deskthority

I couldn't help myself. I know nothing about it, but it's filthy, strangely proportioned, and has a cute stance. Waiting for it to arrive - anybody have some background info?

Bigfoot:


http://deskthority.net/wiki/IBM_Model_F ... 1_Keyboard

A Model F. But, as far as I know, incompatible with Xwhatsit's or Hataa's controllers.

http://deskthority.net/keyboards-f2/ibm ... it=Bigfoot

Soarer's controller (not adapter) works with it, AFAIK.

Awww what a cute nickname.

Thanks for that. Probably should have known it was in the wiki.

Parak wrote:Soarer's controller (not adapter) works with it, AFAIK.

Neato! I'll look into it, thanks!

phosphorglow wrote:I couldn't help myself.

Oooh, I'm looking forward to seeing what you do with this!

Me too, actually!

And yes, Soarer's Controller apparently does support it. Epicness.
Also, looking forward to fiddling around with this controller firmware. I like it already.

I could be wrong (I find IBM's naming and product labyrinth impossible to fully understand…) but according to this thread, the controller PCB is hard bonded to the keyboard matrix on this model, and it doesn't speak a protocol that Soarer's converter supports. That's both controller and converter incompatible. Well, without a lot of chopping…

Hopefully I am just misidentifying this keyboard. If you can hook it up to Soarer's converter, you will indeed have a lot of fun with it. His stuff is great!

By the way: Soarer's controller doesn't handle capacitance sensing, so it is not for Model Fs. It can drive a Model M because those switch in the same basic way as MX switches. There are other, specialised, capsense controllers out there like Xwhatsit's instead.

I'm pretty sure Muirium is right here - pretty much all of terminal Model Fs (except the 122-keys) will need a much more low level adapter as they speak a weird protocol over a parallel connector which doesn't map nicely onto the AT protocol.

Interesting that the 122 keys were better behaved. Even the little Kishsaver falls into this trap: the stock controller doesn't send full make and break codes (separate signals when keys are pressed and released) unless in a diagnostic mode that Hasu used for his Kish converter. Although an excellent bit of detective work on Hasu's part, it never was fast enough to keep up with moderately fast typing.

So everyone's currently installing replacement controllers in their Kishsavers to get around all that. The installation is quite fiddly (there's a 30 pin ribbon cable to desolder and resolder, while keeping aligned) but far from impractical. But the Model Fs with integrated controllers, like the XT and the Bigfoot, are a whole other order of hard to work with.

The XT, fortunately, works just perfectly with its stock controller and Soarer's converter. But the other guys don't.

Muirium wrote:Interesting that the 122 keys were better behaved. Even the little Kishsaver falls into this trap: the stock controller doesn't send full make and break codes (separate signals when keys are pressed and released) unless in a diagnostic mode that Hasu used for his Kish converter. Although an excellent bit of detective work on Hasu's part, it never was fast enough to keep up with moderately fast typing.

So everyone's currently installing replacement controllers in their Kishsavers to get around all that. The installation is quite fiddly (there's a 30 pin ribbon cable to desolder and resolder, while keeping aligned) but far from impractical. But the Model Fs with integrated controllers, like the XT and the Bigfoot, are a whole other order of hard to work with.

The XT, fortunately, works just perfectly with its stock controller and Soarer's converter. But the other guys don't.

I am confused. I thought that the IBM Model F 122-key keyboards worked fine with Soarer's converter. I have an F-122 waiting in the wings. I am typing this on my XT, but I am still using the Hagstsrom converter.

Sorry about that, I just wandered off on a tangent. The 122 key Model F isn't affected by the weird protocol problem that rendered the Kishsaver silent until just recently. 122 key Model Fs and XTs speak in a sensible tongue and Soarer's converter is quite enough for either of them.

The Bigfoot's problem is that it is stricken by the protocol issue *and* has a hard mounted controller. A keyboard is fine if it only suffers one of those two. (The Kishsaver fails the first but passes the second. The XT passes the first while failing the second.)

Hopefully I'm wrong, and Phosphor's Bigfoot doesn't have this hard mounted controller:



If it does, things get complex. No one has made a converter. And it takes daring to hack something like that straight off the main PCB, to clear space for a replacement.

Hrm? Soarer's Controller firmware includes a bigfoot config file.

# IBM 'bigfoot' PC/XT layout 5291-2 terminal keyboard
# Works without modification to keyboard (bigfoot has no CPU!).

Also, I'm typing on my SSK with his controller firmware right now and wow - it's ridiculously easy to configure and install. Bam. Haven't done the layer mapping yet but it also looks super freakin' simple.

Soarer - you rock. A lot.

Perhaps he means a Model M version of the Bigfoot. Model F keyboards use a completely different sensing technology, which requires more complex electronics. (You have to probe with an oscillator instead of a simple flat voltage.)

But he does indeed rock! I recommend Soarer's controller to everyone building customs, for power and simplicity.

Further investigation yields: Soarer is epic.
http://geekhack.org/index.php?topic=48950.0

It reads multiplexed strobes. Neato.

Oh, that's good! The one he's converted has a weird split controller design, where the capsense and the logic are separated entirely. Instead of a signal/protocol, the raw capsensed output is exposed over the wire, so he's processing that. Hopefully yours is one of these!

IBM: still surpring us, decades later.

Muirium wrote:IBM: still surpring us, decades later.

It's amazing when you think about it. They put more R&D into switches than dedicated switch companies and more R&D into keyboards than dedicated keyboard companies.

That was the old IBM, back when they really cared 100% about every piece of tech they put out there. They were truly one of the great engineering forces on the face of the earth in the 20th century.

I doubt we'll ever see another tech company like that. It seems like everything is just cheap, disposable crap these days. The fact that they use surface mount components that one can barely see with the naked eye doesn't help. It's nearly impossible to repair them when they do break.

I had someone request a motherboard repair on a laptop that was damaged recently. The only thing wrong with it was a cluster of capacitors that were toast. But they were a mess of tiny surface mount caps with no identifications on them whatsoever. It was literally impossible now that they were toast to figure out what their values were. Rrrr!

*Waves his cane at the damn kids to get off his lawn!*

Moore's Law and personal computing in general rather put the kibosh on all that. But cheap manufacturing in China really drove the nails into the coffin. Rare is the product indeed that succeeds on physical quality. The first necessity is being in the same order of magnitude in price!

IBM made quality gear for a good long while. I don't hold them in quite the same esteem, though, as they never were as engineering led as HP in its glory days, weren't beyond a self-inflicted fully intentional clunker like the PC Jr. just when they least needed it, and never showed the telltale signs of a soul that cared. IBMs latter day transformation into a hardware free consulting firm was only natural once their hardware started on its way right on down, and off, the priority list. In fact, it was IBM's impact on the personal computer industry post 1981 was the direct impulse behind the race to the bottom that made the PC the barren waste of inventiveness it is today. Chinese manufacturing might not be a shadow of its current self if IBM PC clones hadn't driven the Shenzen industrial complex as hard as it did the last two decades. They might have topped out at mid complexity stuff, rather than going up almost all the stack. Intel and Microsoft survive, alone, in the platform IBM built.

Doesn't stop me liking my buckling springs. But the guys who made these were far from the centre of the company. That was bean counters and sales agents working the golf course. They could have been selling mustard for all they cared.

Often I feel sad about the current state of innovation and manufacturing in the West. Sometimes it seems that we mechanical keyboard enthusiasts are like the characters in a post-apocalyptic sci-fi novel keeping things running with recycled circuit boards powered by E. coli-generated methane. On the other hand, as I sit typing away on my IBM XT keyboard, I smile at the knowledge that it is connected to a brand-new Mac Pro that was designed in California and assembled in Texas. Perhaps there is still some hope.

Most of the components inside came from somewhere else, you know! In fact some of them are Apple's nemesis: Samsung's. Globalisation isn't going anywhere, soon.

Muirium wrote:Most of the components inside came from somewhere else, you know! In fact some of them are Apple's nemesis: Samsung's. Globalisation isn't going anywhere, soon.

Just when I had made myself a wee bit happy, along came this pin to puncture my balloon.

Well, everything came from somewhere else. We are all starstuff, our very elements forged in stellar ovens or supernovae.

Soon none of this will matter as we begin manufacturing everything at home. On our Chinese 3D printers.

Muirium wrote:Moore's Law and personal computing in general rather put the kibosh on all that. But cheap manufacturing in China really drove the nails into the coffin. Rare is the product indeed that succeeds on physical quality. The first necessity is being in the same order of magnitude in price!

IBM made quality gear for a good long while. I don't hold them in quite the same esteem, though, as they never were as engineering led as HP in its glory days, weren't beyond a self-inflicted fully intentional clunker like the PC Jr. just when they least needed it, and never showed the telltale signs of a soul that cared. IBMs latter day transformation into a hardware free consulting firm was only natural once their hardware started on its way right on down, and off, the priority list. In fact, it was IBM's impact on the personal computer industry post 1981 was the direct impulse behind the race to the bottom that made the PC the barren waste of inventiveness it is today. Chinese manufacturing might not be a shadow of its current self if IBM PC clones hadn't driven the Shenzen industrial complex as hard as it did the last two decades. They might have topped out at mid complexity stuff, rather than going up almost all the stack. Intel and Microsoft survive, alone, in the platform IBM built.

Doesn't stop me liking my buckling springs. But the guys who made these were far from the centre of the company. That was bean counters and sales agents working the golf course. They could have been selling mustard for all they cared.

This is quite fantastic, and quite right. Muirium, I love you and your command of the English language.

The PC Jr. was a cute little crappy machine though...