Author Topic: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches  (Read 23887 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:28:04 »
This is a discussion thread regarding the announcement below.

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...

Quote
MX-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 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.
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #1 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:30:15 »
things were so much easier before the fakes....

Offline JinDesu

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 303
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #2 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:32:24 »
Is MX part of the branding too? What does MX refer to?

For example, why say MX compatible instead of just MX switches? Omitting the Cherry seems clear enough from a branding standpoint, no?

Edit: Actually from a quick googling, MX is pretty much part of the name. I wonder if there is a little less clunky way to say MX compatible.
Someday somebody will best me, but it won't be today, and it won't be you.

Proud owner of a Filco Majestouch Cherry MX Blue Tenkeyless, KBT Race S, & Realforce 101

Offline HPE1000

  • Keycap Paparazzo
  • Posts: 2943
  • Location: Carolina Beach, NC
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #3 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:33:41 »
Is MX part of the branding too? What does MX refer to?

For example, why say MX compatible instead of just MX switches? Omitting the Cherry seems clear enough from a branding standpoint, no?
MX should refer to the stems compatibility, for things such as aftermarket keycaps.

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #4 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:39:38 »
I agree, MX is merely used for cap compatibility reasons. MX shouldn't mean "Cherry MX" specifically...
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline Lastpilot

  • Power stance
  • * Esteemed Elder
  • Posts: 1463
  • Location: Louisiana
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #5 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:41:49 »
I think it's fine to say MX-compatible. Just like how some chargers are iPhone compatible. It doesn't mean they are interfering with Apple trademark.

« Last Edit: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:53:28 by Lastpilot »

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #6 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:42:01 »
Imagine there was a very long thread of discussion among the Mods, Admins, and Keepers about what to call MX-style switches made by companies who were not Cherry.

Imagine after an annoyingly long thread, including freaking legal research, we came up with "MX-Compatible" as the least worst option.

If Cherry didn't make it, we're going to call it MX-Compatible on GeekHack.

 - Ron | samwisekoi

p.s.  However, in this thread, feel free to call them whatever you like, argue about the terminology, etc.  Just not elsewhere.  :thumb:
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline JinDesu

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 303
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #7 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:43:49 »
Can we shorten the compatible? Like, MX-C? MX-Comp.?
Someday somebody will best me, but it won't be today, and it won't be you.

Proud owner of a Filco Majestouch Cherry MX Blue Tenkeyless, KBT Race S, & Realforce 101

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #8 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:45:28 »
p.s.  However, in this thread, feel free to call them whatever you like, argue about the terminology, etc.  Just not elsewhere.  :thumb:


"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.
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #9 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:46:21 »
Why not just call them FX caps?

Offline Lastpilot

  • Power stance
  • * Esteemed Elder
  • Posts: 1463
  • Location: Louisiana
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #10 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:48:00 »
I'm interested in seeing how these clones stand up to the originals.

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #11 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:48:48 »
I'm interested in seeing how these clones stand up to the originals. The plot thickens!

Show Image


People pay a lot of money to get fake.......oh wait..nevermind :P

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #12 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:49:45 »
I'm interested in seeing how these clones stand up to the originals. The plot thickens!

Show Image


People pay a lot of money to get fake.......oh wait..nevermind :P

hehe :D

Don't think the same applies here...
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #13 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:50:24 »
"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.

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #14 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:50:57 »
No more animated GIFs here, please.

 - Ron | samwisekoi
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #15 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:51:49 »
so can we charge more now for original switches versus unoriginal ones?

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #16 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:52:31 »
"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.

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"?
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline morpheus

  • Posts: 496
  • Location: South Korea
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #17 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:53:07 »
Any links to these "clones"?  Just curious where this is coming from...

Offline HPE1000

  • Keycap Paparazzo
  • Posts: 2943
  • Location: Carolina Beach, NC
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #18 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:54:05 »
"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.

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #19 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:56:37 »
Any links to these "clones"?  Just curious where this is coming from...

http://www.razerzone.com/razer-mechanical-switches
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #20 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:57:15 »
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"?

True, but most of the time the inner parts are pretty much exact copies (i.e. Kailh sliders and MX sliders are about identical iirc) and after all, it's not really the housing what makes the switch. Replica sounds good as well.

Any links to these "clones"?  Just curious where this is coming from...

Razers mechanical switches aka Kailh switches. Techkeys is also offering red and brown clones.

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #22 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 09:58:46 »
Any links to these "clones"?  Just curious where this is coming from...

http://techkeys.us/collections/accessories/products/keyboard-switches

red and brown

Offline RESPRiT

  • Posts: 414
  • Location: Seattle
  • HHKB = ❤
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #23 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:11:36 »
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
;)

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #24 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:36:03 »
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

Usually you call them cross mount. I think "fake" has too much negative to it, these switches could even be better than the originals (I highly doubt that but you never know).
Clone for example is quite neutral and is already in use for Alps switches that were not produced by Alps.

Offline IPT

  • Formerly projectD
  • * Exquisite Elder
  • Posts: 900
  • Location: NY
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #25 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:37:02 »
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?

Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #26 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:37:26 »

Trademark covers the use of the word Cherry associated with switches and products related with keyboards. Thus, any expression that helps to clarify the similarities, that discloses the fact that the product is not made by Cherry covers the legalities. If you want to use clones, fakes or wathever other term, is irrelevant. I think the proposed guideline is fair. MX-Compatible conveys the idea of similarity and it does not use Cherry in it, thus it is a safe way to call those  switches here.


In the practical side, being the patent expired we will see many offers for switches, but now quality and reliability will have a lot of variation. That is the important part, for us users.

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #27 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:38:43 »
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?

So far we have "generics", "clones", "fakes" and "replicas" as potential terms for these types of switches.

Seems like people are favoring the term "clone" the most...
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #28 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:40:04 »
Does anyone actually make these 'clones' other than kailh?

Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #29 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:43:42 »
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.

Offline Computer-Lab in Basement

  • The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 3025
  • Location: NCC-1701, USS Enterprise
  • Live long and prosper
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #30 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:43:51 »
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.
tp thread is tp thread
Sometimes it's like he accidentally makes a thread instead of a google search.

IBM Model M SSK | IBM Model F XT | IBM Model F 122 | IBM Model M 122 | Ducky YOTD 2012 w/ blue switches | Poker II w/ Blue switches | Royal Kludge RK61 w/ Blue switches

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #31 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:44:36 »
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.


Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #32 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:46:13 »
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.

Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #33 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:50:32 »
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.


They are charging less already, and as economies of scales improve their costs that effect may be even more pronounced. Again, it may be too soon to say what is going to happen, but the lessons we have learned is that more competitors mean lower prices, but quality and reliability will be the concern.

Offline JinDesu

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 303
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #34 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:51:47 »
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.


I would agree with this mostly. There's no incentive to produce a better switch than what Cherry has for now. There's incentive to produce cheaper switches than Cherry and sell to companies that are good at marketing, like Razer, TTesports, Steelseries, etc.

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.
« Last Edit: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:53:49 by JinDesu »
Someday somebody will best me, but it won't be today, and it won't be you.

Proud owner of a Filco Majestouch Cherry MX Blue Tenkeyless, KBT Race S, & Realforce 101

Offline RESPRiT

  • Posts: 414
  • Location: Seattle
  • HHKB = ❤
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #35 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:57:57 »
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.
;)

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #36 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 10:58:06 »
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.

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.

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.

For example, a ready supply of high-quality MX-compatible Greens would be very nice to see.  And MX-compatible locking switches!

 - Ron | samwisekoi
« Last Edit: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:00:59 by samwisekoi »
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #37 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:04:23 »
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.

20$ mechanical when? :))

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

So what do you think of the term MX-clone then?
MX compatible locking switches exist btw.

Offline daerid

  • Posts: 4276
  • Location: Denver, CO
    • Rossipedia
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #38 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:14:13 »
Man, it really sucks for Cherry that their patent expired right when mechanical keyboards are hitting the mainstream.

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #39 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:17:18 »
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...

Offline jdcarpe

  • * Curator
  • Posts: 8852
  • Location: Odessa, TX
  • Live long, and prosper.
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #40 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:24:07 »
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.
KMAC :: LZ-GH :: WASD CODE :: WASD v2 :: GH60 :: Alps64 :: JD45 :: IBM Model M :: IBM 4704 "Pingmaster"

http://jd40.info :: http://jd45.info


in memoriam

"When I was a kid, I used to take things apart and never put them back together."

Offline SpAmRaY

  • NOT a Moderator
  • * Certified Spammer
  • Posts: 14667
  • Location: ¯\(°_o)/¯
  • because reasons.......
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #41 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:26:40 »
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 :(

Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #42 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:29:07 »
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 :(


They are turning into mainstream market venues, that's all.

Offline samwisekoi

  • MAWG since 1997
  • * Administrator
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 2480
  • Location: Mt. View, California
  • Sorry, moving houses. Be back ASAP.
    • Tweet samwisekoi
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #43 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:29:18 »
So what do you think of the term MX-clone then?
MX compatible locking switches exist btw.

Two things:

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.

I think that the MX-compatible switches we've seen in the wild are just that, MX-compatible.  I expect to also see clones and fakes that will deserve those titles.

But for now, MX-compatible is the term we will use on geekhack.org.

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?

Thanks!

 - Ron | samwisekoi
I like keyboards and case modding.  Everything about a computer should be silent -- except the KEYBOARD!

'85 IBM F-122/Soarer Keyboard |  Leopold FC200 TKL (Browns) + GH36 Keypad (Browns/Greens) | GH-122 (Whites/Greens) with Nuclear Data Green keycaps in a Unicomp case

Offline RESPRiT

  • Posts: 414
  • Location: Seattle
  • HHKB = ❤
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #44 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:30:11 »
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...

But there was a lull in the popularity of mechs, and right now "modern" boards are really becoming a lot more popular.
;)


Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #46 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:34:32 »

Offline CPTBadAss

  • Woke up like this
  • Posts: 14368
    • Tactile Zine
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #47 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:37:00 »
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:

DT Discussion about Kailh switches

DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches

Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches

Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video


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]

Offline ideus

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 8123
  • Location: In the middle of nowhere.
  • Björkö.
Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #48 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:40:17 »
Just for some reading material, I think these links will help:

DT Discussion about Kailh switches

DT Wiki entry on Kaihua/Kailh switches

Ripster's Imgur album on Kailh switches

Neowin Article on Razer switches with a video


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.

Offline BlueBär

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Germany, SB
Re: Re: GeekHack Official: "MX-Compatible" Key Switches
« Reply #49 on: Thu, 27 March 2014, 11:40:56 »
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?

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:



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