can have more design aspects to the board itself. I personally love the 660 layout and it is by far the best for me there just hasn't been much high end customs out there besides lz-st.
-
I’ve been wondering for some time: if you’re going to the trouble of building an expensive, fancy, high end keyboard, why build a TKL? It seems easily the second most popular layout behind 60% for builds, and I can’t fathom it. It’s the most well-represented layout among commercial products by far already, making builds seem less necessary, and it’s a far from optimal layout.
If you want dedicated arrow keys in minimal space, surely a 65% is superior. If you want F-keys as well, 75% is smaller. And then of course there’s the 96-key and 1800 layouts, both of which offer more functionality than TKLs with minimal size increase. Also, with rare exceptions (read: M SSV), it’s the least visually appealing. What is it? What am I missing? Why is there such a thing as a Cherry MX-based $800 TKL?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because it looks beautiful af in my eyes. That's why. Preference of everyone is always different. Main and most important reason picking tkl over 75% and 96key or 1800 will probably be, I really hate when every keys are all stacking together. I like to have some space in between like tkl. 75% and 96key especially looks too cluttered in my eyes and it pisses me the hell off.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
-
The MagicForce 68" layout and Varmilo have a layout with a 2×2 nav cluster and arrow keys, which feels like a TKL with space around the key clusters. It has the same number of keys as a compact 65% but it is one column wider and uses "standard" keycaps.
Myself I don't need the Insert key, but I depend on the Delete key. I came up with this layout that has the Backspace like on the HHKB to allow the Delete key to fit in there as well.
[attachimg=1]
(And yes, this exists as a custom but it is disassembled right now so I can't take a new pic. Actually, my design predates the MagicForce)
-
because I want something with a lot more right mouse room, and to have dedicated F-keys, but also have something less crowded than a 75%. also keeping a standard bottom row for keycap customization.
-
aside from my weaven, i haven't really found a kit that meets my standards in any form factor other than a TKL
although i did just go in for e6
-
Why?
There is no other layout.
Nah, to answer your question though, yes a 65% has most of the function of the tkl, but I for one like to be able to see the bezel on the top side where I’m looking.. no point in seeing just keycaps and not the finely crafted hunk of aluminium ‘$800’ board (also makes matching keycaps to the board more fun/interesting when you have mor bezel) :shrug:
-
I find sizes smaller than TKL more or less all look the same. A brick of keys.
For me, there is just not enough case left for real customization by the designers to do unique things that visually set one apart from another. I like being able to tell what a custom board is just by looking at it, ideally without having to see the bottom side. That’s just my ( relatively noob-ish ) opinion anyway:)
-
TKL is standard...Standard keys..with a variable bottom row sometimes...
Everything else is an attempt to improve upon that standard...But to do that you have to give up a few things..namely, you need non-standard keycaps in even more rows to support it.
So yes, depending on what exactly you want, you might find something is more appealing to you...and then you have to decide whether the keycap support (or lack of without going to more expensive sets or buying mods that might not go with the rest of the keyboard) is worth it.
So here might be some reasons why people do TKL over some of the more common layouts.
65% - Because it isn't that much of a savings space wise for the inconvenience of non-standard keys...I personally really like this layout though.
75% - Same problem as above plus the ugly F row (I actually see no point in this layout at all but some people like it).
1800 - A fair bit bigger..requires non-standard keys...if you want a numberpad in a near TKL shape, this is a good option.
-
The question being asked is like asking... why some people prefer a plan burger with just ketchup (40%) vs other people who like a fully loaded bacon burger with triple cheese (That big crazy keyboard PCB that is ic that's like 167 keys I think). This is 100% opinion and personal taste based. Its honestly the spice of life when it boils down to it or individuality.
Hope that helps answer the question thought there honestly no real answer and its a question one might never understand. Such as I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could like a 40% board. I mean understand some people swear by them but the thought of trying to memorize that many layers. Along with something that compact. I guess to take a bit of a quote from Agent Mulder "The Truth is Out There"... Though in this case sadly.. we don't always understand it :P
-
I am currently learning to use a 60% because I really like the idea of it and think it will make me more efficient once I make the transition.
I started out with a tkl because it is a common layout that I was already extremely familiar with. I also don't have much need for a numpad, and I do paired programming at work which means limited desk space because there are two people, two keyboards, two large monitors, etc. I also quite like the look of my tkl.
I'm still not completely convinced that I won't eventually switch back to tkl. Need some more time with the 60 to see how it will impact my efficiency.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
-
Aesthetically，the TKL' s width-to-length ratio is the golden ratio , which is more beautiful that 60% and 100%.
Technologically, anodizing for TKL housing is easier than 100% housing. More area for anodizing ,more chance that defect is caused in housing when adnodizing.
Practically, filco and cherry have rather good full-size keyboard, no matter in fine workmanship or comfortable touching feeling. however , the TKL ones are pretty less.
-
Aesthetically，the TKL' s width-to-length ratio is the golden ratio , which is more beautiful that 60% and 100%.
18.25 / 6.5 = ~2.8
Golden ratio = (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2 = ~1.6
-
do we really need a reason? it's a hobby... we do it cuz we can
-
Aesthetically，the TKL' s width-to-length ratio is the golden ratio , which is more beautiful that 60% and 100%.
18.25 / 6.5 = ~2.8
Golden ratio = (1 + sqrt(5)) / 2 = ~1.6
The square root of a tkl's layout dimensional ratio is roughly the golden ratio, which actually does make it 'another' aesthetically pleasing dimensional ratio. This assumes it is one without a lot of depth. The XD96 is almost exactly the golden ratio squared.
-
do we really need a reason? it's a hobby... we do it cuz we can
pretty much
-
do we really need a reason? it's a hobby... we do it cuz we can
pretty much
yes same
-
It looks the best. Customs are made mostly for the aesthetic appeal rather than practicality in my opinion and the TKL is just the most attractive. Of course thats subjective but I feel as though the majority finds TKLs are the best looking.
-
Honestly, for me I love the separation between the first row and the rest of the keyboard. In addition to the fact I normally don't use a num pad and I love my arrow keys. So a high end TKL build is in my near future.
-
TKL is perfect. In life you need a 100% for work, a 60% for showing off, and a TKL for your home.
60, 65% and all the other small abominations are acceptable only if your life is slow. They have been invented to allow sellers to diversificate and to sell products that aren't directly comparable.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/c7NJRa2.gif)
-
Scrolling back and looking at the original post that started this thread… It seems like the first question was: Why build a custom TKL when there are so many commercial options that you can buy off-the-shelf? And my answer would be: If you want a TKL that's fully programmable with an aluminum case and your choice of switches, then it turns out there aren't so many options at all.
As for the second question, about TKL layout being inefficient or outdated… Actually, it kind of is. Personally, I feel like F-keys are a relic from the DOS era before everyone had a mouse and drop-down menus. (Steve Jobs hated the F-keys, and they've never been used much in the Mac world.) Likewise, I think if you have a mouse on the right, then it would make more sense to have your nav keys on the left. TKL (and full-sized too) is still with us, like QWERTY, because it's established and it's what people know.
-
to play devils advocate here... I use a lot of the F keys for scripting macros in SecureCRT. I use the break key for breaking into rommon on cisco devices, and I use the scroll lock to switch between PC's on my KVM.
-
Personally, I feel like F-keys are a relic from the DOS era before everyone had a mouse and drop-down menus.
I mostly agree. I think that Function key rows are suitable for hunt-and-peck typists only. Reaching them requires a larger motion so it is difficult to acquire muscle-memory for them. The goal should be to help typists type without looking at the keyboard and therefore they only repress the development of keyboarding skills.
In the olden days, there were paper overlays for different programs for using them in programs. I have not seen that since the early '90s. MS Windows has some standard mappings in their user style guide, but.. I find that mnemonics on alphabetic keys are better.
Sun workstations in the early '90s had first numbered function keys at the top but they moved them to the left where they are easier to hit, and then they named them giving each a specific function. (Cut, Copy, Paste, Help, Undo etc.) (And then they added a new numbered function row to be compatible with PCs :rolleyes: )
The function key row makes more sense when it is used not for function but for position. In the Linux console, Alt + <F key> changes console and I first used that also for changing workspace in graphical environments but I changed to Alt + <number> because those are easier to reach.
Then there are media keys. Many vendors have them on the Fn layer and mostly on the function row, but there is no common convention for the mappings and some have them on the nav cluster instead. I wonder how many people actually use those combos — it seems to me as if people prefer separate media buttons.
I think that the best would be to have them not as keys but as smaller buttons near the left or right edge, and with volume control as a knob or roller. I have seen TKLs with them but why not on a smaller keyboard?
Likewise, I think if you have a mouse on the right, then it would make more sense to have your nav keys on the left.
I'm not sure that I agree that arrow and nav keys would not belong on the right side. I use those keys mostly when I type, not together with the mouse. Otherwise I scroll using either the (right-handed) mouse or (right-handed) keys. Even if they would move, I think that the (forward) Delete key belongs close to Backspace.
I think that a staggered non-split QWERTY alphabetic area does not actually belong in the middle in front of the user but slightly to the left because of how the key staggering leans left.
When I sit straight in front of the desk with my arms stretched straight forward, my left hand is on the left keyboard half and my right hand is on the mouse. The arrow/nav cluster is not in the way at all.
-
Personally, I feel like F-keys are a relic from the DOS era before everyone had a mouse and drop-down menus.
I mostly agree. I think that Function key rows are suitable for hunt-and-peck typists only. Reaching them requires a larger motion so it is difficult to acquire muscle-memory for them. The goal should be to help typists type without looking at the keyboard and therefore they only repress the development of keyboarding skills.
LOL
I touch type and I can reach F keys without looking and without a single mistake. I use them continuously for autocad and for graphic software. I never have to look at the keyboard. The fact that they're spaced makes any error impossible.
-
Personally, I feel like F-keys are a relic from the DOS era before everyone had a mouse and drop-down menus.
I mostly agree. I think that Function key rows are suitable for hunt-and-peck typists only. Reaching them requires a larger motion so it is difficult to acquire muscle-memory for them. The goal should be to help typists type without looking at the keyboard and therefore they only repress the development of keyboarding skills.
LOL
I touch type and I can reach F keys without looking and without a single mistake. I use them continuously for autocad and for graphic software. I never have to look at the keyboard. The fact that they're spaced makes any error impossible.
This.
Also any visual studio developer relies heavily on F keys, Android studio to.
And having a mouse in the right hand makes sense to have the cursor keys on the right because you don't use both at the same time, the numpad could be on the left tho.
-
i use F keys in scrivener to navigate quickly, and then some for one-stroke bolding and underlining
-
i use F keys in scrivener to navigate quickly, and then some for one-stroke bolding and underlining
I have been using Scrivener for several years, and I never even was aware that it has any F-key shortcuts assigned. In fact, I'm looking through the drop-down menus right now, and I'm not seeing any F-key shortcuts. Bold is ⌘B and underlining is ⌘U. Are we even talking about the same program, I wonder?
-
Likewise, I think if you have a mouse on the right, then it would make more sense to have your nav keys on the left.
I'm not sure that I agree that arrow and nav keys would not belong on the right side. I use those keys mostly when I type, not together with the mouse. Otherwise I scroll using either the (right-handed) mouse or (right-handed) keys. Even if they would move, I think that the (forward) Delete key belongs close to Backspace.
I think that a staggered non-split QWERTY alphabetic area does not actually belong in the middle in front of the user but slightly to the left because of how the key staggering leans left.
When I sit straight in front of the desk with my arms stretched straight forward, my left hand is on the left keyboard half and my right hand is on the mouse. The arrow/nav cluster is not in the way at all.
And on the flipside, I disagree with you :p. My custom is all about putting the nav/number clusters on the left for symmetry and mouse space, and getting rid of the key stagger centres everything. My use case is with nav/mouse interchangeably. I also put the backspace onto the nav cluster for the reason you state. In fact the reason I made my own is because TKLs were not doing it for me with no number cluster and with nav redundantly/uncomfortably close to the mouse.