Hyper 7 keyboard review (Kailh BOX Burnt Orange)

[Chyros]

Today we look at a keyboard I've been wanting to cover for ages; the Hyper 7 keyboard! A battleship-class keyboard with more keys than you can shake a stick at. Hope you enjoy the video!

[Muirium]

Weren’t “the original designers” of the Hyper 7 none other than DT’s long absent caps GB master 7bit himself?

[depletedvespene]

Ah, the Hyper7... large for the sake of being large. It would have been so much better had there been some amount of thought and design about the form factor and the physical layout other than "Let's go Jar Jar Abrams on the Space Cadet!"...

[depletedvespene]

Also, I find the SAP/QMK comparison a bit insulting for the latter. QMK is a useful program, for starters.

[Muirium]

Maybe Chyros should try DMA’s CommonSense, seeing their shared fondness for QMK.

[Chyros]

Also, I find the SAP/QMK comparison a bit insulting for the latter. QMK is a useful program, for starters.

QMK shouldn't even exist, it's doing something that software shouldn't do :p . SAP at least does a software's job (albeit poorly).

Maybe Chyros should try DMA’s CommonSense, seeing their shared fondness for QMK.

Remind me, wasn't that a converter package for vintage stuff or something like that? I do have another keyboard upcoming in the future that I need to use QMK (or rather, an alternative to QMK) for....

[Delta Research]

Please elaborate on what QMK shouldn't do, QMK works great and isn't the worst software I've used before. I've never had a severe issue with it.

[depletedvespene]

Also, I find the SAP/QMK comparison a bit insulting for the latter. QMK is a useful program, for starters.

QMK shouldn't even exist, it's doing something that software shouldn't do :p . SAP at least does a software's job (albeit poorly).

The idea of a keyboard controller lacking software entirely simply does not parse. At the bare minimum, something must decide what scan codes to send on each key press and release.

Sure, QMK has a few features that shouldn't be there (and lacks others that should be present), but to say it doesn't do a software's job (the one running in the controller in the keyboard itself) just screams of ignorance. Sorry, Thomas, but you are dead wrong on this one.

[Muirium]

Well, there's more to QMK than just the firmware. More, that is, to the user who's tasked with configuring it. The stuff that lives on your computer to *finally!* spit out the damn .hex file is the pain of it.

I mentioned DMA's CommonSense earlier because he's opinionated and often shows up to take potshots at QMK. Honestly, his controller's software is beyond my confidence and I've never had a board that's forced me to learn it, so I haven't.

What I'd actually advise is Soarer's Controller. If you know his Converter, his Controller is all that plus the easiest to use keyboard controller software I've encountered. Excellent documentation too. I've used it a bunch over the years and it remains my go-to for (non-capsense) controllers.

Yes, no Tap Dance. Yes, no Mouse Keys. Yes, no active support! But hot damn, did he create something amazing at the first attempt. It remains unparalleled. Here's an example of it in action.

Code: Select all

matrix
    blocking 0

    sense               pb1         pb2         pb3         pb7         pd0         pd1         pd2         pd3
    strobe      pf1     esc         back_quote  tab         lctrl       lshift      unassigned  unassigned  lalt
    strobe      pf4     f1          1           q           a           unassigned  unassigned  unassigned  lgui
    strobe      pb0     f2          2           w           s           z           unassigned  unassigned  space
    strobe      pc7     f3          3           e           d           x           pad_8       pad_slash   pad_minus
    strobe      pc6     f4          4           r           f           c           pad_9       pad_asterix pad_plus
    strobe      pe6     f5          5           t           g           v           pad_7       pad_equals  rgui
    strobe      pd5     f6          6           y           h           b           pad_6       pad_3       pad_enter
    strobe      pd4     f7          7           u           j           n           pad_5       pad_2       pad_period
    strobe      pd7     f8          8           i           k           m           pad_4       pad_1       pad_0
    strobe      pb4     f9          9           o           l           comma       page_down   page_up     right
    strobe      pb5     pause       0           p           semicolon   period      end         up          down
    strobe      pb6     scroll_lock minus       left_brace  quote       slash       delete      home        left
    strobe      pf7     f10         equal       right_brace enter       rshift      unassigned  unassigned  ralt
    strobe      pf6     printscreen backspace   backslash   f11         f12         unassigned  insert      unassigned
end

So long as this looks comprehendible to you, you're gold!

[Findecanor]

Well, there's more to QMK than just the firmware. More, that is, to the user who's tasked with configuring it. The stuff that lives on your computer to *finally!* spit out the damn .hex file is the pain of it.

Recent versions of QMK have support for VIA or the successor Vial: configuration using a desktop app without having to recompile.

Is there no pre-compiled .hex binary for the Hyper7 with VIA support?

[depletedvespene]

…
What I'd actually advise is Soarer's Controller.

Soarer's Con* do do with ease some things that are rather difficult in TMK/QMK.

I am nevertheless ditching the former in favour of the latter: S.C. is, sadly, abandonware with licensing issues and needs some updates, and there are no signs whatsoever of this ever changing. TMK and QMK, OTOH, are both in active development/maintenance and have no licensing issues (so couldn't be the subject of a shiRt storm of the kind we saw here).

I don't advice the usage S.C. anymore, unless you already have several Soarer's Converter cables around that you just don't want to ditch (this is, indeed, my case).

[Muirium]

I’m a user. I don't give a rat's ass about licencing! Soarer's not going to come after me. Besides, we already updated his tools to 64 bit. As long as Atmel makes those 32u4 chips of theirs, Soarer's will still work.

If I was a competent coder, I'd likely make my own firmware just to suit my preferences, open source it, and duly refuse to meaningfully collaborate with anyone. But I’m not, so it's a moot point.

Is there no pre-compiled .hex binary for the Hyper7 with VIA support?

This is likely more what Chyros is after. But evidently the Hyper7 is an old design and presumably has no VIAL support.

[depletedvespene]

I’m a user. I don't give a rat's ass about licencing! Soarer's not going to come after me. Besides, we already updated his tools to 64 bit. As long as Atmel makes those 32u4 chips of theirs, Soarer's will still work.

And when Atmel replaces those with, say, "64u8" chips, you'll be s-o-o-l, to put it bluntly, yet mildly. Even if the feature set were to be declared frozen, the software needs to be able to be updated to still function in a new environment... and the licensing issues NEED to be sorted out for that to happen and not step into a legal quagmire. That might not affect you "directly" as a user, but if no actual programmers want to touch that thing...

If I was a competent coder, I'd likely make my own firmware just to suit my preferences, open source it, and duly refuse to meaningfully collaborate with anyone. But I’m not, so it's a moot point.

Is there no pre-compiled .hex binary for the Hyper7 with VIA support?

This is likely more what Chyros is after. But evidently the Hyper7 is an old design and presumably has no VIAL support.

You can add as many physical layouts as you want to QMK. If it turns out that "VIAL" (actually, QMK under it) does not support said physical layout, it can be added, and that is the point.

[Chyros]

Please elaborate on what QMK shouldn't do, QMK works great and isn't the worst software I've used before. I've never had a severe issue with it.

Also, I find the SAP/QMK comparison a bit insulting for the latter. QMK is a useful program, for starters.

QMK shouldn't even exist, it's doing something that software shouldn't do :p . SAP at least does a software's job (albeit poorly).

The idea of a keyboard controller lacking software entirely simply does not parse. At the bare minimum, something must decide what scan codes to send on each key press and release.

Sure, QMK has a few features that shouldn't be there (and lacks others that should be present), but to say it doesn't do a software's job (the one running in the controller in the keyboard itself) just screams of ignorance. Sorry, Thomas, but you are dead wrong on this one.

Keyboards have been able to do on-board macro programming and key rebinding without any external software necessary since at least the 90s. Why on earth would we need this software now? Let alone such frustrating, complicated software with a notoriously steep learning curve?

[zrrion]

As long as Atmel makes those 32u4 chips of theirs, Soarer's will still work.

There's a time limit there for sure and I wouldn't count on that being there forever. QMK/VIAL on the other hand don't have that issue, they'll work on all sorts of things and can be updated as better/cheaper options come to market. They've also got features soarers doesn't.

While I'm the not biggest fan of QMK itself, all you're doing is editing a text file (or a few of them if you're using it for a hand wire, but once you have the groundwork set up you're only editing the keymap file after that. There's a few things you'd need to tweak for VIAL support but again, that's set and forget.) and then building and flashing, which isn't any different than editing a text file, building, and then flashing for soarers. Only real difference is that QMK's instructions for doing that on windows sucks. Once you have it set up the first time you're good to go. Hell, like is mentioned here all he really needs is a hex w/ vial support and he doesn't have to do any brainwork at all, just use his mouse at a gui.

EDIT:

Keyboards have been able to do on-board macro programming and key rebinding without any external software necessary since at least the 90s. Why on earth would we need this software now? Let alone such frustrating, complicated software with a notoriously steep learning curve?

>notoriously steep learning curve
It's not notoriously steep just because it's hard for you I'm sure it's notorious difficulty is the exact reason it is the standard firmware for the hobby

>on-board macros since the 90s
While that would be kinda cute to see now (and I would like to see it, don't get me wrong) I only want to see it for the novelty. How do you review what a macro does on such a keyboard if it is already programed? How do you verify before pressing a key that it won't do something undesirable? What if my macro for putting boilerplate in emails has a typo in it? How do I update the macro without completely redoing it? What if I make another typo when I do? What if someone else wants to set up the same macros on their keyboard? What if I want a macro that uses keys my keyboard doesn't have like F13-F24, a windows key, or a key not present in the language layout my keyboard uses?
Before widespread internet access getting software wasn't always easy, so making sure the keyboard had at least partial macro support without software was important. If you've ever got any of these boards NOS though you'll notice that all of them include software for setting macros too because even back then software was better for the average user.

Macros are trivial to set up and change as needed with VIAL. Show me a board with keyboard-side macro programing where you can change something in the middle of the macro without having to redo the entire thing or can do macros using keys the board doesn't physically have and you might a point here.

[depletedvespene]

Keyboards have been able to do on-board macro programming and key rebinding without any external software necessary since at least the 90s. Why on earth would we need this software now? Let alone such frustrating, complicated software with a notoriously steep learning curve?

Let's see the possible motives:

• Bugs and omission in the firmware can be dealt with with something other than controller replacement.
• Remapability is nowhere near being universal in regular modern keyboards, not to say anything of vintage units. Should all of them be ditched?
• Anything more complex than keystroke sequences recording and basic rebinding would be incredibly difficult and error-prone to do with only the keyboard itself as input and no visual output. This SCREAMS for a computer screen where one can SEE what is being done before comitting it to the firmware.
• Reviewing the state of things recorded/rebinded later on, on a particular keyboard (that may have been stored for more than a few days, to boot) screams for the same.

Yes, some remapping sofware (Razer's comes to mind) is notoriously bloated and unacceptably invasive... but that ain't the case of Soarer's, TMK or QMK.


As peer "notoriously steep learning curve", are we talking about vi here, or QMK? QMK covers about 90% of the users' needs in remapping and whatnot with the QMK configurator, which is quite, quite simple for the basic stuff (plus QMK Toolbox for flashing). So this "notoriously steep learning curve" does at least have a very flat initial section.

[depletedvespene]

… just use his mouse at a gui.

Indeed, even my [exact familiar relationship redacted] can use QMK Configurator/QMK Toolbox without fuss after only a couple minutes of guidance. Not much of a learning curve there, as the (rather intrincate and complex) innards of QMK are well covered!

[Muirium]

Chyros's point appears to me to be: 'Why complicate life for all of us when most of us just want the keyboard to do what it says on the keys?'

It's a fair question. There should be straightforward, no-fancy bollocks behaviour built into all keyboards. It's not like he's designed and built this thing himself.

Mind, this particular board is a total nightmare of a test case for any mapping! It's got too many goddamn keys *not* to need shiny, well polished fancy bollocks.

But his apparent line of thinking does apply for humdrum run of the mill fullsize layouts. A remap / macro mode for defining your own right there on the board should be bog standard on those with open source controllers.

[zrrion]

>There should be straightforward, no-fancy bollocks behaviour built into all keyboards.
Are you familiar with the USB HID standard?

[Muirium]

Not intimately. We just know each other's keycodes.

As I said in the second half of my comment, this particular board is just way too over the top to stay 1:1 within the spec. It has whole rows crying out for macros. It's… not my kind of board at all.

[depletedvespene]

Chyros's point appears to me to be: 'Why complicate life for all of us when most of us just want the keyboard to do what it says on the keys?'

There's no question about that. The real question is: How on Earth do you set up a default behaviour in the first place on a custom keyboard?

Also, how come some people manage to use without issue a keyboard that does NOT do as it says on the keys?

The wonders of the hostile keyboard.

Model_M_XXK.jpg (181.06 KiB) Viewed 31079 times

A los hechos me remito.

It's a fair question. There should be straightforward, no-fancy bollocks behaviour built into all keyboards. It's not like he's designed and built this thing himself.

Mind, this particular board is a total nightmare of a test case for any mapping! It's got too many goddamn keys *not* to need shiny, well polished fancy bollocks.

I did say "large for the sake of being large" in my first post on the thread. The Hyper7 physical layout ain't a good physical layout.

But his apparent line of thinking does apply for humdrum run of the mill fullsize layouts. A remap / macro mode for defining your own right there on the board should be bog standard on those with open source controllers.

Isn't QMK... an open-source controller?

[zrrion]

you added the 2nd half between when I loaded the page and when I posted my comment but I still stand by it. If you want something simple you'll get something simple. If you want something complicated you'll get something complicated. Complaining that complicated things are complicated is silly. Especially in this case when it's not that much more complex than what chyros is already dealing with and almost everyone else in the hobby already has this figured out.

[Muirium]

Fair enough. I get where he's coming from, but as I like TKL and smaller—and handling this on host—I've much less complexity in my use of controllers.

Isn't QMK... an open-source controller?

Indeed! QMK really should have an on-keyboard remap mode and macro mode, just like various vintage boards have done and I think Ducky had on the Ducky Mini. Even I'd use that for swapping modifiers around.

And yes, some of us do type on strangely labelled keyboards, quite by choice!

[zrrion]

It's always weird to me when this stuff crops up in chyros's reviews. Like getting someone else to drill holes in his model M or not having a converter for the F bigfoot even though he did make a converter for Project N and both of those use soarers, it really does feel like he just doesn't know how to do much beyond pressing the keys with his fingers. (Not knowing what a half plate was in a recent unboxing was laughably ignorant for someone who reviews keyboards.) If the F bigfoot, the closest you can get to what he's already comfortable with doing without just being the exact same thing is too advanced for him that speaks more to his low technical acumen than it does to the quality of any software he takes a look at.

As for QMK not having an on-board remap/macro mode there's a historic technical reason for this which I'm sure chyros won't ever bother to research because he's already thinks his opinion is the correct one but beyond that there's not some fairy that just poofs this stuff to into existence. If you want it and it doesn't exist make it, if you won't make it then I guess that means you don't actually want it that much then do you.

[engr]

While that would be kinda cute to see now (and I would like to see it, don't get me wrong) I only want to see it for the novelty. How do you review what a macro does on such a keyboard if it is already programed? How do you verify before pressing a key that it won't do something undesirable? What if my macro for putting boilerplate in emails has a typo in it? How do I update the macro without completely redoing it? What if I make another typo when I do? What if someone else wants to set up the same macros on their keyboard? What if I want a macro that uses keys my keyboard doesn't have like F13-F24, a windows key, or a key not present in the language layout my keyboard uses?

Avant (rebadged Omnikey) came with software that allowed these things, but the user could still ignore it (which is nice because it won't run on modern versions of Windows) and remap or program macros manually from the keyboard (unfortunately, the way it was implemented was not as straightforward as on Focus or Ortek boards).

As of previewing what a key does, that's even doable without any external software: firmware can be programmed to output a text version of a macro (such as "Ctrl+Alt+C" or whatever) upon a certain key combo, so the user can just open a text editor and press Ctrl+Prog+macro key. I think one of my programmable boards (FK-9000 or MCK-142) does something similar although I'm not sure.

[Hak Foo]

What I'd actually advise is Soarer's Controller. If you know his Converter, his Controller is all that plus the easiest to use keyboard controller software I've encountered. Excellent documentation too. I've used it a bunch over the years and it remains my go-to for (non-capsense) controllers.

It feels like we're dancing around the edge of a great model:
Some of the new microcontrollers mount as a USB storage device, for "drag and drop to program". What if a keyboard controller also showed up as a 50kb flash drive, and you just wrote a file with the desired keymap to it?

You'd still need something on the host side to compile the keymap down-- with a typical 32-256k RAM MCU, you don't want to burn too much on parsers, but maybe you can store a data structure you can read right out of the flash.