John Dvorak panned the Model M

[Sam Pellegrino]

For those who don't know, John Dvorak is a technology columnist who has spent decades spinning out exaggerated or off the wall opinions. He's no relation to the keyboard layout of the same name. Anyway, I found this article from the 80s where he complains about the IBM extended keyboard, which we know as the Model M. He essentially accuses IBM of incompetence in its design.

http://books.google.com/books?id=OS8EAA ... &q&f=false

Now, 27 years later, both the keyboards and Dvorak are still out there.

[dondy]

It's a really entertaining rant

especially if you compare it to the standard nowadays

good find!

[ماء]

@Sam:you use Dvorak

[Muirium]

He's been a flawless bellwether for technology for decades.

The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a “mouse”. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I don’t want one of these new fangled devices.

In a review of the Macintosh in The San Francisco Examiner (19 February 1984).

Whatever Dvorak says, history does the opposite.

Not that he's above simple trolling:

People are always looking for the be-all-end-all super perfect Linux. It will never happen until Microsoft does Linux. Oops. Did I say that?

PC Magazine, "Inside Track", (26 June 2007), p.1

[Muirium]

Although, spookily enough, I can't say I disagree with much he said about the Model M in this article. Uh oh…

[dondy]

heh, really?

i guess i need to try out a model m before arguing

[Muirium]

His complaints are all about layout. I do agree completely with the big mistake IBM made in shoving Control out of the way for the infinitely less useful Caps Lock, a mistake Dvorak was right to fear became permanent across the industry. Meanwhile, he still praises it as the best feeling keyboard in computing.

But all this agreeing with Dvorak is making me feel queasy so I'm going to have to stop!

[Peter]

Why does it take 21 Country & Western singers to change a light-bulb ?
Because 1 changes it, the remaining 20 sing about how good the old one was

(I DO agree that CRAPSLOCK is placed wrong - but why don't more people complain about the fact that we
are still using a layout designed to slow down typing-speed ?? )

[ماء]

The Best, maybe HHKB with dvorak layout

[dondy]

Why does it take 21 Country & Western singers to change a light-bulb ?
Because 1 changes it, the remaining 20 sing about how good the old one was

(I DO agree that CRAPSLOCK is placed wrong - but why don't more people complain about the fact that we
are still using a layout designed to slow down typing-speed ?? )

i'm not sure there's clear evidence that it is to slow down typing speed; i do find capslock quite useless besides swapping it with escape or control.

i can't really agree with any other points made in this article though.

--- EDIT

but you could always generate a heat-map of your keyboard and adjust the layout according to the heat-map and hand positions (or even the physical key positions if you're doing a custom build anyways)...
or just learn steno http://plover.stenoknight.com/

[Halvar]

Caps lock was above shift on all typewriters, so secretaries were used to it. In 1986, word processing in companies and replacing typewriters by PCs was happening in full speed, so I can understand why they did this, although in the long run it was the wrong decision. Caps lock was used on typewriters a lot for headlines and emphasizing, while on computers is was pretty much obsolete as soon as printers could print boldface and italics, and even more when laser printers came up that could print larger fonts.

The decision to move function keys to the top was right in my opinion, and the separate cursor block was also much better than using the tenkey block for that. The tenkey block was in the way only when the use of the mouse became widespread, which wasn't the case on IBM PCs until 1990ish.

So I don't agree with a lot of what he says.

[Muirium]

Very true about typewriters, actually. I vaguely remember my mum's typewriter – some compact manual I haven't seen in decades, and was likely from the 60s – which I tried when learning to type, along with 80s microcomputers. The caps lock was a little latching key above the left shift, which actually worked in unison with it: the shift keys were the heaviest on the typewriter as you lifted the whole mechanism up when pressing them! Caps lock was a literal lock on the shift. It had to be there or otherwise the internal workings would be more complicated. It was smaller than left shift though, and in fact not a rectangle shape at all but semi-elliptical if I remember; perched up at a jaunty angle when disengaged so you'd never mistake it.

Of course, that typewriter also had only number keys for 2 through 9. For 1 you'd use l and 0 was O, fancypants!

[ماء]

whether you still have them,they have feel Linear like mx dark grey,maybe

[Halvar]

... perched up at a jaunty angle when disengaged so you'd never mistake it.

Of course, that typewriter also had only number keys for 2 through 9. For 1 you'd use l and 0 was O, fancypants!

Great idea! I will put a strong spring in my caps lock today.

The l and O thing is hilarious, I've never seen that.

[Muirium]

Now that's the stuff!

I must admit that the one I used, meanwhile, was a pretty low end typewriter…

Meanwhile:

(I DO agree that CRAPSLOCK is placed wrong - but why don't more people complain about the fact that we
are still using a layout designed to slow down typing-speed ?? )

i'm not sure there's clear evidence that it is to slow down typing speed
…
but you could always generate a heat-map of your keyboard and adjust the layout according to the heat-map and hand positions (or even the physical key positions if you're doing a custom build anyways)...

Well, a picture can't prove intent, but it does suggest Qwerty is about as bad a layout as any random spray of keys can get:



Types I, on Qwerty. Which really says it all.

[ماء]

Why does it take 21 Country & Western singers to change a light-bulb ?
Because 1 changes it, the remaining 20 sing about how good the old one was

(I DO agree that CRAPSLOCK is placed wrong - but why don't more people complain about the fact that we
are still using a layout designed to slow down typing-speed ?? )

i'm not sure there's clear evidence that it is to slow down typing speed; i do find capslock quite useless besides swapping it with escape or control.

i can't really agree with any other points made in this article though.

--- EDIT

but you could always generate a heat-map of your keyboard and adjust the layout according to the heat-map and hand positions (or even the physical key positions if you're doing a custom build anyways)...
or just learn steno http://plover.stenoknight.com/

if talking typing slow http://www.atarimagazines.com/v5n11/dvorakkeyboard.html

[Findecanor]

The caps lock was a little latching key above the left shift, which actually worked in unison with it: the shift keys were the heaviest on the typewriter as you lifted the whole mechanism up when pressing them! Caps lock was a literal lock on the shift. It had to be there or otherwise the internal workings would be more complicated.

My dad had several typewriters during his journalistic career. His last one was an electronic dot-matrix typewriter where you could edit each line in a small LCD display before it was printed on the press of the Carriage Return key. I still have a manual typewriter (that I have yet to throw away...).

In most of these typewriters, the Caps Lock key was indeed a latching key. It was not that common, though, that the Caps Lock key would unlatch on a second key press - you had to press a Shift key.
I was appalled when I first started to use an IBM PC and noticed that the Shift key under Caps Lock mode did not 1) exit Caps Lock mode (as on a typewriter), 2) did nothing (as on my Amiga) but... toggled Shift mode, so that the tEXT bECAME uGLY when I had forgotten to exit Caps Lock/entered Caps Lock mode accidentally. Who would want the toggle mode?
On the DEC terminals and on the Amiga, there were both Ctrl and Caps Lock keys to the left of A. In 1997 when I migrated completely to PCs which had only one key in that position, I choose to omit the Caps Lock and keep Ctrl because the Ctrl key was the one that I used the most ... or rather: at all. Unfortunately, I have become accustomed to using all three Ctrl keys on the PC ...

I have been thinking of modifying the firmware for my Phantom and ErgoDox to always send a virtual key press to exit Caps Lock mode if it encounters that it has been entered.

[Kurk]

.....<snip>
(I DO agree that CRAPSLOCK is placed wrong - but why don't more people complain about the fact that we
are still using a layout designed to slow down typing-speed ?? )

AFAIK, the qwerty layout wasn't designed to slow down typists. It was based on the alphabet but then certain digrams were taken apart that would otherwise cause the type hammers of early typewriters to become entangled.

[dondy]

actually there's a relevant use-case for caps lock if you are DEATH from terry prachett's discworld...

[Muirium]

YES DONDY --- MANY MEMORABLE CHARACTERS IN LITERATURE SINCE THE TYPEWRITER'S INCEPTION HAVE SPOKEN IN BLOCK CAPS. I MUST REPORT THAT I AM UNSURE AS TO WHY. ThouGH WhaT uSe CAps locK'S INGeniouS TOGgLe mODE hAS In anY cIRCUmStAnCE iS BEyond mE.

I've asked about my mother's typewriter. It was a little Brother compact, her first, bought new (with insurance!) in ~1967. She doesn't remember the model, but still has it somewhere.

Findecanor is right: caps lock was a one way lock. You had to press shift to DISENGAGE THE CAPS!

AFAIK, the qwerty layout wasn't designed to slow down typists. It was based on the alphabet but then certain digrams were taken apart that would otherwise cause the type hammers of early typewriters to become entangled.

I heard that one objective was to ensure that the keys necessary to quickly type TYPEWRITER were all on the top row. For the supposed convenience of demonstration by salesmen.

[dondy]

YES DONDY --- MANY MEMORABLE CHARACTERS IN LITERATURE SINCE THE TYPEWRITER'S INCEPTION HAVE SPOKEN IN BLOCK CAPS. I MUST REPORT THAT I AM UNSURE AS TO WHY. ThouGH WhaT uSe CAps locK'S INGeniouS TOGgLe mODE hAS In anY cIRCUmStAnCE iS BEyond mE.

I've asked about my mother's typewriter. It was a little Brother compact, her first, bought new (with insurance!) in ~1967. She doesn't remember the model, but still has it somewhere.

Findecanor is right: caps lock was a one way lock. You had to press shift to DISENGAGE THE CAPS!

AFAIK, the qwerty layout wasn't designed to slow down typists. It was based on the alphabet but then certain digrams were taken apart that would otherwise cause the type hammers of early typewriters to become entangled.

I heard that one objective was to ensure that the keys necessary to quickly type TYPEWRITER were all on the top row. For the supposed convenience of demonstration by salesmen.

for that you would probably have to ask DEATH himself, which might be a unfavourable encounter

[Muirium]

Some good history here. My top row "typewriter" claim is "unsubstantiated".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwerty#His ... d_purposes

[Peter]

The main purpose of QWERTY is to prevent this :

jamm.jpg (37.04 KiB) Viewed 6336 times

You do that by placing the most used characters as far from each other as possible and/or under weaker fingers and that, naturally, results in slower typing-speed .

Anyway, QWERTY is a solution to a problem that no longer exists, it's time to move on.. And it just so happens that
no other real, full-size, keyboard is as easy to convert to an acceptable version of an alternative layout as IBM Model M's,
because the caps all have the same profile ..

(BTW :
How many of you guys have ever tried to type a 4 page letter, in triplicate, on one of those old mechanical Hell-machines ?
You HAD to 'bottom-out' in those days, with considerable and consistent force !
Imagine what that could do to your fingers if you did it 8-10 hours a day ...)

[Muirium]

I did a reasonable bit of typing on the little manual Brother. It wasn't so much about bottoming out as getting the right fling into the keys. If you hit sharp and hard, you could get a fair speed going. Manuals are more like (really heavy keyed, really long travel) pianos than they are key switch keyboards. It's all in the motion.

[ماء]

how many acutation typewriter?

[ماء]

I did a reasonable bit of typing on the little manual Brother. It wasn't so much about bottoming out as getting the right fling into the keys. If you hit sharp and hard, you could get a fair speed going. Manuals are more like (really heavy keyed, really long travel) pianos than they are key switch keyboards. It's all in the motion.

quotes from muririum brother type,your forget?

[Muirium]

You bet I forget. This was in the eighties. I think it was beige? Kinda like the Commodores I was also typing on back then.

Not this one. But something pretty similar in style:


Note: the absent 1. (This one's fancy enough to have 0 though.) And the absent Enter. That's what the big handle's for. When you hear the bell, you'd better finish your line because you're almost out of room! Then crrrraank along the whole top half the typewriter with the lever; the last little bit of pressure on it will feed a new line.

Technology!

[Halvar]

That's a "fancy" one, you can even type in red, or without colour at all (if you use carbon paper or correction paper e.g).

Regarding Caps Lock, here's a blog with a nice picture of the mechanism:
http://designblog.nzeldes.com/2008/10/t ... -lock-key/

[Muirium]

This one took dual tone ribbon too. But the way you switched colours was by taking it out and turning it around. I was advised to type in red. There was always more red spare than black. Odd, that.