3 ms·

Yes, and that's why they're not ergonomic.

by fouric 6y ago

amelius 6y ago
Ok, I was wondering about the eye twitching.
Arainach 6y ago
That's an absurd statement. There are degrees of everything, and I have seen no research suggesting that staggering is as important as wrist angle/position - or even statistically relevant for that matter. Perfection is the enemy of good. A $40 staggered split layout like the Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 that's affordable to most users will do far more benefit than a $300 mechanical ortholinear device that most people will never have.
- fouric 6y ago
  Alright, my statement was too broad. Let me be more precise: "Ortholinearity is an important ergonomic feature that any keyboard that claims to be both "ultimate" and "ergonomic" absolutely must have." > I have seen no research suggesting that staggering is as important as wrist angle/position - or even statistically relevant for that matter That's because there's been very little, if any, research done in this area at all, so we'll have to rely on other things - namely, the combination of (1) the culturally well-known "Emacs pinkie" that results exclusively from lateral finger movement and (2) the facts that (a) RSI is much more likely to result from weak muscle motions and (b) lateral finger movements are weak muscle motions relative to medial finger movements. Together, these show that ortholinearity is better than staggered rows - so unless you have a scientific paper or higher-priority first-principles arguments that contradict this, then you're obligated to accept this conclusion. > Perfection is the enemy of good. This has nothing to do with "perfection". Ortholinearity is an extremely easy and extremely cheap keyboard design choice. There's absolutely no extra hardware you have to add to your design - all you do is move the keys around a tiny bit. It's strictly superior to staggered rows, and there's absolutely no reason to choose staggered rows unless you're concerned with scaring consumers away from the design. > A $40 staggered split layout like the Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 that's affordable to most users will do far more benefit than a $300 mechanical ortholinear device that most people will never have. Please leave your utilitarian value ethics out of this - this has nothing to do with "the most good" and everything to do with "whether the keyboard design is ergonomic or not". Finally, as stated above, ortholinearity is extremely inexpensive to add to a design, and could just as easily be grafted onto a cheap $40 keyboard as to an expensive build like this one. Pretending that the choice of ortholinearity vs. staggered rows has anything to do with cost is crazy.
  - Arainach 6y ago
    "Ergonomic" is not a boolean value. Is an ortholinear keyboard 1% more ergonomic than a staggered keyboard? 10%? Is there even one universal scale? For me, and for all of the people I know who have tried many keyboards, a split layout is a HUGE improvement over a standard layout. Ortholinear is far less obvious - the few people I know who have tried one (such as the Kinesis Advantage) have given it up and gone back. Anything different means that you have to switch layouts whenever you go to some other device - whether that means your laptop or someone else's machine or whatever. It requires relearning some bit of mental memory, and even if it can be done it's absolutely daunting to users and not something to be dismissed. If it's confusing, that is a risk to sales. I have a Moonlander on preorder and will see if it's better than my current staggered split keyboards, but to claim that staggered keyboards aren't ergonomic isn't just controversial - it's flat out wrong.
    - fouric 6y ago
      Please actually read my comment before responding to it - I relaxed my statement to not claim that "ergonomic" was a Boolean value, so I'm not sure why you're still acting as though I am holding that position. > even if it can be done It can very obviously be done, as indicated by other commenters in this thread stating that they did. > If it's confusing, that is a risk to sales. As I've already stated once before, I'm only discussing how ergonomic the keyboard has - I'm not making any claims about mass-market appeal, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Yes, and that's why they're not ergonomic.

by fouric 6y ago

Yes, and that's why they're not ergonomic.

amelius 6y ago

Ok, I was wondering about the eye twitching.

Arainach 6y ago

That's an absurd statement. There are degrees of everything, and I have seen no research suggesting that staggering is as important as wrist angle/position - or even statistically relevant for that matter. Perfection is the enemy of good. A $40 staggered split layout like the Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 that's affordable to most users will do far more benefit than a $300 mechanical ortholinear device that most people will never have.

fouric 6y ago
Alright, my statement was too broad. Let me be more precise: "Ortholinearity is an important ergonomic feature that any keyboard that claims to be both "ultimate" and "ergonomic" absolutely must have." > I have seen no research suggesting that staggering is as important as wrist angle/position - or even statistically relevant for that matter That's because there's been very little, if any, research done in this area at all, so we'll have to rely on other things - namely, the combination of (1) the culturally well-known "Emacs pinkie" that results exclusively from lateral finger movement and (2) the facts that (a) RSI is much more likely to result from weak muscle motions and (b) lateral finger movements are weak muscle motions relative to medial finger movements. Together, these show that ortholinearity is better than staggered rows - so unless you have a scientific paper or higher-priority first-principles arguments that contradict this, then you're obligated to accept this conclusion. > Perfection is the enemy of good. This has nothing to do with "perfection". Ortholinearity is an extremely easy and extremely cheap keyboard design choice. There's absolutely no extra hardware you have to add to your design - all you do is move the keys around a tiny bit. It's strictly superior to staggered rows, and there's absolutely no reason to choose staggered rows unless you're concerned with scaring consumers away from the design. > A $40 staggered split layout like the Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 that's affordable to most users will do far more benefit than a $300 mechanical ortholinear device that most people will never have. Please leave your utilitarian value ethics out of this - this has nothing to do with "the most good" and everything to do with "whether the keyboard design is ergonomic or not". Finally, as stated above, ortholinearity is extremely inexpensive to add to a design, and could just as easily be grafted onto a cheap $40 keyboard as to an expensive build like this one. Pretending that the choice of ortholinearity vs. staggered rows has anything to do with cost is crazy.
- Arainach 6y ago
  "Ergonomic" is not a boolean value. Is an ortholinear keyboard 1% more ergonomic than a staggered keyboard? 10%? Is there even one universal scale? For me, and for all of the people I know who have tried many keyboards, a split layout is a HUGE improvement over a standard layout. Ortholinear is far less obvious - the few people I know who have tried one (such as the Kinesis Advantage) have given it up and gone back. Anything different means that you have to switch layouts whenever you go to some other device - whether that means your laptop or someone else's machine or whatever. It requires relearning some bit of mental memory, and even if it can be done it's absolutely daunting to users and not something to be dismissed. If it's confusing, that is a risk to sales. I have a Moonlander on preorder and will see if it's better than my current staggered split keyboards, but to claim that staggered keyboards aren't ergonomic isn't just controversial - it's flat out wrong.
  - fouric 6y ago
    Please actually read my comment before responding to it - I relaxed my statement to not claim that "ergonomic" was a Boolean value, so I'm not sure why you're still acting as though I am holding that position. > even if it can be done It can very obviously be done, as indicated by other commenters in this thread stating that they did. > If it's confusing, that is a risk to sales. As I've already stated once before, I'm only discussing how ergonomic the keyboard has - I'm not making any claims about mass-market appeal, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]