Quote:
Originally Posted by
benbradley
As I might have indicated in earlier posts, I have no strong preference for the program that saves my words. if anything, I've historically had a NEGATIVE preference for large word-processing programs such as Microsoft Word, as on the machines years and decades ago it could take a significant time between just typing a key and seeing the letter show up on the screen, and then there was scrolling or paging through a file. All these actions are an about an order of magnitude faster (meaning they look instant instead of having a slight or more-than-slight delay) on smaller programs such as the Notepad and Wordpad programs that have come with various Windows versions. And yeah, as a coder I often use Notepad++ as well.
But my True Need for writing is an IBM Model M keyboard. It has the 'click keys' of the original IBM PC and AT computers, but it's the first model with the "modern desktop keyboard" key layout that has been standard for the decades since it was introduced. I've mentioned this innumerable times. I'll use one or more of these until I switch over to voice recognition or thought recognition as a computer text input device.
I've heard others say this, but I never had any of those problems with slowness, even years and decades ago. I started using a word processor in 1979, and saw no slowness. It was as instantaneous as notepad. I've been using Word since 5.5, and never saw any slowness with it at all. This may be because I always keep my hardware as up to date as my software, but slowness just never happened.
And in the past several years, computers have advanced so far and so fast that nothing I run is slow. Certainly not MS office. The letters appear just as fast as on any program, and it scrolls just as fast.
Not that it would matter. There's a heck of a lot more to a good word processor besides how fast letters appear, or how fast it scrolls. I need my word processor to do a dozen this that can't be done at all on notepad, or wordpad, or even on most other word processors.
I have learned why you love those IBM Model M keyboards, though. I really don't care much about the features, as such, but the way the keys feel make all the difference.
Thank you both.
I have disliked my new computer since I got it over a year ago. Quad core, 16 Gig, three monitors, faster than light ... almost - I should have loved it and I didn't. It was okay. I used it. It runs at the speed of light with an ocean of open applications but I read Ben's post, looked at the keyboard, and knew instantly why I didn't like it.
It had (past tense is significant) the el-cheapo Dell mush board. The keys were labeled with decals that are completely worn off 13 keys and damaged on more (I've written an estimated quarter million words on it in the last year and a half), but I never look at it anyway so I can work with a blank keyboard, it's the touch that sucks.
So I went into the basement, looked around and found an old COMPAQ Presario keyboard with a PS2 plug on it - it outlasted the computer it came with which was purchased in the nineties. It still has all the letters legible and it has a much more satisfying 'touch'. Dang! Life is good, noisy but good; the Dell keyboard is in the electronics recycling pile in the garage.
Though it's orders of magnitude better than the Dell, the COMPAQ keyboard isn't as good as my memory of the IBM Model M.
Question: Ben, have you used any of the new Unicomp, Inc. keyboards? See:
http://pckeyboard.com/page/category/UKBD
I'm considering ordering one.
James, sometime around 1989 I read a study IBM had MIT do on the subject of computer response time. I no longer have a copy of it, but the results were instructive. IBM commissioned MIT to study the effect of response time on CAD productivity. IBM found that productivity increased linearly as response time decreased until it got to around 3/4 of a second. After that productivity increased geometrically as response time decreased until it was well under a tenth of a second. Not only that, the operators said the day went faster and they went home way less fatigued.
That result was unexpected. MIT went to work to figure out why productivity increased by a factor of 4 to 5 when response time was fast. It turned out that the way people's brains operate, a second is a long time. The operator would enter a command and if it took more than a second, the operator's brain would go on vacation, change subjects, so when the screen responded they had to drag themselves back to the job at hand, reorient, enter the next command. That was very fatiguing and slowed them down.
One of the things I like about my setup here is the three monitors. All I have to do to see reference material is move my eyes to the right, there it is. I don't lose my place in the composition window, stay right in the zone, and keep going. I like that.
I bought my first large monitor when I was designing houses - I did that for the first five years of my retirement - 44 of them were built. It was a great way to keep the brain from turning to oatmeal, but I digress. I learned that more screen real estate is a huge productivity feature for me. Allows me to stay in the zone.
I do find that I need to exit e-mail when BIC time arrives, but that's not a big deal.
Fitch