21 Nov
2007
21 Nov
'07
12:37 p.m.
-----------------Original Messages:
Message: 29
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 07:15:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com>
Subject: Re: Documentation for the AT&T Sceptre Videotex terminal
But see, it HAS to be bad if Microsoft does it. One
little key, and
the keyboard universe falls apart.
I believe the objection was its placement, not the presence of a
Windows-specific key. I've certainly had trouble adjusting to a Windows
keyboard after being used to not having anything between Ctrl and Alt.
Even Macs don't disturb that. Command is to the side of that group,
not splitting it up.
------------------------------Reply:
Well, yes, obviously the location is the issue, but it is still just another
tedious MS-bash; I've got an APL keyboard here, and I think every
"classic" terminal or computer keyboard I have here is different in
some "improved" way but I don't hear complaints about that, or all the
different PC layouts, especially the enter, backspace and \ keys.
I find the WIN keys quite handy, and since they're control-type keys
the location actually makes sense to me; just part of the DOS>WIN
adjustment.
Don't you also have trouble switching from a C64 to a Mac?
m
21 Nov
21 Nov
12:53 p.m.
In article <01C82C3B.679A09A0 at host-208-72-122-54.dyn.295.ca>,
M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> writes:
Well, yes, obviously the location is the issue, but it
is still just another
tedious MS-bash; I've got an APL keyboard here, and I think every
"classic" terminal or computer keyboard I have here is different in
some "improved" way but I don't hear complaints about that, or all the
different PC layouts, especially the enter, backspace and \ keys.
Exactly.
Particularly since it was claimed that *any* keyboard with a Win key
is the #1 awful keyboard. Give me a fsckin' break. There are plenty
of keyboards that are much worse than that -- there are keyboards that
require you to lift your fingers off the home keys in order to reach
CTRL, for instance. Try that with emacs. There are plenty of
keyboards that don't let you type lower case. And so-on.
In addition, the tedious MS-bash was just tossed out there without any
explanation of key placement until further elaboration was requested.
I wouldn't have rolled my eyes had woodelf said something like "I
don't like keyboards that put keys in between my CTRL and ALT keys,
like the common placement of Win keys on newer PC keyboards". That's
a grump about ergonomics, with Win keys given as an example not just
yet another attempt to denigrate all things Windows.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>
1:06 p.m.
On Wednesday 21 November 2007 17:53:08 Richard wrote:
I wouldn't have rolled my eyes had woodelf said
something like "I
don't like keyboards that put keys in between my CTRL and ALT keys,
like the common placement of Win keys on newer PC keyboards". That's
a grump about ergonomics, with Win keys given as an example not just
yet another attempt to denigrate all things Windows.
Of course we've ignored one important fact about keyboards with "Windows
keys" - they're bloody awful. I could chew up and swallow a bag of yoghurt
pots and excrete a less flimsy keyboard than the ones on sale these days.
I scrounged a newish Mac keyboard for my PC at work - that's quite nice. I
might get one for home because the clunketty-clack of m Model M (see, it was
at least a little bit on-topic!) drives my fiance? nuts.
Gordon
6:34 p.m.
On 21 Nov 2007, at 18:06, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
....
Of course we've ignored one important fact about keyboards with
"Windows
keys" - they're bloody awful. I could chew up and swallow a bag of
yoghurt
pots and excrete a less flimsy keyboard than the ones on sale these
days.
Here, I've corrected your statement for you:
Of course we've ignored one important fact about most modern
keyboards
- they're bloody awful...
I have an IBM keyboard here with windows keys - it is at least as
good as the Mac keyboard (assuming that was actually made by Apple)
that you say you're using in your work PC (and, really, probably
better).
Of course, I've had this a few years, and perhaps IBM's (Lenovo's?)
current keyboards aren't so good, but you can still pay 100 quid
(that's c $200) for a keyboard if you want a good one. PCkeyboard.com
offer buckling-spring models which feature the Windows key and which
are "based on an award winning design, ... the same quality and crisp
tactile feedback as their IBM predecessors"; if these are really as
good as the model M, then I think there are few who would be unhappy
with them; I find these prices to be surprisingly cheap. I'm sure you
can alternatively get a top-of-the-range Cherry with Windows keys,
and I'm got one old one of theirs here which I believe to be better
than a model M.
Back when my father bought his first "IBM-compatible" 286, he paid
more than that for a keyboard, but in those days, so did everyone
else - it was just one component in a c ?2000 package. Nowadays
computers are cheap "commodity" items, and Walmart sell whole
computer systems for $199. Are you surprised that the keyboards feel
naff?
I find the Windows keys pretty useful, being obliged to use Windows
on a daily basis. All the keyboard shortcuts on Windows 2000 / XP and
other Microsoft apps of this generation are well-panned & useful -
I'm sure I've read that Microsoft conduct a good deal of usability
research, hands-on with users. For those of us that like keyboard
shortcuts a Mac is a VERY poor relation in this regard.
Stroller.
22 Nov
22 Nov
3:53 a.m.
On Wednesday 21 November 2007 23:34:33 Stroller wrote:
On 21 Nov 2007, at 18:06, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
Hmm. They look interesting. I couldn't see anything about buckling-spring
keyboards, but I might not have been looking hard enough. The idea of custom
keycaps sounds good - the Windows Objectors could get alternate logos on
their Windows keys.
....
Of course we've ignored one important fact about keyboards with
"Windows
keys" - they're bloody awful. I could chew up and swallow a bag of
yoghurt
pots and excrete a less flimsy keyboard than the ones on sale these
days.
Here, I've corrected your statement for you:
Of course we've ignored one important fact about most modern
keyboards
- they're bloody awful...
I have an IBM keyboard here with windows keys - it is at least as
good as the Mac keyboard (assuming that was actually made by Apple)
that you say you're using in your work PC (and, really, probably
better).
Of course, I've had this a few years, and perhaps IBM's (Lenovo's?)
current keyboards aren't so good, but you can still pay 100 quid
(that's c $200) for a keyboard if you want a good one. PCkeyboard.com
offer buckling-spring models which feature the Windows key and which
are "based on an award winning design, ... the same quality and crisp
tactile feedback as their IBM predecessors"; if these are really as
good as the model M, then I think there are few who would be unhappy Back when my father bought his first
"IBM-compatible" 286, he paid
more than that for a keyboard, but in those days, so did everyone
else - it was just one component in a c ?2000 package. Nowadays
computers are cheap "commodity" items, and Walmart sell whole
computer systems for $199. Are you surprised that the keyboards feel
naff?
You could (as of 2006) buy new Model Ms as an IBM spare part - I don't have
the reference number handy, but it was in the parts database. As you can
probably imagine, they were Not Cheap.
I find the Windows keys pretty useful, being obliged
to use Windows
on a daily basis. All the keyboard shortcuts on Windows 2000 / XP and
I use Linux pretty much exclusively (the rest of the time I use NetBSD), and
find the Win keys handy - you can always remap them to something useful if
you're not using them as modifier keys.
research, hands-on with users. For those of us that
like keyboard
shortcuts a Mac is a VERY poor relation in this regard.
Not having much experience with Mac and even less experience with Windows, I'm
not best placed to comment. But, they seem about the same to me. Going from
Gnome or KDE to Mac OS X takes a bit of getting used to, mostly reaching for
Splat-S instead of Ctrl-S to save ;-)
I think that's as much OT as I'm going to get into.
Gordon
23 Nov
23 Nov
12:12 p.m.
On Thursday 22 November 2007 03:53, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
It isn't just the logo on the keys, though. It's the addition of
those "extra" keys to the bottom row, and the consequent resizing of the
existing alt and ctrl keys to allow them to fit, that's part of what's
messing me up with those keyboards...
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
Of course,
I've had this a few years, and perhaps IBM's (Lenovo's?)
current keyboards aren't so good, but you can still pay 100 quid
(that's c $200) for a keyboard if you want a good one. PCkeyboard.com
offer buckling-spring models which feature the Windows key and which
are "based on an award winning design, ... the same quality and crisp
tactile feedback as their IBM predecessors"; if these are really as
good as the model M, then I think there are few who would be unhappy
Hmm. They look interesting. I couldn't see anything about buckling-spring
keyboards, but I might not have been looking hard enough. The idea of
custom keycaps sounds good - the Windows Objectors could get alternate
logos on their Windows keys.
7:15 p.m.
New subject: keyboards
On 23 Nov 2007, at 17:12, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
...
It isn't just the logo on the keys, though. It's the addition of
those "extra" keys to the bottom row, and the consequent resizing
of the
existing alt and ctrl keys to allow them to fit, that's part of
what's
messing me up with those keyboards...
Might be up your street:
<http://pckeyboards.stores.yahoo.net/linux101.html>
I sound like I'm pitching for them, but honestly I have no relation.
In fact, I've never used one of these guys' keyboards, so can't say
for sure that they're as good as an original Model M.
24 Nov
24 Nov
5:21 a.m.
On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 12:12 -0500, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
It isn't just the logo on the keys, though.
It's the addition of
those "extra" keys to the bottom row, and the consequent resizing of the
existing alt and ctrl keys to allow them to fit, that's part of what's
messing me up with those keyboards...
Am I being particularly dense here? I don't really see the problem. If
the Windows key is where you expect the ALT key to be, just remap it...
Gordon
26 Nov
26 Nov
12:58 p.m.
On Saturday 24 November 2007 05:21, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 2007-11-23 at 12:12 -0500, Roy J. Tellason
wrote:
On this IBM keyboard I'm typing on now, there are two keys to either side of
the spacebar. I can find one or the other of ctrl or alt by feel, no
problem. On the "windows" style keyboard I have plugged into another machine
here, there are three keys to the left of the spacebar and four to the
right. I can't find those by feel, have to stop and look at what I'm
hitting, and it slows me down. The positioning is changed, too, which
also impacts my typing speed. Somewhere I have another IBM keyboard, and
once I find it in the mess here I'll be using that one on that other box as
well. The quality of that windows keyboard is lousy, anyway -- having to
hit keys especially hard to get them to work, and similar nonsense is also
slowing me down when using that machine.
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
It isn't just the logo on the keys, though.
It's the addition of
those "extra" keys to the bottom row, and the consequent resizing of the
existing alt and ctrl keys to allow them to fit, that's part of what's
messing me up with those keyboards...
Am I being particularly dense here? I don't really see the problem. If
the Windows key is where you expect the ALT key to be, just remap it...
23 Nov
23 Nov
7:13 p.m.
On 22 Nov 2007, at 08:53, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
Yeah, I'm finding their site hard to navigate, too.
"Our corporate history stretches only
back to April, 1996, when we purchased
keyboard technology from Lexmark,
former manufacturer of IBM keyboards."
<http://www.pckeyboard.com/pdf/Co%20sheet.pdf>
They seem to avoid saying, "this is a Model M", but instead
"Customizer is the marketing name we've given to our classic IBM
style keyboards."
<http://pckeyboards.stores.yahoo.net/customizer.html>
You'll see that "buckling spring" is mentioned in the "technology"
drop-down - you can choose a quieter option instead.
Since KDE & Gnome undoubtedly offer mappings & shortcuts which make
use of the Windows key I'm surprised you can't get a penguin as a
standard option, although this seems not to have been a big seller
for Cherry (AFAICT they've discontinued this model):
<http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8233268776.html>
<http://www.easylinux.de/Artikel/ausgabe/2004/11/010-news/
tastatur_frei.png>
Stroller.
....
Of course, I've had this a few years, and perhaps IBM's (Lenovo's?)
current keyboards aren't so good, but you can still pay 100 quid
(that's c $200) for a keyboard if you want a good one. PCkeyboard.com
offer buckling-spring models which feature the Windows key and which
are "based on an award winning design, ... the same quality and crisp
tactile feedback as their IBM predecessors"; if these are really as
good as the model M, then I think there are few who would be unhappy
Hmm. They look interesting. I couldn't see anything about
buckling-spring
keyboards, but I might not have been looking hard enough. The idea
of custom
keycaps sounds good - the Windows Objectors could get alternate
logos on
their Windows keys. 
21 Nov
21 Nov
1:07 p.m.
On Wednesday 21 November 2007, Richard wrote:
In article <01C82C3B.679A09A0 at
host-208-72-122-54.dyn.295.ca>,
M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> writes:
Despite the fact that I don't use emacs if I've got a choice, I always
remap "Caps Lock" to be "CTRL" on my Model M's (along with
swapping ~
and ESC).
I also detest the stupid placement of <- and \, but at least the Model M
has that right.
Somehow, though, I've gotten used to using a Sun Type 6 USB keyboard at
work, despite the bad key placement. If you use a keyboard long
enough, you'll actually get used to its key placement just fine, no
matter how annoying it is at first, I guess.
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
Well, yes, obviously the location is the issue,
but it is still
just another tedious MS-bash; I've got an APL keyboard here, and I
think every "classic" terminal or computer keyboard I have here is
different in some "improved" way but I don't hear complaints about
that, or all the different PC layouts, especially the enter,
backspace and \ keys.
Exactly.
Particularly since it was claimed that *any* keyboard with a Win key
is the #1 awful keyboard. Give me a fsckin' break. There are plenty
of keyboards that are much worse than that -- there are keyboards
that require you to lift your fingers off the home keys in order to
reach CTRL, for instance. Try that with emacs. There are plenty of
keyboards that don't let you type lower case. And so-on. 
2 p.m.
Richard wrote:
I did ... see windows keyboards. But then I am cheap, I don't spend
money on a real keyboard. Not that I have seen a modern keyboard I did like.
Well, yes,
obviously the location is the issue, but it is still just another
tedious MS-bash; I've got an APL keyboard here, and I think every
"classic" terminal or computer keyboard I have here is different in
some "improved" way but I don't hear complaints about that, or all the
different PC layouts, especially the enter, backspace and \ keys.
Exactly. Particularly since it was claimed that *any* keyboard
with a Win key
is the #1 awful keyboard. Give me a fsckin' break. There are plenty
of keyboards that are much worse than that -- there are keyboards that
require you to lift your fingers off the home keys in order to reach
CTRL, for instance. Try that with emacs. There are plenty of
keyboards that don't let you type lower case. And so-on.
So where is your stock of classic keyboards? They only keyboards
I can think of that are not lowercase today is your TTY's.
Ben alias woodelf
PS. No comments about where to buy a better keyboard... I am broke
until after the new year.
3:14 p.m.
They only keyboards I can think of that are not
lowercase today is
your TTY's.
I don't recall seeing a computer keyboard that *is* lowercase, ever.
Modern keyboards are generally connected to systems that map alphabetic
keystrokes to uppercase and lowercase depending on other state, and
have keys ("Shift") designed to provide that state, but the keyboards
themselves have only one case of alphabetic key, and in every case I
can recall seeing, that case is upper.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
3:46 p.m.
On 21 Nov 2007 at 15:14, der Mouse wrote:
I don't recall seeing a computer keyboard that
*is* lowercase, ever.
Modern keyboards are generally connected to systems that map alphabetic
keystrokes to uppercase and lowercase depending on other state, and
have keys ("Shift") designed to provide that state, but the keyboards
themselves have only one case of alphabetic key, and in every case I
can recall seeing, that case is upper.
I'm very happy that modern keyboards aren't like some of the old
typewriters:
http://www.typewritermuseum.org/collection/kbrd_writers/_ill/caligraph
21.jpg
Still, the Caligraph No. 2 had only 72 keys; the keyboard I'm using
to type this has something in excess of 100--and yet requires "mode"
keys to obtain characters. If, on the other hand, modern computer
keyboards had the same number of keys as an 026 keybpunch, I wonder
what our human-computer interfaces would look like today.
Cheers,
Chuck
4:02 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 21 Nov 2007 at 15:14, der Mouse wrote:
Still, the Caligraph No. 2 had only 72 keys; the
keyboard I'm using
to type this has something in excess of 100--and yet requires "mode"
keys to obtain characters. If, on the other hand, modern computer
keyboards had the same number of keys as an 026 keybpunch, I wonder
what our human-computer interfaces would look like today.
Umm a place for your tail. :) I am thinking of all the lines I read that start
like "A monkey is banging at a 026 keypunch and .."
Cheers,
Chuck
3:49 p.m.
der Mouse wrote:
I don't recall seeing a computer keyboard that
*is* lowercase, ever.
Modern keyboards are generally connected to systems that map alphabetic
keystrokes to uppercase and lowercase depending on other state, and
have keys ("Shift") designed to provide that state, but the keyboards
themselves have only one case of alphabetic key, and in every case I
can recall seeing, that case is upper.
I stand corrected ... the only keyboard without a shift key I have seen
is a TTY's.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
7:46 p.m.
der Mouse wrote:
Actually all my TTY keyboardsd have shift keys. Of course some of them
are labeleld 'LETTERS' and ''FIGURES' :-)
But having a shift key doesn't mean the keyboard will send lower-case
letters. The shift key might be used only to get things like the symbols
over the digit keys, and letter keys may be sent in upper case whether
the shift key is pressed or not. That ITT I mentioned in the last message
was like that before I added the modification.
-tony
I don't recall seeing a computer keyboard
that *is* lowercase, ever.
Modern keyboards are generally connected to systems that map alphabetic
keystrokes to uppercase and lowercase depending on other state, and
have keys ("Shift") designed to provide that state, but the keyboards
themselves have only one case of alphabetic key, and in every case I
can recall seeing, that case is upper.
I stand corrected ... the only keyboard without a shift key I have seen
is a TTY's.
9:22 p.m.
But having a shift key doesn't mean the keyboard
will send lower-case
letters. The shift key might be used only to get things like the
symbols over the digit keys, and letter keys may be sent in upper
case whether the shift key is pressed or not.
Mmm, true. But then, many - probably most - keyboards don't send
letters at all; they send scancodes of some sort. As far back as early
Suns, at least, and probably farther, keyboards were sending small
integer keycodes bearing no particular relationship to the values of
the key-top characters in any character set, even if you consider just
the character-generating keys.
And of course there are things like electromech teletypes where the
boundaries between the keyboard and the rest of the device are not
nearly as well-defined as they are with a peecee - or a Sun-3 or a
VT-100, which for these (very restricted) purposes are the same as a
modern peecee. (Does a purely mechanical typewriter - remember them? -
have a keyboard that sends letters? Or does it "send" an index value
into the (mechanically stored) array of glyphs in the printing part of
the mechanism? Is it fair to consider that index an encoded letter?
Some interesting philosophical questions lurking.)
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
22 Nov
22 Nov
5:55 p.m.
But having a shift key doesn't mean the
keyboard will send lower-case
letters. The shift key might be used only to get things like the
symbols over the digit keys, and letter keys may be sent in upper
case whether the shift key is pressed or not.
Mmm, true. But then, many - probably most - keyboards don't send
letters at all; they send scancodes of some sort. As far back as early Suns, at least, and probably farther, keyboards were
sending small
integer keycodes bearing no particular relationship to the values of
the key-top characters in any character set, even if you consider just
the character-generating keys.
And of course there are things like electromech teletypes where the
boundaries between the keyboard and the rest of the device are not
nearly as well-defined as they are with a peecee - or a Sun-3 or a
VT-100, which for these (very restricted) purposes are the same as a
No wait a second. Does it actually matter for the purposes of this
discussion what the actual communcation is between a VT100 and its
keyboard? Assuming you're not going to modify the VT100's firmware (if
you're allowing modificatations then _anything_ is possible ;-)), a VT100
sends a particular code out of its serial port when you press a key
(subject othe modifier keys, SHIFT, etc). The fact that (IIRC) the
keyboard sends a keycode over the seiral interface to the VT100
mainboard, and it's turned into ASCII by the firmware doesn't make any
diffference IMHO as to whether, for example, this keyboard can be
considered to be an upper-case only one or an upper/lower case one.
modern peecee. (Does a purely mechanical typewriter -
remember them? -
Rememebr them? I use one...
have a keyboard that sends letters? Or does it
"send" an index value
into the (mechanically stored) array of glyphs in the printing part of
Well, for the typewriter I have, each key/type hammer is an independant
mechanism. Pressing a key activates the type hammer it's linked to. No
encoding/decoding at all.
the mechanism? Is it fair to consider that index an
encoded letter?
Some interesting philosophical questions lurking.)
-tony
6:51 p.m.
Mmm, true.
But then, many - probably most - keyboards don't send
letters at all; they send scancodes of some sort.
I would dispote the
'most' Does it actually matter for the purposes of this
discussion what the
actual communcation is between a VT100 and its keyboard?
Depends on exactly what you mean when you talk about a keyboard sending
something.
A VT100 has a relatively well-defined and narrow channel between the
keybaord and the rest of the terminal; it also has a well-defined
physical boundary between the keyboard and the rest of it - unlike,
say, a mechanical typewriter.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
3:59 a.m.
On Thursday 22 November 2007 00:46:55 Tony Duell wrote:
But having a shift key doesn't mean the keyboard
will send lower-case
letters. The shift key might be used only to get things like the symbols
over the digit keys, and letter keys may be sent in upper case whether
the shift key is pressed or not. That ITT I mentioned in the last message
was like that before I added the modification.
Another that leaps to mind is the Canon Cat with its "Use Front" key.
Gordon
10:07 a.m.
From: gordonjcp at gjcp.net
Another that leaps to mind is the Canon Cat with its "Use Front" key.
I wish that on the Cat, the "Use Front" could be switched to enter
control characters, while in the Forth mode. When writing my HP printer
driver, putting control characters into print strings was a pain. The
key board had no ESC key and most printer strings started with
that control character.
One could modify it but then one would lose the original functions.
I use the "Use Front" key for help and normal functions such as saving
to disk.
I guess one could add a special key sequence to enter control characters.
I know it sees things like "Use Front" "Shift" "Space" as
something special
when in the editor.
Dwight
_________________________________________________________________
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista? + Windows Live?.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC…
21 Nov
21 Nov
7:43 p.m.
They only keyboards I can think of that are not
lowercase today is
your TTY's.
I don't recall seeing a computer keyboard that *is* lowercase, ever.
Modern keyboards are generally connected to systems that map alphabetic
keystrokes to uppercase and lowercase depending on other state, and
have keys ("Shift") designed to provide that state, but the keyboards
themselves have only one case of alphabetic key, and in every case I
can recall seeing, that case is upper. 
8:08 p.m.
New subject: Keyboard and case (was Re: Documentation for the AT&T Sceptre Videotex terminal)
On Thu, Nov 22, 2007 at 12:43:27AM +0000, Tony Duell wrote:
If you mean that keyboards only have upper case glyphs
on them, then I
agree with you. I have never seen a keyboard with lower case printed on it.
Did the 3Com Audrey have lower-case glyphs? So much of it was meant
to be "friendly" that I have a vague memory that they were avoiding
the stern and authoritarian "shouting" of caps.
-ethan
--
Ethan Dicks, A-333-S Current South Pole Weather at 22-Nov-2007 at 01:00 Z
South Pole Station
PSC 468 Box 400 Temp -36.2 F (-37.9 C) Windchill -58.6 F (-50.4 C)
APO AP 96598 Wind 7.2 kts Grid 60 Barometer 685.1 mb (10436 ft)
Ethan.Dicks at usap.gov http://penguincentral.com/penguincentral.html
12:57 p.m.
New subject: keyboard layouts was Re: Documentation for the AT&T Sceptre Videotex terminal
Don't you also have trouble switching from a C64
to a Mac?
Yup. Fortunately most of the emulators let you either use 64 or Mac layouts
and map the keys appropriately.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. -- Hunter S. Thompson -------
6083
days inactive
6088
days old
25 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cclist＠sydex.com -
classiccmp.org＠stellar.eclipse.co.uk -
dkelvey＠hotmail.com -
dm561＠torfree.net -
ethan.dicks＠usap.gov -
gordonjcp＠gjcp.net -
legalize＠xmission.com -
mouse＠Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
rtellason＠verizon.net -
spectre＠floodgap.com