Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site callan.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!intelca!proper!callan!geoff
From: geoff@callan.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning)
Newsgroups: net.cog-eng,net.unix
Subject: Re: name=value or -n value?
Message-ID: <146@callan.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Apr-84 21:49:03 EST
Article-I.D.: callan.146
Posted: Fri Apr  6 21:49:03 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Apr-84 05:40:24 EST
References: <1640@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: Callan Data Systems, Westlake Village, CA
Lines: 26

>	It's rather amazing how long an argument can continue over the relative
>	merits of - and + based almost solely on one being shifted on most
>	keyboards.  People use <, >, !, &, $, etc. all the time with no
>	complaints about shifts. If dealing with a keyboard is *really* that
>	much of a problem, wouldn't it be more appropriate to go to a mouse
>	and menu system?
		- John Quarterman

The problem is that switch indicators and argument separators are typed much
more often than <, >, !, &, $, etc.  I can notice a definite speed difference
when I type the aforementioned characters (< and > are faster because they at
least don't require major hand motions even though they are shifted).  I don't
mind this with a character I type once per command at most like < and &, but
I mind it a lot with characters like the argument separator or the switch
indicator, which I type a lot more.

As to the mouse suggestion, I can only say "hear, hear".  What I *REALLY* want
(I think, I haven't tried it) is a two-handed chord keyboard where one or
even both chord keyboards are mounted on a mouse.  Then I could have the best
of all worlds.

	Geoff Kuenning
	Callan Data Systems
	...!ihnp4!sdcrdcf!trwrb!wlbr!callan!geoff

Vax?  Is that a 68000 with the bytes going the other way?