Ask Slashdot: Calculators With 1-2-3 Number Pads?

dotancohen writes "Although the telephone has the 1-2-3 key on the top row, most calculators and keyboards have 7-8-9 on the top row. Switching between the two destroys muscle- and spatial- memory. Do any slashdotters use a scientific calculator with 1-2-3 on the top row? I've already scraped and resoldered my Casio fx-82 calculator to have 1-2-3 on the top, and remapped the numpad in Kubuntu, but if there exist any calculators like this already on the market, I'd buy two."

Comments

Don't you have anything better to do?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously.

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[dotancohen]

Since the whole thread has gone into ridicule, let me defend myself (OP):
I use Anki to learn and memorize facts. When memorizing phone numbers and the like, I type them in so that Anki can check my answer. Then when I get to the phone I find that my muscle-memory is not only useless, it is actually a hindrance.

I have no problem operating either type of device, but the dichotomy puts up barriers where there could be bridges. When you need to remember a phone number, do you not mentally punch it into an imaginary phone? That spatial-memory device won't work if you sometimes type the number on a 1-2-3 keypad and other times on a 7-8-9 keypad.

I know that there are those of us who like to learn, and therefore use efficient memory techniques, and that there are those who ridicule those of us who learn. On a website for geeks, I had expected to find the former, not the latter.

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[gknoy]

You have an interesting question there. I don't consciously imagine punching in a phone number, but as I do it my muscle memory helps me know when I've done it wrong. (Thanks for the link to Anki, also.) However, I almost never need to type in phone numbers on a computer, and it sounds like the only reason you do is so that you can use the memory aid tools. Do you do a lot of work with calculators? The way I type in numbers on a phone is normally with my thumbs, rather than my fingers, so it's (for me) a very different mental task than keying in on a keyboard. I don't think I'd have much overlap between the memory of typing numbers on my phone versus typing them on a keyboard.

A sibling commenter mentioned that they are terrible at remembering phone numbers. I am too -- that's why I use a tool to remember them for me. Why do you find yourself caring whether you have it in your head versus in the phone's memory?

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[gatkinso]

I rarely call people on my calculator.

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[gcalvin]

Who memorizes phone numbers anymore? Twenty years ago, I probably knew 100 phone numbers, and now I know maybe 10. My phone knows the numbers of the people I call, not me.

The calculator layout is much more important in terms of spatial memory than the phone layout. Data entry operators and spreadsheet power users have been using the 10-key format for many decades. If you need to make a change, make it on the phone, not on the calculator.

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[Spudley]

There are good reasons for the two layouts. They're lost in the mist of time, but they are good reasons.

Calculators derive their layout from a strictly mathematical perspective, and is probably the most sensible layout to work with if you want to practice your muscle memory.

The phone layout is that way due to the mapping of letters to the digits, which was defined back in the days of rotary dial phones. Putting the 'ABC' key at the top of the keypad made it easier to read. In addition, the in old pulse-dial system, the zero digit actually represented ten, not zero, and on rotary dials it was placed at the end after nine. That also helped to make the chosen key layout for phones seem more logical at the time, both for the phone manufacturers and for users who were used to rotary dials.

One thing you certainly aren't going to achieve is to get calculator or phone manufacturers to change their layouts. Both layouts are highly ingrained in the collective consciousness of their users, and no-one is going to buy a product which deviates from the norm. You may as well try to persuade everyone to go and buy a Dvorak keyboard.

So the short answer to your plea is: no. It ain't gonna happen.

But I can see hope for you: Smart phones.

While you aren't going to get calculators to change, smart phones have touch screen interfaces. I don't see any reason at all why there couldn't be an app that displays the phone keypad in calculator-like style. It may be the opposite of what you're asking for, but it would achieve the consistency that you're looking for between the two.

The only problem then is if you ever have to use someone else's phone to make a call....

Re:Don't you have anything better to do?

[Dun Malg]

Either way, it's a wasted question. Years ago, when Ma Bell was the only phone company and they came out with touch-tone phones, they patented the arrangement with 1-2-3 at the top. So if you want to make a calculator that uses that, you'll have to pay a fee.

That's not true. There's no patent for the 1-2-3 keypad (nor was Bell/AT&T the only phone company in the US, but that's not relevant here). Calculators in the form of mechanical adding machines predated the DTMF keypad by decades. When Bell came up with the touch-tone system, they actually spent a lot of money researching whether it should be adding machine layout, or 1-2-3 from the top. As it turned out, even experienced ten-key operators were able to dial phone numbers faster on the 1-2-3 pad because everyone--- even tenkey operators--- approached the task of dialing a phone with their index finger alone, regardless of whether it was pushbuttons or dial, because they were already in the habit of doing so with dial phones. 1-2-3 keypads are faster to use when visually hunting and pecking with one finger. Given that no one was ever going to be doing rapid data entry on a phone, it made more sense to use top-to-bottom order, because the reverse order of tenkey exists only to make rapid multi-digit data entry faster (i.e. zero under the thumb, pinkie for enter, and most common digits under the fingers as per Benford's Law)

I don't know what the hell is wrong with the OP that his brain doesn't have room for two different keypad layouts.

I'd rather have a phone with 789 at the top...

[Anonymous Coward]

...given that I use keyboards more frequently than telephone number pads.

Ask Slahdot: Calculators with Rotary Dial?

[makubesu]

Although the telephone has a rotary dial for dialing numbers, most calculators and keyboards have button pads. Switching between the two destroys muscle- and spatial- memory, as well as ability to use commas. Do any slashdoters use a scientific calculator with a rotary dial on it? I've already scraped and resoldered my Casio fx-9000 calculator to have a rotor, and plugged a USB rotor phone into Gentoo, but if there exists any calculators like this already on the market, I'd buy three.

Nope.

[Aladrin]

You don't dial a phone with the same fingers you punch a calculator with. At least, not if you're a touch-typist. And if you aren't, why would you worry about this in the first place?

I learned the 10-key calculator in middle school and have never, ever had a problem with the fact that some keypads are upside-down from the standard 10-key layout.

This is seriously a non-issue in every regard.

Re:Really??

[rolfwind]

While I don't enjoy it, I switch between my own home dvorak and qwerty at clients multiple times a week. It look a lot to get used to... but I did with a lot of stumbles on the way. I can understand the frustration, I guess, but I'd just stick with the calculator numpad. Dialing phone numbers is largely on the way out, isn't it?

Re:Its the phone company that caused the problem

[Nethead]

Not true:
http://www.vcalc.net/Keyboard.htm

On a side note, back in my teens, I would make $5 for swapping the top and third rows of buttons on a standard WECO 25xx phone so that they matched an adding machine. The ladies in the office loved it.

OCD Much?

[thechemic]

So if it "destroys muscle- and spatial- memory" as you say, that means that everytime you wanted to use your phone you would have to sit down in a chair, find a horizontal flat surface to lay your phone on and then dial with 3 fingers? Or do you do it the other way around? Everytime you want to use a numeric keypad on a keyboard you have to pick up the keyboard off the desk and double-thumb the numbers in? I have GOT to see this in action!

Re:OCD Much?

[Chapter80]

I learned to tell time at a much younger age then I learned how to use a phone or a calculator. And so I learned that numbers are arranged in a circle, with 1 just to the right of the top most point, 3 straight across to the right, 6 at the bottom, and 9 to the left.

Clearly the correct layout for a numeric keypad should reflect this!

Using mod 10 (or, looking at the last digit), the correct layout to match clocks would look something like this:

X 2 X
9 X 3
X 6 X

with the extra key going on the bottom somewhere. Filling in the corner numbers, rounding down, it should look like this:

0 2 1
9 X 3
7 6 4

The middle of a clock often has a couple of circles on an axle - one for the hour hand and one for the minute hand, so it probably makes sense to put the number 8 in the middle (which also has two circles). This leaves 5 for the extra key, and a final configuration of:

0 2 1
9 8 3
7 6 4
- 5 -

Does anybody know where I can get calculators and phones that match this obviously superior design?

-D. Vorak