Trends in keyboard design: Who started what?

[mr_a500]

Vintage is not by definition better

Actually, it usually is. This is the way it works: something is designed by a creative, intelligent designer. The product is produced and is successful. Then the executives and accountants say, "How can we get more profit out of this?" The obvious answer is to cut costs. Cutting costs involves cutting quality, using cheaper materials and lower cost labour. Eventually, they're down to using garbage-can plastic and third world labour. No wonder everything is disposable these days.

[webwit]

Ok, back to your ball mouse, black&white tv, brick "mobile" phone, and 8 bit computer without internet then

[Daniel Beardsmore]

No, we'll make mr_a500 carry a PDP-11 onto the train.

[mr_a500]

Ok, back to your ball mouse, black&white tv, brick "mobile" phone, and 8 bit computer without internet then

I use a 1991 trackball, CRT TV (with 8-bit computer connected), 50's rotary phones with bakelite handsets, drive a 1958 VW, have a top-of-the-line 80's JVC VCR (wood panelled!), cook in solid copper pots, and have a collection of books from the 1800's. I even have an original 1964 lava lamp. I like to get the best from every time period.

[Halvar]

legends,fonts and typography went to shit about the same time these people were made 'redundant' :

Late 1970's, early '80's ..
It wasn't the 1990's that destroyed everything, it was Thatcher/Reaganomics .

Too bold a statement, and one of nostalgia mostly.

Everyday typography used to suck really bad before the digital age. Look at old newspapers for example.

Do you really think this

http://blog.encyclopediavirginia.org/fi ... 9.1.70.jpg

is better than this:

http://www.chrishondros.com/clips/NYTimes17Feb2007.jpg

OK, they are both pretty awful...

But many great layouts of today's papers and magazines wouldn't be possible at all with this guy's tools, and knowledge and expectations of typography are much higher today in a large part of the population.

Also, look at product packaging today vs. back in the days before DTP.

[Daniel Beardsmore]

… CRT TV (with 8-bit computer connected) …

That's a passable pairing: the terrible picture of the CRT lessens the harshness of jaggies and vicious dithering (like red+yellow → orange). However, staring at a static picture at 50 or 60 Hz isn't ideal, and for anything more, having a five-ton behemoth that's going to be way out of focus and convergence is even worse that many picture limitations of LCD, though Dell's latest E-series TFTs are so awful, a CRT would be a step up. What shocked me is how much more vibrant the colour is on even TN LCD panels over a cheap CRT (I don't have a decent CRT left — the only good one I had (Diamond Pro) burnt out the EHT).

Considering that LCD has higher dot pitch, no x-rays, no need to constantly fiddle with the picture to get it vaguely rectangular instead of jelly-shaped (or in the case of the batch of brand-new exobot-shaped CRTs at uni, a horribly twisted picture that was impossible to adjust using the Mac OS-based controls), no need to keep degaussing it due to continual colour shifting (I had a screen at work once that genuinely required routine degaussing), fantastic colour, support for subpixel antialiasing¹ and an acceptable diagonal size to weight ratio, why would anyone ever want to be stuck with a horrible fuzzy CRT again? CRTs also had such delights as poor voltage control where changes in overall intensity would change the image dimensions, and arcing over carbonised dust that would make the picture shrink and dim briefly. I was senselessly anti-LCD until I realised that even a good Dell TN was light years ahead of a CRT (though for practical purposes, I got an S-IPS).

Nostalgia is fun, but in many cases, using old equipment is a real shock — how did we ever put up with what we were using? Reminds me of how long it took my Mac LC (16 MHz CPU) to render the 8-bit table of any True Type font. The one thing I do miss is listening to the Amiga 500's glorious floppy drive stepper motor. The Amiga 1200 was dead to me due to having a stupid quiet floppy drive. Sacrilege!

Computers now aren't necessarily better, they're just broken instead of inherently incapable :) The biggest problem now is that nobody takes any care over writing software. Schoolboys in the 80s wrote high-performance games in assembler, whereas now even the simplest poxy .NET program falls over and breaks from errors even schoolboys were too smart to make in the past.

¹ though hardware using the Mullard SAA5050 character generator IC got hardware antialiasing!

[webwit]

While I feel mr_a500's argument about product cheapening, I simply don't think it can be applied on the introduction of cylindrical keycaps. Sometimes something is an improvement or evolution, sometimes it's a cheapening. In this case it's an ergonomic, logical evolution. The upper shape of the mold is not related to cheapening. Those ridged sphericals look nice and classic and all, but if you put down your finger on a spherical, it rests on the bottom ridge. With cylindrical it rests neatly in the cylindrical position without the bottom of your fingertip resting on a ridge. This ridge also forms a barrier when moving your fingers to a higher row. Hyperbolically, you have to hold your hands like you're scratching a window. Yes, that will make you hit those keys in the center, but it's less comfortable and ergonomic. Even if you don't value my argument about keys needed to be hit in the center in some distant past, I feel that simply more thought went into the cylindrical keycaps as a step up from a previously simple design.

[mr_a500]

OK, you win. I never thought the introduction of cylindrical keycaps was a deliberate cheapening (unlike cylindrical to flat, or double-shot to pad printing) but that the result was that it was easier and cheaper. Maybe it's not. I'm willing to accept that I was speaking nonsense. My main point was that I prefer sphericals.

Maybe I type like I'm scratching a window. Maybe it's because I spent a decade programming on sphericals. Maybe it's mostly nostalgia. Who knows? (...who cares? )

[Vierax]

Apparently, cylindrical caps may be the only evolution on recent keyboards that goes in the good way (ergonomically speaking)

Technological inertia…

[Halvar]

Recent? Cylindrical keycaps go back to the 80's, as well as almost all the good switches.

I still think that cylindrical keycaps mostly appealed to buyers because they looked more modern back in those days, and not for ergonomic reasons. Much like chiclets today. I would like to read some review articles from that time on the one vs. the other, but if there are any at all they will be hard to find because this predates digital media and widespread interest in computers.

[Vierax]

Recent? Cylindrical keycaps go back to the 80's, as well as almost all the good switches.

Well yeah it's been a while… so effectively, “90's ruined everything” 00's follows the descent… maybe 10's will be better if consumers starts to boycott crappy boards.

I still think that cylindrical keycaps mostly appealed to buyers because they looked more modern back in those days, and not for ergonomic reasons. Much like chiclets today.

No doubt of it. Paradoxically, there is a retro/vintage tendance

[Muirium]

so effectively, “90's ruined everything” 00's follows the descent… maybe 10's will be better if consumers starts to boycott crappy boards.

That'd be the day. It was Joe Public's complete disinterest in quality that was the gravity pulling us down the slippery slope of crappy keyboards. Only two numbers ever meant anything to that guy. MHz and $USD.

Fortunately consumers have left keyboards in droves. First to laptops, which almost all of them never hook up an external keyboard to. Then to touch screens. So we may end up being the core of the market! Like the remnants of a mighty star left behind one it went supernova. Only without the massive release of planet frying energy, or the mind numbingly dense degenerate matter… fingers crossed.

[Halvar]

Oh, interesting! I expected something quite different when I clicked on degenerate matter...

[Muirium]

If I could just get an aftermarket case made of white dwarf insides I could crush a skyscraper with an HHKB. Of course, it'd probably affect key feel a bit, and I'd need a better desk.

[mr_a500]

If I could just get an aftermarket case made of white dwarf insides I could crush a skyscraper with an HHKB. Of course, it'd probably affect key feel a bit, and I'd need a better desk.

Imagine a keyboard dense enough to generate its own gravitational field. Awesome.

Now I know what to ask Santa for Christmas.

[dorkvader]

If I could just get an aftermarket case made of white dwarf insides I could crush a skyscraper with an HHKB. Of course, it'd probably affect key feel a bit, and I'd need a better desk.

Imagine a keyboard dense enough to generate its own gravitational field. Awesome.

Now I know what to ask Santa for Christmas.

Every object with mass has it's own gravitational field. That's how gravity works (as far as we can tell)

This is an interesting topic, it's very good to see how trends get started, rise in popularity, and are supplanted by newer ones. I don't know if apple was the first to use beige keycaps on the 1970's, as honeywell and IBM were both using them around that time.

It also seems like that DEC kb and the ibm PC keyboards spawned more layout copies than possibly even the IBM enhanced keyboard.

I am interested to now when PBT appeared on the scene. Certainly IBM used it on their PC keyboard in the early 1980's, but was it available anytime before then?

[czarek]

Also how about tactility in computer keyboards? All of the vintage computers I ever had were sporting linear keyboards. The oldest tactile keyboard I have is Commodore CDTV from 1991. I know IBM was before, but was there anyone else too?

[kbdfr]

Here's the kind of keyboard on which I learnt typing:



You really had tactile feedback, even with the spacebar

[Findecanor]

Typewriters were also first with squarish type faces on keys. At least, the one typewriter I still own has what I think is Eurostile.

[Daniel Beardsmore]

Also how about tactility in computer keyboards? All of the vintage computers I ever had were sporting linear keyboards. The oldest tactile keyboard I have is Commodore CDTV from 1991. I know IBM was before, but was there anyone else too?

The common Alps switch goes back to 1983. Blue (clicky) is listed by MouseFan as having appeared in 1985; we have no documented date for when brown Alps, the first tactile variant, appeared. The wiki also lists no date for Cherry MX blue, likely the first tactile switch from Cherry, but the MX range is cited to have appeared around 1985 (starting with black, linear). Likewise, we have no data on any of the other Alps switches; the "CM" series was preceded by the vintage tee mount, which was linear.

Microswitch keyboards went clicky around 1985 or so.

In time, this may end up more complete and more accurate:

[wiki]Keyswitch timeline[/wiki]

IBM introduced the beam spring in 1971; it took a long time for other manufacturers to introduce clicky and then pure tactile switches. The irony is how many people appreciate Cherry MX red, validating the original simplicity of linear switches.

Of course, rubber dome keyboards were also around pretty early on; I don't have a date for those, though.

[kps]

The wiki also lists no date for Cherry MX blue, likely the first tactile switch from Cherry, but the MX range is cited to have appeared around 1985 (starting with black, linear).

My Xerox 1109 (no later than 1985) has Cherry MX switches in pale white (linear), grey-green (firm linear), and pale yellow (firmer linear), as well as latching black.

[czarek]

Thanks for very educating replies. I was asking about computer keyboards rather than typewriters since I knew those were tactile since they were invented. I wasn't aware of linear switches being used in electric ones though.
This is interesting really. Seems like linear switches were kind of fashion in the 70s (Apple II, CBM Pet) and 80s (Commodore, Amigas, Atari, Macintosh, various IBM clones)? And then they were mostly replaced with more tactile rubber domes in the 90s? Or is there some other story behind it. Maybe in the early days those linear mechanical switches were cheaper and more readily available than rubber domes?

[Icarium]

The simple linear switches were extremely cheap because basically you just pressed down something conductive on the PCB to close a circuit. I'm not sure if they should be called linear because if you looked at the force diagram there would be an EXTREMELY sharp increase in force right at the actuation point.

[Muirium]

I've played with quite a few vintage linear keyboards and although some of them are quite cheap, linearity was in vogue at the high end too. Notably Honeywell / Micro Switch brand Hall effect switches (renowned from the Space Cadet keyboard) which are as silky smooth as it gets.

IBM was definitely the outlier, and a good one as I do adore the feel of beam spring. I think Mr. A500's original theme of who copied what surely applies here. Everyone went chasing big blue. Dorkvader has a clicky Hall effect keyboard — et tu Micro Switch? — from around 1990 which shows who was playing the tail and who the dog!

Besides, for the cheapest of all keyboard technologies, look no further than Sinclair.

Pioneers of rubber chiclet: 1982! A keyboard so bad it defined the whole computer.

[ماء]

Typewriter is the linear ancestors
typewriters have feelings linear clicky

[Muirium]

Typewriters had a tactile ancestor:

With a piano, you swing a hammer, much like a manual typewriter. Both of them have a run up when you first press the key, as they start to swing their hammer. But a typewriter tries to whack with an even speed. Pianos are all about letting you control how much force the hammer has when it hits the string. (The name comes from "pianoforte" which is Italian for quiet/loud.)

But here's the thing: typewriters went electric well before computers came along to push them aside. Electric typewriters are a different beast. They can have linear switches, because you don't need to push the hammer. IBM went with clicky electric typewriters, but there were linears from other manufacturers available. No doubt the linear keys felt better to some typists. You didn't have to work as hard while you typed all day long!

And even pianos are mostly electric now. Go to a musical instrument shop and feel the keys. They are almost all linear! You have to pay top dollar to get "fully weighted" tactile keys on your electric piano these days, and they are aren't available at all on synthesisers; which are 100% linear.

[ماء]

The Old Typewriter is really really Linear and clicky when hitting the paper May like Mx Dark grey
I have Keyboards Music they is linear and clicky (sound music)

[Muirium]

That is indeed where the idea for clicking comes from: the audio feedback that you get from hammers hitting strings or paper. Playing a linear electric piano with the sound turned down feels different. The same was true for linear computer keyboards I imagine. No click, no keystroke!

[Daniel Beardsmore]

The wiki also lists no date for Cherry MX blue, likely the first tactile switch from Cherry, but the MX range is cited to have appeared around 1985 (starting with black, linear).

My Xerox 1109 (no later than 1985) has Cherry MX switches in pale white (linear), grey-green (firm linear), and pale yellow (firmer linear), as well as latching black.

Whoa! You've bagged one mother of a keyboard. Let's see, we have at least two previously-unknown colours, at least two more previously unknown switches, "Cherry-in-a-box" branding (on the MX Lock), and switches that appear to be so old, they're not even branded at all (and considering it's Xerox, I doubt they're fake). Are we looking at the birth of the MX switch?

I'll link this into the discussion topic with Robin at Cherry.

You're up as a candidate for this year's best relic/discovery award for this.

Oops, MX Lock really does have different branding to the other switches :)

[Daniel Beardsmore]

OK, you win. I never thought the introduction of cylindrical keycaps was a deliberate cheapening (unlike cylindrical to flat, or double-shot to pad printing) but that the result was that it was easier and cheaper. Maybe it's not. I'm willing to accept that I was speaking nonsense. My main point was that I prefer sphericals.

Maybe I type like I'm scratching a window. Maybe it's because I spent a decade programming on sphericals. Maybe it's mostly nostalgia. Who knows? (...who cares? ;))

I just encountered, on Wikipedia, "Coincident with sublimation printing, which was first used in high volume by IBM on their keyboards, was the introduction by IBM of single-curved-dish keycaps to facilitate quality printing of key legends by having a consistently curved surface instead of a dish."

Apparently it was done to make dye sub printing work. If that's true then, yes, it was indirectly as result of cost, to avoid the need to use doubleshots :)