Laptop Computer Keyboards

Interesting, but not quite what I had in mind!!!!!

How about these? 1" square keys...

https://www.infogrip.com/bigkeys-lx.html#:~:text=Product%20Description-,BigKeys%20LX%20keyboard%20by%20is%20the%20size%20of%20a%20standard,or%20ABC%20for%20easy%20learning.

https://www.spectronics.com.au/product/bigkeys-lx

The old analog typewriters had the spacing right on the keys.The new ones are conserving desktop space and the keys are too close together.

I learned to type on an OLD,OLD mechanical typewriter from the 1940's.It took a lot of effort and a lot of finger travel to hit a key,but errors were very few because correcting an error was a lot of work.

Why is it so hard to build a keyboard with larger space between the keys?

I have seen them with larger letters,but same spacing.

I learned to type on an OLD,OLD mechanical typewriter

That's part of my problem I'm sure--fingers could rest on keys with no problem. But some of the new ones are so sensitive that just brushing a key gives you an extra letter. This makes re-reading essential, not just a good idea.

You could just go speech to text...

...or if you are more tech savvy you can use AI which adds graphics you just describe....it's a bit more complicated, but still free to use....

Thanks, SE. I've tried voice typing on Microsoft Word, and it does work, but it also picks up any stray noise or stutter that I make, therefore probably would not work in an office environment. It seemed like editing those "errors" took about as much time as editing for the extra letters I get when typing. But this video says I ought to try it some more and get used to speaking the punctuation, etc.

I tried dictation again today, Dec 21, but had to look for the microphone icon, because it was hidden in an ellipsis. Dictation did work on reading from an 1892 newspaper, but not well on that outdated language which language is OK with this old fogie, but apparently not with modern AI. Also poor at proper names which spell check also has problems with. All told, it takes about the same time to proof-read for dictation errors as it does for my own typos

"All told, it takes about the same time to proof-read for dictation errors as it does for my own typos"

That's what I've found too, from another old fogie.

Thanks for the video. I have to try it. Sometimes I would forget the end of a sentence by the time I get there; maybe this helps.

Some very good typists could get over 60 words per minute on these old typewriters.

The speed was limited by the mechanical movement of the keys.Too fast,and the keys would jam together at the platen,so it was a very fine discipline to get that many words without jamming the keys.

My best was 35 WPM in school and now I cannot get much over 15 when I subtract out all my errors,and my fingers do not fit on the home rows.

My ex was a professional secretary and super typist. She could type over 100 wpm without errors on an IBM Selectric.

She hated it when the company switched to word processing. The keyboard/computer back then could only handle about 80 wpm at best.

I learned to type in a typing class in high school circa 1965 or so. I don't think I got over about 35 wpm on a manual because of being afraid of making a mistake and having to go through the correction routine. My most used key nowadays is the back arrow.

I think we have a winner here....

https://www.amazon.com/

Nuclear option....contact this guy

That is interesting! Does anyone have any experience with the keyboard or with the manufacturer? Those round keys sure look familiar.

I always read the reviews for insight....

That reminds me.When PCs first came out,there was an interface to adapt a Selectric to a computer input to print text on screen.Now what they need is an interface to modify an old 1940's style typewriter to a modern computer input.

Perhaps a Hall Effect sensor at the bottom of each key stroke.

This would give the old feel with new technology.

Probably only a few old timers would buy it,but it would be nice.

I still sometimes hear the bell and have the urge to pull the platen back at end of a line

I think interfacing it to duplicate keystrokes using a modern keyboard mother board base would work.

Of course there would be some keys not present on the old typewriters,but an aux key set could be used.

Perhaps some hobbyist with plenty of time on their hands would like to do it on rainy days and come up with a kit.

The problem with the old keyboards was that you had to hold your hands up, just so, or you would depress more than one key and you would have entanglement, you had to hover your hands, and if you relaxed for even a second, well you were faced with mechanic deadlock...In order to maintain that hovering you needed to sit with back straight, you couldn't relax...I remember when the electrics came out, so much faster, it was like having a turbocharged machine...

When I took a typing class in high school around 1980, the first 80% of the class, we were required to use the manual typewriters. The last section of the course, we moved over to electrics. I guess the discipline required on the manual typewriters helped our form once we started using the electric typewriters. Funny how quickly things can change in our world.

I can't help but be jealous and a bit amused at you younger folks. I dropped out of (obviously mechanical) typing class in 1954, when at the semester I had only reached 5 WPM, after errors.

I did improve considerably when computers came out, but I'm going downhill now, and always have to proofread what I just wrote, most commonly to remove extra characters.

They've come a long way in converting speech to text, but I still mostly use a physical keyboard.

always have to proofread

This is ALWAYS! Spell check just cannot catch everything. Wrong word, but correctly spelled, it won't flag you. It's poor on proper names. It won't flag typos that make a real word.

I've seen some embarrassing words, because it wasn't proofread. Of course, others that aren't embarrassing, but make you look stupid.

Not true.I have used the old typewriters many times,and the keys are less sensitive than the new keyboards,requiring a lot of pressure and a long stroke to make a key hit.

The new keyboards are very sensitive to the slightest touch and account for many errors,at least on my part.

The old typists were very skilled,and the most amazing story I recall was a typist on the second floor was a relative of a businessman on the 1st floor and when typing dictation from her employer,a competitor of the 1st floor relative,when she was typing in Morse code while simultaneously typing the letter required by her boss.The typing sounds could be heard from the floor below.The 2nd floor manager always wondered how the first floor company got a jump on his clients till one day he hired an ex-navy yeoman and the trick was revealed,because he was fluent in Morse code.I can only imagine the skill required to do this.

I sometimes got comments from co-workers at my old workplace about how hard I beat on keyboards. Then I'd tell them about the experience of learning to type on old manual typewriters. That's when they decided that I really was an old phart.

Not true. I have used the old typewriters many times, and the keys are less sensitive than the new keyboards, requiring a lot of pressure and a long stroke to make a key hit.

The new keyboards are very sensitive to the slightest touch and account for many errors, at least on my part.

Agree! You could rest your fingers on the manual keys and not get letters. This is not true of modern keyboards, especially the membrane type.

I never had much trouble with entanglement, because I wasn't fast enough.

There's an old joke about the hardware guys on a design project promising that a problem would be fixed in the software, while the programmers assured everyone that a hardware modification would do the job.

So, along that line of thought, have you tried tweaking the keyboard preferences? Your system software may let you adjust the delay before repeat and the repeat rate.

My "personal problem" is not the repeat rate, but slightly brushing adjacent keys or maybe resting my fingers, even lightly, on keys--a habit left over from using a manual typewriter.

You might just need to reposition your hand/keyboard relationship

Sure! That will work fine with arthritic fingers.

Perhaps a heated glove with sensors would be better?

With 4 direction sensors,nearly all keyboard functions could be duplicated.

Add toes,and you've got it.

I am not a fan of the "short displacement" keyboards for the same reason.

I don't necessarily need the tactile and audible "click" type, but the keyboards I seem to prefer have about 200-thou of travel and the spring action has an "over-center" sort of feel that lets you know you've hit the key. The initial "high spring-rate" of these keyboards mean you can rest your fingers on the keys and not get unintentional characters.

Sounds good. Is this type of keyboard available on a laptop? If so, how does their literature describe it so I know what to ask about when shopping? Thanks.

I've never seen this style keyboard (long travel, high initial spring rate) on a laptop.

My work laptop is a Dell Precision 7710 and the keyboard is pretty good. However, I still carry my favorite full-size HP keyboard with me when I travel because I just like it better. Even though this laptop has a short-travel keyboard, it does seem to have reasonably stiff initial spring-rate on the keys, that then over-center to a lower spring rate as the key is depressed.

Maybe the thing to do is to try out different laptops on display at a store and see if any of them suit your liking.

Thanks. I'll have to check out that Dell Precision 7710.

I think there is a potentially viable market for wide spaced keys for the older generation with limited finger mobility,and digits crooked by arthritis.

Voice to text is ok,but not presently fully developed enough to be universal.

Although I've be able to avoid the arthritis so far, I still agree on the wide spacing.

On further thought, the current key-center to key-center spacing is about right for my small-sized hands, so I wouldn't want that distance increased much, if any. Reducing the width of the keycaps while keeping the same center-to-center separation should reduce the probability of a finger accidentally hitting the next key in addition to the intended key, which I believe is my most frequent error.

Is there a "standard" spacing for the keys? The keyboard I'm using now is .75 inch. Several that I have measured are also .75". The difference, what my fingers like and don't like (very subjective!), seems to be the type of keys. These are individual keys, tapered a bit so they are smaller at the top. But the main difference seems to be how sensitive the keys are to tiny accidental touches.

Merry Christmas, since that is about 15 minutes from now.

Right. I just checked three different keyboards, and all have 0.750" key spacing as well. These keycaps are not significantly tapered, and have a 0.100" gap between keys, so the keycaps are 0.650" wide.

If they reduced the keycap width to 0.55" and kept the same key-to-key spacing, the gap would be increased to 0.200". I think that might help, at least for those of us with less-than-perfect finger control.

The keyboard I am using, which my fingers seem to like, has key tops .5" wide and gap between keys of .25". It is a Dell model SK-8115 with a USB wired connection. I have no idea how old it is, because I got it used at a moving sale several years ago.

What you have sounds like the "typical" laptop keyboard that I'll probably end up with when I have to get a new one sometime next year. That's why I'm wondering if keyboards are available that are more "finger-friendly." (I am not concerned about the thickness of the laptop.)

I've been a Mac user since '84. The first keyboard I measured for my reply to you was on my MacBook Pro 16". The second was a wireless Apple keyboard being used with an iMac, while the third was a Logitech wireless.

You got me curious. I've been repairing computers since 1978, and Macs since '85, so I have a collection of keyboards, including one from an original 1984 Mac. I measured half a dozen keyboards, including that one from 1984, and every one has a key-to-key spacing of 0.750". It's really interesting how other aspects of the keyboards make some appear much larger than others.

The biggest difference between the older keyboards and newer ones is the length of the keystroke; it is difficult to measure with precision without setting up a dial indicator (which I just might do tomorrow), but I'm pretty sure that the early keyboards had at least triple the stroke of the current ones, and clearly the shorter stroke leads to more accidental characters.

It's still Christmas here, so Merry Christmas to all!

Please do it.Curious minds want to know!

Ok. You provided the impetus!

I had to warm up the dial indicator after bringing it in from the cold garage, in order for it to move smoothly, and figure out how to mount it (with a magnetic base on a piece of sheet steel) to get consistent values. Here are the results, in JPEG and
Text:

Keyboard key strokes

Measured with a vertical 0.100”/revolution dial indicator, from (close to) first touch to bottom of stroke, near the center of the “J” key in all cases.

None of these keyboards, except the laptops, were connected to a computer; most keys will send their signal some unknown distance before reaching the bottom of the stroke.

All values are in thousandths of an inch.

Keyboard Stroke

≈1984 Macintosh wired keyboard 133

1994 Mac Powerbook 5209C 113

≈1996 Dell Latitude laptop 105

1998 iMac wired 130

2005 Apple wireless (AA batteries) 135

2005 Dell Vostro 1000 laptop 88

2009 Apple wireless (AA batteries) 88

≈2011 Logitech wireless (solar) 76

≈2012 Apple wireless (recharge) 45

2021 16” MacBook Pro M1 laptop 45

I am considering adding a spring under the keys to give more feedback,and less sensitive touch to my keyboard.I need to find a square spring of the proper size and spring rate.Any help is appreciated.

I presume all the modern keyboards have the same size (umbrella) over the key touch pad itself so it look like there is room for a spring.

I will measure mine to give more feedback later.

The idea just occurred to me and I cannot pull the keypads on line.

OK.I just measured mine.

The ID of the square spring needs to be 8mm minimum,and 9mm maximum.

The outside of the spring needs to be 12 mm,max.11 mm minimum.

The spring rate is undetermined,since I do not have a sensitive pressure gauge,but I would try several to determine the best fit for me. I even would consider cutting some to increase spring rate if necessary.The height for neutral position is approximately 12mm.

Cutting the spring would give customizable tension for different users.

Also, some sort of square shim(s) would help produce customizable tension. Instead of a spring under the keys, could some sort of foam be used--maybe thin sheets wrapped into a tube?

I cut thin strips from upholstery foam,which should have a long life,and folded and twisted them to get more or less back pressure.

My first puter was an Apple II with a built in keyboard. There was a reset key on the upper left next to other frequently used keys. It was not unusual for a user to be typing away and accidentally fat finger the reset key and lose everything when the system restarted.

Some genius figured out that an o-ring could be installed under the key cap that required the user to be rather forceful to actually activate the key accidentally.

I don't know if an o-ring can work on modern keyboard keys but it might be worth experimenting with.

I don't know if an o-ring can work on modern keyboard keys

I think not. All the laptop keyboards I have seen are of the membrane or chicklet type (Does anybody know the proper definition of those names?) An external keyboard with keycaps would work, but that surely affects the portability. This is why I asked if laptops are available with that type of keyboard when thickness is not important.

After fruitless searches for O rings of the proper durometer rating and size,

I think I have found a solution for sensitive keys on keyboards:

Foam rubber, from an egg crate upholstery pad.

A thin slice;about 3/16 inch wide and thick,about 1 inch length, tucked on the underside of the key cover. Twisting the foam into a rope will increase the pressure,as will increasing the width of the strip before twisting and the tightness of the twist.

This will allow increasing the pressure according to personal preference.

It works well for me.

I hope this helps someone else. .

Yep, I thought an o-ring might be too stiff. It took quite a concentrated effort on the Apple II to get the key to activate. Which was exactly the intent.

But I'm glad the idea resulted in a workable solution. At least for you.

Wow! It sounds like you must be working on a really old keyboard, with individual replaceable switches at each key. I have a small drawer full of such switches, but haven't used one since the '90s.

I just checked a keyboard that I had handy; the entire key unit, including the switch, elastic "spring", and keycap is only about 0.150" thick, and that's at least 10 years old, possibly 20.

As I said above, I have no idea how old this keyboard is since I got it at a moving sale several years ago. I see nothing on it that I recognize as a date although it's probably coded into some of the numbers. It's a Dell SK-8115.

I've never had a keycap off of it, but will guess the cap is about 3/8" tall; of course some of the spring. switch, etc will be inside it.

[So why am I using fractions?? Before retirement, the guys kidded me about always using decimals! They claimed a "real" engineer doesn't use decimals, besides it confuses the people in the field. In addition, 5/16" = .3125, but is it actually .31, or maybe .312? Fractions because that's the ruler I have beside me.]

As you indicate, the problem with fractions is that there is no indication of precision. I do use fractions, but only in descriptions, almost never as an actual measurement. When I said the key/switch assembly was 0.150" high, the three digits after the decimal point were intended to indicate that the measurement (done with digital calipers) was more precise than 0.15", but not as precise as 0.1500".

The switches are not replaceable,only the letter on top.

The actual switch is a membrane "bubble" under the letters,like the one in SE's with the O rings.

The "bubble" provides the upward resistance to the key stroke..

I tucked the foam rubber around the edges of the key on the bottom, in the gap.

It does not touch the membrane,it simply provides more pressure feedback.

https://www.mechanical-keyboard.org/switch-types/

You can probably just replace the switches with stronger springs, they have several...also travel distance...

https://kineticlabs.com/blog/keyboard-switch-force-curves-explained

https://www.amazon.com/DAIDAI-Tactile-Durable-Mechanical-Keyboard/dp/B09YTYL68P?th=1

O-ring dampers...

https://www.amazon.com/ThreeBulls-120Pcs-Dampeners-Keyboards-

Wow! As I indicated in an earlier post, I haven't seen a keyboard that used that type/size of switch in 20 years or more! With the exception of one for nostalgia, I've recycled all such keyboards years ago.

Apparently, that's mainly due to my being a Mac guy. I've repaired quite a few keyboards over the last 40 years, but it's been around 20 years since I last replaced a keyswitch.

Yeah Mac's use different type switches...

https://www.macrumors.com/guide/butterfly-keyboard-vs-scissor-keyboard/

You also need a hot swappable keyboard to make changing the switches fast and easy...no soldering...you can also convert your solder-in keyboard to plug-in with a kit....

https://createkeebs.com/blogs/blog/hot-swappable-keyboard-vs-soldered-keyboard#:~:text=Hot%2Dswappable%20keyboards%20are%20also,require%20technical%20expertise%20to%20replace.

Thanks! Since I work almost exclusively with and on Macs, I was totally unaware of no-solder replaceable key switches.

This is especially true for my own computer use, since all of my personal work has been on laptops since the year 2000.

I presume that these switches are not used in laptops...

https://www.gigabyte.com/webpage/482/en_us.html

The Aorus laptops use Omron mechanical key switches...too pricey for plain folks...Alienware has mechanical key switch options, also very pricey...

Hmm... What does "mechanical key switch" really mean? To me, "mechanical" implies metal spring contacts.

I've been using Omron photo-interruptor switches in machines for nearly 30 years; they are incredibly reliable, and require zero actuation force, so the haptic force could be totally dependent on separate spring devices. I wouldn't be at all surprised if these key switches use photo-interruptor technology.

https://www.amazon.com/Redragon-Mechanical-Keyboard-Ergonomic-Anti-Ghosting/dp/B09V4HTWLT?s

...."THERE ARE THREE MAIN TYPES OF KEY SWITCHES

optical, magnetic, and traditional switches"..."three main keyswitch types: Linear, Tactile, and Clicky."....

..."Most companies will label these switches in terms of color, with Red being linear, Brown being tactile, and Blue being clicky."...

Hall Effect vs. Optical: What Mechanical Keyboard Switches Should You Choose?

https://www.makeuseof.com/hall-effect-vs-optical-switches/

Thanks. Interesting article. I'm surprised that in the articles I've seen here, I have seen no mention of whatever device (spring or ...) that provides the force to reduce accidental keypresses and the restoring force to return the key to its unpressed position.

Obviously if that device is a metal spring, then the force can be determined to some extent by choosing an appropriate wire size for coil springs or metal thickness for flat or stamped springs. I like a mechanism that sends me a tactile message that the key has been depressed sufficiently to actuate, other than just bottoming out; in other words, a "snap action".

Some flat metal springs can do that, as do the conical or dome-shaped elastic membranes. If the membrane covers the entire keyboard under the keycaps, it will also greatly reduce the possible damage from liquid spills, a major enemy of keyboards.

Yes... in post #57 the travel distance, actuation force, upstroke force, tactile bump, are all combined in a graph for keys...so the force required to operate the key is usually expressed in gram/force between about 40 and 60....so for the most resistance you would want a higher gf rating, basically the spring force, and a longer distance of travel for the key to tactile bump....

https://kineticlabs.com/blog/keyboard-switch-force-curves-explained

https://kineticlabs.com/switches/wuque-studios/ws-morandi-linear-switches

There is lots of interesting info here, but it seems to be all about plug-in keyboards which I'm probably going to have to use when away from home. Of those I have talked to, for "real" typing, none like the keyboard that comes with laptop computers. [That brings a side question: why aren't manufacturers paying attention? It sounds like many folks are like me--a user-friendly keyboard is more important than thickness.] The question was: Are user-friendly keyboards available on laptop computers? The answer appears to be NO.

In #63 there are 2 brands cited...this is a relatively new trend mostly unknown outside the gaming world, but spreading to those that use a keyboard all day and want to personalize their experience for whatever reason...

Thanks for the reminder. These are much more than I need in plenty of other ways. (I'm not a gamer at all.)

Learning to use the keyboard shortcuts is a most useful way to speed up text editing...

This chick is crazy fast...

https://docs.devart.com/code-compare/shortcuts/text-editor-shortcut-keys.html

I don't know the situation for non-Apple laptops, but all Apple laptops easily connect either to USB or wireless external keyboards (and 10-key pads, trackpads, mice, etc.).

It's not unusual for a Mac laptop to be used with an external keyboard and an external large monitor. I presume that Windows laptops can do the same.

If you want long-stroke replaceable keys in the laptop itself, then you may be right. Or, possibly some military-level laptops might have keys that you'd like, but $$$$.