) (07/20/89)
While we are on the subject of keyboards, does anyone have some
good references for "chord" style keyboards, where one presses several
keys simultaneously instead of a single keystroke? It seems to me
that most keyboards are too large, partly because there is one key per
letter. The keyboards could be made smaller if there was a set of ten
keys, of which different combinations would produce different
letters/keystrokes. Sure, its not qwerty, but it would make portable
computers a lot smaller.
So, does anyone have references or more information on chord
keyboards? Thanks in advance for your help.
.oO Chris Oo.
--
Christopher Lishka ...!{rutgers|ucbvax|...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka
Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene lishka%uwslh.uucp@cs.wisc.edu
Data Processing Section (608)262-4485 lishka@uwslh.uucp
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind -- or not to have a mind at all.
How true that is." -- V.P. Dan Quayle, garbling the United Negro College
Fund slogan in an address to the group (from Newsweek, May 22nd, 1989)deanb@Apple.COM (Dean Blackketter) (07/22/89)
In article <436@uwslh.UUCP>, lishka@uwslh.UUCP (Not an illusion!) writes: > > While we are on the subject of keyboards, does anyone have some > good references for "chord" style keyboards, where one presses several > keys simultaneously instead of a single keystroke? It seems to me > that most keyboards are too large, partly because there is one key per > letter. The keyboards could be made smaller if there was a set of ten > keys, of which different combinations would produce different > letters/keystrokes. Sure, its not qwerty, but it would make portable > computers a lot smaller. > > So, does anyone have references or more information on chord > keyboards? Thanks in advance for your help. > -- > Christopher Lishka ...!{rutgers|ucbvax|...}!uwvax!uwslh!lishka > Wisconsin State Lab of Hygiene lishka%uwslh.uucp@cs.wisc.edu > Data Processing Section (608)262-4485 lishka@uwslh.uucp There already exists a pocket computer that uses a chord keyboard. It's called the AgendA, and is made by a company called MicroWriter in the U.K. They used to sell a portable machine called the MicroWriter with a chord keyboard and apparently was pretty popular with journalists in that country. The AgendA is one of the best pocket calendar/notepad/address book computers I've seen, very useful. It uses a seven key chord keyboard (three for the thumb) and it only takes a few minutes to learn the alphabet. (But a lifetime to master. :-) Now if I could only get it back from Mark, who borrowed it to "try it out." -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dean Blackketter deanb@apple.com Apple Computer (408) 974 4213 20525 Mariani Ave MS 60V Cupertino CA 95014 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nukim@ndsuvax.UUCP (kyongsok kim) (07/23/89)
In article <2989@internal.Apple.COM> deanb@Apple.COM (Dean Blackketter) writes:
:There already exists a pocket computer that uses a chord keyboard.
: (deleted)
:useful. It uses a seven key chord keyboard (three for the thumb) and it only
:takes a few minutes to learn the alphabet. (But a lifetime to master. :-)
How do you compare the input (or typing) speeds between a chord and
an ordinary keyboard (qwerty or dvorak)?
Kyongsok Kim
Dept. of Comp. Sci., North Dakota State University
e-mail address:
nukim@plains.nodak.edu
nukim@ndsuvax.bitnet
uunet!ndsuvax!nukimewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles) (07/25/89)
[ FOLLOWUPS DIRECTED TO COMP.PERIPHS This being a discussion of ]
[ peripherals after all...... ]
[ "nukim@ndsuvax.UUCP" asks how one would go about comparing different ]
[ keyboard arrangements to see which one is the "fastest". Here's how ]
[ I would go about doing it, combined with some personal opinions.... ]
Since it seems that most of the wasted time would be in:
A) Moving to the new key, and
B) Restoring your fingers to the 'home' position;
Do a study which indicates how much time is spent (on average) striking keys
which are not directly under a finger. (If you wanted to get really picky
about it, biomechanics could determine the absolute maximum finger speed given
the ideal hand typing position and the known abilities of the human body, then
it becomes a matter of physics to determine the travel time for each finger to
each non-home key.)
Determine from the hardware what the MAXIMUM typing speed is, presuming that
you are delayed only by the amount of time that it takes for the hardware to
disengage its keys.
Select a representative piece of text to be entered via keyboard.
From that text, you can now calculate the time required by the hardware for
the actual entry of the characters. This should be closely equivalent for
all the devices (except old style manual typewriters where the letters are
on individual bars that must strike the paper and return to their rest
positions).
Examine the text to determine how many of it's characters are not directly
under the home finger positions for each of the keyboards. For each of those
characters, add a certain amount of time for the finger to reach the key, and
then return to it's home position before striking the next.
Given that the more you have to move your fingers, the longer it will take to
type a given document; and assuming equal skill in each of the keyboard forms;
it should be obvious that the fewer movements you have to make, the faster you
will be able to type.
Thus, a Querty comes in last, a Dvorak comes in second, and a Chord keyboard
comes in first.
Querty comes in last because it was specifically designed such that the most
used letters would be the farthest apart in the old style manual typewriters.
This was done so that they didn't stick together so much, as they actually had
in the original design which I understand was ordered alphabetically.
(This design is seriously outmoded with the advent of electronic document
printing, and the 'ball' or 'daisy-wheel' typewriters of today. It's kept
around because: few of the existing secretaries want to switch over; the
schools will not start teaching any of the new systems until they're in use in
the marketplace; and the manufacturers won't make many of them until they see a
demand.)
Dvorak comes in second, because the most used characters are placed directly
under the user's fingers. Thus, there is less movement of the fingers. Thus,
there is less time wasted in moving the fingers about.
(Unfortunately, this makes assumptions about the frequency of characters, which
does NOT hold true for all languages, or all forms of typing. Question: What
are the most frequently typed characters when one is programming in the "C"
language? ...when one is writing in French? ...etc... One would have to have
either a different keyboard for every purpose/language to achieve the highest
possible benefits. The problem with this is what does an American in France do
for a keyboard? Possible answer: Keycaps which have 'LCD' displays on them that
the user could configure with a personal card which is carried around from
keyboard to keyboard. Of course, this has problems of its own! Which were
talked about on the network some time ago.)
A Chord keyboard would be the fastest because the only moving finger is the
thumb, and it only has three places to move to.
(The nice thing about the Chord keyboard is that all the keys are in one
unified place. No more manufacturers coming out with their own 'Querty'
keyboards where the control, alt, return, and shift keys are of varying sizes
and locations! Of course, they can still mess you up by changing which
"chords" mean what characters, but I think they'd standardize REAL quick.
Either that, or they don't get to sell much equipment! Most likely, the chords
would be based closely on the ASCII byte values for the characters.)
[No doubt IBM will come out with something based on EBCIDC and then try to
shove it down everyone else's throats as the "de facto industry standard"...
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) ]
Now, with ANY keyboard device there IS a learning curve (remember how long
it took you to learn to type without looking at the keyboard?) which means
that a person who knows the Querty keyboard would initially loose a great
deal of speed switching to Dvorak. But once they got past that learning
curve, they would be MUCH faster.
[IMHO, it would be easier going from Querty to Chord, than it would be from
Querty to Dvorak, since the Chord keyboard is OBVIOUSLY different from Querty.
There's no unconscious training that expects a certain key to be in a certain
location to overcome; only a new set of reflexes to lay down...]
Enjoy!
..!hadron\ "Who?... Me?... WHAT opinions?!?" | Edwin Wiles
...!sundc\ Schedule: (n.) An ever changing | NetExpress Comm., Inc.
...!pyrdc\ nightmare. | 1953 Gallows Rd. Suite 300
...!uunet!netxcom!ewiles | Vienna, VA 22180nukim@ndsuvax.UUCP (kyongsok kim) (07/26/89)
Somebody told me that stenotype machines used by court reporters might have a chord keyboard. Does anyone have some good references for those machines? I tried the local library and failed to find any book. Any clue will be appreciated. Kyongsok Kim Dept. of Comp. Sci., North Dakota State University e-mail: nukim@plains.nodak.edu; nukim@ndsuvax.bitnet; uunet!ndsuvax!nukim
jcgs@wundt.harlqn.uucp (John Sturdy) (07/26/89)
In <2808@ndsuvax.UUCP> Kyongsok Kim writes >How do you compare the input (or typing) speeds between a chord and >an ordinary keyboard (qwerty or dvorak)? In Britain a good few years ago someone brought out a six-key (4 finger, 2 thumb keys) pocket WP system called the MicroWriter. They claimed that with a similar amount of practice on that and on an ordinary keyboard, people would typically reach about half the speed on the chord keyboard as on the ordinary one - ie a good typist could get up to about 40wpm. I tried one once - quite easy to learn. They had a one-line (I think) LCD display, and an RS232 port, and I think also a cassette recorder connector (for saving data to tape). You could use the RS232 either for transfer to/from a "real" computer/wp, or directly to a daisywheel printer. These things never really caught on; in the past year a new one has come out, in the form of an "electronic filofax" with a chord keyboard and an alphameric/calculator keyboard. Looks a neat idea, but I doubt they'll really take off, as the electronic "organizer" niches are already quite full. -- __John When asked to attend a court case, Father Moses took with him a leaking jug of water. Asked about it, he said: "You ask me to judge the faults of another, while mine run out like water behind me." jcgs@uk.co.harlqn (UK notation) jcgs@harlqn.co.uk (most places) ...!mcvax!ukc!harlqn!jcgs (uucp - really has more stages, but ukc knows us) John Sturdy Telephone +44-223-872522 Harlequin Ltd, Barrington Hall, Barrington, Cambridge, UK
hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) (07/27/89)
In article <2809@ndsuvax.UUCP> nukim@ndsuvax.UUCP (kyongsok kim) writes: }Somebody told me that stenotype machines used by court reporters might have }a chord keyboard. Does anyone have some good references for those machines? }I tried the local library and failed to find any book. }Any clue will be appreciated. My father was a court reporter for 40 years. He tried to teach me stenotype, but it just didn't take. Anyway, the answer is "sort of". You can hit all the keys on a stenotype at once and they'll all print in one line across the tape. In practice, you use chords to form words (short-hand abbreviations, actually). The chord keyboards used on computers use chords to generate individual characters. Not quite the same thing. -- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, hollombe@ttidca.tti.com) Illegitimati Nil Citicorp(+)TTI Carborundum 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 452-9191, x2483 Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun|philabs|psivax}!ttidca!hollombe
landauer@morocco.Sun.COM (Doug Landauer) (09/13/90)
> In other words, I am fairly certain that court reporters do NOT use chord > keyboards of the type we are discussing. Hmmm... I don't think that "we" are all discussing the same type of chord keyboards. I've seen four types mentioned: - SRI's (Engelbart's) ancient NLS/Augment ones, designed to work in concert with the two-wheeled wooden mouse; - The ones that court stenographers use, which don't really quite do English fast (though one could easily make electronic versions of these and program them to expand that particular stenoghrapher's idionsyncratic shorthand); - Normal keyboards, with special software ...; - "IBM has done some studies ..." I think that, in spite of my previous (several months ago) posting (which, alas, I seem to have lost), few of the readers of & posters to comp.misc are thinking of the IBM chord keyboard described in IEEE Computer, March 1978. This fourteen-key one-handed baby keyboard was able to do 4407 different possible chords, averaged 2.2 characters per chord, and was (after training) competitive with standard (QWERTY) keyboards speedwise. I wonder if they tried running two-handed tests, with two of these? I wonder how well it'd work to build one of these with a mouse built into the bottom (the whole keyboard is only about 7cm by 14cm)? Three requests::: 1- Did anyone save my previous posting? Could you e-mail me a copy? 2- Could someone find and make me a copy of that entire article? (It's IEEE Computer Magazine, March 1978. The article is by Nathaniel Rochester, Frank Bequaert, & Elmer Sharp.) 3- Could someone build me a chord keyboard as described in that article? :-) free? :-) -- Doug Landauer - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Languages - landauer@eng.sun.com Matt Groening on C++: "Our language is one great salad."
tcline@hpislx.HP.COM (Ted Cline) (09/27/90)
> / hpislx:comp.misc / landauer@morocco.Sun.COM (Doug Landauer) / 7:01 pm Sep 12, 1990 / > > I think that, in spite of my previous (several months ago) posting > (which, alas, I seem to have lost), few of the readers of & posters to > comp.misc are thinking of the IBM chord keyboard described in IEEE > Computer, March 1978. > > 2- Could someone find and make me a copy of that entire article? > (It's IEEE Computer Magazine, March 1978. The article is by > Nathaniel Rochester, Frank Bequaert, & Elmer Sharp.) > > -- > Doug Landauer - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Languages - landauer@eng.sun.com > Matt Groening on C++: "Our language is one great salad." > ---------- "March 1978" is wrong. I found the ariticle "The Chord Keyboard", Nathaniel Rochester et al, in IEEE Computer Magazine, December 1978, p57-63. I have a copy of the article (STRANGE keyboard!, I like the MicroWriter (sp?) better). ---- Ted Cline Measurement Systems Operation R&D Lab ted_cline@hpisla.lvld.hp.com Hewlett-Packard, CU-325 [ihnp4|hplabs]!hpislx!tcline 815 14th Street SW (303) 679-2352 Loveland, CO 80537 USA
markd@iti.org (Mark Delany) (09/30/90)
tcline@hpislx.HP.COM (Ted Cline) writes: >I found the ariticle "The Chord Keyboard", Nathaniel Rochester et al, >in IEEE Computer Magazine, December 1978, p57-63. By any chance, is this electronically available? >I have a copy of the article (STRANGE keyboard!, I like the MicroWriter >(sp?) better). Maybe so if there was a way to make the keyboard completely dumb, and thus useful as an alternative keyboard into an RS232 port. I found it impossible to turn off it's internal WP functions. Also generating Ctrl and ESC type characters are a nightmare which makes it pretty much useless if you're an Emacs user.