Show Posts
1
General Discussion / The Zaurus Replacement (perhaps)
« on: May 08, 2007, 10:51:50 pm »
I have to confess that I'm overstating the case. Exaggerating. The Z keyboard is not quite so bad as to be a joke. Maybe just a wry witticism.
But that is the way I feel when frustrated with it. And of course, that tells you as much about my own shotcomings and inflexibility as it does about the keyboard.
It's interesting to discover that I'm not the only one who finds the Zaurus keyboard less than lovable, and equally interesting to see that it works very well for some. It's possible that there's some variation from one unit to the next: maybe my keyboard has a "softer" feel that someone else's, or something like that. But I think it's more likely that the difference in satisfaction level is more a matter of expectation and adaptability.
First of all, I'm not a fan of thumb typing. I use it when absolutely necessary, but I much prefer to have the Z on a surface that allows me to type with two hands. So it's usefulness as a thumb board is not a selling point for me.
The typing style I prefer is to use two fingers from each hand. This worked great with the HP, but does not work -- for me -- on the Zaurus. And either I'm too old to be willing to learn an alternate technique or I just haven't found one that works for me.
Comparing the two keyboards, I find the Zaurus (C1000) is actually slightly wider than the equivalent portion of the HP 200LX (ignoring the HP's numeric keypad) and the Z keys are slightly larger. But the HP leaves a little more space between adjacent keys on the same row and almost twice as much space between adjacent rows. I think that's one reason why my error rate was lower with the HP: I was much less likely to hit the wrong key.
I don't have a way to objectively measure key travel, but my guess is that the HP keys travel twice as far as the Z's, with more resistance to pressure and a very solid feeling of connection at the bottom of the stroke. I've been surprised that some have praised the Z keyboard for good feedback; I find it very inadequate in that regard. And the Z keyboard doesn't just feel mushy, it also suffers from contact bounce, often producing unwanted double letters. Maybe I have a defective keyboard? Naah, I think it's just operator error. But again, these are errors I was much less likely to make with the HP.
There you have it. That's why I'm the keyboard curmudgeon of the group. I consider the Z keyboard nearly adequate, at best. And I agree that makes it superior to all the current competition. But I know a better keyboard is possible, because I've used one.
My question for those who like the Z keyboard as it is: do you not see any room for improvement, especially in the areas I've described?
But that is the way I feel when frustrated with it. And of course, that tells you as much about my own shotcomings and inflexibility as it does about the keyboard.
It's interesting to discover that I'm not the only one who finds the Zaurus keyboard less than lovable, and equally interesting to see that it works very well for some. It's possible that there's some variation from one unit to the next: maybe my keyboard has a "softer" feel that someone else's, or something like that. But I think it's more likely that the difference in satisfaction level is more a matter of expectation and adaptability.
First of all, I'm not a fan of thumb typing. I use it when absolutely necessary, but I much prefer to have the Z on a surface that allows me to type with two hands. So it's usefulness as a thumb board is not a selling point for me.
The typing style I prefer is to use two fingers from each hand. This worked great with the HP, but does not work -- for me -- on the Zaurus. And either I'm too old to be willing to learn an alternate technique or I just haven't found one that works for me.
Comparing the two keyboards, I find the Zaurus (C1000) is actually slightly wider than the equivalent portion of the HP 200LX (ignoring the HP's numeric keypad) and the Z keys are slightly larger. But the HP leaves a little more space between adjacent keys on the same row and almost twice as much space between adjacent rows. I think that's one reason why my error rate was lower with the HP: I was much less likely to hit the wrong key.
I don't have a way to objectively measure key travel, but my guess is that the HP keys travel twice as far as the Z's, with more resistance to pressure and a very solid feeling of connection at the bottom of the stroke. I've been surprised that some have praised the Z keyboard for good feedback; I find it very inadequate in that regard. And the Z keyboard doesn't just feel mushy, it also suffers from contact bounce, often producing unwanted double letters. Maybe I have a defective keyboard? Naah, I think it's just operator error. But again, these are errors I was much less likely to make with the HP.
There you have it. That's why I'm the keyboard curmudgeon of the group. I consider the Z keyboard nearly adequate, at best. And I agree that makes it superior to all the current competition. But I know a better keyboard is possible, because I've used one.
My question for those who like the Z keyboard as it is: do you not see any room for improvement, especially in the areas I've described?