Minolta KY-1 keyboard - Prototopre?

snuci · 10 Dec 2017, 21:19

I checked this keyboard to see what switches it had and found these capacitive foam and foil switches. Pics are in the wiki along with a Wiki page here: wiki/Minolta_KY-1

What I'm not sure is if these switches and keyboard mechanism is actually made by Brother; the company that is said to have made the "Proto Topre" keyboards. Has Brother been confirmed or was that just the first keyboard found? This keyboard is from a Minolta PCW-1 Word Processing system \ I actually have the full Word Processing system but it's awkward to photograph as it's pretty large.

Here are some pics but there are more in the Wiki.

livingspeedbump · 13 Dec 2017, 01:50

The layout is quite interesting, especially the 1.25 right shift and location of |\ to left shift.

Are the switches comparable to Topre in terms of feel and tactility?

Daniel Beardsmore · 13 Dec 2017, 09:55

This Epson keyboard seems to be from the same OEM, judging by the PCB model number, PCB design and sliders:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/triplehaa ... 3852870386

There are definitely similarities with Brother:

keyboards-f2/unknown-dome-with-slider-t13958.html

The keystem is the same (with two ridges instead of a solid block) and the sliders, albeit a totally different design, bear a curious resemblance.

There are surely more proto-Topre examples out there for comparison, but I'll leave you to dig those out of the endless disorganisation of this community.

Curiously, your keycaps look dye sublimated, but they presumably cannot be as the keycaps have yellowed.

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 10:14

Love the PCB colors, great find! I don't recall seeing actual verified proof on any of this "Proto Topre" talk and do correct me if I'm wrong. Certain popular YT/GH/DT videos thematizing this "Proto Topre" talk do not make for actual proof for example.

002 · 13 Dec 2017, 10:40

I have one of the Seiko Epson ones like HaaTa's. Mine does not feel very good at all but foam and foil boards like this do not age well.

Prototopre was just a nickname given to them by HaaTa -- there was never any evidence that Topre were involved with making them. Just some pure speculation (from HaaTa and I) that someone involved with the design of this switch either worked at Topre, or vice versa. I'm not sure which design comes first, but the original Topre capacitive prototype was produced in 1983. Maybe Topre just looked at what was being used in banking or data entry and decided to use some design elements in their own creation...or vice versa

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 10:48

002 wrote: Prototopre was just a nickname given to them by HaaTa -- there was never any evidence that Topre were involved with making them. Just some pure speculation (from HaaTa and I) that someone involved with the design of this switch either worked at Topre, or vice versa. I'm not sure which design comes first, but the original Topre capacitive prototype was produced in 1983. Maybe Topre just looked at what was being used in banking or data entry and decided to use some design elements in their own creation...or vice versa

I know. Sometime after I created the wiki page (long after HaaTa posted it) the topic came up again and a few of us here agreed that there was no clear link to Topre.

w/index.php?title=IBM_6298329&redirect=no

And there's this of course:

wiki/IBM_6247440_for_RT_and_5086_Processor

002 · 13 Dec 2017, 10:53

Oh yeah I thought we'd had the discussion before

If only there was a place where we could centralise this knowledge so that we weren't running over the same old ground. Some sort of online encyclopedia would probably do the trick.

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 10:59

002 wrote: Oh yeah I thought we'd had the discussion before

Right?

002 wrote: If only there was a place where we could centralise this knowledge so that we weren't running over the same old ground. Some sort of online encyclopedia would probably do the trick.

Oh, so your feeling a bit too euphoric?

You might be able to really tick someone off with that idea here...

002 · 13 Dec 2017, 11:07

What ever do you mean, Mr. seebart?! Are you suggesting that I am deliberately attempting to rouse trouble with my idea for a web based collaborative knowledge repository of sorts?

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 11:09

002 wrote: What ever do you mean, Mr. seebart?! Are you suggesting that I am deliberately attempting to rouse trouble with my idea for a web based collaborative knowledge repository of sorts?

Oh jeez relax.

Our wiki may be far from perfect but at least it's up and running and we have several diligent users working on it.

wiki/Special:RecentChanges

002 · 13 Dec 2017, 11:13

Yeah I know I was just being stupid. DT wiki is the best.

It's frustrating sometimes because it can be a pain to present certain insights and theories / speculation on the wiki. The best approach is to just document what you feel is true and provide as many references and photographic evidence as you can but then there's lots of potentially useful or interesting little nuggets of info that wouldn't be there if you adhered strictly to that approach.

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 11:18

002 wrote: Yeah I know I was just being stupid. DT wiki is the best.

Right and you think can't tell even from around the globe.

Oh yeah and you have summertime now...

002 wrote: It's frustrating to sometimes because it can be a pain to present certain insights and theories / speculation on the wiki. The best approach is to just document what you feel is true and provide as many references as you can but then there's lots of little things that kinda shouldn't be on the wiki if you adhere strictly to that approach.

Possibly we should have a {{TODO speculation}} banner also...like one of these:

: Unbenannt.JPG (39.67 KiB) Viewed 5133 times

002 · 13 Dec 2017, 11:23

{{TODO WILD SPECULATION FROM A HALF DRUNK AUSTRALIAN SHITPOSTER}} ought to cover most of my pages.

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 11:25

002 wrote: {{TODO WILD SPECULATION FROM A HALF DRUNK AUSTRALIAN SHITPOSTER}} ought to cover most of my pages.

Not quite but here's the usual European stereotype:

Spoiler:

Daniel Beardsmore · 13 Dec 2017, 22:56

seebart wrote: Possibly we should have a {{TODO speculation}} banner also...

It's more helpful to simply explain why the suggestion is being made. It's still a good idea to post photos or references of anything that demonstrates the reasons for the suggestion, so that readers can assess this information and draw their own conclusions or match up their own findings with existing information.

Since the term /proto-?topre/i is reasonably well understood, it could be filed under [wiki]Category:Designations[/wiki] and [wiki]Category:Research[/wiki] and used as an evidence gathering point for all the examples. Of particular interest are things like ICs, anything else with dates, and PCB part numbers, in additional to sliders, domes and keycaps. All dates should be before 1983 to be truly proto-Topre, but this example has an IC from 1985, which is more realistic considering the device it was found in.

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 23:11

The "{{TODO speculation}}" banner was meant to be ironic Daniel. Apparently inefficient irony unlike various sections of my wiki entries which simply are erroneous. Various of your edits on my pages seem illogical on to me the other hand. In the end it's quite relative as long as we are able to communicate the data to the reader sufficiently. In that sense I do think you were right in saying it would become chaotic if we had 50+ people or more working on the wiki.

If and how realistic the term "proto-Topre" is in that case I don't really know or want to know.

Daniel Beardsmore · 13 Dec 2017, 23:24

How are my edits illogical?

And if you don't want to know if "proto-Topre" is even realistic, why are you in here?

seebart · 13 Dec 2017, 23:50

Daniel Beardsmore wrote: How are my edits illogical?

SOME, not all. Which and why another time not now.

Daniel Beardsmore wrote: And if you don't want to know if "proto-Topre" is even realistic, why are you in here?

Because I feel like it.