Command Classic: Difference between revisions

From IoWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here.
Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here.
== Design Goals ==
== Design Goals ==


Line 5: Line 8:
** Mac/Sun-style bottom row modifier layout
** Mac/Sun-style bottom row modifier layout
** Large Command and Option keys for people who use them often
** Large Command and Option keys for people who use them often
* Not minimalist
** Dedicated arrow keys
** Coincidentally smaller than 101/104 keyboards, but compactness itself is not a goal
* No IBM-style nav cluster
* No IBM-style nav cluster
** Arrow keys can go on the bottom row as on many Apple keyboards
** Arrow keys can go on the bottom row as on many Apple keyboards

Revision as of 16:24, 28 May 2020

Tsundoku's keyboard concept. Concept, goals, etc. here.


Design Goals

  • Not for Windows
    • Mac/Sun-style bottom row modifier layout
    • Large Command and Option keys for people who use them often
  • Not minimalist
    • Dedicated arrow keys
    • Coincidentally smaller than 101/104 keyboards, but compactness itself is not a goal
  • No IBM-style nav cluster
    • Arrow keys can go on the bottom row as on many Apple keyboards
    • Home/End/PageUp/PageDown on Fn layer of arrow keys
    • Don't need Insert
    • Forward Delete can go on tenkey (Clear on Macintosh keyboards)
  • No dedicated function keys
    • Can use Fn layer for number row
    • Anticipates an environment where these are rarely used and only in specialized circumstances (eg. Minecraft)
  • Has a tenkey
    • No Num Lock (no modes!). Always numbers

Problems with existing PCBs

  • No JIS Right Shift support
  • Layouts all referenced from AT101/Windows 104
    • 75%, 60%, etc... all expressed as reductions of AT101
    • No consideration for different combinations of elements. Tenkeyless? 75% 60%? What about a tenkey but no IBM nav cluster?