[HN Gopher] Where did the QWERTY keyboard come from?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Where did the QWERTY keyboard come from?
        
       Author : Brajeshwar
       Score  : 20 points
       Date   : 2023-09-05 15:52 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.smithsonianmag.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.smithsonianmag.com)
        
       | javier_e06 wrote:
       | I learned to type on a Corona typewriter and it would jam when
       | the key metal arms (or whatever the name was) came from the
       | opposite side. The arm coming from the left side leaving too slow
       | and bam! the arm from the right side comes smashing the other
       | arm. My guess then was that the letters were put in some fashion
       | that the group of letters coming from the right side seldom where
       | adjacent from the group of letters coming from the left side. The
       | closer the arms where to the center of the typewriter the less
       | they would travel hence faster going in and out and beneficial
       | for the letters to be adjacent, for the English language of
       | course.
       | 
       | ETAOIN SHRDLU
       | 
       | The 10 most common letters in the English language. With
       | exception of the A, all towards the center of keyboard.
        
         | pbhjpbhj wrote:
         | L is the opposite position to A, so also an edge letter.
         | 
         | I too learnt to type in part on a mechanical typewriter
         | keyboard -- there was a TV kids show about journalists and I
         | wanted to mimic them I think. IME (a long time ago) you wanted
         | to have consecutive keys on opposite hands because it took the
         | whole hand moving to provide a good force to move the key and
         | impact the ribbon hard enough to make a good print of the
         | letter. But then, as you said, you would occassionally get the
         | type arms locking up. I definitely couldn't use my pinky to
         | type on that keyboard.
         | 
         | TH, ER, ON, AN are the most common letter pairs [in British
         | English]; TH is good on a QWERTY but the other pairs are not
         | particularly well placed I think.
        
         | fanf2 wrote:
         | The Linotype keyboard has ETAOIN SHRDLU as the leftmost two
         | columns of each block of letters (separate keys for lower and
         | upper case!)
         | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Linotype_keyboard_wi...
        
       | llm_nerd wrote:
       | Tangentially related but there is a recent Radiolabs podcast
       | about "The Wubi Effect" and it's a very interesting listen. The
       | Chinese market also uses QWERTY (which surprised me), and they
       | enter text using a variety of coding tactics. The government
       | pushed method is called pinyin and is basically phonetic and was
       | a way to try to standardize pronunciation. The Wubi method is
       | basically building the shape components of the character set.
       | 
       | Anyways, fascinating to learn. Somehow didn't realize that so
       | much of the world also uses QWERTY.
        
         | umanwizard wrote:
         | Pinyin is not just an input method, it's also the standard way
         | to write Mandarin in the Latin alphabet.
         | 
         | Virtually all the spellings of names from mainland China that
         | you're familiar with (e.g., Xi Jinping) are written in Pinyin.
        
         | hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
         | https://radiolab.org/podcast/wubi-effect
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | The essential read: https://sino-
         | platonic.org/complete/spp171_chinese_writing_re...
        
       | lsmeducation wrote:
       | It's interesting how we play the most advanced video games on a
       | peripheral from 1870. Zero innovation on that front, and worse,
       | we're going even further backward with the mechanical keyboard
       | obsession.
        
         | Phrodo_00 wrote:
         | The reason we had to go backwards to mechanical keyboards is
         | that modern keyboards were being built just for lower prices
         | with no regard to feel or longevity.
         | 
         | Sometimes things don't need innovation. If you don't want to
         | play with a keyboard there's always controllers (that also seem
         | to have found a pretty stable form the last years)
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | I have a mechanical keyboard on my main desktop system. But I
           | have to admit that, given the amount of typing I do on short-
           | throw (non-butterfly) MacBook keyboards, I'm not sure I
           | really have a clear preference at this point.
           | 
           | (And there's something to be said more generally for the
           | keyboards you use day to day not being radically different
           | from most other keyboards you'll encounter.)
        
         | qball wrote:
         | >we're going even further backward with the mechanical keyboard
         | obsession
         | 
         | Well, not quite; single-stage/two-stage trigger technology, as
         | well as progressive triggers, have some benefits when applied
         | to keyboards.
         | 
         | First, single-stage/two-stage triggers give you (with single-
         | stage) a single smooth press with activation point somewhere in
         | the middle, or (with two-stage) a consistent amount of takeup
         | then a wall that you have to break through to activate the
         | mechanism. So you can have the key pressed and resting on the
         | activation point, and then press it the rest of the way when
         | you want the input to register (for instance, if you're in a
         | game and are waiting for someone to peek around the corner).
         | 
         | Second, progressive triggers, where pressing a little way
         | registers a single input and pressing it all the way down/back
         | types something fully-automatically. They're still mostly
         | useless because the manufacturers refuse to put properly heavy
         | springs in the switches, but the technology itself is ready for
         | this.
         | 
         | It's certainly strange that it took 70 years from the
         | implementations of these ideas in firearms to today's keyboards
         | given the advantages of each mechanism are equally applicable
         | to both, but that's the way it happened.
        
           | lsmeducation wrote:
           | _First, single-stage /two-stage triggers give you (with
           | single-stage) a single smooth press with activation point
           | somewhere in the middle, or (with two-stage) a consistent
           | amount of takeup then a wall that you have to break through
           | to activate the mechanism. So you can have the key pressed
           | and resting on the activation point, and then press it the
           | rest of the way when you want the input to register (for
           | instance, if you're in a game and are waiting for someone to
           | peek around the corner)._
           | 
           | This is a cool thing, I'd want that on my mouse triggers
           | also. The problem is that in practice it'll never be what we
           | want it to be because the distance of switches is too small
           | to make that two stage thing be a thing (we'd need super
           | heavy switches for this to be a thing). Now imagine mouse
           | clicks which are supposed to represent a trigger (we operate
           | as if everything is a hair trigger).
           | 
           | Burst/Single burst is mostly a timing thing at this point.
           | Would be interesting to see it become a force based thing.
           | 
           | Fun ideas though.
        
             | qball wrote:
             | >Now imagine mouse clicks which are supposed to represent a
             | trigger.
             | 
             | Interestingly, some consoles already do this- the PS5 in
             | particular will vary the weight of its shoulder triggers to
             | match what you're doing on screen.
             | 
             | >we'd need super heavy switches for this to be a thing
             | 
             | It continuously surprises me that none of the Hall effect
             | keyboard makers (Wooting, Drunkdeer, and... I think
             | Steelseries and Corsair have some as well) don't offer
             | ultra-high-weight springs as at least an option for this
             | reason.
             | 
             | Interestingly, there's another keyboard manufacturer, Roli,
             | who makes a board that has some very interesting modes of
             | input (as they accept inputs of variable pressure, give you
             | the ability to slide smoothly between keys, and vary the
             | kind of input from each key by shaking your fingers). Of
             | course, that's not a computer keyboard, but it's still a
             | glimpse into the kinds of interesting input devices we
             | could make if only we bothered to do so.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | asoneth wrote:
         | > even further backward with the mechanical keyboard obsession
         | 
         | My impression has been that, along with 3D printing, the
         | mechanical keyboard obsession has has spurred a renaissance of
         | keyboard innovation in the last decade or so.
         | 
         | You can now buy keyboards or kits with ortholinear/columnar
         | keys, split hands, built-in displays, modes/layers, non-QWERTY
         | layouts, Hall effect keys, non-uniform resistance, and more.
         | 
         | I haven't seen this degree of keyboard innovation in a long
         | time. The best part is that they're an order of magnitude
         | cheaper than the wacky keyboards of the 1980s and 1990s, many
         | of which cost thousands of dollars. These days you can try
         | something innovative out for just a few hundred bucks and even
         | less if you're willing to solder it yourself.
        
       | navels wrote:
       | What a useless article, especially given the title. Here's all
       | they have to say about the layout:
       | 
       |  _There's some dispute over how and why Sholes and Glidden
       | arrived at the QWERTY layout. Some historians have argued that it
       | solved a jamming problem by spacing out the most common letters
       | in English; others, particularly more recent historians, hold
       | that it was designed specifically to help telegraphists avoid
       | common errors when transcribing Morse code. Regardless, after
       | around 30 test models, Sholes and Glidden settled on QWERTY--and
       | changed the world._
        
         | happytoexplain wrote:
         | I disagree. When I have a question, I am prepared for the
         | answer to have some amount of ambiguity, especially when it
         | comes to historical questions of the format "why is X", "how
         | did X originate", etc. If I were trying to choose a descriptive
         | name for an article, the question that it researches is a
         | reasonable choice. Combined then, I am happy with the article's
         | content given its title, and I am happy with the information it
         | delivered to me without my having to do my own research. I
         | don't feel that this is clickbait, nor do I feel qualified to
         | assert that their conclusion is wrong.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Yes, and like many I've heard the anti-jamming explanation
           | (contra the slow typists down one), so I actually find it
           | interesting that this is a somewhat unsettled question.
        
       | TheBlight wrote:
       | Came for the why but at least got the where as advertised.
        
       | yboris wrote:
       | One fun theory is that layout purposefully included letters for
       | the word "Typewriter" in the top row (even when fingers are on
       | the home row). This made it an easy selling point: "see how easy
       | it is to type the name of the object?"
        
         | AprilArcus wrote:
         | Yes! And the home row is mostly in disemvoweled alphabetical
         | order: "d_fgh_jkl", another hint at the layout's origins.
        
         | eimrine wrote:
         | The qwerty came from idiots.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-05 23:02 UTC)