Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!iuvax!rutgers!apple!arc!steve From: steve@arc.UUCP (Steve Savitzky) Newsgroups: comp.std.misc Subject: Re: User Interface Standards -- *Keyboards!* Keywords: keyboards,standardize,plug-n-play,freedom,ADB Message-ID: <442@arc.UUCP> Date: 14 Jul 89 20:22:14 GMT References: <115518@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <13@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> <440@arc.UUCP> <14@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> Reply-To: steve@arc.UUCP (Steve Savitzky) Organization: Advansoft Research Corp, Santa Clara, CA Lines: 79 In article <14@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> dsill@ark1.UUCP (Dave Sill) writes: >In article <440@arc.UUCP> steve@arc.UUCP (Steve Savitzky) writes: ... >>ADB handles arbitrary devices (e.g. mice); the PC can be made to do >>the same by mapping them into keystrokes or modifying the keyboard >>driver to handle more scancodes. > >Ugh. I'd rather have no pointer support than kludgey support. Obviously, we differ. I have a PC and a mouse, and the combination can be made to work well enough for me to prefer it to a PC and no mouse. Would it make you feel better if I say "user interface events" instead of "keystrokes" or "scancodes"? >There are (at least) two ways you could go about improving the input >interface. You could try to provide an intelligent front-end that >would plug into the required existing systems and act like the >original equipment. That would require a bunch of smarts on the part >of the "keyboard": ... > The sole advantage of this approach is that >it doesn't require the development and adoption of Yet Another >Standard. > >The other way *does* require a standard, but the payoff is much >greater. You get a single hardware/software interface that supports a >much wider range of input devices *well*, as well as much more >consistency of operation between systems. I think you've missed the point. There is unlikely EVER to be a standard for keyboard arrangements and keybindings, because the "best" such arrangement is a matter of preference (i.e. a religious issue). I would rather have the ability to customize my interface than have somebody else's idea of the "correct" interface shoved down my throat. Similarly, keyboard/mouse/etc. interfaces are improbable in the next ten years or so, because manufacturers work on the (usually correct) assumption that their customers are using only THEIR OWN (the mfr's) equipment. What I want is something I can use *now* (not thirty years from now when keyboards are obsolete enough to have a standard interface) to be able to carry my own personal user interface around in my briefcase. >>This is done more with ADB than PC, but there are plenty of alternate >>PC keyboards, some of which DO have things like trackballs on them. > >Which unfortunately can't behave like a "normal" PC mouse/pointer. No reason why not. You just have to make the keyboard interrupt handler in the PC service both the keyboard and mouse device drivers. [stuff omitted] >*That's* another problem altogether: the lack of a single standard >pointer on the PC, and the lack of applications that even support a >pointer. Which is EXACTLY *my* point. >>ADB is sort of in the right direction, but... >> if you unplug your keyboard you risk blowing up your Mac, >>because the ADB also includes the "on" button!)... > I don't see any problem with putting the >"on" button on the ADB, the problem is that it's too easy to >accidentally send garbage when plugs are moved. No, the problem is that you blow a fuse which Apple cleverly *solders* to the motherboard! >Dave Sill (dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil) -- Steve Savitzky | steve@arc.uucp | apple.com!arc!steve ADVANsoft Research Corp. | (408) 727-3357(w) / 294-6492(h) 4301 Great America Parkway | #include Santa Clara, CA 95054 | May the Source be with you!