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