JCMax wrote: 23 Apr 2022, 20:56I've asked how the New Model M compares to the old, and I also asked about how the Mini M compared to the New Model M before that. And it sounded like it was a pretty apples-to-oranges comparison.
With respect, I would suggest that you took the wrong conclusion away from those discussions. On DT, I dare say that you are interacting with obsessives who take note of the smallest differences, both because they care about the subject and also because most others won't. So you may have gotten the impression that the differences between the various Ms are more exaggerated than they really are. Even while IBM was manufacturing the M it evolved over time and subtle changes were introduced over the course of its life. But at the end of the day, an M is an M is an M, and most of the discussions that take place here about the various differences observed over its now 40+ year lifespan come down to subtle manufacturing quality differences (whether real or perceived) and/or slight tweaks in design or materials. Even so, the typing experience on a 1980s M in good shape and the typing experience on a brand-new 2020s Unicomp is largely going to be (IMO) 95% the same, though naturally some people may be more sensitive to minute differences between units/examples than others.
As far as the differences between the various M models go, a New Model M is
100% internally identical to any other 101-105 key Unicomp 'board: all of the Unicomp full-size keyboards from the "Classic" to the "Ultra Classic"/EnduraPro to the "New Model M" have identical membrane-sandwich construction and controller electronics, and it's only the outer casing that differs. You can take the guts from a Classic and drop them into a New Model M: they'll fit. So the New Model M differences all come down to the outer casing/shell, and the main advantages to the new shell from a consumer's perspective are that 1) the molds are new, so the plastic has less cosmetic flaws and blemishes than the shells produced from other (aging) Unicomp case molds, and 2) it has a slightly smaller footprint than the original Model M casing ("Classic", in Unicomp parlance) while still retaining the same basic shape and design language (unlike the EnduraPro-related case designs).
The Mini M is Unicomp's answer to the IBM Space Saving Keyboard. They lost the original IBM case molds for the SSK long ago so had to design and manufacture new ones from scratch. The Mini M is more different than all other Model Ms mostly because the matrix layout was re-worked to allow for more (on average) simultaneous key presses to occur without collisions; that said, the membrane-based M design is inherently non-NKRO, and again the typing feel of a Mini M vs. full-size New Model M is going to be virtually identical. The decision about which one to buy if you are in the market thus mostly just comes down to whether you prefer having a numpad, or prefer having more desk real-estate.
So at least if what you are comparing is key switch actuation feel and the fundamental design of the thing, I see all M comparisons as largely apples-to-apples because all Ms have so much in common with each other that calling one an "orange" strikes me as nonsensical. We're talking more along the lines of "Red Delicious" vs. "Granny Smith" here: both are recognizably the same fruit. It's the M vs. F arena where citrus happens. That both have buckling spring switches, can share the same key caps, and were designed and manufactured by IBM is basically where the similarities end. I'd argue the taxonomy is something along the lines of, Buckling Spring is the "family", M and F are the "genus", and the particular models are the "species". You are left with some objective differences (e.g. NKRO) that are direct consequences of each keyboard's fundamental design, but when it comes to key feel comparisons between the two, that's when you start getting much more into the weeds of subjectivity.
Re: Model F recreations / "original" / b*tching / quality comparison to original / etc., though I for sure have my own gripes about aspects of the project, I also think Ellipse's Fs are a tremendous value for what they are & that what he has managed to accomplish here is nothing short of amazing. Is it expensive relative to the current mass-produced keyboard market? Sure. But that's not his target market. And keep in mind that the 62-key version of the 4704 keyboard had an MSRP of around ~USD$340 back when they were released...so that's in
early 1980s USD. These repros are a relative bargain from that perspective, plus he is increasing the overall market supply of these keyboards, and selling at a fixed price (no stressful bidding wars over extremely finite supply). Plus keep in mind that even if aspects of his repros are themselves finicky, if you were fortunate enough to snag an original IBM-manufactured 4704 'board, given how much time has passed as well as how much most known samples were (ab)used, you'd likely have to put in MUCH more work to get an original back up to snuff than you surely will to get your repro working right.
I'm also a big Unicomp fan for the same reason: they're cranking out more Ms and selling them direct-to-consumer for just over USD$100 in today's money where throughout the 80s and early 90s IBM was MSRPing them for > $200. Increasing the total supply of Ms and thus making them available to more people at reasonable prices is only a good thing. Though "mechanical" keyboards continue to fall in price and you can find cheap no-name ones with Cherry-style clone switches in them for under $50 these days, the $100 price-point is roughly where most name-brand mass-produced ones fall. And while some may talk about how Unicomp manufacturing standards are not what they once were under IBM's purview, I argue that they are "good enough" for most, and even perhaps higher than other "mechanical" keyboards sold by other name brands for roughly the same price.
But, yes: a 4704 'board is no more "original" than the 'board that shipped with the IBM 5150 PC or 5160 XT. After all, the 4704 and the PC were released by IBM
in the same year. Even so, it's plainly obvious that the PC keyboard and the 4704 keyboard were targeting different markets and the PC/XT keyboard built to a cost. One reason why many F fans were so enamored of the 4704 'boards when they were discovered is because it's the only post-beamspring computer keyboard IBM manufactured with an all-metal enclosure.
).
