How Unicomp Could Do It

[quadibloc]

In this post, I'm describing what I would like to see, so presumably Unicomp needs to do more market research before investing in a new product.

In any case, Unicomp has been the despair of people on this forum. They have the great buckling spring technology, but they haven't used it to bring out exciting new products that would appeal to Model M lovers... who will probably wait to order from Unicomp until their old Model Ms break down, by which time, at this rate, they'll be out of business.

Given that while Unicomp hasn't even deigned to produce the Space Saver keyboard for keyboard enthusiasts... but it still produces 122-key keyboards and 3151 keyboards, my suspicion is that they don't make their living from the enthusiast market, but instead from supplying replacement keyboards to businesses that have a lot of IBM systems in-house. That's their bread and butter, their core business, not us.

They should still be able to produce a Space Saver keyboard, simply because IBM/Lexmark did, so they should actually already have the tools and dies they need. And perhaps someday soon they will.

In the meantime, here is my suggestion for a product I would think is really cool... and which just might appeal to some segments of their core market as well.

No retooling is required. The starting point for the design would be the 102-key U.S. layout terminal keyboard. This one has a layout like the 101-key U.S. keyboard; the extra key is added by splitting the + key on the numeric keypad into two keys.

The keyboard, on the surface, would look just like a 101-key U.S. keyboard, except:

Where the Scroll Lock key used to be, there's an unlabelled key a solid dark green in color.

The keys on the numeric keypad are laid out like this:

Num Lock, Scroll Lock, /, * (first row)
7, 8, 9, - (second row)
4, 5, 6, + (third row)

and the rest as usual.

So far, nothing particularly exciting has taken place. The keyboard is virtually the same as a 101-key keyboard... except it has an extra key. But while the physical keyboard isn't changed much, the electronics is a bit fancier, so that the keyboard has different layouts that you can switch between while you're typing. Several of them.

Take that, HHKB.

Hold down the green key and press F1, and the keyboard becomes a 101-key U.S. keyboard, with functions matching the layout as described.

Green Key-F4: This is for Unix and Windows lovers. (Hmm; this intersection might be the null set...) Caps Lock becomes the Control key. The two Control keys become Windows shift keys. And poor old Scroll Lock (the one on the numeric keypad, remember: the Green Key must remain fixed, whatever else happens) becomes the Windows Menu key.

Green Key-F5: This mode is for using the numeric keypad for data entry instead of like a calculator. + becomes -. - becomes Tab. * becomes Space. / becomes Comma. Thus, the numeric keypad changes to the style found on the 122-key keyboard and on IBM terminal keyboards; but the codes produced mimic the behavior of a conventional PC keyboard.

Now come the possibilities that are harder to explain.

Green Key-F3: Here, Caps Lock becomes an Fn key. F1 is PF1... and Fn-F1 is PF13. Fn-|\ is the International key. Other Fn combinations let one use all the keys on the 122-key keyboard that aren't on the 101-key keyboard, and there's an Fn-combination for Caps Lock too.

Print Screen is the control shift, and Pause/Break is the key in the middle of the cursor keypad. The numeric keypad is in 122-key keyboard arrangement, with comma and space and tab. Num Lock and Scroll Lock don't have their old functions, but correspond to what is in those positions on that keyboard.

In order to allow this layout to be changed to on the fly, but look like a Host Connected Keyboard, in this mode, what the keyboard does is this:

Scan Code Set 3: Same codes as the HCK.

Scan Code Set 2: Yes, it's supported - but it outputs the same codes as in Scan Code Set 3. This way, it plays nice with the operating system, and yet looks like you've connected an HCK while the computer was off.

Green Key-F2: Same assignment of the 122-key keyboard to the layout as in the mode described above... but this time, the keys are "faked" in the way Unicomp does this on their PC/5250 product.

A keyboard like this would have something for everybody; it would be a universal keyboard for offices using PCs in different ways. And it just requires two new keycaps - the green key and a single-height buff + key. It uses an existing printed-circuit board layout and spring arrangement.

[spremino]

Given that while Unicomp hasn't even deigned to produce the Space Saver keyboard for keyboard enthusiasts... but it still produces 122-key keyboards and 3151 keyboards, my suspicion is that they don't make their living from the enthusiast market, but instead from supplying replacement keyboards to businesses that have a lot of IBM systems in-house. That's their bread and butter, their core business, not us.

That explains the "quality issues" when it comes to details not involving functioning where we enthusiasts are so fussy about.

They should still be able to produce a Space Saver keyboard, simply because IBM/Lexmark did, so they should actually already have the tools and dies they need. And perhaps someday soon they will.

Indeed they should be, since they manufactured the Space Saver for IBM:

http://mineko.fc2web.com/box/kb-room/items/unicomp-uni04c6.html

[quadibloc]

Incidentally, instead of simply describing what the keyboard should be like, I should have included a diagram. So I'll try to attach one, which will also allow me to supply photos which I feel I'm not ready to include on my website yet.

Note that I've tried to change from standard IBM coloring to my preferred color-coding, but only a little bit, using what I think are readily available standard colors:



The third color, shown as black keys with white legends, would actually be the third color that they already have; the "metallic gray" keys from their 104-key keyboard with the black case.

[JBert]

What, no DIP switches? That's a pity...

[quadibloc]

What, no DIP switches? That's a pity...

Well, there could be a dip switch to disable Scan Code Set 2, so the keyboard would really look like a Host Connected Keyboard. But the idea is to avoid using DIP switches the way the HHKB does it, and instead let the user change layouts on the fly while the computer is on and the keyboard is in use. I think that's better.

If it makes sense to use DIP switches the way IBM did it, to give an identifying code to the keyboard, that is another matter, but since this keyboard is for PS/2 (and maybe USB) connection to a PC, I don't think that's applicable.

[skriefal]

The keyboard is virtually the same as a 101-key keyboard... except it has an extra key. But while the physical keyboard isn't changed much, the electronics is a bit fancier, so that the keyboard has different layouts that you can switch between while you're typing. Several of them.

And that's why it won't happen.  Although Unicomp rarely changes the physical attributes -- layout, casing, etc -- of their keyboards, they do seem to be able to manage it when necessary.  New controllers, however, seem to be a problem.  I suspect that they need to outsource such work... and the interest in doing so seems to be lacking.

[spremino]

IMO, the better route would be to release specs of controller used, and let hobbyists build and program their own. Then you'd have as many layout as you like.

[quadibloc]

New controllers, however, seem to be a problem.

Aside from adding the Windows keys, they do have not just one, but two custom Linux versions of the keyboard, and aside from having the 122-key Host Connected keyboard, they also have the PC/5250, which outputs more civilized scan codes to function as a Windows keyboard - and run IBM's Client Access/400 software when it's set up as if the computer had a 101-key keyboard on it.

So they have created custom controllers on their own initiative, and, indeed, the Linux keyboards show they have at least some interest in the keyboard aficionado market.

That's why I thought that a new controller was a better bet than a new layout. A Space Saving Keyboard, particularly one modified by the addition of Windows keys, though, is more likely to be a popular item than what I've suggested here. What would be best, of course, is a keyboard which is both compact and flexible, the way the HHKB is. But I don't, yet, have a good suggestion to make in that area.

[ironcoder]

Add Windows keys!?

One of the best things about Unicomp is the lack of WIndows keys!

[quadibloc]

Add Windows keys!?

One of the best things about Unicomp is the lack of WIndows keys!

Well, I somewhat accommodated that in my design. Normally, it's a 101-key layout, without Windows keys. But if you need the Windows keys, you can switch to a different layout, where Scroll Lock (positioned where / is on the numpad) becomes Windows Menu, and the two Ctrl keys become the Windows Shift.

Of course, I should have included more possibilities; Green Key-F6 and Green Key-F7 could be used to invoke the two Linux layouts they already offer (as modified by the displacement of Scroll Lock).

The idea is a rough sketch; I haven't, for example, specified exactly where every Fn-key combination to emulate the 122-key keyboard would be located.

[spremino]

Add Windows keys!?

One of the best things about Unicomp is the lack of WIndows keys!

Power keyboard users do need additional modifier keys in easy to reach spots.

If it weren't for Windows keys, why would you bother with Unicomps? I think there are more than enough Model Ms around to make us happy.

The thing I hate about Windows keys is that many keyboard makers make them not flat like other modifiers are.

[quadibloc]

Power keyboard users do need additional modifier keys in easy to reach spots.

This is true. Is there a standard version of the LISP Machine software for the IBM PC platform?

If Alt -> Meta, Ctrl -> Super, could ~` and |\ be used for Hyper?

That would be an unusual mode, though... but the MacIvory keyboard had only 88 keys (because it didn't have a numeric keypad, and it only had three function keys), so it's hardly impossible.

[spremino]

This is true. Is there a standard version of the LISP Machine software for the IBM PC platform?

I don't know. Maybe GNU Emacs is the modern Lisp machine emulator.

If Alt -> Meta, Ctrl -> Super, could ~` and |\ be used for Hyper?

It depends on your needs. I don't like sacrificing keys, however. I've never seen Hyper used, and I wonder what it was meant for. OTOH, as I've already stated in another thread, Windows (Super) keys are often used to access your window manager's facilities, and to define hotkeys of your own, included multimedia functions, therefore a serious modern keyboard must have these keys.

A wart of standard keyboards is that the most used modifiers are placed on you pinkies, which is not fun. Therefore, I've modified my bottom row like this:

Windows Alt Ctrl Space Ctrl Alt Windows Menu

This way, I can hit Alt and Ctrl using my thumbs (maybe, I should have put Shift instead of Ctrl). It works wonderfully. I can't wait for my Japanese keyboard to arrive, for it will help reducing these stretches.

[quadibloc]

I don't like sacrificing keys, however. I've never seen Hyper used, and I wonder what it was meant for.

I can't say that I've seen it used.

But I'll tell you why I would even think of suggesting such a thing.

My basic idea was this: the 102-key terminal keyboard that Unicomp makes was a sound basis for further development. The extra key makes the numeric keypad match the one on the 122-key keyboard, assisting with emulating that one. And so I used the extra key to move the Scroll Lock key, because I replaced that key with the one key that could never be reassigned - the key that is used to tell the keyboard controller to change layouts.

The simplest layout is to use the other 101 keys to reproduce a 101-key layout.

And there's quite a bit that can be done with that, such as swapping the Esc key and ~`, swapping Caps Lock and Ctrl, and so on.

But that's only the first level of flexibility.

Layouts can be chosen that include an Fn key. The Fn key, familiar from laptop keyboards, is a shift that's internal to a keyboard, allowing it to pretend it has more keys than it has physically. So this changes a 101-key keyboard to a 200-key keyboard.

Well, not quite. You can't use an Fn key to change a shift key to another shift key - because then you can't depress both kinds of shift keys at once, and is the shifted key affected by the Fn key being down. So shift keys are at a premium.

So if one wants to emulate a keyboard with extra shift keys, other keys have to give. ~` and |\ wouldn't be lost, but they would just be accessible only through using the Fn key.

In fact, though, I realize that if Hyper were needed, Tab and |\ would probably have to be Hyper - so Tab would replace ~`.

[skriefal]

Aside from adding the Windows keys, they do have not just one, but two custom Linux versions of the keyboard, and aside from having the 122-key Host Connected keyboard, they also have the PC/5250, which outputs more civilized scan codes to function as a Windows keyboard - and run IBM's Client Access/400 software when it's set up as if the computer had a 101-key keyboard on it.

The addition of the Windows keys quite likely would have required a new controller -- or at least some minor tweaks to the existing controller.  But the Linux versions probably use the same controller as the standard versions.  And the terminal boards existed prior to Unicomp, IIRC, so those are likely using existing controllers designed by IBM or Lexmark.

I'm not implying that Unicomp has done nothing with the controllers.  But of all items needed to build a keyboard, the controller seems to be the item that they try are least likely to touch.  For example, it has been stated that this is the only reason why they're no longer building new M Mini boards.  The old controller can no longer be made due to a part having been discontinued, and despite the apparent interest in M Minis they've shown no interest in modifying the controller to use a replacement component.

[patrickgeekhack]

As much I would like Unicomp to succeed, I cannot see them making a lot of money from the general population. Why?

Most people don't even know they can buy keyboard from another manufacturer besides their PC manufacturer, Microsoft or Logitech. Sad, but true. Even if Unicomp keyboards were sold at Best Buy for example, most would turn away not because the keyboard is bad nor because the keys require a lot of force, but rather because of the noise produced by the keys. And since most people  (not those on this forum) tend to buy a keyboard and use it until it dies, they are very unlikely to buy again from Unicomp for its keyboards last for a very very long time.

The noise level is what prevents me from taking my Customizer to the office.

[quadibloc]

Even if Unicomp keyboards were sold at Best Buy for example, most would turn away not because the keyboard is bad nor because the keys require a lot of force, but rather because of the noise produced by the keys. And since most people  (not those on this forum) tend to buy a keyboard and use it until it dies, they are very unlikely to buy again from Unicomp for its keyboards last for a very very long time.

Both of your points are absolutely right.

On top of those points, though, is an even bigger objection. Why would people, unless they know about the tactile feel and durability quality of Unicomp keyboards, pay $70 instead of $20 for a keyboard?

(EDIT: While they offer a value-priced keyboard which is as cheap as anyone else's, the rubber dome version of the 3153 keyboard they have costs the same as a buckling spring, so they don't have this means of getting into the mass market.)

So I'm not suggesting that Unicomp should gamble a lot of money on entering the mass market.

Unicomp does sell POS keyboards; right now, they appear to be just standard Unicomp keyboards with third-party bar-code wands and/or card readers added. They do not appear to be making any attempt to compete with Cherry and other POS keyboard makers in offering grid-layout keyboards and/or keyboards with programmable keys.

A retail point-of-sale environment is one where the noise level of the keys would not be an issue, and where durability is vital.

What I'm suggesting isn't a mass-market item. I did make the mistake, though, of leaving out some possibilities with more mass-market appeal. If Scroll Lock becomes Caps Lock, and Caps Lock becomes Fn, Fn with the function keys can be used to issue the scan codes used with all those tiny little buttons on multimedia keyboards. (The only problem is you can't include the key for turning the computer on, because that can hardly be reassigned.)

Instead, I see this as a dual-niche product.

Businesses that want some flexibility in how they use their computers, so they don't have to do a keyboard swap if they decide to use a terminal for an application normally requiring a 122-key keyboard, and that wish to minimize retraining for that keyboard, would find it attractive, I think.

And for keyboard fans, since it has multiple configurations, it's a full-size counterpart to the HHKB; a flexible keyboard for people who aren't looking to learn something too new and different.

The 3151 keyboard design lets them make a 101-key keyboard, plus the one special key needed to switch modes, without physical retooling.

The fact that it needs a fancy controller is the only downside. But that means that another company could even add the controllers, using Unicomp as its supplier.

I notice that they can't sell their USB keyboard with a trackpoint outside the U.S.; it may be that they haven't pursued licensing patents they would need to produce more flexible keyboards.

This flexibility, while it increases value for the customer, also exacerbates one of Unicomp's problems that you noted, of course. It's bad enough the keyboards take so long to wear out; now, you also don't need to buy a new keyboard to get a different layout.

And this keyboard is not for everyone; getting it in the wrong layout by accident could lead to support costs in some situations.

[spremino]

Whatever.

Let's face it: as soon as you devise a new layout, most people will be annoyed from it. That's why IBM developed the sucky layout that has become a defacto standard, and with which we have been stuck for years and will be stuck for years to come.

IMO, the best way would be allowing hobbyists to customize both the layout (the way Ripster has done) and the controller's ROM. It should have a switch to allow the latter, so we would not be at risk of getting a virus or something like that. That way the manufacturer will make mainstream customers and tinkerers happy.

As for current layout, the thing which annoys me the most is the uselessly wide space bar. You could squeeze two more keys from it.

[spremino]

It's bad enough the keyboards take so long to wear out; now, you also don't need to buy a new keyboard to get a different layout.

I don't think so. You'll never reach the throw-away market with an expensive keyboard. You could charge customers of premium keyboards for lost sales, since your product will be unique. As I said before, you can charge for goods as much as customers are willing to pay. Maybe we should ask a reseller for percentage of sales.

[ironcoder]

As much I would like Unicomp to succeed, I cannot see them making a lot of money from the general population.

But don't they still OEM keyboards for IBM or are they out of that business?

The noise level is what prevents me from taking my Customizer to the office.

Depending on your coworkers that could be a very good reason to take your customizer to the office :lol:

[quadibloc]

I should note, though, that the layout shown is strictly for aficionados, or businesses with no use for the Windows keys. I don't consider it a "new" layout. It's the 101-key layout, the only change being one extra key squeezed in... and the Scroll Lock moved to the spot where that happened.

For the mass market, though, not basing the keyboard on the 104/105-key layout which includes Windows keys would doom it to being ignored without a second glance.

EDIT: Perhaps the trouble is that with the title "How Unicomp Could Do It", I leave ambiguous the answer to... how Unicomp could do what?

The "what" was: another way (besides a tenkeyless buckling spring keyboard) Unicomp could make a new product with a coolness factor that would interest a number of the people here. And so I observed that their existing 3151 layout was almost identical to the 101-key U.S. keyboard, which is very well liked, but has one extra key, so I outlined how this extra key could be used to make a keyboard with different configurations.

This was intended as a way to fit into an apparent limitation on retooling, it wasn't an optimal product, nor was it aimed at a mass market.

A mass market product can't avoid the Windows keys - unless it's a Mac keyboard. (Which actually is something Unicomp should make, too, a buckling spring keyboard with key legends and layout specifically designed for the Mac. This is a market that can't rely on old M2s!)

An optimal product aimed at keyboard fanciers would, it appears from what I see here, and the popularity of the HHKB, be a compact keyboard, not one with the 101-key keyboard form factor.

So if the new controller needed would require a major investment, not a minor one, then I wouldn't recommend the idea presented here to Unicomp. If it were easy to do, though, it would be a way for them to gauge the value of extending to a new market - in more than the relatively minor way they have so far, with, say, the Linux 2 layout.