WizardStan makes a keyboard

It is a very bad idea because you shift focus for new users, and you tie the two thumbs at extreme ends for the maximum possible duration. It is the least effective way.
You don't think that having to press Fn and then reach all the way across with the left hand might be even a little more ineffective?
Also , and . isnt expected at the left.
Neither is " on a US international keyboard, and yet that's where you put it on yours. Don't be a hypocrit, you know as well as I that tradeoffs need to be made and sometimes that means doing things that aren't immediately obvious but ultimately are for the best.
I guess what i should have said is that " is closer to the ascender-height than the baseline.
Just like basically every keyboard that has been proposed. The exact placement of the label isn't really relevant and talking about it is nothing more than a distraction from the intent: I didn't place it there intentionally, all I did was enter a " into the space and the keyboard layout site made the placement; if it needs to be higher to be more clear then that'll be part of ED's final tweaks and will be a part of everyone's layouts, yours included.
Sure, but of the ways considered, non-fn slalom is as bad as it gets.

I put " on 2 because its there on a german keyboard. I dont mean to come off as all-knowing, i just want to share all the insight i have aquired by doing it for a long time.

Then you can get up to speed with all the discoveries made.

My number row is a mix-up of the biggest layouts, shift only to type language, and one dead-deactric per key. And also the combo from column-row ctrl+alt+5 6 7 to type dead-key accent aigu retroflex/circumflex and grave. Those being some of the most used ones, and what the french has on number row.

The layout-editor can be a pain.
Last edited by a moderator:
Or a place to hang his keys upon arriving home.
That would be this
I like how it looks.  It isn't really a key board, but pretty close, and cool.

I really don't want to complain or critisize but how many "Keyboad" threads you guys wanna make until a final one is choosen? :-||""
One for each serious proposal, a single reference thread for all proposals which links back to the discussion threads, a general purpose "throw ideas around" one, an unofficial poll (because polls are fun), and eventually an official poll which will help ED make the final decision. Occasionally when someone gets a really good idea or needs some specific information that may warrant its own thread to keep it separate from the rest of the discussion. Basically I'm saying I don't think there needs to be a limit on keyboard threads as long as they all serve their purpose. Cross and off-topic discussion is the only problem with these keyboard threads, and often leads to having multiple threads spawn for the same topic.
Pretty much what I was going to say.   Now, if only people would stop with all the off-topic discussions about things like boards on which to hang keys in the keyboard threads...

I know many people are sick of the keyboard threads, but the keyboard is one of the most important parts of the Pyra.  The more people working on it, and the more layouts that are created after considering real use, the better the chances that we will get something that works very well for most users.

Putting dot and comma at one extreme end and space in the other means "slalom

 typing". Going from one side to the other for oft-used combinations.

It is a very bad idea because you shift focus for new users, and you tie the two thumbs at extreme ends for the maximum possible duration. It is the least effective way.

Also , and . isnt expected at the left.
I fully agree that it would be nice to have those close to where they are expected on a US keyboard.  In the long term I don't think it will be a huge problem, just an inconvenience when switching between the Pyra and a real keyboard.  By having them on opposite ends of the keyboard it might turn out to be more efficient since you are saving time and movement of the same thumb, regardless of how close you have punctuation to the next character.  You can move both thumbs to where they will next be used, so the only delay between , and space is the user waiting to push with the right thumb so that they get ", " instead of " ,".  New users are going to need to adapt either way.  I do prefer keys close to their typical location, but those ones may not be so bad.

I don't know why the formatting of that quote got trashed.

I put " on 2 because its there on a german keyboard.
It is also there on other keyboards afaik, but most of the layouts seem based on something closer to a US style keyboard than a German one.  Since that is the case, should the shifted number row not function as it would on a US keyboard?  We can continue this discussion in your thread if we need to, but I have mentioned this specific key before.
Why would switching to a different thumb be more efficient? Its not like there is an amount of comma space, or dot space shift to press, its a sequence.

The left thumb wont be used at extreme left, yet thats where you are tying it up for when the next thing is going to happen.

Placing sequences close together is what makes keyboards more efficient. Adapting to being able to press comma at one side of space and dot at the other means more efficiency.

Because then you dont have to lift your finger to do so.


 " is supposed to be on the typewriter part of the keyboard in US international layout, yet it cant be. Because then you arent free to trade away those keys, nor does it make sense there when its brackets only.

Nor are there enough keys.

It could have been, but what could have been is only balanced when you go all the way. Losing anything when you want to go whole-hog, means that point is gone, so its all or nothing.

UK layout " is back on 2 for example.


About all standard layouts have something that isnt used a whole lot, within limitations i think it makes sense to get the most use out of it, rather than familiarity of lazy placement, for less than people.
Last edited by a moderator:
It would be more efficient for the reasons I gave.  For me it is far easier/quicker to type with 2 thumbs (even better with multiple fingers) than just 1 thumb. With 2 thumb presses on opposite thumbs on opposite ends of the keyboard both keys can be pressed at nearly the same time, but additionally as soon as , is pressed that thumb can get to the next key it might press as the space is being pressed, just as with typing anything else.

That brings up another interesting thing: if using both thumbs is not more efficient why go for a keyboard that can be typed with them (or multiple finger, when on a table/desk)?  when I thumb type both fingers are flying around the keyboard anyway, so I don't really see how forcing . and , to be in a location that doesn't work well on a particular layout will make things better.

As for "tying up" the left thumb, that is only the case if the next character is on the left...but it won't be.  In typed communication the next character after . or , is almost always space.  As soon as the punctuation is out of the way, the left thumb is going for the next thing it needs, and is not slowing things down.  In the character combination ". I" with you have three characters with the same thumb.  This is not efficient.  

On a REAL keyboard having all characters under the fingers is where efficiency comes from.  QWERTY was designed to prevent that by having your fingers traveling all the time, and you are massively slowed down by typing multiple different characters in sequence with the same finger (and your little type arms might get tangled, which is why this is to be avoided on a typewriter), and the same is true with thumbs.  We only have 2 thumbs doing most of the work, so it is actually better to alternate key presses with alternating sides.  I don't know why you would think otherwise.

I have read your reason for having . and , near space many times before.  That isn't really why I like them where you have them.  I like them near space on the Pyra because they are close to where I expect them.  I don't think having them there helps for efficiency, but I also don't feel there is a huge loss in efficiency.  The same for having them across the keyboard.  I just tried typing "gummy" and "lament" repeatedly to see which one works better for me.  You should try it yourself, and keep in mind that "gummy" is shorter and has a double m.  To me lament feels more "right" since both thumbs are helping out (I didn't have a third hand free with which to use a stop watch and see which was actually quicker).  That's just me, and I may be wrong.  It may be less efficient, but it feels like my thumbs are in the right place quicker. 

So...WizardStan, I like your layout.  I don't remember if it is one of my favorites, but keep . and , where they are if it works better for what you are doing.
The reasons you gave only took into consideration the difference in time of a small change, (pushing either comma or dot with one thumb, and doing the next in the sequence with other thumb in a far away location vs doing it with the same thumb when its close) and didnt at all touch on what makes it so inefficient.

You are saying its two thumbs over one, when that isnt the case. You are not typing an amount or buttons in the combo, you are typing the combo as a sequence.

Using both thumbs is splitting up what one thumb can do in a naturally following sequence to do it with two, which also ties the other thumb at the worst possible place.

You cant pause time, if both are comparativly fast, you wont have extra time to move the left thumb away from worst position.

Either you are fast at pressing comma space, or you have tought yourself to press comma space fast. One is just better for all, and familiar, the other takes skill.

If you are saying the actual from comma and dot to something else is as close to instant as possible, that means you pause time at the difference between the two, lets say its the same.

The time you have to react to get left thumb away from worst position when its typing comma or dot, is worse than the same time you have to move left thumb being at away from ideal position if its doing neither.

Consider what happens when your shift+ sentence starts with T.

In one scenario you have to move from bottom left, all over to T, in the other, you have time to move from D or F (where your thumb naturally hovers) over to T while you are busy with the other thumb.

Unless you are moving your right thumb over to do it and you are _really slow_, much slower than you would be moving in a swipe-combo, then you see the point.

And its not like you then arent tied up where you shouldnt be.

Again, its not a case of x amount of keypresses divided by each thumb, thats not how it works. You are then making the argument each thumb has a fixed apm, which would be true if movement wasnt different between keypresses.

Clusters of keys often used, close together is what makes a keyboard efficient, mathematically. You shift neither focus, nor do you travel an extra distance. That also pans out for novice users.

You are mistaken about QWERTY keyboards. Its a layout to prevent locking, which is only secondarily what makes it less efficient.

"gummy" and "lament" over and over again is probably as far from a practical use-case as you can get.

The scenario is very limited. It doesnt take into consideration that you either can or cant type other letters than A-Z (äöÊüøæå etc) This is the one real difference a full layout makes. Measured both in familiarity and speed.

And you arent considering placement of comma and dot, space, enter or shift. Which is the other option that can be made.

At least make it "Lament. shift" "Lament. enter" or "Lament, " And then start your sentence with A-Z+whatever else.

 In the long term I don't think it will be a huge problem, just an inconvenience when switching between the Pyra and a real keyboard.
This is sub-par behavior. It is not as good as avoiding it.

Edit: The reason why comma dot on the right makes sense, is the exact same reason shift on the left doesnt. Try it.
Last edited by a moderator:
I fully agree with rygD here: I prefer to have , . on the right, because that's the expected location for those keys, not because it's more efficient in common sequences with space or enter.

Type klklklklklklklkl. Now type alalalalalalal. On a normal keyboard, you can do klklklklkl slightly faster because you use two different fingers from the same hand; alalalalalal is slightly slower because you have to synchronize between two different hands. Still it is way faster than doing klklklklkl with just one finger. Now do the same thing on your Pandora, in handheld mode (two thumb typing). You can type alalalalalal faster than klklklklklklkl.

So perhaps , . on the left is actually more efficient (in combinations with space or enter) than on the right. Still, I prefer to have it on the right (expected location), but it's not a strong preference.
So perhaps , . on the left is actually more efficient (in combinations with space or enter) than on the right. Still, I prefer to have it on the right (expected location), but it's not a strong preference.
That's what I'm going for, yeah. In my mind it is more efficient in two-thumb typing even if it does "feel" weird to not be where it is. Compromises suck but they need to be made.