And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
And with that any reason to buy the new 4704s has gone for me.
And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
Same here, if that happens I'm placing (another) order with you.andrewjoy wrote: ↑And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
And with that any reason to buy the new 4704s has gone for me.
I think we *may* have to convince lizard of that, since his latest post about phase 2 sounded like it was flat plates or bust (no more curved plates produced, which to my mind means no FEXT/FSSK compatible metal cases, and no compatibility with existing IBM caps, just cherry caps with adapters). I didn't want to muddy the waters further about phase 2, which is why I didn't bring this up earlier.fohat wrote:
And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
Oh, I may have to dredge through this again. Perhaps I was mistaken and dreaming and/or hallucinating.Techno Trousers wrote: ↑I think we *may* have to convince lizard of that, since his latest post about phase 2 sounded like it was flat plates or bust (no more curved plates produced, which to my mind means no FEXT/FSSK compatible metal cases, and no compatibility with existing IBM caps, just cherry caps with adapters). I didn't want to muddy the waters further about phase 2, which is why I didn't bring this up earlier.fohat wrote:
And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
Honestly, I was hoping that in phase 2 I would be able to buy at least one complete, from scratch "Model F SSK" or parts to build it, with newly produced plates, barrels, flippers, springs, foam, and a metal case. I think it may be going in a different direction though.
Agreed. We're getting close on phase one, and that will already result in a keyboard that's better than I ever thought possible!seebart wrote:Well guys let lizard do his magic for now and we'll see what is realistically doable.
Yes, standard cases.elecplus wrote: ↑So this project will be using SSK and regular M 101-103 type cases? I am asking because there are a large qty of 101 and 122 key Model Ms that I could pick up tomorrow. No more standard SSK, but there is one terminal style.
I thought the final phase was rich Corinthian leather.fohat wrote: ↑
And the final phase of this project is M and SSK cases in metal.
I've been mulling over making a ergo F and and ergo beamspring after that. Just haven't really had time to do any actual pcb design yet.lot_lizard wrote:Actually some Buckling Spring Dox would be fun. This is why Phase 2 will be focused on getting flat plate buckling springs to work. It will... I have faith. And it opens up "limitless" cheap layout possibilities for the switch.Vizir wrote: ↑Why not an ergonomic layout?
Terminal cases are problematic because they don't have the right caps and lack LEDs.elecplus wrote: ↑
So this project will be using SSK and regular M 101-103 type cases? I am asking because there are a large qty of 101 and 122 key Model Ms that I could pick up tomorrow. No more standard SSK, but there is one terminal style.
This. But instead of the numpad, F keys on the left please. That's why I love the XTant (regardless of it's 1.25U keys). Unsaver is also great (AT is not far off too), except...drevyek wrote: ↑ Everyone has a preference. I love the F-row-less TKL, or the full size.
...it doesn't have the Super key. And I agree, 103 layout with 1.5U-1U-1.5U on each side of the spacebar is absolutely the way to go. So basically, something between F77 and F107. F87/F82 anyone?fohat wrote: ↑ Personally, I was wishing/dreaming about only one deviation from "the one true keyboard" layout being: Windows keys (a la Unicomp 103).
Nothing will ever happen until the choices are winnowed down to a very small number, such as 1alh84001 wrote: ↑
it doesn't have the Super key.
And I agree, 103 layout with 1.5U-1U-1.5U on each side of the spacebar is absolutely the way to go.
So basically, something between F77 and F107. F87/F82 anyone?
The AT had a great layout, BAE aside. They did a great job with having the f keys on the left- lots of space to have both the f keys, or have added modifiers/macros, if desired.
Phase 1 will have every barrel on the SSK and Full Size as an operational pad. So if you wanted to pull a stabilizer from a barrel, and have as a split key layout (think split backspace), it would work. In addition, the winkeys (between ctrl and alt on both sides) will also be there.drevyek wrote: ↑Would phase 1 be the F101 and F84, then?
My own FSSK and FEXT will have a fn/super key. It will be immediately to the right of a short ISO left shift, and when combined with new barrels in the dead space between alt/ctrl, will turn the original 87/101 layouts into 90/104 key layouts. That's the genius of IBM's original buckling spring barrel plate idea. So many configuration possibilities for so little customization effort. No other type of keyboard can compare.alh84001 wrote:...it doesn't have the Super key. And I agree, 103 layout with 1.5U-1U-1.5U on each side of the spacebar is absolutely the way to go. So basically, something between F77 and F107. F87/F82 anyone?fohat wrote: ↑ Personally, I was wishing/dreaming about only one deviation from "the one true keyboard" layout being: Windows keys (a la Unicomp 103).
Oh, I agree. This was more an academic discussion in IBM layouts. The key is to keep focus, even more in phase 2, than in phase 1, and it's up to lot_lizard to make a choice. And it is only expected of us to bitch and moan if we get a decision or two not in line with personal preference. It's a sign of love for this projectfohat wrote: ↑ Nothing will ever happen until the choices are winnowed down to a very small number, such as 1
Actually that's a good point... Poll created for PCB color (blame andrewjoy ). Even though you have two options, please limit one to each form factor. Will have to research if the matte surface is even an option. Assume shiny for nowandrewjoy wrote: ↑looking good, would look even better in matte white soldermask. just saying
Although I greatly appreciate your outstanding efforts on these projects, I was disappointed about abandoning curved plates for Phase II. I've always thought of the curved plate as one of the hallmarks of IBM keyboards. With a flat plate, would it still be possible to achieve row profiles with interchangeable same-height IBM keycaps, or is the concept of Phase to move well beyond the original IBM designs?lot_lizard wrote: ↑ <snip>
<snip>
<snip>
We will never make another curved plate project after Phase 1 (at least that I would actively participate in)'. Even if you couldn't afford the switches at the moment, and didn't currently have access to a donor board... I would at minimum pick up the parts needed to do so if you thought you might have interest later since we really are running this whole thing with a zero profit goal (you could easily sell the kit later to recover costs).
<snip>
Same here.Hypersphere wrote: ↑
Although I greatly appreciate your outstanding efforts on these projects, I was disappointed about abandoning curved plates for Phase II. I've always thought of the curved plate as one of the hallmarks of IBM keyboards. With a flat plate, would it still be possible to achieve row profiles with interchangeable same-height IBM keycaps, or is the concept of Phase to move well beyond the original IBM designs?
Reading the tone of my original statement... It was a little harsh. I really have no idea yet what Phase 2 actually holds, but the Cherry adapter prototypes are looking really promising (haven't posted anything because I am trying to avoid "phase confusion"). If they continue to progress, I would like to use Cherry MX caps in Phase 2 since it finally opens up unique cap choices to buckling spring fans. With it, comes the need of flat (or flatter) plates.Hypersphere wrote: ↑... I was disappointed about abandoning curved plates for Phase II. I've always thought of the curved plate as one of the hallmarks of IBM keyboards. With a flat plate, would it still be possible to achieve row profiles with interchangeable same-height IBM keycaps, or is the concept of Phase to move well beyond the original IBM designs?
This is fantastic news! I think I'm now mentally prepared to order 2 of each phase 1 assembly now.lot_lizard wrote: FOR METAL CASES that support the Phase 1 drop-in (or legacy Model M assembly for that matter), we will do that somewhere along the way as a standalone group buy. Not sure when, but I think it would be fun as well. At that time though, we won't be doing anything else (no Phase 1 plates, PCB's, etc), just the metal cases. The plans will be published and always available for someone to produce them, but will be expensive in small quantities.
100% yes. If/when we flatten the plates, we will need to tighten the distance between the rows by ~2mm. So really the only change to the switch (other than some silencing technique that we might like) would be that the barrel base is ~2mm shorter on the Y plane, and the flipper's paddle will need to be shortened by ~1mm. This will have almost ZERO impact on anything functionally. Not sure the barrel lock mechanism just yet (XT or AT style), but it will be one of them.Techno Trousers wrote: ↑We think that phase 2 barrels and flippers will be 100℅ backwards compatible, right? If so, I can order that second FSSK without barrels and springs, and mothball it until the case, barrels, and springs are produced.
For point 1, let's make a mental note to have that choice finalized before phase 1 ordering opens, so we can know what type of phase 1 plate to order to make it compatible with the upcoming barrels. And for point 2, won't point 1 kind of make that impossible for the "losing" lock option? I suppose what would make the most sense is to choose the barrel type based on the distribution you're getting from your donor boards. My gut says that the AT style will be most plentiful, but maybe not.