Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew
From: mathew@mantis.UUCP (mathew)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.laptops
Subject: Re: B.O.S.S or Wizard, etc
Message-ID: <HLHcT5w163w@mantis.UUCP>
Date: 28 Nov 90 11:54:28 GMT
References: <8540004@hpspcoi.HP.COM>
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
Lines: 36

dlow@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Danny Low) writes:
> I chose a BOSS 8000 over a Wizard. The BOSS is optimized to be
> an electronic DayTimer (TM). It fits in my shirt pocket.
> The Wizard does not. That makes all the difference in the world.
> The BOSS has a qwerty key layout. The Wizard is alphabetic which
> is the worst of all worlds for a key layout.

From "Human-Computer Interaction" (INTERACT '90 conference proceedings):

   KEYBOARD LAYOUT FOR OCCASIONAL USERS

   Nicolas MARMARAS and Kostas LYRITZIS
   Technical University of Crete, Greece

   The present study is a first attempt to solve the problem of keyboard
   layout for occasional users of computer-based systems. [...]  The
   keyboard arrangements tested were the alphabetical diagonal, the
   alphabetical horizontal, the standard Greek keyboard which is similar
   to the QWERTY layout, and a new alternative Greek keyboard designed
   for typists.

   The obtained results showed that the alphabetical diagonal
   arrangement achieved better typing speed rates, and that the
   differences between typing rates achieved with the other three
   layouts are practically insignificant.

So for people who don't use computers much (i.e., those who might be expected
to buy a Sharp personal organizer) an alphabetic keyboard is no worse than
QWERTY, and probably somewhat better.

mathew.

P.S. Me? I use a Microwriter.
--
Mantis Consultants, Unit 56, St. John's Innovation Centre, Cambridge. CB4 4WS.
   "CP/M is to metric as cockroaches are to a Timex watch" - booter@catnip