deskthority

Azteca wrote: ↑A Clone by definition must be identical in every way.

By definition, a Cherry MX clone should be grown from the DNA of another Cherry MX switch … wait …

There is no official definition of "clone" in terms of technology. However, being identical is not part of any definition I've ever seen. I go with the principle that a clone serves as a drop-in replacement, i.e. if you replaced the original with a clone, it would still work. An IBM PC clone can be put on a desk in place of an IBM PC, and still run all the same software.

In terms of switches, this means that it needs the legs in the same positions, it needs to fit the same size hole in the mounting plate and expect the PCB to be the same distance from the plate, and it needs to take the same keycaps.

That's why I don't class Omron, SMK or KPT switches as Alps clones, as you can't use them in place of a real Alps switch. Kaihua PG1511 series however can be used as a direct replacement to Cherry MX switches in the same keyboard. Hence, Cherry MX clone. It's not as though the internals are different either: they're a straight-up copy of Cherry's design, with the expected simplifications. You can see a comparison here:

http://www.kailh.com/gb/Newsdetail.asp?Newsid=37

I don't consider the design of the contact mechanism to be part of the clone definition, but since Kaihua copied that too, it's really quite obviously a clone. It doesn't mean that PG1511 switches are inherently poor; after all, they're copying a reputable product.

Azteca wrote: ↑Razer is betting its entire mechanical switch products on Kailh, so it is fair to assume they did their homework and they know Kailh switches are reliable.

The XArmor-era iOne boards must have been reliable then.

AULA switch looks nice too

Daniel Beardsmore wrote: ↑Kaihua PG1511 series however can be used as a direct replacement to Cherry MX switches in the same keyboard. Hence, Cherry MX clone.

The GeekHack.org wording discussion about either replicas, fakes, clones, or compatible, concluded "MX-Compatible" as the best option at describing Kailh. This is not GeekHack , but the same brain storming here will come up with the same wording as the most acceptable.

Hence, is best to describe Kailh as MX-Compatible.

That GH topic was retarded. I won't obey its judgement here or at GeekHack.

Pah, even if Beardsmore decides to call it MX-Schmem-ex, that will be leading, as we're talking the world's leading switch expert of the world's leading wiki vs some guys with loud sigs.

Azteca wrote: ↑

Daniel Beardsmore wrote: ↑Kaihua PG1511 series however can be used as a direct replacement to Cherry MX switches in the same keyboard. Hence, Cherry MX clone.

The GeekHack.org wording discussion about either replicas, fakes, clones, or compatible, concluded "MX-Compatible" as the best option at describing Kailh. This is not GeekHack , but the same brain storming here will come up with the same wording as the most acceptable.

Hence, is best to describe Kailh as MX-Compatible.

Your argument doesn't make sense.
Reading this thread, it seems to me that the popular opinion is that Kailh switches are clones.
As you said, this is not Geekhack. Perhaps "MX compatible" is the politically correct way to call them, but they are clones.
Call them any way you like, they are clones. Or replicas...Here is an idea!
I hereby propose the official name of any such switch to be "Cherry MX Replica"!

I like MX-Schem-ex, or MX-Bootleg, which is probably not entirely correct, but I like the gritty sound of it.

"Compatible" includes switches that are just that, MX compatible.

For instance, the Novatouch TKL's Topre sliders are MX keycap compatible, as are the Datanetics switches (IIRC) on my Apple ][ plus keyboard that I'm using with a clone of an Apple-1 (to the point that Wendell Sander sells converter controllers and keycap kits for Apple-1 use... and I'm pretty sure the keycaps are Signature Plastics SA profile doubleshots meant for Cherry MX applications). As an aside, those Datanetics switches actually predate MX, so... Or, Cherry's run of MX blues that have an Alps compatible slider are, well, Alps keycap compatible. And, I believe there have been other switches designed to use the same PCB footprint and keycap mount as other companies' switches, but with different internals, and for that, I'd use "compatible".

Kailh is a whole different animal from that. Kailh is a clone (or if you'd prefer a pejorative, bootleg or knockoff). Same internal design, same external design, same everything.

Yep. No need to pussyfoot around it: clones are clones. Cosmetic differences be damned. We're not just talking about the cap mount here but the entire switch, top to bottom.

bhtooefr wrote: ↑"Compatible" includes switches that are just that, MX compatible.

For instance, the Novatouch TKL's Topre sliders are MX keycap compatible

I don't quite agree, MX cap-compatible, sure, but can not be used as a drop in replacement. Thus, the NT switches are only MX half-compatible