Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watarts!bernie
From: bernie@watarts.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: Why are micro keyboards braindamaged?
Message-ID: <1885@watarts.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Jun-83 11:05:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: watarts.1885
Posted: Mon Jun 20 11:05:48 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Jun-83 04:42:56 EDT
References: uw-beave.668
Lines: 18

I think the Apple II has to beat out the TRS-80 I for lousy keyboard design.
The Apple keyboard simply doesn't have enough keys on it, and cannot even
generate lowercase (at least the Model I keyboard was dual case, even if they
did blow the sense of it).  More importantly, the keyboard design bug on the
TRS-80 can be overcome through software, while the Apple has to have hardware
kludges to get it to work right (and even then, there aren't enough keys).
  I think the absolute undisputed winner for worst keyboard on a micro should
go to Commodore, for their original PET.
  The winner for *best* keyboard design is a far more difficult choice.  For
completeness, the winner ought to be the IBM PC (it has every character in the
ASCII set directly and easily accessible from the keyboard, and has lots of
useful function keys and special purpose keys as well).  However, the keyboard
layout is less than intelligent (they misplaced the left-hand shift key).
The feel is nice (at least, a lot of people seem to like it) and reliability
us far better than you'd find on most micros.  I understand the shift-key
problem can be alleviated through software.
					--Bernie Roehl
					...decvax!watmath!watarts!bernie