(Yet Another) Mobile Keypad

A reader wrote to us about Intel's newly unveiled mobile keypad, which, all things considered, doesn't look nearly as terrible as most mobile keypads. Still not exactly stirring, but not too bad either. Of course, there's getting it into production, licensing etc etc

Comments

Great idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

I haven't seen this before. It uses the dead space between keys for the alpha characters.

As long as it doesn't interfere with regular use it looks like it will work great.

Re:Great idea.

[DanoTime]

Checking the picture from the article; I know some marketing genius out there is looking at the keypad now and saying "Hey, there's still some little blue spaces we can fit more keys right here!"
I hope the keys are raised enough for my (fat) finger.

Re:Great idea.

[kaltkalt]

Yep, buttons with letters on them. How innovative. I wonder how many patents this "idea" has already received....

Re:Great idea.

[Desco]

Nope, still dumb.. How many of us QWERTY users shudder when we approach something that has a keyboard arranged ABCDEFG? Ugh! Not optimized in the slightest! (I know, neither is QWERTY, but atleast we're used to it!)

What I wonder is why no one's invested in finding a unique letter layout that's optimized for two-thumb typing... Kinda like the way the FITALY people developed that layout with stylus-tapping in mind, the keyboard could be arraged in four columns like the one in this article, and then arrange the letters so they're most optimized-- i.e. by analyzing letter-pairs in most english text, one finds out that many pairs are more popular than others, and the best solution would be something that keeps alternating between sides.

Re:Great idea.

[schtum]

From the article:
Words can be typed by pressing the raised keys, and numbers by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number.

If i'm reading that correctly, they solved the alpha problem rather elegantly but broke the numbers in the process. You have to push FOUR buttons SIMULTANEOUSLY to get a number out! Sounds like one step forward, two steps back. I think I'll pass.

Re:Great idea.

[Anonymous Coward]

The QWERTY layout is optimized though. It's optimized for typewriters to avoid the bars which strike the paper from being stuck together. How dare you call QWERTY unoptimized!!

Why the confounded close-ups?

[casio282]

Both pictures available in the article are too close-up to see the entire keypad...Here's a better pic:

http://www.futurebytes.ch/images/news/fastpad.jpg

Re:Why the confounded close-ups?

[InfiniteWisdom]

Ah now I know why.... in your picture the phenomenal ugliness of the keypad is much too obvious

Re:Why the confounded close-ups?

[arth1]

I don't know about you, but with my large sausages it would be very hard to use the PRIMARY functionality of the phone keyboard -- hitting the number keys.

Well, there is no way to determine the scale of the image, so if the phone is 12" tall, I might be able to use it...

A more reasonable design might be to use hat switches, which would give you even more keys in less space, without forcing people to put their fingers through pencil sharpeners.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Why the confounded close-ups?

[Oculus Habent]

I remember reading Levy's comments on it. When you press the number buttons, accidental FasTap presses are disregarded. I couldn't give you technical detail, however.

Re:Why the confounded close-ups?

[arth1]

I remember reading Levy's comments on it. When you press the number buttons, accidental FasTap presses are disregarded. I couldn't give you technical detail, however.

Based on the picture, I doubt I would be able to reach the number buttons with my big fingers.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Why the confounded close-ups?

[Anonymous Coward]

why does this look familiar - ahh... repeat story, we've seen it before.

A good mobile keyboard is . .

[Brahmastra]

. . . a dead mobile keyboard. Every mobile input device I've used until now is slow and sucks arse. A good speech based input device may help but you can't use that everywhere. It'll be like the annoying cellphone freaks who think we want to listen to their conversation in a restaurant.

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[Zakabog]

I never understood people who think talking on a cell phone in a restaurant is rude.

It'll be like the annoying cellphone freaks who think we want to listen to their conversation in a restaurant.

Oh now it all makes sense. I completely agree, I never want to listen to someone's conversation in a restaurant. I mean come on, it's time to study and you've got all this work to do, why the hell do people have to talk while you're at a restaurant! Those pricks should all be shot. Wait a restaurant is a what? A place to eat? Oh.

Generally while you're eating you like to discuss things with the people you're their with right? So what's wrong if I'm on my cell phone talking to someone? Not like you're sitting their with your friends all quiet, why is it that if someone's not physically in the restaurant they don't have the right to talk to people eating, and people eating don't have a right to talk to them. Sure you can't hear the other person talking but it's none of your damned buisiness what the other person is staying so butt out.

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[Anonymous Coward]

I never understood people who think talking on a cell phone in a restaurant is rude.

I've wondered about that myself. I think I find it rude because by and large, people having cell phone conversations tend to raise their voices, sometimes for good reasons of intelligibility and sometimes just because of habit.

On the other hand, people having face-to-face conversations can and usually do adjust their conversation to the ambient level. You can intrinsically speak more quietly f2f than on the phone since you can use visual cues as part of your communication.

So what's wrong if I'm on my cell phone talking to someone?

If you're aware of your physical surroundings and are speaking no louder than you would to a friend across the table, good on ya. OTOH, if you're shouting into your handset, please take it outside.

BTW, I feel the same way about people who have excessively loud f2f conversations the next table over -- I'd like to "butt out" as you so elegantly put it, but if they're yelling then I can't very well, now can I?

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[csimicah]

I agree. I think people who take this attitude are just angry because they can only eavesdrop on half the conversation.

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[demonbug]

It'll be like the annoying cellphone freaks who think we want to listen to their conversation in a restaurant.

What, as opposed to the annoying freaks not on cell phones who think we want to listen to their conversations? Using a cell phone in a restaurant is only rude to those you are sitting with, unless you speak very loudly into your phone. Its not like it is any different than talking to the people around you, as far as everyone else in the restaurant is concernced.

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[JanusFury]

Have you ever used the keyboard on the Danger HipTop (aka T-Mobile SideKick)? Obscenely bad phone design issues aside, it has a nice keyboard. I can type quite fast on it, and it requires almost no learning time because it's very close to a standard QWERTY layout. I'd venture to guess I get at least 30WPM on it.

If I was to buy another mobile device with internet/email/etc features, I would definitely look for one with a keyboard similar to the hiptop's. Nothing innovative, but it works great.

Re:A good mobile keyboard is . .

[Saeger]

I never understood people who think talking on a cell phone in a restaurant is rude.

Funny. I remember reading an article (linked from /.) that explained the real reason why people hate cellphone chat so much more than regular chat.

The conclusion was that one-sided conversations in public are much more distracting because of social conditioning that it's bad form to leave someone hanging. You shout one-way into the phone something like: "When are you going to get here?", and when no response is heard (even subconsciously) by those around you, the flow is broken and heads turn. It's annoying.

(sorry, couldn't find the article)

--

Sweet

[-Grover]

j4Ust W1h1a8t we al3l ne21ed!!!

Okay, obligitory funny out of the way, it actually might just work out. As far as I'm concerned the extra $2 bucks a month I spend on unlimited text messaging on my phone saves me a ton of money because I'm not using minutes. Anything to help facilitate me using it more, I'm all for.

Re:Sweet

[Anonymous Coward]

Try T-9 predictive text. On a good keypad, you can write as fast as you could on a keyboard.

Re:Sweet

[kingLatency]

That sounds nice. I get 500 in my plan, but can't get any more. For other plans, it's $3 for 500. Sounds like you've got a better deal. As for this keyboard, I think it might be good if you've got the right sized hands. Personally, I think my T9 Text Input is plenty fast. I'm not sure if this could go much faster.

Re:Sweet

[Banjonardo]

2 bucks? Seriously? From where?

(I'm actually interested.)

Re:Sweet

[-Grover]

It's actually an AT&T business plan I get. Now that I think of it, it might be $5, but the point remains the same.

Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but

[sixteenraisins]

I haven't used text on my phone enough for the text entry method (typing each number up to four times) to be a hassle.

What I DO use my phone for, however, is dialing numbers. And if I have to have to press FOUR buttons to enter ONE number, then this keyboard would create more problems than it would solve for me.

Just my two pence.

William

Re:Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but

[fuzzix]

The keypad looks to me to keep the numeric functions intact.
It does look a little cluttered, however, but I'd certainly like to try it.

Re:Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but

[mrtroy]

If you read the article...

"Words can be typed by pressing the raised keys, and numbers by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number. " So ya...that kind of sucks.

It would be much better I would think if they DID leave the numeric funtions intact.

Re:Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but

[b!arg]

I think the idea is that by pressing a number you are essentially pressing all four letters that surround that number at the same time and it interprets it as that number. That's how I see it it anyway. It does seem like a bit of a kludge no doubt, but I couldn't really say until I used it. It also seems to work under the assumption that everyone's fingers are the same size.

Re:Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but

[Lord_Dweomer]

What if my fingers are too fat to push the buttons you insensitive clod? Perhaps I'd better order my special dialing wand now.

Finally something useful

[My name isn't Tim]

This would be useful, I text message, often. And I don't like the "phones" with keyboards on them. They look so tacky.

Not Big and Not Clever...

[locarecords.com]

I think this is a diversion from where technology in user input design should be heading. I actually find it increasingly frustrating to get information into any kind of portable device using mini-keyboards. No matter how clever they are.

The future lies with Hand-writing recognition and good high resolution screens. We have used to pen for well over 2000 years and it is both comfortable, easy to understand and use and fits the requirements of being small and usable on the train/bus/airplane.

Yes it is possible to shrink a keyboard down to the size of a pin-head but our fingers are not getting any smaller...

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[Anonymous Coward]

The future lies with Hand-writing recognition and good high resolution screens.

The hell you say! My handwriting has always sucked, and sucks way more now that I use a keyboard 99% of the time (not using it, and losing it). No computer on earth will have the processing power necessary to decipher my chicken-scratch.

Give me better keyboards please.

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[john82]

Let's break this into two problems:

1) This input design is primarily for a phone handset. What instance do you think that it's a good idea to insist on two hands and a pen (one hand to hold the phone, one to write hieroglyphics) to enter data? There are those chuckleheads who are attempting to dial by searching through the contacts on their phone, whilst driving on the freeway in a 2 ton SUV. Whoops! I just dropped my pen. Now where did that sucker go?

2) What about those instances where we don't have two hands available or can't devote the concentration required to ensure that the handwriting recognition is working?

The future does NOT lie in hand-writing recognition for all applications.

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[vicviper]

I think this is a diversion from where technology in user input design should be heading. I actually find it increasingly frustrating to get information into any kind of portable device using mini-keyboards. No matter how clever they are. The future lies with Hand-writing recognition and good high resolution screens. We have used to pen for well over 2000 years and it is both comfortable, easy to understand and use and fits the requirements of being small and usable on the train/bus/airplane. Yes it is possible to shrink a keyboard down to the size of a pin-head but our fingers are not getting any smaller...

I prefer the mini keyboard on my Zaurus to it's handwriting recognition (or in fact, to the one that formerly came with my Palm.) My handwriting sucks, and I find it easier to type with my thumbs than to scratch out a letter at a time and hope that the software wants to be kind today. While the "pen" may have been in use for sometime longer than typewriters/keyboards, handwriting recognition software is comparably still in it's infancy, and IMHO not as reliable as a keyboard. I haven't used/played with any other PDAs besides the Zaurus (never wanted to :), so I'm not sure if other ones have the "pickboard" input option that it does. Essentially it's a keyboard on the lower portion of the screen that allows you to use the stylus to choose letters. If you don't like to use a mini keyboard, and don't like hand writing recognition, that may be the option for you.

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[Planesdragon]

I haven't used/played with any other PDAs besides the Zaurus (never wanted to :), so I'm not sure if other ones have the "pickboard" input option that it does. Essentially it's a keyboard on the lower portion of the screen that allows you to use the stylus to choose letters. If you don't like to use a mini keyboard, and don't like hand writing recognition, that may be the option for you.

YES!

That's a standard feature of Palm OS--Graffitti and the keyboard as input devices.

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[TopShelf]

Personally, I think voice recognition is the way to go for situations like this. Granted, there still remains a great deal of work to improve recognition and user interface, but in the long run "writers cramp" will be a thing of the past...

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. Just another gimmick. There's a proverb from some oriental culture that says 'there are those that will try to sell the same thing with an extra spurious (useless) addition on the merits of the spurious addition, and win the marketing war'

Rough translation, obviously.

Re:Not Big and Not Clever...

[shirai]

I have to respectfully disagree with this. While I agree handwriting has its place and can be quite fast, especially in PDAs, it is not a be all end all solution. Like anything else in technology, it has benefits and pitfalls. Here's where I see handwriting fitting in compared with pushbuttons:

1. Handwriting requires space: In objects with enough space, this is fine but on my mobile phone, I like things as small as possible. The exception to this might be phones with built in PDAs which might necessitate a larger size.
   
2. Handwriting requires time to start: With a keypad, especially one like that in the article, you can begin typing immediately. With a pen, you need to take it out, hold it properly in your writing hand, and have the object in a position that is easy to write in (probably the palm of your other hand with an appropriate grip) before you can start input. Note that this is not saying handwirting is bad, only that it has a higher startup time. If you are doing mostly short entries, this startup time can negate any benefits some people might have from faster handwriting input.
   
3. Losing the Stylus: I hate this and don't think I would tolerate it in a mobile phone. In a PDA, I feel a little differently to the cost/benefit ratio.
   

That said, a stylus does have benefits like a tap based user interface. For some, stylus input might be faster than a keypad.

Just because buttons have been around for a while, however, does not negate their usefulness.

And finally, can you imagine trying to input a guys name at a stop light?

What about us with big fingers?

[GuyinVA]

I already have a hard enough time with a regular key pad, now I have to deal with this too? The idea is good, but will not be usefull for me.

Re:What about us with big fingers?

[swordboy]

Obligatory Simpsons Reference

Re:What about us with big fingers?

[mrtroy]

You need a special dialing wand. *cough* Simpsons *cough*

Re:What about us with big fingers?

[Anonymous Coward]

You insensitive clod! I just have big hands. Just ask your mamma!

wep

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Yorks peally hre4t

Quite frankly...

[Soukyan]

keyboards are the next bit of technology that need to be brought into the 21st century. While they have come a long way, you'd think we'd have some more intuitive device to use by now. I think the concentration isn't in the right area with respect to keyboards. I'm thinking light sensor keyboard that could project on any smooth surface.

Re:Quite frankly...

[192939495969798999]

well, that exists already!
http://www.alpern.org/weblog/stories/200 3/01/09/pr ojectionKeyboards.html

Re:Quite frankly...

[Soukyan]

Excellent. That's exactly what I was thinking of, but perhaps still a bit large in terms of the hardware involved.

Re:Quite frankly...

[b!arg]

How about a keyboard that picks up your eye movements. No more repetitive stress injuries...well not for your wrist anyway...just your eyes. :) Actually I'm pretty sure they have this sort of thing for quadriplegics.

Re:Quite frankly...

[Anonymous Coward]

They're well known to be very hard to use, as you get no tactile feedback and you're banging your fingers on an unyielding surface all the time which knackers your joints.

Fat fingers

[gpinzone]

Most people have typos with regular keyboards. I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

Re:Fat fingers

[Anonymous Coward]

move to the country with GDP per capita lower than $1000/year, problems of your fat fingers will magically disappear.

Re:Fat fingers

[Anonym1ty]

I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

You didn't read the aritcle then... the object is to hit the four letter keys surrounding the number you want, not the number itself. --this in itself could lead to even more typos and frustration.

Re:Fat fingers

[gpinzone]

You didn't read my comment then.. I said it would be a problem if you WANTED to hit the number and instead hit the letter, which is raised up and surrounds each number.

Re:Fat fingers

[thaddjuice]

To a certain extent, things would be context sensitive on a phone. Dialing a phone number? Then only respond to number presses and ignore the letters. Texting? Ignore numbers except when a modifier is pressed (i.e. shift, control, alt on a full-size keyboard).

Re:Fat fingers

[mrtroy]

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in

waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.
The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm.
Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

However.....................

Lnog wrods are "eapslcileliy dilifufct"

Re:Fat fingers

[Realistic_Dragon]

And you didn't read the article or the follow up post.

There are no cirsumstances where you need to hit the number. To select a number, press the surrounding 4 letter keys at the same time instead.

Re:Fat fingers

[Anonymous Coward]

There are no number keys! From the article (which the grandparent pointed out to you):

and numbers [can be typed] by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number.

Re:Fat fingers

[tigersaw]

That is already the case on most mobile phones with standard keypads, as you know. You can't really do that with this one, because most of the letters are in gaps between two or more numbers, and are not tied to a particular number (i.e jkl5 on a std. pad).

Pressing the four surrounding letters to indicate which number you are selecting seems like the only way to accurately get number input.

Still, you could probably program the pad to let you get away with only three letters pressed. As long as they're in the same number space, there's no longer any doubt which number the user intends.

Re:Fat fingers

[Ugmo]

I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

This is just a wild guess but I think that this keypad depends on you "fat-fingering" it, meaning hitting more keys than you intended. I could imagine a keypad that takes into account the surrounding extra keys that are hit and averaging that into a center key. This is like a touch screen that localizes pressure in an area and translates that into a single point. If this keypad doesn't do that, how about someone putting one out that does? It would be cheaper than a real touch screen since the display would never change.

If this keypad works like I think it does, hitting one of the corner/letter keys outputs that letter, Hitting the center key and 2,3 or 4 letter keys simultaneously outputs the number key in the center. I am guessing that the center number key doesn't even depress, it could be just a picture. The average of the letter key gives the output. You fat finger the numbers when dialing, so you can be less careful in the most often used function and you are more precise when typing out a message with the text keys.

Re:Fat fingers

[poot_rootbeer]

I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

RTFA.

You're supposed to hit the letter keys when you're trying to type a number. That's how it works. If all four letter keys surrounding a number are pressed together, it registers as the number rather than the letters. In fact, I don't think the number 'buttons' even have any switches under them.

(Actually, I would hope that they register a number-press when any THREE letters are chorded -- that's enough to determine which number is intended, and makes it less important to distribute your finger pressure evenly across all four corners, which must be unnatural.)

Re:Fat fingers

[MoreDruid]

even hitting 1 would probably suffice... if I'm typing in a number I wouldn't be needing text input and vice-versa, well that's another point. Maybe 3rd press of a letter? eg: a, A, 1?

*slaps forehead*

[cybermace5]

Too obvious! This is a "why didn't I think of that five years ago" moment.

Mobile input is THE barrier to true interactive use of wireless data. I could see a keypad like this speeding up my mobile text input by at least four to five times, yet still non-clunky enough to fit in a flip-phone.

Re:*slaps forehead*

[watzinaneihm]

I had a Nokia 5510 .That allowed me to use both my thumbs to type.I can type at an average speed on a keyboard, and on the 5510 I can find the keys easily enough(its QWERTY). Even then, my friends with an ordinary keypad (with T9en autocomplete) could atleast keep up with me most of the time (we timed it a couple of times). Now this new Intel keypad has all the keys, but you can only use one thumb to type ,moreover Im sure I'll have to look at the keypad to type since I wont know where the keys are (sure they are alphabetical but my thumb will not know that). So I think this will actually cut my typing speed even compared to the ordinary T9en enabled keypads
Not good for the Phone , but great for PDAs

Re:*slaps forehead*

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually remember seeing this 5 years ago - good to see this one actually make it thru the machine thru to the market ...

Re:*slaps forehead*

[dfitzpat]

I'm surprised nobody has pointed out the Nokia 6800. QWERTY keyboard, backlit, yadda yadda yadda...

Re:*slaps forehead*

[texaport]

Mobile input is THE barrier to true interactive use of wireless data

Changing those pesky state laws to allow keyboards on the unused rear-view car mirrors would be a good first step as well.

See also...

[azzy]

The BBC covered this keypad in May last year and again in November .

Re:See also...

[ozbon]

I was sure Slashdot had covered it when it was first listed as well, but I can't find the link for it.

If only I could think of the right search phrases...

Re:See also...

[satterth]

To bad the BBC doesn't have a comment section so people can start typing 'DUPE!'

Nope

[stratjakt]

Get speech recognition, or improve handwriting recognition.

Scre any and all cheesy ass miniature keyboard thumb twiddling little clusterfuck pain in the ass monkey boards. They'll never come up with something truly usable.

And I hate those stupid thumbpads and twizzle sticks on laptops too. Put a damn trackball down in the lower right (fuck lefties!), you insensitive clods!

Re:Nope

[Anonymous Coward]

Rather than this, what we need is a system that represents several characters with one key-- one key, perhaps, might represent 'p, q, d, b' by flipping them around, and 'E, F, K' or 'Y, V, U, W', 'Q,O,D', etcetera so that they're easy to memorize. There are people who get 300~400 chars/min on cellphone input in Korea. Having one button represent character is idiotic.

Re:Nope

[ncc74656]

And I hate those stupid thumbpads and twizzle sticks on laptops too. Put a damn trackball down in the lower right

Trackballs suck...your thumb is usually nowhere near as accurate at positioning stuff as your fingers. (Why else would the only thing your thumb hits on a keyboard be the spacebar--the largest key?) Trackpads and TrackPoints aren't quite as easy to use as a mouse, but either is a big improvement over a trackball.

Re:Nope

[stratjakt]

Sez you. It just takes some practice, but a trackball is much more accurate and easy to use, IMO, than those crappy touchpads.

All those years playing centipede have honed my trackball skills beyond those of mere mortals.

BTW, there's no law saying trackballs must be operated with your thumb. Put the mouse buttons where the thumb would be while your first two fingers operate the trackball.

Re:Nope

[squiggleslash]

Speaking for myself, a trackpoint is a hell of a lot nicer than a mouse. It's right there where my fingers are, the mouse buttons are where my thumb is, and it's like having a huge mousepad when it comes to moving long distances. I pretty much eschew mice now where possible, using trackpoint keyboards.

Different people have different ways of working. I hope no one solution wins out, and manufacturers, where possible, try to make their systems modular enough to give people choices.

Mobile?

[Realistic_Dragon]

Pah, who needs all this new fangled rubbish, my Amstrad portable is more than compact enough for me, and as a bonus doubles as a great offensive weapon for use in riots or indeed small wars.

Hasn't that been out for a looong time?

[192939495969798999]

I saw one of those ages ago in San Diego... hasn't that existed for a while already?
Still, it is pretty neat looking. I'd really have to try one, because I can imagine a huge problem being the pressing of "K" at an odd angle might output the numbers 5,6,8,9 in some sequence, if K is simply programmed to be "press 5,6,8,9 at the same time", and the button just overlaps the sensors... that would suck!

Re:Hasn't that been out for a looong time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the problem is the opposite. To press 5 you have to hit FGJK at the same time.

Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Thinkit3]

Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[connsmythe96]

QWERTY is better because it is consistent. Alphabetic keyboards vary from device to device because the number of columns change. With a QWERTY you can always be sure of the basic layout (the letters at least, which are most important). But with alphabetic you're never sure what each device is going to look like. It's like relearning how to type every time you pick up a new device.

Maybe it is time for change, but definitely NOT to alphabetic.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[cybermace5]

Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.

You deserve a +5, Funny. What exactly is alphabetical order, if not a layout people have been afraid to change for a few thousand years?

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[mrtroy]

But QWERTY was designed to put commonly used letters far apart to prevent typewriters from sticking and such.

So this is "better" just because it is consistent?

I could hit my head against the wall every hour on the hour...but this isnt necessarily a great idea, even if it is consistent.

Alphabetic isnt all bad, im sure you could type the same speed on a normal keyboard if you were used to alphabetic. Perhaps even faster than a QWERTY since some common letters will be close together, thus making less finger reaches and quicker typing.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Anonymous Coward]

And why is alphabetical order any better? Maybe when typing abacab or def but english words are a jumble of letters. If you want to design a keyboard then do some frequency analysis of the English language and place letters together based on that. I think you will find that the letter E should be in the middle.

I agree that QWERTY is outdated but at least suggest something that is a better solution.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it is time for change, but definitely NOT to alphabetic.

Current mobile phone keyboards are alphabetic, so it wouldn't really be a change, would it?

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Malc]

When I looked at this, I thought it stupid that it didn't use QWERTY. In fact, it should use a layout similar to the keyboard of the region where it's being sold, and it should be changeable (either to change region or satisfy the technologically phobic who aren't used to a normal keyboard.)

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[grumbel]

So this is "better" just because it is consistent?

Yes, being consistent is a big plus. Beside that qwerty isn't that bad and especially its still superior to alphabetic layout.

Alphabetic isnt all bad

Alphabetic is bad, since it doesn't help you at all. You don't know where the rows break and so you have to manually search for the letters and since you end up searching you could use an optimized layout in the first place, which wouldn't result in slowing down newbie, but in increasing long time users speed.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[connsmythe96]

So this is "better" just because it is consistent?

Exactly. Consistency is better, even if the design isn't ideal. Alphabetic surely isn't designed for efficiency either, so your argument is flawed. Why replace one inefficient design with another, more inefficient, design? Just to "rebel"? You might be able to type just as fast with alphabetic eventually, but that's assuming that you're using the same device the whole time. All of that speed would be lost, though, as soon as you go to another device with a different number of columns. The whole layout changes and you have to relearn how to type again. And any commonly-used letters that are close together in an alphabetic keyboard are like that out of coincidence, not design. Just like QWERTY. That's not an argument for either design.

Like I said, if it's time for a change, then we should use a BETTER design. Not just any different design.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[connsmythe96]

Current mobile phones don't typically have keyboards at all. They use the number keys in a layout that has been used on regular phones for a long time. So that's beside the point. Once you start putting actual, separate, keyboards on them, though, then this argument comes up about which layout is best.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[ncc74656]

Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.

You deserve a +5, Funny. What exactly is alphabetical order, if not a layout people have been afraid to change for a few thousand years?

YHBT (presumably by one of those Dvorak freaks). YHL. HAND.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[cybermace5]

No, I think they were serious. Just didn't think too hard about which has been sticking around longer, QWERTY or the alphabet.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why not FITALY (aka JUMPX)?

I haven't personally tried this one yet but it looks like a good approach for mobile devices. Since it keeps movement between letters close to a minimum it's perfect for thumb or one-fingered or stylus input.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Think mass market and not the techno-gadget of the month.

Try fitting "QWERTY" on a mobile device. It would require a longer and skinnier pad, or in the case of that phone, you'd be making it shorter and wider.

The world doesn't need another typewriter keyboard crammed into a tiny device.

Believe it or not, fewer people have learned to type than you think, and not everyone bothers. For a device like this, I think it would be better, it's not as if there would be any easy way to standardize on any one key arrangement because the needs of and form factor of each device type are different.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[Anonymous Coward]

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

LOSER

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[connsmythe96]

That's the first valid argument I've heard, and I was waiting for someone to bring it up. And since most phones will have the same layout (3 columns), the inconsistency of alphabetic keyboards isn't as bad for mobile phones. It's still a problem with the alphabetic system in general, though.

Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY.

[good-n-nappy]

QWERTY is better because it is consistent.

Actually, this discussion is confusing two different metrics. One metric is the maximum speed limit of a given keyboard based on letter frequencies and Fitt's law. A second metric is the learning time needed to get close to that maximum speed.

If you are interested you can get some background from this paper, for example. The paper references previous work on a "metropolis" keyboard with hexagonal keys to improve key packing. Better key packing means maximum key sizes with minimal stylus/finger travel.

Even smaller keys?

[fruey]

What are these mobile designers on? Acid, probably, if they suddenly develop a random love of small things, maybe to them it looks "massive"?

Now, I love the T1 predictive typing thing. As long as you can spell more or less accurately then you can get very fast on that, and you still only need the letter keys. However, having seen proof from many people I tell about it who never switch it on because they don't "get it" or get frustrated... maybe it's not the way forward. Also, ppl cnt wrt abbrvs in thr texts w dicts...

I also liked the look of that system where letters sort of scrolled in front of you and you picked the one you wanted, automatically likely choices for the next letter were bigger and so on. Wasn't particularly intuitive though, even less so than T1 dictionary stuff.

But now, tiny keys, and not in the QWERTY pattern either? How is this helping? And you have to press multiple keys to get numbers, once the basis of all telephone dialling circuit I/O?

Just another gimmick. There's a proverb from some oriental culture that says 'there are those that will try to sell the same thing with an extra spurious (useless) addition on the merits of the spurious addition, and win the marketing war'

Rough translation, obviously.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[InfiniteWisdom]

the T1 predictive typing thing
The t9 predictive typing thing.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[fruey]

the T1 predictive typing thing
The t9 predictive typing thing.

Aie! Murphy's law strikes again... when criticising others, beware the mistakes you might make yourself!

Re:Even smaller keys?

[Anonymous Coward]

You, sir, have clearly never done acid.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[poot_rootbeer]

they suddenly develop a random love of small things, maybe to them it looks "massive"?

This is the same reason I prefer to date women with tiny hands.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[poot_rootbeer]

But now, tiny keys, and not in the QWERTY pattern either? How is this helping?

How would having it in the QWERTY pattern help anyone? You can't do ten-finger touch-typing on a cell phone, so there's no advantage for touch-typists. Hunt-and-peck typists are going to need time to locate each letter anyway, whether the layout is QWERTY or Dvorak or alphabetical or anything.

Text entry on small devices is an entirely different beast than text entry on a full-size keyboard, and I commend the designers for recognizing that. Whether the solution they've come up with is any good, I suppose time will tell.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[Lord_Dweomer]

" I also liked the look of that system where letters sort of scrolled in front of you and you picked the one you wanted, automatically likely choices for the next letter were bigger and so on. Wasn't particularly intuitive though, even less so than T1 dictionary stuff."

I remember reading somewhere about this and how in Japan, there are now teenage girls who use this on their cell phones who can now type faster than they can speak.....using their thumbs.

Re:Even smaller keys?

[n6mod]

You can't do ten-finger touch-typing on a cell phone, so there's no advantage for touch-typists.

Dead wrong. I have a Treo 180, and I'm reasonably fast with it. I'm a touch-typist (60+WPM uncorrected...and as a child of the word processor, my effective speed is much higher than my corrected speed.)

I use a Brady labeller at work that has the keys in Alpha order, and its a nightmare to use. Even though the keyboard on the Treo is too small to touch-type, at least I *know* where the keys are.

I dunno

[rde]

Maybe it's just because I've become so adept at using the traditional one, but I have my doubts about this one, for two main reasons...

1. At this stage I, and indeed the rest of the texting universe, know where 'R' is; just press 7 three times. I don't even need to look at the keypad any more. Just because I've to press it three times doesn't make it a chore. With use, it's easy. That may be true of the new keyboard, but more keys doesn't make it simpler. Which brings me to point two:

2. As I said, I don't need to look at the keyboard any more; that's because there are just four rows of three keys. With this one, if I want to text without looking I'd have to feel my way from one of the corners. That, or stop texting while I walk. That, or bump into a lot of lampposts. 4x7 is not simpler than 3x4.

And anyway, unless the protruding keys are huge (making the numbers difficult to use), punctuation is still going to have to be shifted. Unless, of course, UR 1 F THSE FKRS HO DNT UZ PNKTN.

Re:I dunno

[hattig]

And with T9 predictive text, R is just one press of 7, assuming you are writing a word.

I think that kids spelling must improve with predictive text though because of the use of dictionaries, although getting punctuation and numbers is annoyingly slow - a few more buttons on a keypad for ",", "!", "?" would be useful even with T9 - there would be still many fewer buttons than on this Intel keypad, or the DeltaII or alphabetic layouts.

And T9 is handily fast for a one handed, one finger/thumb typing system. Certainly fast enough for sending an "I am on the bus, see you at the pub in twenty minutes" text.

That intel keypad looks ugly, and thus it is dead in a mobile phone market where style rules supreme, even amongst older people (who don't send texts as much, and thus won't need this anyway).

Re:I dunno

[rde]

A lot of people I know use predictive text; a lot don't. I'm among the latter; I tried it briefly on my nokia, but after the constant cycling between 'on' and 'no' and similar sets of words, I decided I was better off without it. 'night' is still a pain in the arse to type, though.

I don't know about that 'ugly' thing; granted, many people are obsessed with frippery like polyphonic ring tones and ridiculous logos, but as far as I'm concerned, as long as a phone has bluetooth, a data port and a moderately decent ergnomic feel, I'll be happy with it. I suspect I'm far from alone in this regard (a few people have remarked on teh ugliness of my 6310i, but I don't think it looks bad).

Speaking of bluetooth: graffiti on a Tungsten is the best way of writing text messages. It may be gratuitous overuse of technology, but it beats Intel's 'change for change sake' attitude. IMO.

Re:I dunno

[hattig]

Graffiti is no use when one hand is full of shopping bags and you only have one hand free.

Also, trying it briefly is hardly giving it a chance - like most data input systems it takes a little time to get used to it. Compared to 777222224448 to get rabbit, 722248 is much much faster. I found it to be around 5 times faster at least than plain-old. When "on" and "off" are a # or two apart, it really is quick.

Oddly enough the requirements of my phone were: good reception, long battery life, small, cheap. Hence my Nokia 6100.

proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[*weasel]

why is it that with this generation's phones, I can record a simple clip to voice-activate dialing a particular number, but i can't enter a voice-activated dialing mode where i speak the numbers to the phone? (eg. "dial: 8, 6, 7, 5, 3, 0, 9" )

once you do that, we won't need tacticle buttons for no-look dialing; removing their last advantage over touch-pad dialing.

and once we're doing touch-pad interfaces - then we're free to do a -good- interface. such as tossing in a stylus and doing handwriting->text conversion a la tabletPC. (writing will always be faster/easier/more accessible than thumb tapping.)

come to think of it, writing phone numbers to dial/store them would completely remove the necessity to even emulate a traditional dialing pad. now we're talking convergence device...

Re:proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[Zakabog]

Umm do you understand how difficult it would be to have a phone that recognizes numbers from millions of different people's voices? It's easier for them to have a recording of your voice to compare with (how many different ways will you say "Dial Jim") besides can't you just make the recording for 9 dial the number 9? And have one for each number? And then just combine them all? I dunno, I never use any voice recognition type stuff, I really hate anything that doesn't take physical input because something can go wrong so much easier ("Dial gym", "Dialing Jim", "No you stupid phone! Dial gym!")

Re:proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[*weasel]

preprogrammed numbers are the way to go, certainly - but dialing a number you've never dialed before, or don't have stored for whatever reason, when you're not looking - is the last feature of a physical 'button' interface that touch pads cannot replicate/do better (because by definition they can't have raised buttons).

the current crop of touch-screen dialpads drive me insane because there's no telling what number you're pressing if you're not looking. your traditional phones have 12, easily distinguished buttons, normally with at least the '5' marked by a raised bump (just like 'F' and 'J' on your qwerty keyboard).

to do voiced number dialing, you would most certainly have to record your names for the digits, just as you record names for numbers now; programming 10 digits isn't going to take alot of time.

as for voice activated dialing working/not working - i've never had a mis-dial with my current phone. you might try to make sure the handset is in the same position when you're recording the name as when you're trying to call the number (Eg. next to ear on head), and you may also want to turn down the radio :)

Re:proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[csimicah]

why is it that with this generation's phones, I can record a simple clip to voice-activate dialing a particular number, but i can't enter a voice-activated dialing mode where i speak the numbers to the phone? (eg. "dial: 8, 6, 7, 5, 3, 0, 9" )

Newer Samsung phones let you dial like this. My brother's does it and it works just fine.

Re:proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[XPisthenewNT]

Writing is easier/faster unless you only want to use one hand. Most of the time that other hand is holding something: briefcase, bottle of water, railing, another hand (well, it could happen), etc. If the whole phone was pen shaped except for a large flat screen on the top (think icepick) and I could write into thin air that could work. I sold my palm because I could not use it while walking around and if I was sitting I'd rather write on real paper or whip out the laptop.

Re:proper no-look dialing == better interfaces

[edwdig]

Well, AT&T Wireless has a pretty nice voicedial feature. You can enter people's names and phone numbers into your address book through the internet. Then you tell the phone "call home" and it'll dial it. There's no need to prerecord the names, although they do give you that option for hard to pronounce names. As long as the name is pronounced phoentetically, then the voice dial works perfectly. Other people can pick up your phone and use it too.

It wouldn't surprise me if they have a mode where you can speak numbers for it to dial.

is it me or...

[segment]

Words can be typed by pressing the raised keys, and numbers by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number.

Are things getting so overboard that companies are now just reinventing a round wheel. What purpose would this otherwise serve. Sure it might make things easier, hell could even save you a second or two, but is it really necessary. Is it even worth writing an article over.

Sometimes I question where companies get some of these quirky ideas from, I for one do not use my phone for email nor the net, it's what laptops with wifi is made for, or palms, handsprings, etc.. I Just don't get what one would get out of this other than a quick right to brag about some new geek/hip toy they got only to see the price get slashed in a month, and a bazillion others with the same thing the following week.

Is it me or did someone lace the waters with dumbanium, moronium, or idioticum

Re:is it me or...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes I question where companies get some of these quirky ideas from,

Maybe from the multibillion dollar SMS market?

This is obsolete

[beef3k]

I've gotten used to the embedded dictionaries in mobile phones a long time ago, and once you do it's just as fast as this will be.

OK, maybe you can improve typing speed in your text messages a bit, but I think the odds are better that these extra keys will just interfere with the way myself and millions of others are used to typing messages on their cell phones.

What?

[LtMajZombie]

It looks like a Cell Phone Pad! I have a hard time driving and doing a Text Message... lol

They forgot one thing...

[darkscorp]

After taking another look at the keyboard, I have to point out the obvious design flaw... No QWERTY.
This is the standard we are all use to -- how can a keyboard be successful without it.

You're totally missing the point...

[WIAKywbfatw]

This isn't a keyboard for PDAs, it's a keyboard for mobile phones, hence the juxtaposition of alphabetical keys around a numeric keypad with the primary focus still on the numbers.

The whole purpose of this layout is to make texting (sending text messages via SMS) easier but the primary focus is still on dialling.

This isn't designed for PDA text entry. It's not even designed for PDA/phone convergence devices. It's designed for phones and phones only.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[b!arg]

I've always wondered about touch screen pads. Why can't you have a phone that is the same form factor but is essentially just a touch screen? And depending on what you want to do it shouws you a numberpad, keyboard of your choice or handwriting recognition.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[nullard]

I have one -- the Samsung i300. The interface sucks. Try checking your voicemail or using any phone menu system. Instead of feeling where the key is to erase your message, you have to take the damned phone off of your ear, look at the pad, and find the button. If someone would make an lcd that would allow the app designer to specify that certain areas should be raise (probably by air injection or magnetism), then this would be useful. Until then, its just a PITA.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[b!arg]

I see your point. Because I know how often I rely on tactile sense when I'm dialing my phone or trying to get to my voicemail while driving...errr...I mean when I'm pulled to the side of the road. The raised screen or whatever would have to be added for sure. An added feature would be voice interaction where you could just say "delete." I just worry about those people around you in a restaurant saying "delete" all night long. :) But it would be a good option while driving or whatnot. And that's obviously available as I know how I hate those help lines that tell you to speak into the phone instead of hitting a certain number on the dialpad. I feel like such an asshat when I'm in the middle of a quiet office and it sounds like I'm talking to myself.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've always wondered about touch screen pads. Why can't you have a phone that is the same form factor but is essentially just a touch screen? And depending on what you want to do it shouws you a numberpad, keyboard of your choice or handwriting recognition.

Tactile feedback makes using small keypads much easier.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[JVert]

Something like this would revolutionize keyboard interface.

Nobody better have a patent on this yet cause i'm gonna personally drive down to their house and kick them in the ass for not producing it yet. So when someone does get a patent on it, its gonna be your responsibility to block it proving prior art through this post.

But a magnetic pressure point... you wouldn't even need true touchscreen just a flexible lcd. The magnet array would sit behind the lcd normally closed. When a button is avalable the magnets are energized and when you push down you get a reassuring click as the contacts physically connect (like how 2 opposite polarities will stick as long as they are sidways enough). Now you have enough pressure to run your fingers across the raised area. AND the magnetic field would be therapy to cure RSI.

Ok, i'm ready to make it, does anyone know where I can get some flexible lcd?

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[5KVGhost]

Onscreen keypads/keyboards don't work well for that sort of thing. Too easy to enter keys by accident, and too difficult to use without looking at the keypad. Small touch screens really only work well for things that use a stylus, like handwriting recognition, and that requires two hands.

Re:You're totally missing the point...

[nullard]

I actually started to write up a patent for this, but I'm not sure how to implement it. I may make it my research subject for grad school.

Bah...

[realmolo]

I can buy a faster AMD keypad for less money. Of course, VIA hasn't released a decent set of drivers for it yet.

What about the chorded data egg input device?

[GGardner]

I've seen several references in the past to a chorded key device (scroll down) roughly the shape of an egg, which fits in your fist. It uses chords (multiple keys down at the same time), so that with just four or five keys in each hand, you can input a whole keyboards worth.

As usual with things like this (and dvorak keyboards), it takes a while to learn, but once you do, you can type pretty fast. Also, it would take up a lot less room, and be much less intrusive than even the smallest "standard" keyboard.

Re:What about the chorded data egg input device?

[nullard]

I've been trying to get one of Englebart's chorded keyboards (BAT), but he insists on charging way too much money for a keyboard that uses a really outdated interface and would require an adapter. If he wants to see his ideas (other than the mouse) accepted, the price of entry should be lowered. A $5 qwerty keyboard has more moving parts and probably costs more to build than a BAT. If I could buy a BAt for even $20 I would do it in a heartbeat.

Re:What about the chorded data egg input device?

[nullard]

I hate replying to myself, but here's some more info on BATs: google
They all seem to cost $200. It's just silly to pay that much for a keyboard. Particularly one that requires two weeks of training, and won't even talk to my computer w/out having to hack the drivers.

i've seen this pic before...

[line.at.infinity]

>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/250 4091.stm </a>

If I were looking for a new cell phone, I would be worried that I might accidentally press an alphabet when I meant to press a number.

Re:i've seen this pic before...

[line.at.infinity]

(sorry for the hiccup in the previous post..)

A May 2002 BBC article was posted on slashdot before. I wonder if it's the same tech or they're using the same graphics for a different tech. Anyhoo, also found another cell-keypad-type article at BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2504091.stm

If I were looking for a new cell phone, I would be worried that I might accidentally press an alphabet when I meant to press a number.

Re:i've seen this pic before...

[Anonymous Coward]

How? There are no number buttons. You press "Numbers" by depressing the four raised alphabetic buttons that surround each number graphic.

Better than predictive text?

[jez_f]

I may be being a bit of a luddite over this but predictive text works well once you get used to it. If Symbian/Nokia/Whovever could just get it sorted so it remembered what words you used the most it would be even better.
This just seems really fiddly and you will have to spend the first couple of months working out where all the keys are. It may be OK for some people but can't see myself using it.

New stage in human evolution.

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

As devices and their corisponding input devices get smaller and smaller, people with smaller fingers will be at a decided advantage. Eventually, employers will measure your finger size during the application process. And eventually small fingers will become attractive to members of the opposite sex.

Surely a better investment would be...

[Channard]

in voice recognition. Some mobiles recognize certain spoken words - as evidenced by the amusing sight of a colleague yelling 'home!' into his phone when trying to ring his wife. But what if one day we could have a phone that could actually recognize what people say and translate it into text? And then perhaps translate the text back into synthesised speech at the other end. Some day, maybe this could be done real time so that people could use these 'mobiles' to communicate instantaneously. Er.. hang on a minute...

Re:Surely a better investment would be...

[Tacomanator]

Forget voice recognition and tiny little keyboards, where is my direct brain link?! Then we can start talking about instantaneous.

Re:Surely a better investment would be...

[Nohbdy001]

But what if one day we could have a phone that could actually recognize what people say and translate it into text? And then perhaps translate the text back into synthesised speech at the other end.

My phone does this already. Except the synthesized speech is in the same voice as the sender of the message! I think it's called voice mail or something.

Missing key

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's NumLock?

Re:Missing key

[lanswitch]

And the Any Key?

Re:Missing key

[doppleganger871]

And the panic button?

Great....

[Stonent1]

Now I can type on my phone but intel has made it impossible to dial!

Predictive typing sucks

[scarolan]

I'm sorry but predictive typing sucks, unless every word you plan to ever use is in the dictionary. As soon as you have to type someone's name it's a total pain in the ass to figure out how to disable the predictive text so you get a name instead of the closest dictionary word.

I don't like the tiny buttons on the phone either, but perhaps these things aren't really ideal for email and web surfing anyway!

There's a funny Dilbert cartoon where he invents this ring that has a built-in web browser. It lets you read ONE ascii character at a time. I wish I could find it, it was quite funny.

Re:Predictive typing sucks

[Anonymous Coward]

As soon as you have to type someone's name it's a total pain in the ass to figure out how to disable the predictive text so you get a name instead of the closest dictionary word.

Press "#" until the "__abc" in the upper left of the screen turns to "ABC". Not exactly rocket science.

Re:Predictive typing sucks

[fruey]

unless every word you plan to ever use is in the dictionary

That's pretty funny, actually... apart from Proper Names (like you said) which at least some of are available in the predictive algorithm, everything else is OK, unless you are trying to abbreviate. And as Anon Coward said, it's a simple switch between modes in every phone I've seen.

Re:Predictive typing sucks

[hattig]

Most mobile phones have an expandable dictionary these days, so you can add the names you need to add or use often... hence I now have the names of my friends' cats in mine ...

and going from predictive [...Abc] to manual [Abc] is as simple as pressing the # key a couple of times.

And the "cup", "bus" problem, use the * key to switch between multiple definitions in the dictionary where they clash.

Keyboard Innovation is a Good Thing (TM)

[kb3edk]

Thank god at least someone still cares about trying to come up with a better interface for a cell phone keypad. I was beginning to get worried that everything was going to converge on the standard, kludgey keypad ("Hit 7 three times for R")... while it looks like some people in this thread have gotten used to it, I can't stand it. Think about it... the interface is 40 years old (first touch tone telephone, 1963) and was never intended for text entry. The engineered inefficiency and its overwhelming rate of adoption is a creepy repeat of how QWERTY still dominates over Dvorak.

(Not that QWERTY is all bad, it still is much faster than a numeric keypad. I can type 15 words per minute on my Treo using just two thumbs... Of course, 15 years of Nintendo served as excellent training :-)

Re:Keyboard Innovation is a Good Thing (TM)

[mrtroy]

Fifteen *tick tock tick* words *tick tock tick* per *tick tock tick* minute *tick tock tick* would *tick tock tick* drive *tick tock tick* me *tick tock tick* crazy!

No fast typing and no beer makes Homer something something...and i dont mind if i do!

Re:Keyboard Innovation is a Good Thing (TM)

[hattig]

> I was beginning to get worried that everything was going to converge on
> the standard, kludgey keypad ("Hit 7 three times for R")...

Err, that died in 2000 or so. You have enabled predictive text on your phone, haven't you?

I can get 15 wpm on a T9 keypad ...

T9 word for me

[Powercntrl]

Like most other modern cell phones, my Sanyo 6400 has a T9 predictive input mode... Once you get used to it, it's really not so bad.

I really don't think the extra keys are worth it considering how much they'll get in the way, so this is not a feature I'd want my next cell phone to have. Besides, if I need to use a real keyboard, I can just plug the phone into my laptop and use the phone as a wireless Internet connection.

I have seen some phones that have fold-up keyboards they can "dock" with... That seems like a much better idea and it would be nice if more phones supported it. I think adding more buttons is really just another example of cell phone designers forgetting the primary use of the device is a phone. I don't need a full alpha numeric keypad to dial phone numbers.

Looks great

[triptolemeus]

for Asian languages as well. And since most of the new things concerned to mobility come from Asia, I guess the designers have some extra work to do here.

Nokia solves the problem in software

[__aanekd3853]

The Fastap keypad does away with the need to press keys several times to scroll through the letters associated with each number.

There is a (partial) software solution. Try sending SMS messages from a Nokia 6210 or 6310 phone: there is this nifty dictionary that "knows" which word you are typing. As a result, you practically never need to press a key more than once to get the right letter.

This leaves inputting new telephone numbers, addresses, calendar entries, etc. Those usually contain names and other words that are not parts of the dictionary, so you do need to press the keys as many times as needed. This happens relatively infrequently (how often do you input a new phone number?) and is not a problem.

The hardware solution seems clunky to me. I don't SMS as often as European kids, but I do use the feature, and typing is fast and convenient.

i'd like to see this with dvorak

[joda]

what about keymap. there is nothing as frustrating as typing in an a-z fashion. the ti-83 calculator pops up in mind ...
how bout releasing it with the options of using a more efficient keymap

Why press four keys for a numeral?!

[hoggoth]

> Numbers are typed by pressing the four letter keys surrounding each numeral.

Umm... am I missing something obvious or is this incredibly stupid?
Why press FOUR keys to get a numeral instead of pressing THE NUMBER KEY ITSELF?!

Again?

[waldoj]

We talked about this on May 18, 2002. The BBC had pretty much the same article back then, only it was marginally more informative.

-Waldo Jaquith

Emergency!

[Baby_with_a_nailgun]

Quick, dial KLOP KLOP ABEF !

Re:Emergency!

[Baby_with_a_nailgun]

Quick, dial KLOP KLOP ABEF !

Of course, I meant KLOP ABEF ABEF

Re:Emergency!

[Koyaanisqatsi]

hum, that would be KLOP ABEF ABEF :)

Re:Emergency!

[Mrs. Neutron]

Alright, the typo is funny, but you bring up a serious point: This looks like a nice alternative to the standard cell phone keypad (granted, the qwerty and/or dvorak versions look more appealing to me) but what does it do for actually making phone calls? I know that you have numbers stored in the address book, but everyone has to dial an unstored number every so often, and it looks like dialing a number on this gimmick will be as much a headache (or more so) than text messaging on the current phone layout is.

Jenny?

[dlosey]

...(eg. "dial: 8, 6, 7, 5, 3, 0, 9" )

How did you get my girlfriend's phone number?

Re:Jenny?

[*weasel]

I got her number from the wall.

'For a good time call'

I thought I'd seen this before

[orangepeel]

Turns out it was here on Slashdot more than a year ago.

Here is the article at the BBC site, and here's the Slashdot story. Cut and paste for some quick karma! ;-)

Kill off c, q, and x while you're at it?

[Thinkit3]

Just practicalities here. It's easier to change something that not everyone uses (yes, there are those who have not used a computer), and is much newer.

I think they mean this

[SEGV]

I think they mean "ONE of the FOUR" buttons around the letter. Or another way of saying it: "four numbers surround each letter."

Re:I think they mean this

[sixteenraisins]

From the article:

Words can be typed by pressing the raised keys, and numbers by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number.

If they ARE mistaken and mean "press ONE OF the four keys..." then you don't know which "number" corresponds to with letter, since one letter can be in the midst of up to four numbers. Unless you press the letter button more than once...which leads you back to Square One.

William

Re:I think they mean this

[dmstevens]

It seems obvious to me that pushing a finger into the recessed number surrounded by four letter buttons would depress the four letters all at once.

And even if you only got three actuated, that would be enough to identify the number you were trying to key.

What we really need....

[Anonymous Coward]

Are key pads that strap onto your wrist/fingers that you can type with like your on a normal keyboard and the senors and some really clever software turns those into key movements.

Now blut tooth enable the device and use a miniture display mounted in your glasses and finally no more notebooks in class I can just sit and tap my finger on the desk to type. Of course it would proably have to be calabrated on a normal keyboard but so what?

Even better design it so that your hands could be anywhere and it would be just like typing... so as I walk down the street and twitch my fingers I'm writing a paper for class... Also if they weren't huge and cumbersom I'd wear mine all the time. I'd be the geek on the go!

not exactly stirring, but not too bad either

[Hubert_Shrump]

well, i'm glad this got posted.

i'd hate to miss out on this ambiguously interesting news.

button mashing

[pavon]

There have been several incorrect statements about how the input will work. Here's the facts that I found from a manufacturer of this device:

1) If you have small fingers you can press the inset button to get a number.
2) If you have large fingers you can press the four buttons surrounding the number.

But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button. This mistake could happen if you were trying to hit the letter or the number, so there is no real smarts that could be added to the device to make it "forgiving" to these types of mistakes. So, without using the device I will still have concerns about how easy it is to mash the wrong button combinations.

Also, full blown handwritting or speach recognition not panaceas, when you concider that it is not uncommon for a people to make mistakes reading their own handwritting, or listening to other people.

Although it would be interesting if hand printing and diction started being taught in school again to help with computer interfaces, I don't think that they will ever become the primary input method for a computer. Typing is faster than handwriting, and more accurate. And having cubicles full of people talking to computers all day would be too annoying (then again I've never worked in a call center :).

For cell phones, eatoni's WordWise is the best thing I have seen yet. It is a predictive method. And let me tell you I hate most predictive input methods, and usually end up switching back to multi-tap. But with wordwise you use a shift key to provide a little more info, which lets it do an incredably good job at guessing. The site has a bunch of research that shows how the number of keystrokes is smaller than both predictive and multitap methods. Plus, unlike predictive methods where your next keypress can dependant on what the current guess is, WordWise is non-modal, allowing your actions to become habituated, and thus even faster (ie you can touch type on it).

For PDA's Quick Writing is very cool. It requires you to learn the input method, just like you have to learn how to type, but is it damn fast. Faster than grafitti, and often even faster than handwriting. Think of it as cursive on amphetamines :)

- jackson

Re:button mashing

[R.Caley]

But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button.

I think it would be hard to hit an alpha and a digit -- the alphas are raised, so youur finger would stop before triggering the digit.

Personally I like the Ericson keypad+slide varient on multi-tap. 3 characters per key are available because you have a double shift, slider up or slider down.

Re:button mashing

[dude123]

But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button. This mistake could happen if you were trying to hit the letter or the number, so there is no real smarts that could be added to the device to make it "forgiving" to these types of mistakes. So, without using the device I will still have concerns about how easy it is to mash the wrong button combinations.

The letters are raised and the numbers are recessed, so presumably it would be hard to accidently press a number plus a letter if you were trying to hit just the letter. So I think that any time you hit a number, all letter keys should be ignored. It should assume that you were going for the number, and ignore any letter keys that you also hit by accident.

Re:button mashing

[pavon]

I thinking along the lines of having you finger mostly over the digit button, but off center so you to would accidently bump the alpha button. I don't think this would be hard to to.

The other possiblility - aiming for an alpha and sliding and hitting a digit would be less likely, depending on how "grippy" the buttons were.

In general this keypad seems to be overkill for a cellphone, but not good enough for a PDA.

Re:button mashing

[otis wildflower]

Or, you can just get a dialling wand...

Re:button mashing

[William Tanksley]

WordWise looks nice indeed. I also like MessageEase (I've only used it on my Palm, but it looks like it'd be really nice on a cell phone as well), which is based on sliding. In short, your 9 keys are assigned to the nine most common letters, and slides from one key to another are assigned to less common letters.

Nice and quick, and non-predictive, so words don't change while you're typing them. Oh, and a HUGE number of possible characters, so you can program using it :-), or create macros.

-Billy

Re:button mashing

[pavon]

I just spent some time looking at MessageEase, and agree that it looks very interesting, especially the fact that it can work on both keypad and stylus input devices. Out of curiosity I did an off-the-cuff analysis.

MessageEase (on a keypad) requires a double tap 70% of the time and two taps about 30% of the time. Wordwise requires a single tap about 50% of the time and a shift-tap about 50% of the time. Since one usually keeps a finger on the shift key when using WordWise, the shift-tap would take about as long as a double-tap. A single tap naturally takes half the time that two taps do. So letting 'T' be the time for a single tap, and 'D' be the time for a double tap we have

MessageEase = 30*2*T + 70*D
WordWise = 50*T + 50*D
or
MessageEase = WordWise + 10*T + 20*D

So I would guess that WordWise would be about 25% faster than MessageEase, which matches the claims on the respective websites of MessageEase = 29 wpm, Wordwise = 35-40 wpm.

In addition there were a few things I did not like about the demo Wordwise Keypad implementation they had on their site. Mainly that it is highly modal. It has a button to toggle between dictionary and non-dictionary mode. I think dictionary mode is unnecessary myself, so it is comparable to the insert key on a normal keyboard - since you never use it, it would cause problems only when accidentally hit, and then the user would be confused because the keypad was functioning differently. It also has a toggle between the numeric and alphabetic input. I can see this one biting people all the time, as they would rarely remember to exit alphabetic mode after typing a name, and would then go to dial a telephone number, and get letters. Also, double-taping the backspace key deletes an entire word. This is very bad, as it require conscious effort on the part of the user to wait between taps when needing to delete more than one letter. This is a prime example of an interface in which (uncontrollable) habituation hurts the user rather than helping them. Fortunately, I did not see any of these problems in the stylus version :)

A numerical comparison to QuickWriting is harder. Like MessageEase, it has 9 sectors. You draw a letter by starting in the middle, moving the stylus out into one sector, and then renter the middle from another sector. (It's easier to explain with pictures :) The nice thing about it is that you never have to pick up the pen between letters, but instead each letter is a loop, which flow nicely together and common words become fluid gestures. It's hard to say which of these would require more pen movement, since MessageEase has most of the movement between letters, while QuickWriting has all the movement in the production of the letters. They both share the good feature that you can look at the letter-map as you are learning, as opposed to grafitti, where you have to memorize all the glyphs before you can be productive. One potential concern I had was once you learn MessageEase, how much do you have to keep your eyes on stylus, rather than the text it is generating. I know that with QuickWriting you really don't have to look at the stylus at all, once you get used to it. What has been your experience with this?

I definitely want to check this out more. It looks to me that MessageEase is slower than both QuickWriting and WordWise, but not by much, and has the added advantage of working with both finger and stylus input.

-jackson

Re:button mashing

[William Tanksley]

Good analysis, although I was surprised at first by it (having used MessageEase only on a Palm, I didn't realise the extent to which it would have to rely upon double-taps in a hardkey implementation).

My experience would tend to cause me to agree with your analysis in general and your statement about having to keep your eyes on the writing pad (although if there were tactile cues, such as hard buttons, that wouldn't be the case). However, my experience with QuickWriting has been very limited; I found that its initial learning curve was just too steep. Perhaps I need to revisit its website (do they have a good Palm version now?).

Checking -- no, their Palm version is still not the best for learning. It would help if they made an onscreen version, for people who just want to try it out without having to print out an overlay (keep in mind that most Palms won't work with their inserts, since they're for obsolete models).

ANYHOW...

Thanks for the pointers. I like WordWise.

-Billy

Why not copy steno devices?

[NobleSavage]

I think the solution to the mobile keyboard problem would be for everyone to learn stenography -- like court reporters use. The key boards on the stenography devices use a minimal key set. This would be perfect for moble devices. Check the the key pad lay out. Not only is the key board layout greatly simplifiet, but a court reporters can kick the the ass of the best typest on the plannet using a standard key board.

Ick.

[Kaki Nix Sain]

Why did they put the keys in alphabetical order. Bad, bad, bad.

Would have been better to pick this layout

Re:Ick.

[Dwedit]

Hmmm... I've typed on a TI83 for a while, and the A-Z layout might be more comfy than the qwerty layout.

Re:Ick.

[DarkSarin]

ACk!
why use a qwerty based layout? QWERTY was designed to slow typists down, since old typewriters couldn't keep up with ultra-fast typists. Sure the concept of pc keyboarding helping is nice (technically this is called priming, borrowed from pouring water down a pump to start it going), but priming effects only go so far, and are frequently cancelled out by other cognitive and linguistic factors (such as letter frequency in any given set of words).

The layout you show in your link is interesting, but hardly the best imagineable. The real comparison would be to a dvorak layout, or something similar.

I imagine a fairly simple test of this--change only the layout and give the sorry things to 500 different people. You could either do this as a repeated measures expirement (where each subject gets both designs, with half getting one design first, and the other half getting the second design first), or as a independent measures (where everyone only gets one of the layouts).

Either design is valid, but shows slightly different things. Either way a simple statistical test would show you which layout was better, with your dependent variable being the number of words "typed" per minute, using a fairly lengthy set word set.

This is the kind of process real usability folks (frequently applied (human factors) psychologists) use. Until I see the hard data, I reserve judgement, but I don't know that I would predict one over the other just based on priming.

Re:Ick.

[shepd]

>QWERTY was designed to slow typists down, since old typewriters couldn't keep up with ultra-fast typists.

That's actually just a joke, not fact.

Some light reading.

The keyboard arrangement was considered important enough to be included on Sholes' patent granted in 1878 (see drawing), some years after the machine was into production. QWERTY's effect, by reducing those annoying clashes, was to speed up typing rather than slow it down.

Which really only make sense... The Straight Dope on this.

Furthermore, because hey, someone will bring it up, there are no quality studies that show the superiority of Dvorak layouts over QWERTY. :-)

Re:Ick.

[Kaki Nix Sain]

Look, if they want to find the optimal layout, great, sure, whatever (I doubt it would even need that many keys then). I'll be a bit annoyed when learning it, but I can, of course, see how that is nice, and I'm even the type to go through the hassle.

But, what I'm saying is that alphabetical order is worse than basing the layout on qwerty. It is a new layout that I would have to train my motion-control centers on and it isn't even a good one to make it worth it. If they aren't going to go for the super optimal layout, it is better to use one that people already have some skill with.

Plus, basing it on qwerty allows people other than the main user to pick it up and quickly use it well. I don't know about you, but loaning my phone to someone isn't all that uncommon.

Re:Ick.

[toddestan]

I don't know about most people, but I don't like using a keyboard layout that was designed only to keep typewriters from jamming.

To me Dvorak just makes sense. Put the most commonly used keys on the homerow, instead things like g, j, k and ;. Vowels on one side, on the homerow. Constanants on the other. Contrary to what one of those articles says, Dvorak is designed to keep alternating from the left to right hand - which should obvious to anyone who looks at the layout.

Also, it seems that many of the people who knock Dvorak haven't used it much, or not at all. I make less errors. Dvorak does have it's gremlins (my two gripes mainly have to do with the placement of the y and f keys, and I don't know why Dvorak placed m and w next to each other either), but much better than Qwerty. Also, my hands feel much less tired after a day of typing. Whenever I use Qwerty now, it feels like my hands spend all their time dancing all over the place instead of hitting the keys. But YMMV.

As for the studies, how about something like this?
http://www.visi.com/~pmk/evolved.html

Or go here and do your own comparisions:
http://www.acm.vt.edu/~jmaxwell/dvo rak/comparePage .html

Re:Ick.

[shepd]

>Contrary to what one of those articles says, Dvorak is designed to keep alternating from the left to right hand - which should obvious to anyone who looks at the layout.

I can neither confirm nor deny that which I have not experienced, nor has particularly solid evidence one way or another.

In that case, if it's working for you, great. :-) Otherwise, you take a gamble, you lose some you win some.

Re:Ick.

[Doppler00]

I totally disagree with this:
"2. we don't have to practice or learn anything."

If you are not willing to spend 10 minutes learning a new input method that will end up saving you HOURS in the long run, then why does the layout matter at all? You might as well give the customer random letters on the phone if they are not going to be using it often enough for speed to matter.

One handed dvorak might translate well to a phone somehow, or even a type of cording keyboard and a combination of word completion would be superior to what they have now.

QWERTY keyboard

[JaCKeL 1.0]

I know someone might steal this idea but, anyway, I want to help the development. Why not keep this great concept and by rotating the phone right, we can have a QWERTY type keyboard instead of the ABCD type proposed by the prototype. You just have to add a little sensor able to rotate de display in the direction the phone is rotated and now IM will sell like hot bread.

Why don't they just?

[yotto]

I have no problem with the '4 type' rule, but they could make it even easier.

You could even work on it to mix common and uncommon letters, putting the common ones first and the uncommon ones 2nd, and the damn right rare ones last.

Like so: (Taken from 'etaoinshrdlu' and just tossed the rest of the letters in there)

1 2 3
edm tlp auq

4 5 6
obv icw nfx

7 8 9
sgy hjz rk.

# 0 *
... ... ...

The periods signify 'common symbols' that I don't really care to think about. Enter, backspace, and space seem good ideas for #, 0, and *'s main character, with a mode where that's all they are. Anyway, I've given this too much though for how late in the post it's going to end up.

Re:Why don't they just?

[yotto]

Grrrrr, ecode rips spaces, and I don't preview. You get the point.

Re:Why don't they just?

[puz]

And if we adopt the Hawaiian language, we only need 12 alphabet keys.

Voice Recognition

[serutan]

All I can think of when I look at gizmos like this is that all this tinkering will become obsolete when voice recognition gets to a usable state. Maybe that's still a few years off, but personally I can wait for it.

obligatory quote

[awing0]

The fingers you have used to dial are too fat. To obtain a special dialing wand, please mash the keypad with your palm now.

Original Slashdot article on this technology

[dude123]

Here's the original Slashdot article from last year. It sounded like a brilliant idea to me at the time, I was wondering if they were getting anywhere...

hey mods! just because you dont get the joke...

[*weasel]

my post was just the lyrics from 'Jenny (8675309)' by tommy twotone.

i made a vague reference, dlosey demonstrated that they got the in-joke, i demonstrated my appreciation.

you don't have to mod it down just because you don't get the joke. it's not my fault i've got 'excellent' karma.

Re:hey mods! just because you dont get the joke...

[Anonymous Coward]

Now the joke is on you, haha, you got modded down twice for the same stupid mistake.

If you aren't trying to be a big-headed, opinionated prick you have to post anon. Mods don't do humor.

You are ALL missing the point

[Anonymous Coward]

You can not ever have a good interface on something the size of a palm pilot or mobile phone. Fingers are not the answer. We can solve the output problem by projecting onto the retina so that the screen becomes magnified to usable dimensions and we can solve the input problem by having small arrays of flexible electrodes implanted in our cortex. What is the hold up people. Do we think the market wont accept this level of intrusion/body-modification cos if so just take a look around at all the tattoos, body-peircing and scarification. Look at the fact that people are quite happy to come to your house and then answer their mobile phone. People are desperate to have communications technology invade their lives so they don't feel quite so alone.

Lets get a couple of basic popular apps to market with an intimate interface which actually has a future then release an SDK so that the rest of us can start customising ourselves.

For fox sake - why are we arguing about exactly what degree of crap a mobile keyboard is. All current mobile devices are disappointing in the extreme. Time to move on!

BTW I am only anonymous because my password hasn't come through yet. I'll take you all on :) username: mofag

dialling wand

[otis wildflower]

ObSimpsons

How do they get in the way?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are NO NUMBER BUTTONS. Numbers are selected by depressing the four raised alphabetic buttons that surround each number graphic.

If your finger stabs at a number "key", it will press down on the four buttons around it, effectively "chording" that number. If you're typing Alphabetic, just press the individual alpha buttons. It couldn't be any simpler.

Chording Keyboard

[Matimus]

I think it would be nice if a good chording keyboard standard caught on. It would be a lot easier to make a smaller keyboard if it only had five buttons.

OSR - Obligatory Simpsons Reference

[altek]

"The fingers you have used to dial, are too fat. To obtain a special dialing wand, please mash the keypad with your palm, now." -- Ma Bell Operator

Public Record

[Anonymous Coward]

Bell Canada's outsourcing of inept customer services has led to the adding to the coffers of it's competitors. A simple resolution which should have taken under 3 minutes was extended to 1 1/2 hrs. An inability to talk to a real Bell employee leads me to wonder if the call center is receiving a greater income from one of it's competators.

Hell of a business strategy and something to keep in mind before considering outsourcing.

further improvement?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why wouldn't they just put the letters diagonally across the # button, would help a lot when trying to type the letter "C" and hit the "B".....

I need a job....

Not impossible to dial...

[Anonymous Coward]

eight six seven five three zero nine

Now that wasn't that hard, was it? (Can we put these on all the telemarketers' phones?)

All touch screen + Optional buttonpad

[henele]

Why can't you have a phone that is the same form factor but is essentially just a touch screen?

If you've got the money or plan you can...

The Sony Ericsson P800...

Smaller and smarter.

[danielsfca2]

[Intel Boss Paul Ottelini] said that Intel had to adapt as smaller, smarter gadgets become popular with consumers.

Quite an astute observation. Intel had better adapt soon, since their current specialty is big, dumb things (such as the clock-speed on the Pentium 4).

T-9

[Anonymous Coward]

For those who have trouble typing on any kind of ten key pad: try T-9 predictive text. It is already available on most phones capable of text messaging. In a short time you can learn to T-9 as fast as you can type on a conventional QWERTY keyboard.

"Scrunched" QWERTY looks good to me

[poopie]

I just recently started doing email on my Palm PDA, and while I'm darn good at Graffiti, writing an email in graffiti gets tiring quickly and I'm looking for a thumbboard.

So... when I saw the phone layout above, It immediately made sense, and I'm sure I could type twice as fast as with the alphabetical layout.

Probably the biggest hurdle to the adoption of this layout is the general perception that John Q. Public is a moron. Seriously, though, I bet that there are a lot of cell phone makers that would GREATLY fear that using a modified QWERTY layout would confuse too many people, while ABCD is understood by everyone and so the speed and efficiency is secondary.

I've noticed that within the last few years, most of the department store bridal registry kiosks have switched from an abcdef layout to QWERTY. I assume that they finally gained confidence that this layout was more familiar and easier to use.

Let's hope the phone companies do some usability studies with the 'WIRED' crowd who will be the early adopters and actually try to do email on these phones instead of pandering to people who don't know how to type.

Predictive Text

[Anonymous Coward]

The topic may have come up before but what keypad can beat predictive text in speed an accuracy?

hmmm....

[Mrs. Neutron]

Let me guess... you are either a hunt-and-peck typist, or you're used to alternative keyboard configurations like Dvorak or the Twiddler... therefore, qwerty is too much strangness to assimilate.

No more orgasms

[CemeteryWall]

I use a Stowaway Portable Keyboard from Think Outside with my Palm. It's fantastic for taking notes - nicer to use than my usual keyboards. Lovely key action and it unfolds like a device from "The Fifth Element". And when I fold it up, the final click is as close as I get to an orgasm these days.

It's a bit fragile for someone as clumsy as me, but when I broke my first one, I rushed out for a replacement. I don't think I'd bother to carry the Palm if I didn't have it.

Less letters is the ultimate solution

[hayriye]

There are too many letters in western alphabets. If we'll be able to design an alphabet with less letters, then making a keyboard for phones would be easier.

I hereby propose a 9 letter alphabet (letters after : is the coverage)

w: v, y, f
e: i
r: p
s: z,
t: q, d, b
a: o, u
h: g, j, l
n: m
k: x, c