johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) (09/29/90)
When Touch*Tone first came out, I remember my father griping that the
number pad was arranged differently from that of ten-key adding
machines, i.e.,
1 2 3 7 8 9
4 5 6 on the phone, vs. 4 5 6 on calculators.
7 8 9 1 2 3
0 0
Does anyone remember why Bell chose to be different? (I assume ten-key
adders came first).
How are the number pads arranged on European or Asian phones? The
last time I was in a telco building (1975), dir assisters looked in
paper directories and test boards had rotary dials. Do the keyboards
of today's operator consoles have the same number pads as us mortals
(7 8 9 on the top), or do they have 1 2 3 on the top row, as on
phones? Have I reached max_num_of_trivia_questions_per_posting yet? ;-)
Thanks,
John Parsons"Roeber, Frederick" <roeber@portia.caltech.edu> (09/30/90)
In article <12785@accuvax.nwu.edu>, johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) writes... >How are the number pads arranged on European or Asian phones? ... The pushbutton phones I've seen in France had keypads arranged the same way as American phones. The pushbutton phones here at CERN (obtained from the Swiss PTT) also have the same keypad, with a couple of additions for the usual extra PBX services: an `R' to the left of the `7' and a red dot to the left of the `*'. Frederick G. M. Roeber | e-mail: roeber@caltech.edu or roeber@vxcern.cern.ch r-mail: CERN/SL-CO, 1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland | telephone: +41 22 767 5373
David Lemson <FREE0612@uiucvmd> (10/01/90)
In a message of Fri, 28 Sep 90 , John Parsons <johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com> writes: >How are the number pads arranged on European or Asian phones? The ones I've seen have been just like ours, but I haven't seen Eastern Europe, etc. In the older areas (and many countries), you're more likely to see rotary dial phones. Some countries don't handle Touch-Tone (tm), so the only pushbutton phones you see are actually pulse. The country I'm thinking about here is Israel, but this situation is changing (slowly). >The last time I was in a telco building (1975), dir assisters >looked in paper directories and test boards had rotary dials. Do the >keyboards of today's operator consoles have the same number pads as >us mortals (7 8 9 on the top), or do they have 1 2 3 on the top row, >as on phones? The only telco building I've seen recently was this year in an AT&T Office in Washington, D.C. that handled operator assistance for NPAs 202 and 703. The setup they had there was the newest equipment AT&T has, according the guy that showed us around. There was no large board with lighted buttons, the equipment consisted of a large (approx 100 key) keyboard, paper white monochrome screen, and earpiece/ microphone. When a call came in, the operator would see the person's number and the number they were trying to reach (if they dialed 0+NPA+NXX+XXXX). If it was a collect call, the operator typed in the caller's name, and hit one button as the call was placed by the computer. The operator asked if they would accept the charges, and one more button connected the two. Also, on the keyboards, they could make it so that the caller could not hear the callee, the caller could hear but not talk to the callee, or make it a full connection. Many of the calls involved one keypress to connect, five to ten seconds of talking to the caller, and one keypress to disconnect from the operator. The operators seemed to like this setup better than the old boards with so much work. However, this also seems to make the setup a little more Big Brotherish, as the AT&T corporate people can instantly see how productive any certain operator is. In this room with the operators, they had several large LED message annunciators that put up messages like "Good job Jeannie!" I suppose the negative messages were saved for review time with the supervisors. In response to your question, in this setup, if the operator has to enter a number, it gets entered just as you might enter it on your computer's number keypad, with the 789 across the top. Incidentally, in that same building, they had the last cord-board setup still in use by AT&T. It's the national TTY (service for the deaf) directory assistance center. Each operator has a cord board with several incoming and outgoing lines, a PC, and a Baudot modem. The accounting for these calls is all done by hand -- they figure that the operator has so much time available waiting for slow typists that they can fill out cards for each call. And in this setup, when a typical caller asked for the relay station in Wherever, Pennsylvania, the operator got out the phone book and looked it up. (No computerized DA here!)
Sandy Kyrish <0003209613@mcimail.com> (10/01/90)
Regarding why touch-tone pads put the "1" on the top left while adding machines put the "7" on the top left ... In 1983, I was doing historical research and I read that the early Touch-Tone pads WERE configured like adding machine pads -- but the early electronic switching systems couldn't handle rapid entry of DTMF, and people proficient with adding machines could literally "outdo" the switch. Bell engineers flipped the keypad to slow these people down. If this is indeed true, will some loyal TC reader please tell me where I found that reference? I've often wanted to quote this vignette but can never remember just where I read it. Thanks, Sandy Kyrish, MCI Mail 320-9613
gabe@sirius.ctr.columbia.edu (Gabe Wiener) (10/01/90)
In article <12785@accuvax.nwu.edu> johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) writes: >When Touch*Tone first came out, I remember my father griping that the >number pad was arranged differently from that of ten-key adding >machines >Does anyone remember why Bell chose to be different? (I assume ten-key >adders came first). If Bell had arranged the keys in calculator order, the alphabet on the keys wouldn't have followed in any logical way. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gabe@ctr.columbia.edu gmw1@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu 72355.1226@compuserve.com
ballerup@diku.dk (Per G|tterup) (10/01/90)
johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) writes:
=> When Touch*Tone first came out, I remember my father griping that the
=> number pad was arranged differently from that of ten-key adding
=> machines, i.e.,
=> 1 2 3 7 8 9
=> 4 5 6 on the phone, vs. 4 5 6 on calculators.
=> 7 8 9 1 2 3
=> 0 0
[ stuff deleted ]
=> How are the number pads arranged on European or Asian phones? The
[ other questions deleted ]
Well, on phones here in Denmark (which is in Europe) we use a layout like
the calculator shown above, i.e.:
7 8 9
4 5 6
1 2 3
0 * #
On some phones we have those extra four buttons, although they're not
used for anything here. Then the layout is:
7 8 9 A
4 5 6 B
1 2 3 C
0 * # D
BTW, since 1979 it has been impossible to get rotary phones here, and
only those remaining from before that time still uses pulse dialing.
Touch tone is (of course) free.
I hope you can use that info.
Per Gotterup
Student, DIKU (Inst. of Comp. Sci.)
University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Internet: ballerup@freja.diku.dk ashbya@uunet.uu.net (Adam J. Ashby) (10/01/90)
In <12835@accuvax.nwu.edu> roeber@portia.caltech.edu (Roeber, Frederick) writes: >The pushbutton phones I've seen in France had keypads arranged the >same way as American phones. Amazingly enough, in England too we have managed to arrange our buttons the same way as America - amazing eh? Adam Ashby ...!uunet!motcid!ashbya +1 708 632 3876
julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) (10/01/90)
In article <12785@accuvax.nwu.edu>, johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) writes: > When Touch*Tone first came out, I remember my father griping that the > number pad was arranged differently from that of ten-key adding > machines, i.e., > Does anyone remember why Bell chose to be different? (I assume ten-key > adders came first). Every time I lecture on the subject of phones and there is a bean counter in the audience I get asked this question. Usually from the perspective that the calculator model ("Ten Key") is perfect and the AT&T model is an aberration. My response, which is often not well received by the bean counters, is below. I am not sure how true it is, some or all of it may be folklore. I have gleaned it over the years. I believe there is a Bell paper on this, but have never located it. Back in the old days when AT&T was designing Touch Tone, they had to lay out the dial. This was late fifties, early sixties. I am not sure when the 10 key adding machine replaced the comptometer, but it was in this era. This was an era before the $5.00 calculator. This was when electric adding machines were expensive, large, noisy, beasts and only used by bean counters. So AT&T needed a number pad. They really had no model, so they ran experiments to determine which was the easiest to use with the least errors. The clear winner was the 2X5 (Two columns, five rows) as below: 12 34 56 78 90 The problem with the 2X5 is that it doesn't fit too well on the front panel of a standard desk phone. The next winner was the 3X4 which is what most of the world uses today: 123 456 789 0 Now obviously if the same research was being done today, the ubiquitousness of the electronic calculator would have an influence. This brings me to the next comment. > How are the number pads Arranged on European or Asian phones? In Denmark, the Touch Tone pads are "Upside down". This is mainly because the Danes moved into Touch Tone in the late seventies and by that time everyone had a calculator and expected that number pads had 789 in the top row. But Denmark is the only exception I know of. In many countries, Touch Tone is still being introduced. > Do the keyboards > of today's operator consoles have the same number pads as us mortals > (7 8 9 on the top), or do they have 1 2 3 on the top row, as on > phones? Operator consoles follow normal telco practice. By the way, TIE once had a combined calculator/phone. I never saw one, so I wonder what the number pad was like. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495
hrs1@cbnewsi.att.com (10/02/90)
In article <12837@accuvax.nwu.edu>, 0003209613@mcimail.com (Sandy Kyrish) writes: > Regarding why touch-tone pads put the "1" on the top left while adding > machines put the "7" on the top left ... In 1983, I was doing > historical research and I read that the early Touch-Tone pads WERE > configured like adding machine pads -- but the early electronic > switching systems couldn't handle rapid entry of DTMF, and people > proficient with adding machines could literally "outdo" the switch. > Bell engineers flipped the keypad to slow these people down. If this > is indeed true, will some loyal TC reader please tell me where I found > that reference? I've often wanted to quote this vignette but can > never remember just where I read it. An interesting story, but not true. Research was done on button order at (AT&T) Bell Laboratories in the late fifties by Dick Deininger and others, and published in the Bell System Technical Journal. They found that the 1-2-3 order was best, i.e. faster with fewer errors, for people who were not familiar with keypads. In those days, of course, calculators were mechanical and used by a relatively small part of the population. Individuals who were used to the 7-8-9 order of course were faster on that pattern. Since most of the population of prospective telephone keypad users were not trained on 7-8-9, the 1-2-3 pattern was chosen. Similar studies were performed in Sweden, with similar results. It was because of these human factor studies that CCITT standardized on the now familiar 1-2-3 pattern. Herman Silbiger hsilbiger@attmail.com
jwb@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) (10/02/90)
In article <12785@accuvax.nwu.edu>, johnp@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (John Parsons) writes: > When Touch*Tone first came out, I remember my father griping that the > number pad was arranged differently from that of ten-key adding > machines, i.e., > 1 2 3 7 8 9 > 4 5 6 on the phone, vs. 4 5 6 on calculators. > 7 8 9 1 2 3 > 0 0 > Does anyone remember why Bell chose to be different? (I assume ten-key > adders came first). As I have heard it, the ISO standard for numeric keypads antedated the CCITT recommendation. When CCITT "studied" the keypad layout, AT&T representatives refused point-blank to compromise, and CCITT (cravenly) gave in. All praise to those (few) PTTs which held out and adopted the ISO version. An anecdote. When Telecom Autralia introduced Touchfones in the mid 1970s, the Standards Association of Australia (our equivalent of ANSI) had a gentle correspondence battle with Telecom, trying to convince it to use the ISO layout. In its replies to SAA, Telecom stated that "overseas studies" had shown that there was no confusion when the two layouts were used simultaneously on a desk, e.g. on a phone and a VDU keyboard. Quite coincidently, Telecom was insisting that all the VDUs it purchased had the numeric keypads reversed to the CCITT format. The reason stated in the documentation was "to prevent confusion with telephone keypads." Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose. Jim Breen ($B%8%`(J) (jwb@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au) Dept of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 (fax) +61 3 573 2745
forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) (10/02/90)
It's odd how the brain works - I can dial a TT phone or use a 10-key layout quite rapidly. My fingers just "know" what to do. However, I'm sure many of you have experienced the strange feel and slowness of entering a phone number on the computer keybord for the modem - it just doesn't "feel" right!
levine@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Leonard P Levine) (10/03/90)
From article <12881@accuvax.nwu.edu>, by julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey): > So AT&T needed a number pad. They really had no model, so they > ran experiments to determine which was the easiest to use with the > least errors. The clear winner was the 2X5 (Two columns, five rows) as > below: > 12 > 34 > 56 > 78 > 90 Ever notice how nice the PC function keys used to feel on the pre-101 key keyboard? Just like this right? Leonard P. Levine e-mail levine@cs.uwm.edu Professor, Computer Science Office (414) 229-5170 University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Home (414) 962-4719 Milwaukee, WI 53201 U.S.A. FAX (414) 229-6958
wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) (10/03/90)
Phil, the guy whose answering machine messages caused such a problem in the 60's, had an accountant that got TT service as soon as it was offered. He had a fit about the pad layout, and Phil disassembled the pads in all his phones and made them "correct" i.e: 7 8 9 4 5 6 1 2 3 0 by swapping the buttons and moving a few wires. (the things we do to get our tax returns done on time;_]) He really wanted 0 for the bottom row, but if you remember how the pads were made, you KNOW why Phil talked him out of THAT. Things were fine for years until Mr._Tax's flunky called 611 to get one of the 1500's fixed. When the Greenie showed up, he had a fit: vandalizing PHONE COMPANY property and all the rest of that bs. But the accountant stood his ground, and refused to give up the set. The poor repairman had to actually *fix* the phone and not just swap it out. After that, they just called us over to fix their phones...... wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM
msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) (10/03/90)
> In Denmark, the Touch Tone pads are "Upside down".
Norway, too, has the 789 at the top. I found this amusing, because,
as Telecom readers know, Norway is also one of the few places in the
world where DIAL telephones are numbered backwards. But whereas the
backward dial is not used in Oslo, the upside-down keypad is
apparently used throughout the country.
Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.comoheare@uunet.uu.net (David O'Heare) (10/04/90)
In article <12881@accuvax.nwu.edu>, julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) writes: > Operator consoles follow normal telco practice. By the way, > TIE once had a combined calculator/phone. I never saw one, so I wonder > what the number pad was like. One of the folks here had a desk pad with a speaker phone, regular handset, and a calculator built in (I can't remember the manufacturer's name, sorry). The phone and calculator used the same numeric display, but had separate keypads. One way to do it, I guess. David O'Heare oheare@gandalf.ca (note corrected spelling) +1 613 723 6500
david@uunet.uu.net (David E A Wilson) (10/05/90)
I saw a Telecom Australia Card phone the other day. It has 2 keypads - one is a membrane type to enter your PIN for the credit/debit card and the other has real push buttons for dialing the phone number. Both had 123 on the top. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au
edward@pro-harvest.cts.com (Edward Floden) (10/06/90)
In-Reply-To: message from julian@bongo.uucp > Operator consoles follow normal telco practice. By the way, > TIE once had a combined calculator/phone. I never saw one, so I wonder > what the number pad was like. That was the TIE SmartSet. And the keypad was the telephone-standard 1-2-3, not the calculator 7-8-9. Fortunately, I rarely needed to use the calculator feature when I had one of those turkeys (the microswitches used in the hookswitch circuit failed too often, IMHO). UUCP: crash!pro-harvest!edward ProLine: edward@pro-harvest INET: edward@pro-harvest.cts.com BIX: edward2 ARPA: crash!pro-harvest!edward@nosc.mil CIS: 73220,1624 BIT: edward%pro-harvest.cts.com@nosc.mil America Online: Elseware