Subj : Re: Bluetooth Keyboard To : Barry Martin From : Ky Moffet Date : Sat Sep 14 2024 13:18:00 BARRY MARTIN wrote: > Hi Ky! > > KM> We have many shotgun conversations: if you're in the way, you get > KM> talked to. > > And sometimes I learn something! It's a hazard. > > KM> It came with... ....instructions. Rather extensive > > KM> instructions. > > In English??!!!!! > KM> Astonishingly, yes. And not as microscopic as usual. > > There have been times I've scanned the 2"x2" manual-ette just to get it > to a legible size. ...OTOH I scan manuals If I can't find them on-line > so I have an electronic copy and don't have to store or especially find > the original. Been there, done that... I can't even tell this is print, let's go find a PDF... > > That paragraph sounds like lifted from a review!! > KM> Probably because it was -- mine. :D > > Hope you got permission from your other personality to use it here! I'll ask myself next time I see me. > Or as Ed (?) mentioned in a reply his phone already has a tiny keyboard > and that was what he was trying to improve. One detail is possibly the > phone's virtual keyboard has the keys touching, so too easy to have a > finger flop over whereas the real albeit tiny keyboard has separated > keys, making it harder to activate two at the same time. The tiny onscreen keyboards can be way too sensitive for big fingertips. I use a stylus when I'm stuck with the stupid thing, cuz finger is "which key did you mean??" > KM> Yeah, USB-C is certainly a LOT easier. All other sorts you try to > KM> plug in wrong, turn it over, it's still wrong, turn it over again > KM> and NOW it fits?? > > USB-A!!! Every freakin' time! Multiply that for the mini plug. I turned it over six times and it's STILL wrong side up! > KM> It's also bigger (enough to be an issue for very thin devices), > KM> and probably costs a lot more (if you're doing millions, ten > KM> cents adds up) and also already designed around micro-USB and > KM> have lots in existing stock. But it is slowly going away. > > Agree. A penny extra when purchasing a part to you and I is nothing. > Mutliply that by a million...... Yeah. And there may be royalty costs we don't know about. That was true with USB3 until recently -- a single two-port chip cost an extra $40 in royalties, which was why motherboards rarely had more than one, and for a while add-on ports were pricey. That pair of ports was already half the cost of a consumer motherboard. > Company I used to work for in New Hampshire used to give away small > quantities of extra electronic parts. Was cheaper to buy a million than > the needed 850,000. The extra were available in the Electronic Store; > generally anything like resistors and transistors was cheaper to give > away less than ten than to do the paperwork. Yes, I still have a bunch > of discrete parts sorted in coin envelopes downstairs. Good bean counting, to do it that way. Maximize the beans without crop losses. That was exactly the logic when Montana went to permanent plates for vehicles 11 or more years old: it cost more to keep track of the plethora of old farm trucks than the revenue from annual tags, especially when they come and go as if the truck never left the farm, it would often not be licensed, then you've got to dig up the title again when the kid takes it to college. So now for older vehicles you pay whatever the next three years would cost, and get permanent plates. Was about $270 for the truck, once and done, vs. $70 annually for the same truck. þ RNET 2.10U: ILink: Techware BBS þ Hollywood, Ca þ www.techware2k.com --- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462 * Origin: ILink: CFBBS | cfbbs.no-ip.com | 856-933-7096 (454:1/1) .