Keyboard Layouts

[Great Hierophant]

When it comes to a keyboard, I have lived with the 101/104 layout for so long I have found it difficult to use anything else.  

I have an 83-key XT Model F and have no love for the tiny shift keys, vertical enter key, the raised keys, or crowded keypad.  The placement of the ~ and \ keys are not great (US keyboard layout user here).  

I read lots of praise for the construction quality of the 84-key AT Model F.  It does fix most of these problems, but the Esc, Num and Scroll Lock keys are in unusual positions.  The backspace key is irritatingly short.  If you use this in a modern computer, how will you deal with the lack of an F11 and F12?

Then there is the IBM Model M Spacesaver keyboard.  I feel IBM missed a good opportunity to provide an ideal compact keyboard layout.  Instead of giving us the extra arrow and cursor control keys, they should have put the numeric keypad on instead.  As with the AT Model F, they could put the Scroll Lock, Sys Req, Print Screen, Pause and Break functions on the Num Lock, /, *, -, + keys respectively.  I think anyone who works with numbers would have preferred this approach.  

The standard IBM Model M's 101-key layout is not free from criticism.  The Fat Enter key could be restorted by placing the \ key between the Right Control and Alt keys.  The space between the Left Control and Alt keys could be used for the Function key.  Windows and Menu keys could also be placed there.  But why should the spacebar have to be squeezed for these not particularly useful keys.

[quadibloc]

I generally agree with your comments; on my web page, with pictures, at

http://www.quadibloc.com/comp/kyb03.htm

among other things, I express similar sentiments.

But to make the Enter key as fat as I would like, it would not be enough to find someplace to put the |\ key (there are keyboards that squeeze the right-hand shift key to put it on the far side of that). The }] key would have to be moved as well.

And it's too late for that, I fear. It would be better, in my opinion, to go back to having a [] key and a {} key so that this could be done - because then one could go back to the official standard typewriter-pairing APL/ASCII coding (despite the current arrangement of braces and square brackets being superior in general).

At least, that would have made sense back when PCs were frequently used as terminals to log on to mainframes, where one might want to use APL. Today, the most powerful computers in the world tend to be made of the same chips as personal computers, just more of them.

[timw4mail]

I've typed with short backspace keys long enough that it isn't really an issue for me, but I see your point.

My biggest beef with the 101 key ANSI layout is the Caps Lock key. I mean really, why?

[JBert]

I have an 83-key XT Model F and have no love for the tiny shift keys, vertical enter key, the raised keys, or crowded keypad.  The placement of the ~ and \ keys are not great (US keyboard layout user here).

Yes, I wouldn't recommend the XT version to a US typist, but Europeans on the other hand still use this kind of layout.

In the end, it's hard to change a keyboard's layout. Live with it or use another one (as sad as it may be in case of th model F XT).

One question though: how you'd get an XT in the first place? These are a little rare after all.

[timw4mail]

Yes, I wouldn't recommend the XT version to a US typist, but Europeans on the other hand still use this kind of layout.

In the end, it's hard to change a keyboard's layout. Live with it or use another one (as sad as it may be in case of th model F XT).

One question though: how you'd get an XT in the first place? These are a little rare after all.

The XT aren't that rare. The AT are.

[Great Hierophant]

Although rare, a Model F can be had if you are willing to pay the price.

[spremino]

My biggest beef with the 101 key ANSI layout is the Caps Lock key. I mean really, why?

Indeed, why?

Looking at all attempts to fix that key misplacement is funny: making a gap between it and A, making it fire after a delay (Apple Aluminium)...

Happily, remapping the Caps key to something useful is easy.

[timw4mail]

Indeed, why?

Looking at all attempts to fix that key misplacement is funny: making a gap between it and A, making it fire after a delay (Apple Aluminium)...

Happily, remapping the Caps key to something useful is easy.

Well, with OS X it is, because you can map it via the Control Panel. With Windows you have to find a program to do it, and Linux...is more complicated.

[Rajagra]

My biggest beef with the 101 key ANSI layout is the Caps Lock key. I mean really, why?

Blame typists. They complained that CapsLock wasn't where they were used to finding it on typewriters.
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/kb/layout/std_XT83.htm

Many PC users, after having complained for years about changes they wanted made to the PC keyboard layout, found they weren't all that happy with them once their wish was granted!

And the moral is, be careful what you wish for.

[cmr]

caps lock is cruise control for cool.

molon labe.

[spremino]

Well, with OS X it is, because you can map it via the Control Panel. With Windows you have to find a program to do it, and Linux...is more complicated.

Agreed. I'm a programmer, therefore it has been easier.

Anyway, for those interested, the Windows freeware is SharpKeys.

About Linux, I agree: you'll have to wrestle with XKBD or Xmodmap scripts :-(

[cmr]

also i vehemently disagree that this large-enter, tiny-backspace, misplaced-backslash, mini-spacebar abomination is the normal 104-key layout.

[Rajagra]

also i vehemently disagree that this large-enter, tiny-backspace, misplaced-backslash, mini-spacebar abomination is the normal 104-key layout.

True. His description is accurate, but his choice of photo is poor.

[timw4mail]

That's the thing, though, why was Caps Lock useful?

I'm not too familiar with typewriting, but it seems like the only reason to use Caps Lock is to save energy when typing titles, symbols, or a lot of something that normally required Shift. And still, that seems applicable only when typing on a manual typewriter, not an electric typewriter, or a keyboard.

[timw4mail]

also i vehemently disagree that this large-enter, tiny-backspace, misplaced-backslash, mini-spacebar abomination is the normal 104-key layout.

That's a hold-over from the 84key layout.

[itlnstln]

Usually, typewriters had a Shift Lock which was similar to Caps Lock, but it locked the shift function for all keys, not just caps.  Now, I use Caps Lock a lot when writing SQL, but I am not too sure what else would require heavy use of Caps Lock.

[timw4mail]

Usually, typewriters had a Shift Lock which was similar to Caps Lock, but it locked the shift function for all keys, not just caps.  Now, I use Caps Lock a lot when writing SQL, but I am not too sure what else would require heavy use of Caps Lock.

Maybe I'm just weird, but I find it easier to just hold down shift...

[itlnstln]

It's not when writing long queries.  It also messes with your touch typing as your pinky is glued to the Shift key the whole time.

[timw4mail]

It's not when writing long queries.  It also messes with your touch typing as your pinky is glued to the Shift key the whole time.

Fair enough. Although, I've kind of developed a sort of touch-typing when pressing Shift anyway...since I only ever use the left shift key.

[Rajagra]

Maybe I'm just weird, but I find it easier to just hold down shift...

Even when you're touch-typing and you have to keep swapping sides for the letters? It's quite a dance!

And spare a thought for everyone outside the US, we don't have that nice, easy-to-reach Shift key under the left pinkie.

[vicz]

Well, with OS X it is, because you can map it via the Control Panel. With Windows you have to find a program to do it, and Linux...is more complicated.

That depends on which Linux distribution you're using. On Ubuntu 9.04 (and I presume on all distributions that include a recent version of Gnome), you just have to check the "Make Caps Lock an additional Ctrl" box under System / Preferences / Keyboard / Layouts / Layout options / Ctrl key position.

[vicz]

Maybe I'm just weird, but I find it easier to just hold down shift...

I just type in lower case then go to command mode and type gUU to capitalize the current line. Yay vim.

[timw4mail]

That depends on which Linux distribution you're using. On Ubuntu 9.04 (and I presume on all distributions that include a recent version of Gnome), you just have to check the "Make Caps Lock an additional Ctrl" box under System / Preferences / Keyboard / Layouts / Layout options / Ctrl key position.

Case in point.

[timw4mail]

Even when you're touch-typing and you have to keep swapping sides for the letters? It's quite a dance!

And spare a thought for everyone outside the US, we don't have that nice, easy-to-reach Shift key under the left pinkie.

I think you missed the part where I said that I only ever use the Left Shift key. I have my own silly capitalization dance.

[quadibloc]

also i vehemently disagree that this large-enter, tiny-backspace, misplaced-backslash, mini-spacebar abomination is the normal 104-key layout.

I agree. But back when I was getting my first PC-compatible computer, a 10-Mhz computer using the NEC V20, I had to have my order especially amended to use a non-standard and more expensive choice of keyboard, a KeyTronics keyboard sold through U. S. Keyboards, to get the standard IBM 101-character layout.

In those days, when generic clone XT-compatible computers had just started coming out, nearly all the third-party keyboards had this kind of arrangement, and only a few had the standard one.

And even much later, if you go to magazine ads, both Gateway and Dell pictured their computers with that style of keyboard at first. Dell changed over to the standard layout much earlier than Gateway did, however.

So I can understand people mistakenly thinking that this particular arrangement, which retains elements from the 84-key AT keyboard design (after all, compared to the 83-key keyboard, it was deservedly popular) is the "standard".

And spare a thought for everyone outside the US, we don't have that nice, easy-to-reach Shift key under the left pinkie.

Given that two nonstandard versions of the 101/104-key keyboard are very common in the U.S. (and most of Canada, where the U.S. keyboard is used) which either put Backspace or Enter in the wrong place, I'm surprised that despite there being possible ways to make a nonstandard version of the 102/105-key keyboard that is more similar to the U.S. keyboard (one simple way would be to put the extra key on the far side of the right-hand Shift key) no one seems to be doing so.

Why are nonstandard keyboards that make things worse so easy to find, while nonstandard keyboards that make things better virtually nonexistent?

[ch_123]

I think the evils of the backwards-L Enter and the small backspace are grossly over-exaggerated by people who have never used them.

That depends on which Linux distribution you're using. On Ubuntu 9.04 (and I presume on all distributions that include a recent version of Gnome), you just have to check the "Make Caps Lock an additional Ctrl" box under System / Preferences / Keyboard / Layouts / Layout options / Ctrl key position.

Im pretty sure that KDE also offers this functionality.

[quadibloc]

I think the evils of the backwards-L Enter and the small backspace are grossly over-exaggerated by people who have never used them.

Before the PC ever came along, as a student, I used a wide variety of computer keyboards. There was the 2741, which had everything in the "right" place. There was the 3270; the ones I used were set up to work as interactive terminals, so the Enter key was in a ridiculous place. There was the Tektronix 4010, the LA36 DECwriter, and various forms of Silent 700 terminal, and a matrix printing terminal from Anderson-Jacobson that I used. And I've used the Teletype Model 33 as well.

ASCII terminals, because they needed three (or four, if they were bit-pairing) "extra" keys if they supported lower-case, were prone to having the Enter key, or the Backspace key, or both, moved away from their normal spots. On the other hand, only IBM dared to think that the shift keys, right or left, could also be moved to make more room.

I used the original IBM keyboard, and never quite got used to it. It is true that moving the backspace key over one space is not all that evil - I've worked on terminals that moved it over two spaces - but I did have enough experience to know what I liked.

[ch_123]

When you say the original IBM keyboard, do you mean the PC/XT or AT one? Because I would find the PC/XT one a nightmare to type on. With the AT one, the layout is usable, and the keyboard's strong points overcome the bad layout.

[quadibloc]

When you say the original IBM keyboard, do you mean the PC/XT or AT one? Because I would find the PC/XT one a nightmare to type on. With the AT one, the layout is usable, and the keyboard's strong points overcome the bad layout.

I meant the PC/XT one. I had a job working with a group that managed to get authorization to purchase an IBM PC. While I was working there, another department on the same floor managed to get the then-$10,000 PC/AT when it came out.

While I thought that the idea of putting an extra key between the Z and the left shift key was terrible, IBM was simply following what it had done with the Selectric III typewriter and the 3278 terminal - as I note on my web page in defense of IBM against the accusation that they did this in a gratuitous fashion.

The 101-key layout isn't perfect, as the left Control key is moved from a location many people were used to on ASCII terminals stretching back to the Model 33 Teletype - which is why Sun offers an alternate version of its keyboard with that key there, and there's a switch setting for the HHKB, and so on. As a touch-typist, I find the convenience of also having a right-hand control key far outweighs that, and so with the other benefits of IBM's 101-key keyboard, I simply breathed a sigh of relief that they had gotten it right.

Moving the backspace key one place over, therefore, is not so terrible - but I just view it as gratuitous, and it implies the manufacturer isn't familiar enough with the history of keyboards to know that the standard arrangement is the best - because it corresponds well to that of an ordinary electric typewriter, up to and including the Selectric II, but also the other brands as well.

[vicz]

you just have to check the "Make Caps Lock an additional Ctrl" box under System / Preferences / Keyboard / Layouts / Layout options / Ctrl key position.

Case in point.

Well, checking one checkbox in a logically-placed and easy-to-find settings panel doesn't seem to me more complicated than having to find, install and run a third-party program. Some things are hard to do in Linux, but this isn't one of them.

ObKeyboard: I use a keyboard with dead keys, as I write French as often as English. The standard French keyboard (Canadian French, that is, not the abomination known as AZERTY) has a "dead cedilla" key that is used only in conjunction with the letter c to type ç or Ç. I thought that giving the cedilla its own key was wasteful, and changed my keyboard layout  so that  the grave accent key followed with c or C gives ç or Ç. It works very well. (It also means that I cannot type things like ȩ (that's e-with-cedilla) without using my Compose key, but I don't mind because those characters do not occur in French.)

Now that is a good example of a thing that's not so easy to do in Linux (one has to read manpages and use google-fu in order to learn the mysteries of xkb), but it's doable without having to resort to an external keyboard remapper or (as I had to do in Windows 98, back in the days) reverse-engineering keyboard driver formats then patching files with a binary editor.

[ch_123]

While I thought that the idea of putting an extra key between the Z and the left shift key was terrible, IBM was simply following what it had done with the Selectric III typewriter and the 3278 terminal - as I note on my web page in defense of IBM against the accusation that they did this in a gratuitous fashion.

I had read that it was because IBM wanted one keyboard layout for everyone, and adopted ISO to please the Europeans. People didn't take well to it so the AT layout was ANSI with a few concessions to the ISO people (eg. the large Enter is basically the ANSI and ISO enter stuck together). Eventually with the Model M, they just made ANSI ones for the US, and ISO ones for Europe, and everyone was happy.

[kode]

To be perfectly hones I don't really understand the fuzz with a smaller left shift, but I'm obviously biased as I've had that sort of layout since I first started out with computers some 15 years ago (typing away on a model m, no less), and I just don't have much experience typing on a keyboard with a larger left shift (I think I'd miss that handy little extra key...). Obviously a lot of you are the same, only the other way around. I could think that the \| key of us layouts is a bit large (even though I guess it could be nice to make those two characters without an alt-gr combo)

[quadibloc]

Obviously a lot of you are the same, only the other way around.

Yes, habit is the main issue here.

In my case, I live in Canada, and not in Quebec. Thus, where I live, we only speak English, and we use the U.S. keyboard layout (as opposed to even using the U.K. English keyboard layout, which also has the extra key).

But in 1981, when the IBM PC came out, I had already been touch-typing for ten years on typewriters, keypunch machines, and computer terminals. None of them had an extra key between Z and the left-hand shift. (There were such keyboards in existence, for example on the IBM 3278 terminal, but they were rare.)

Only on computer terminals did I have to deal with cases where the backspace and Enter/carriage return keys were out of reach (of course, on a manual typewriter, one had to lift one's left hand off the keyboard to push the lever...) so I welcomed the U.S. 101-key layout when it arrived. The 84-key AT layout may have been an improvement, but the 101-key U.S. layout was, to my mind, simply when they got it right.

For people in Europe who are content with their standard keyboard arrangement, there is no problem, but I am surprised, since alternatives to the standard 101-key layout are common here, that I can't seem to see cases where the 102-key layout has been modified to put the extra key somewhere less obtrusive.

[ch_123]

Somewhat unrelated, but what did you think of the 3278 keyboard? They were meant to be one of the first BS keyboards made by IBM.

[spremino]

To be perfectly hones I don't really understand the fuzz with a smaller left shift...

European here. Once you'll try a US keyboard, you'll realize how more comfortable is a larger left Shift. The European's Enter is also farther to reach. I resorted to mapping Caps to Shift and shifting right hand keys a column to the right.

[kode]

Not so sure about that. My netbook has a us key layout, and the lack of that extra key to the left of z really shows. I ended up remapping the menu key to be that key. I might just go with using us international layout on it, though, and see if that helps any. Old habits die hard, though.

[spremino]

Not so sure about that. My netbook has a us key layout, and the lack of that extra key to the left of z really shows. I ended up remapping the menu key to be that key. I might just go with using us international layout on it, though, and see if that helps any. Old habits die hard, though.

Agreed. Using a european layout on a US keyboard does not work.

I do not recommend you switch layout to use your current netbook, unless you are committed to stick with US keyboards for your future buys. I was going to do just that, but then I discovered Japanese keyboards, and now I looking to get one. I think I'll stick with them.

Maybe you could replace your netbook keyboard with an european one, if that makes sense to you.

[quadibloc]

Not so sure about that. My netbook has a us key layout, and the lack of that extra key to the left of z really shows. I ended up remapping the menu key to be that key.

Obviously, a "better" layout doesn't outweigh a key you need being missing from the keyboard. But the question is, why couldn't the extra key have been put somewhere else, where it would not have caused problems? Admittedly, the 101-key layout already seems to have keys placed in all the reachable areas.

Ah, there's one obvious possibility. Move the main typing area over slightly, to narrow the | \ key on the right of the U.S. layout to a single-key width... and that would widen the Caps Lock key to double-width. That way, the extra key could be put on the near side of it, making it much more reachable than it would be on the far side of the right shift key.

[vicz]

Ah, there's one obvious possibility. Move the main typing area over slightly, to narrow the | \ key on the right of the U.S. layout to a single-key width... and that would widen the Caps Lock key to double-width. That way, the extra key could be put on the near side of it, making it much more reachable than it would be on the far side of the right shift key.

My idea of the best keyboard layout changes constantly. Having used ISO and Japanese keyboards in the past, I know that having extra keys is very nice, but I am also used to the comfort and roominess of the US keyboard with its wide shift keys and wide space bar.

I think the HHKB layout, with a 1.5-width backspace right above enter, and the usual double-width backspace replaced by two normal keys, allowing escape to be in its rightful place left of 1, is very good. In fact, at the moment, my dream keyboard would be a Topre 86U with all 45g keys and the HHKB layout for the top two rows.

[vicz]

The HHKB2 layout ain't bad but it needs one more key.  I like the extra key next to Left Shift.  It's highly accessible and I'm trying to decide whether it's better as a FCN key or a BackSpace.

I can't stand having an extra key between Left Shift and Z, but that's a personal thing.

To me, the area below the space bar, in the middle, is a great place to put function keys (and chording keys in general), since they can be hit by the thumbs. See for instance the Canon Cat's two leap keys. I would like to see quality keyboard makers offer similarly-placed keys. I'd probably put the third level shift (a.k.a. AltGr) on them, liberating the more awkwardly-placed right Alt key for some other use.

I'd really like to try a Cat keyboard some day. If it's based on the same technology as contemporary Canon typewriters (and the keys look very similar on the Wikipedia photo linked above), it must be very comfortable.

[joniho]

Is there any benefit to having the rows on all standard keyboards offset by 1/4 and 1/2 of the key? Why not have them aligned into columns as well like numpads?

[wellington1869]

Is there any benefit to having the rows on all standard keyboards offset by 1/4 and 1/2 of the key? Why not have them aligned into columns as well like numpads?

there are keyboards that do that -
http://www.typematrix.com/

[Rajagra]

To me, the area below the space bar, in the middle, is a great place to put function keys (and chording keys in general), since they can be hit by the thumbs.

Amen to that, brother!


http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=101602&postcount=39

[msiegel]

Amen to that, brother!

i'm liking your layout ideas more and more

[joniho]

there are keyboards that do that -
http://www.typematrix.com/

The Delete/Shift/Enter keys look like a pain to reach for.

[JBert]

Amen to that, brother!

http://geekhack.org/showpost.php?p=101602&postcount=39

Interesting enough, this is something I've been wanting to do on a Compaq MX11800.

[quadibloc]

Pure historical artifact.

Indeed. So we have QWERTY offset by 50% from the number keys and 25% from the ASDF row, and a 50% offset for the ZXCVB row, so that the levers going up from the keys could all reach the levers that would connect them to the type basket.

So, naturally enough, builders of electronic keyboards wished to duplicate the arrangement of keys on a four-bank keyboard so that touch-typists who learned on typewriters would find the keys exactly where they expected them.

Of course, on a keyboard with only three banks - think of a Model 19 teletype, a Varityper, or an old three-bank Corona - the offset was 33 1/3% for all the rows.  But that's a much less common and familiar arrangement.

So standard keycaps, if not designed to take up the standard 3/4" by 3/4" space on a keyboard (19.05mm) are lengthened in increments of 3/16" in order to fit around a standard typewroter layout. Thus, without a big tooling charge, those are the building blocks keyboard designers have to work with.

At least they were brave enough not to stagger the numeric keypad.

And I'd illustrated this, but only with a diagram, on my site as well:



I'll have to take a photo of the keyboard of my old Flexowriter someday as another way of illustrating this.

[timw4mail]

Show Image

Where do you find one of these 101 key typewriters? :rolleyes:

[Mikael le Fou]

The Delete/Shift/Enter keys look like a pain to reach for.

Hello ! the Delete for sure but here you can see a french guy typing with a local dvorak (the Bépo)

[wellington1869]

omg, is that our first frenchman?
I dont recall anyone (admitting to being) french before!
(wait - does he have 10 posts yet? Damn.)

Actually I think its pretty cool that yet another nation has discovered mechanical switches