Re: Custom Keyboards

Oh, right, logistics of producing this

I think the answer is something big, so maybe a crude version could be built
out of wood and some cushioning with some sort of buttons detecting
movement. A proper version that moves very smoothly and has lots of easy
combinations would be quite expensive because it would need to move very
smoothly and precisely. It would be quite expensive for sure, but they may
be constructable in small quantities if things could be made to move along a
few standard paths, like lines, so that the parts wouldn't have to be
custom-produced. Because irregular, nonlinear movement in three dimensions
would be ideal, the design should allow for non-standard movements even
though any moving parts would have to move along standard paths.

There are force sensors that can measure force in three dimensions. Maybe
there could be an immobile bar with force sensors around some body part that
senses forces instead of moving. I'm also getting the crazy idea of using
something really creative like electromyography. It wouldn't work for all
the letters, but it may work for things like the shift key. You'd still need
to exert your toe (for example) muscles in order to press shift, but you
wouldn't need to keep the toe in the same place, and you could move the toe
up, right or left instead of down. This would allow you to rest the toe when
you're not using shift. Actually, it would require you to rest your toe.
Maybe this would also act as biofeedback and encourage users to relax more.

Thomas Levine!

On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Thomas Levine <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Even though it's proprietary, I have SkypeOut Unlimited (shocking) and can
> thus call everyone in the US for free.
>
> The main problem with all keyboards is the static loading that occurs when
> one isn't pressing the button. Ideally, keyboards should be designed such
> that you can relax your arm entirely when you're not pressing the buttons.
>
> I think the real answer is using something other than the fingers to type.
> Maybe the torso and joysticks would be enough. Unless you're reclining or
> lying down when you use the computer, (which applies to me, actually,) using
> the legs would be bad because it would make it harder for you to support
> your weight.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Felipe Barros Corrêa de Oliveira <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>   We can do it through a phone software like ooVoo.. With webcam it would
>> be
>> even better... I believe since the manufacturers of hi-technology are
>> starting to thing about extinguishing keyboards and mices, to think about
>> a
>> definitive solution between our way of thinking
>> (keyboard/ergnomics/usability addicteds) and the common sence way is
>> vital.
>> Who would care about it, besides of us? Companies are interested in money,
>> and they will do whatever they can to win more... if we believe our
>> beloved
>> hardwares must survive, we need to do this. To find a perfect solution for
>> the whole world, cheap, ergonomic, easy access... hard task? Maybe... but
>> inside human mind, the possibilities are endless. (im inspired hehehe)
>>
>> With hope,
>>
>> Felipe Barros
>>
>> 2008/6/4 Chuck Esterbrook <[email protected]<Chuck.Esterbrook%40gmail.com>
>> >:
>>
>>
>> > Hmmm, well I'm more interested in the logistics of getting the
>> > physical keyboard realized than what the specific design points are.
>> > I'm interested in the idea that each of us could have our own ideal
>> > design sitting on our desktop.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, if some of us could converge on the design that
>> > might reduce cost.
>> >
>> > Are there conferences for this sort of thing? (Custom
>> > hardware/manufacturing.)
>> >
>> > In any case, what voice options were you thinking of? I've done
>> > conference calls for the companies are telecommute/contract for and
>> > they've always mentioned that the calls were not cheap.
>> >
>> > -Chuck
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 7:17 PM, Thomas Levine <[email protected]<thomas.levine%40gmail.com>
>> <thomas.levine%40gmail.com>>
>> > wrote:
>> > > This is giving me an idea. It would be really cool if we all spent a
>> few
>> > > hours discussing our ideas for the perfect keyboard over some voice
>> > > protocal, probably telephone. We get into discussions like this on the
>> > > mailing list from time to time, but they'd get much farther if we
>> could
>> > > talk. I don't know what would come out of this, but it would probably
>> > lead
>> > > to the question you're asking.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Chuck Esterbrook
>> > > <[email protected] <Chuck.Esterbrook%40gmail.com><Chuck.Esterbrook%
>> 40gmail.com>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> > --- In [email protected]<altkeyboards%40yahoogroups.com><altkeyboards%
>> 40yahoogroups.com><altkeyboards%
>> > 40yahoogroups.com>,
>> > >
>> > >> "Giles Orr" <gilesorr@...> wrote:
>> > >> > My idea of the perfect keyboard would be the Model M15 (the Model M
>> > >> > with the ability to split) with straight keyboard rows and the
>> Dvorak
>> > >> > layout. And perhaps Kinesis scooping. I just said it was my idea of
>> > >> > the perfect keyboard - I didn't say it was likely.
>> > >>
>> > >> I've been meaning to post about custom keyboards for awhile now and
>> > >> Giles thoughts above are the perfect segue.
>> > >>
>> > >> Many of us have our own idea of the perfect keyboard. Given one's own
>> > >> specs, what would it take to get it made? Can such a task be
>> > >> outsourced to one company? How much would it cost? Is there a minimum
>> > >> volume? Where would one even start?
>> > >>
>> > >> I imagine the answers might vary as a function of the specs and yet
>> > >> there is probably much in common even between different designs.
>> > >>
>> > >> Any thoughts?
>> > >>
>> > >> -Chuck
>> > >> --
>> > >> Aging: The Disease, The Cure, The Implications
>> > >> June 27, 2008 at UCLA
>> > >> http://www.mfoundation.org/Aging2008/
>> > >> ::
>> > >> http://cobra-language.com/
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>  
>>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]