Why are keyboard keys skewed?

[fuzzybyte]

Why are keyboard keys placed always in a skewed form instead of being perpendicular to each other? Are they supposed to be more easily reachable like that?

Does there exist any keyboards that have perpendicular typewriter keys (not just numpad etc.)?

[ricercar]

my answer for almost anything: Cherry brown. Wait, that's my other answer.

There are squared keys on the Kinesis Contour.

[Viett]

Originally, it was so that the typebars of a typewriter would not overlap:



Also, a lot of point-of-sale (POS) keyboards carry a square layout:

[fuzzybyte]

they should make a squared Filco

[spremino]

Why are keyboard keys placed always in a skewed form instead of being perpendicular to each other? Are they supposed to be more easily reachable like that?

Oh no, they would be more easily reachable for people with two right hands ;-)

They are placed that way because typewriters had keys placed that way and most people couldn't think about using a different shape. Numeric keypads are shaped like calculators' ones, which weren't constrained by mechanics.

As a side note, function keys are placed like that because first programs menus were on an horizontal line.

[DreymaR]

The row stagger is quite all right on the right-hand side of the keboard; it's on the left-hand side the stagger goes against a good hand position.

I think that a square layout like the POS keyboards (I think of that abbreviation differently) is horrible to type on. They should just turn the stagger for the left hand, like some very few boards have. Unfortunately, those boards are no good mechanically.

[ak_nala]

Datadesk SmartBoard, and hopefully soon the SmartBoard II.

They did a few things wrong, but at least used White Alps or Alps fakes. Interesting ergo layout designed to mimic the natural splaying of the fingers of the hand and with varying sized keycaps to take into consideration the lower precision of the outer fingers. But keys are basically in-line with each other rather than staggered.

Reason it wouldn't be good to have a perfectly squared keyboard with the same spacing as a normal board is that the usual staggered arrangement actually allows a slightly more natural position of the hands and wrists as they angle into the keys. If perfectly square and close together it forces the hands even more "in" than usual, badly angling the wrists to square the hands, almost guaranteeing eventual RSI problems.

[ak_nala]

The only problem with redefining the left side of a staggered keyboard to also stagger-in instead of stagger-out for a given finger the way they presently do, is that the degree of stagger isn't uniform from row to row and isn't mirrored right to left, and also seems to be optimized for the direction of reach employed by the right hand.

Specifically, when you go up-and-in on a new diagonal with the left hand to mirror the right hand, presently the reach would be significantly further than the same moves with the right hand. Not good.

Ideally you would want to redesign a keyboard so that the stagger was uniform from one row to the next and also mirrored so the same degree of stagger appeared for each hand's fingers on a given, mirrored move.

Edit: The only place on a standard keyboard that presently does this "correctly" is the 1/2 key stagger of the bottom alpha to home row and the top alpha to numeric row. Where things completely break is the home row to top alpha stagger, which is only 1/4 key to the left for the right hand, but a whopping 3/4 key stagger to the right for the left hand if remapping to mirror the reach direction.

One could try to make a board where the spatial shift is a uniform 1/2 key stagger from row to row throughout, but don't know if this would make the reach to the top rows a bit too much or not, and certain keys (like "y" in qwerty) would be equidistant from both hands, possibly leading to some confusion.

[DreymaR]

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about, using row stagger consistently all the way. This layout only exists inside my head unfortunately.

[ak_nala]

But your pattern breaks on the top row where you go 1/2 space shift instead of the 1/4 space you use everywhere else.

If you're going to change it up, though, that is the place to do it instead of right above the home row like a normal board, but just saying.

[Rajagra]

I can show one even uglier.

I'll see your ugly keyboard, and raise you with one of my own designs:


Occupies exactly the same space as a conventional 104/5 key board, but fixes some of the problems.

I realised I messed up the 67890-= row, it needs to be 1/4 key width further to the right. Not worth redrawing though. Nobody will ever make it. :lol:

Edit> Hehe, I just realised I have three '6' keys on that design. It's a Devil of a board.

[microsoft windows]

I'd prefer not to mess around with keyboard layouts unless I develop some sort of RSI requiring me to do so to prevent discomfort. For me, the standard 101 layout gets the job done (But again, I'm sure others here don't do the same stuff with their computers as I do). But it's always interesting to take a look at those ergonomic varieties of the QWERTY and think about how they were invented.

Does anyone here use a special ergonomic keyboard like the ones pictured above?

[keyb_gr]

Occupies exactly the same space as a conventional 104/5 key board, but fixes some of the problems.

...while looking like a mess. And I bet hunt and peck typists would hate you. A tenkeyless version with separate numpad might be worth a shot though...

EDIT: Ins to the left of Tab? (Too prominent. In return, Del seems a bit far off at the top right.) ISO 102 key right next to RShift? (Shift+Backspace would get a little clumsy. OK for < and > though.) Not to mention that the setup would be quite AltGr-unfriendly - it would be OK with my adapted German layout but entering these curly brackets {} with the standard one would be even more annoying than usual, as the left hand would need to be moved all the way to the right to reach 7 and 0.

Hmm, I've got a full set of keycaps floating around here...

[ak_nala]

Wow, this is the first time I took a really close look at the uTron layout. Those are some strange layout choices.

Strikes me as brilliant and severely flawed all at the same time. Perhaps it makes more sense on an Asian board, but some of those keys seem really, really poorly placed, IMHO - eg, Shifts are too small and poorly placed, Tab is given too much importance, Backspace is poorly placed (would be better put where Tab is). And is there even a Windows key that can be used as Command for a Mac?

[ak_nala]

Yeah, I noticed the small Space key, and on the wrong side (at least for me).

What are those long keys under the Tab and Enter?