Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!apple!ames!nap1!ark1!dsill
From: dsill@ark1.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill)
Newsgroups: comp.std.misc
Subject: Re: User Interface Standards -- *Keyboards!*
Keywords: keyboards,standardize,plug-n-play,freedom,ADB
Message-ID: <14@ark1.nswc.navy.mil>
Date: 14 Jul 89 19:44:23 GMT
References: <115518@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <13@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> <440@arc.UUCP>
Reply-To: dsill@ark1.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE)
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA
Lines: 72

Newsgroups: comp.std.misc
Subject: Re: User Interface Standards -- *Keyboards!*
Summary: 
Expires: 
References: <115518@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <13@ark1.nswc.navy.mil> <440@arc.UUCP>
Sender: 
Reply-To: dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Dave Sill)
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA
Keywords: keyboards,standardize,plug-n-play,freedom,ADB

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.

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": it would have to be taught how to interface with
each new system.  It would also require a bunch of hardware: logic,
jacks, and cables to allow it to hook up to each system.  After all
this work you still wouldn't achieve a very high level of consistency.
The trackball attached to your keyboard wouldn't be able to act like a
Microsoft Mouse on a PC.  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.

>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.

>What I'd like to see is a little box I can carry around with either a
>keyboard or a portable PC that lets it emulate arbitrary keyboards and
>do arbitrary remapping on the keys.  To be really general you'd have
>to be able to program it to handle the oddballs, like Apollo and Sun,
>as well as PC's and Macs.

Which is what I mentioned above: complex, expensive, unlikely to work
with the next system NeXT or Sun or IBM puts out, and only buys you a
common keyboard layout.

>For things like PC's you'd want the ability to map mouse motion and
>buttons into different keystrokes for different programs; this would
>require some smarts on the PC side.

*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.

>ADB is sort of in the right direction, but because it's Apple it has
>all the usual problems:  small market, high price, and weird problems
>(e.g. if you unplug your keyboard you risk blowing up your Mac,
>because the ADB also includes the "on" button!)  Also the CPU has to
>poll it--no interrupts.

Well, at least it's proof-of-concept and a place for those designing
the next generation to look.  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.
-- 
Dave Sill (dsill@relay.nswc.navy.mil)