Talk:Ergonomic keyboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Hardware (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Computer hardware task force.
 

I am not aware of any Topre ergonomic keyboards. The only Topre keyboards I am aware of are the Real Force and HHKB, which I would not classify as Ergonomic. Even if certain Real force keyboards do have "ergonomically" weighted keys, I am more inclined to believe that this is just a marketing strategy. I own one of these keyboards, and its "ergonomic" feats are greatly shadowed by a real ergonomic keyboard such as the Microsoft Natural 4000 Keyboard (which I also own). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.232.67.136 (talk) 17:49, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Bill Clinton became President in 1993, and hence could not have passed a bill in 1990 as claimed in section "Keyboard Types". Please fix! 95.208.106.107 (talk) 18:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


Why are there no mentions of Kinesis and Maltron keyboards? They are as ergonomic as a keyboard with keys can be. Mentioning Datahand products would also be nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.77.71.48 (talk) 16:19, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, TrulyErgonomic, http://www.trulyergonomic.com/ seems to fit the description very well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.77.71.48 (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Maltron added. Proword (talk) 07:41, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Considerations entry[edit]

I would suggest to rewrite that section. It is full of "may" / "may not" statements that are not backed by any data. A dubious writeup by Jess Johnson is used to back up some claims, even though that writeup doesn't quote any scientific.

Statements like "Ergonomic keyboards may take practice to get used to, and may permanently reduce typing speed." should not be there, as

  1. virtually any keyboard may take practice to get used to (try to use a different laptop),
  2. where is any data that supports typing speed reduction?

Same for the next statement about taking more space - it applies to any bigger keyboard, nothing to do with an ergonomic one (remember, there are full size keyboards with a set of numeric keys out there, aren't those big ones?).

I am using various 'ergonomic' keyboards for the past about 15 years. I am not connected to any keyboard manufacturer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.140.53.182 (talk) 00:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


"... forcing the mouse to be farther away ..." Some ergonomic keyboards (eg Maltron) have the trackball mounted in between the separate halves of the split keyboard, and they are the same size as those keyboards with no inbuilt trackball.

Proword (talk) 07:32, 16 August 2012 (UTC)