Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:965 comp.sys.mac:24292
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!agate!soup.ssl.berkeley.edu!gckaplan
From: gckaplan@soup.ssl.berkeley.edu (George Kaplan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: replacing the desktop metaphor
Keywords: desktop metaphor, graphical interfaces, computing environments
Message-ID: <18549@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 22 Dec 88 16:35:31 GMT
References: <4362@pitt.UUCP> <257@gloom.UUCP> <82702@sun.uucp> <8939@ut-emx.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 23

In article <8939@ut-emx.UUCP> osmigo@emx.UUCP (Ron Morgan) writes:
[suggestions for wireless keyboards, displays]
>
>                                                     ...  but I don't know
>why a wireless keyboard would be far-fetched. It'd only have to send a
>hundred or so infrared (or other) pulses: one for each ASCII character.
>There are video/audio remotes on the market right now that do more than that.
>

A wireless keyboard has already been implemented on at least one
computer:  the IBM PCjr.  Its keyboard used infrared to communicate
with the cpu box.  It worked pretty well through a wide range of
angles, although as I recall you had to have a clear line of sight 
between the keyboard and the cpu.  There were interference problems 
sometimes if you tried to put two cpu's next to each other.

The PCjr was a flop, but most likely for reasons other than the fact
that the keyboard was wireless.

George C. Kaplan		Internet:  gckaplan@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu
Space Sciences Lab		UUCP:  ...!ucbvax!sag4.ssl!gckaplan
University of California	
Berkeley, CA  94720