Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!ames!amdahl!kim
From: kim@amdahl.amdahl.com (Kim DeVaughn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Some A2000/A500 answers
Message-ID: <16251@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Date: Thu, 15-Oct-87 16:02:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdahl.16251
Posted: Thu Oct 15 16:02:27 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Oct-87 09:20:16 EDT
References: <4313@zen.berkeley.edu>
Organization: Amdahl Corporation,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Lines: 71

In article <4313@zen.berkeley.edu>, bryce@hoser.berkeley.edu (Bryce Nesbitt) writes:
> 
> Now what I wonder about is the A2000's keyboard.  The German models have
> tiny function keys and feel terrible and sag at the slightest pressure.
> Will the real American A2000's switch to a better keyboard (like the
> A500's)?  The two reasons are the feel, and the size of the function keys,
> if all American Amigas have the same size keys one can create function key
> templates for software that one sells that use them.

Having complained about how flimsy the A2000 keyboard seemed at the dealer,
I'm pleased to report that the one that came with my B2000 seems alot stiffer.
Not quite as solid as I'd really like, but not too bad at all.

There is a small amount of flexture of the pc board proper, which the
keys are mounted to.  When I earlier criticized the A2000 keyboard, one
person emailed me his solution ... open up the keyboard case, and stuff
some folded-up heavy plastic bags, foam (non-conductive, please!), etc.
between the back of the pc board and the case.  With the B2000 keyboard,
this should be all that's needed to solidify things.

No change in the size/location of the function keys that I noticed.  For
myself, I find function keys that are along the top of the keyboard a pain
anyway.  I would much prefer a function keypad to replace the numeric
keypad at the right side of the keyboard ... far more utilitarian (how many
people really *use* the numeric keypad, anyway)?

The other gripe I have is cursor keys.  I dunno why the inverted "T" or the
1000's diamond seem to be the trend.  True, it *looks* logical and intuitive,
but most people I know who program alot much prefer this layout:

             +-------+-------+
             |       |       |
             |   ^   |   |   |
             |   |   |   |   |
             |   |   |   v   |
             |       |       |
             +-------+-------+
             |       |       |
             |       |       |
             | <---  |  ---> |
             |       |       |
             |       |       |
             +-------+-------+

Seems that most people fast cursor (repeat key) to about where they want
to be, and then back up if they over shoot, or continue with discrete
key strokes.  Thus, the up/down keys are used in conjunction alot, or
the right/left are used in conjunction.  With the above arrangement, one
can use the index/middle fingers on either the up/down pair, or the right
left pair, and reversing directions doesn't require repositioning any
fingers.

But what do I know ... I'm not an ergonomic engineer ... I just have to
*use* keyboards 8+ hours a day at work, and 4+ hours a day at home :-).

I'm not a real fan of IBM, but the Selectric keyboard is still one of
the best laid out keyboards I've seen, as is the function, cursor, and
local editing key layout of their 327x terminals.

Maybe one of these days I'll design a keyboard the way I'd like to see
it done ...

Sorry ... I don't mean to start up a religious war on keyboards!

/kim
-- 
UUCP:  kim@amdahl.amdahl.com
  or:  {sun,decwrl,hplabs,pyramid,ihnp4,uunet,oliveb,cbosgd,ames}!amdahl!kim
DDD:   408-746-8462
USPS:  Amdahl Corp.  M/S 249,  1250 E. Arques Av,  Sunnyvale, CA 94086
CIS:   76535,25