I was going to go on a long rant about how this article and comments in this thread were wrong for saying or implying that the Model M mechanism, and indeed oth

I was going to go on a long rant about how this article and comments in this thread were wrong for saying or implying that the Model M mechanism, and indeed other high-quality not-Cherry-MX-derivative switches, were not mechanical. But no matter how I tried to clearly show and prove my position, what I typed out still felt like it was being just as incomplete and selective as I was ready to accuse others of being. Any definition of "mechanical" I could come up with that felt more accurate than "doesn't suck" or "Cherry MX or derivative", granted the holy status of Mechanical to the clearly inferior and undeserving rubber dome mechanism. Well, shit. So I did a little bit of reading to check my assumptions and found they were indeed wrong. I found a definition I like much better for its internal consistency, which differentiates between mechanical and capacitive[1]. What makes a mechanical switch mechanical is something physically moves to complete a circuit. And a capacitive mechanism changes the distance between two plates, causing a change in capacitance at that point in the keyboard matrix and thus the distribution of current throughout. And with those internally-consistent definitions that don't make my brain itch, it is correct to state or imply that the buckling spring or Topre design is not mechanical, because those are capacitive designs It does bug me some that "mechanical" has become a synonym for "doesn't suck to type on", but I shouldn't complain too loudly. That options other than than the cheapest-possible rubber-dome are now readily available is a good thing. 1. https://computer.howstuffworks.com/keyboard3.htm https://computer.howstuffworks.com/keyboard3.htm