3 ms·

This reminds me of how we used to type on pre-smart phone era phones. Eg https://phonesdata.com/files/models/Nokia-E51-807.jpg https://phonesdata.com/files/mod

This reminds me of how we used to type on pre-smart phone era phones. Eg https://phonesdata.com/files/models/Nokia-E51-807.jpg https://phonesdata.com/files/models/Nokia-E51-807.jpg The funny thing with those little handsets was, with a bit practice you could actually get very quick at typing. Quicker even than on QWERTY keyboards on touch screen phones (at least you had tactile buttons).

lelandfe 5y ago
Typically this was T9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T9_(predictive_text) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T9_(predictive_text) I still miss being able to compose messages in my pocket...
- laumars 5y ago
  I had no idea it was a named technology, though I probably shouldn’t have been surprised. Thanks for sharing that link.
- Kiro 5y ago
  Speed typers did not use T9. A friend of mine used to compete in texting.
  - least 5y ago
    This isn't surprising given that T9 is predictive and a typing contest would probably not coincide with your typical typing habits, though I am very skeptical that typing by pressing successive numbers on a number pad is faster than T9 for general texting purposes, at least after you've trained it. Perhaps I'm underestimating the speed of which these people could press buttons in succession, just it seems like depending on the word you're pressing significantly more buttons to type the same thing.
  - skohan 5y ago
    But was that because it was bad or because it was slow on those old microprocessors? T9 would fly on a modern smartphone chip
    - pjerem 5y ago
      Neither, T9 was pretty reliable and fast. That was the best method for most people. But if your goal was to be above the average speed, the probability, even low, of false prediction by the algorithm would make you lose « a lot » of time while with no T9 your error span is scoped to one character. Plus, for the people who typed without seeing the screen, you couldn’t take the risk to accidentally send the wrong word that would totally change the meaning of your message while an error on one character could be understood by your recipient. But for the average user who just wanted acceptable speed, reliability and used its phone while watching the screen, T9 was the best for them.
    - owlmirror 5y ago
      speed of the lookup was not a limiting factor and felt instantaneous. the problem was more short words for which there were too many suggestions and a bad or non existing ranking system and missing words in the dictionary. very similar to swipe keyboards but more precise and faster
pjerem 5y ago
Maybe it’s just nostalgia, but I also remember that typing on those keyboards was way more reliable. Even with or without T9. I probably typed a little slower than on a virtual keyboard but at a more predictable pace. On my iPhone, I totally rely on autocorrect and I lose a lot of time if it get a big word wrong. Typing on those phones required some practice to get muscle memory but it was accessible to barely anyone that had to use it. Even people who use computer keyboard all their life but are still watching they keycaps succeeded to type SMSs with the phone in their pockets. I’m sad that we are getting nothing that stands between the old closed feature phones and the mini computers we call smartphones.

lelandfe 5y ago

Typically this was T9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T9_(predictive_text) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T9_(predictive_text) I still miss being able to compose messages in my pocket...

laumars 5y ago
I had no idea it was a named technology, though I probably shouldn’t have been surprised. Thanks for sharing that link.
Kiro 5y ago
Speed typers did not use T9. A friend of mine used to compete in texting.
- least 5y ago
  This isn't surprising given that T9 is predictive and a typing contest would probably not coincide with your typical typing habits, though I am very skeptical that typing by pressing successive numbers on a number pad is faster than T9 for general texting purposes, at least after you've trained it. Perhaps I'm underestimating the speed of which these people could press buttons in succession, just it seems like depending on the word you're pressing significantly more buttons to type the same thing.
- skohan 5y ago
  But was that because it was bad or because it was slow on those old microprocessors? T9 would fly on a modern smartphone chip
  - pjerem 5y ago
    Neither, T9 was pretty reliable and fast. That was the best method for most people. But if your goal was to be above the average speed, the probability, even low, of false prediction by the algorithm would make you lose « a lot » of time while with no T9 your error span is scoped to one character. Plus, for the people who typed without seeing the screen, you couldn’t take the risk to accidentally send the wrong word that would totally change the meaning of your message while an error on one character could be understood by your recipient. But for the average user who just wanted acceptable speed, reliability and used its phone while watching the screen, T9 was the best for them.
  - owlmirror 5y ago
    speed of the lookup was not a limiting factor and felt instantaneous. the problem was more short words for which there were too many suggestions and a bad or non existing ranking system and missing words in the dictionary. very similar to swipe keyboards but more precise and faster

pjerem 5y ago

Maybe it’s just nostalgia, but I also remember that typing on those keyboards was way more reliable. Even with or without T9. I probably typed a little slower than on a virtual keyboard but at a more predictable pace. On my iPhone, I totally rely on autocorrect and I lose a lot of time if it get a big word wrong. Typing on those phones required some practice to get muscle memory but it was accessible to barely anyone that had to use it. Even people who use computer keyboard all their life but are still watching they keycaps succeeded to type SMSs with the phone in their pockets. I’m sad that we are getting nothing that stands between the old closed feature phones and the mini computers we call smartphones.