Keyboards
in [Java Help]
|
From: Zlatko Duric on 26 Apr 2010 07:42 On 04/26/2010 12:40 PM, Lew wrote: > Zlatko Duric wrote: >> Can you elaborate a bit that one? Why is that, what's the trick? > > Why: because keyboards already have too much for the right hand to do. > Putting the mouse on the left balances the load better. > > What's the trick: I don't understand the question. > What's the trick was just a repeated question number one, to elaborate. I wanted to know why is it better to point and click with my left hand (which I'm doing now, btw :) ) Thanks anyway -- Zlatko
From: Tom Anderson on 26 Apr 2010 08:44 On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Roedy Green wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:43:48 +0100, Tom Anderson > <twic(a)urchin.earth.li> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who > said : > >> In my office, we have several rubbish keyboards. We are going to >> replace them with less rubbish keyboards. Does anyone have any >> recommendations for keyboards they really, really like, and if so, >> would they care to tell them to me? > > Consider gettinga keyboard WITHOUT a numeric keypad. You probably never > use it. Without it, your mouse is closer to where your right hand rests. I don't use the numpad much, but i do use the keys in between the numpad and the main block, and without a numpad, you don't get a proper version of those. But yes, good point about the numpad not being that useful. tom -- Three o'clock is always too late or too early for anything you want to do.
From: Lew on 26 Apr 2010 09:01 Tom Anderson wrote: > I don't use the numpad much, but i [sic] do use the keys in between the numpad > and the main block, and without a numpad, you don't get a proper version > of those. But yes, good point about the numpad not being that useful. Actually, it's a really, really terrible point since the numpad is very useful. -- Lew
From: Patricia Shanahan on 26 Apr 2010 10:45 Lew wrote: > Tom Anderson wrote: >> I don't use the numpad much, but i [sic] do use the keys in between the numpad >> and the main block, and without a numpad, you don't get a proper version >> of those. But yes, good point about the numpad not being that useful. > > Actually, it's a really, really terrible point since the numpad is > very useful. This discussion reminds me of a conversation I had a few years ago with my mother and my aunt. They were in total agreement that it was silly to have both a numeric pad and a number row on the main keyboard - until I asked them which should go. My mother used her computer mainly for correspondence and writing essays for classes she was taking. She had learned to touch type on a mechanical typewriter. My aunt had worked as a statistician starting soon after World War II, as a part time book-keeper for the first few years of her retirement, and still kept the books on a volunteer basis for her swimming and bridge clubs. Dorothy had used electronic calculators from soon after they became available until she switched to spreadsheets. There are no prizes for guessing who absolutely insisted on keeping which set of number keys. Patricia
From: Thomas Pornin on 26 Apr 2010 11:28
According to Lew <lew(a)lewscanon.com>: > Actually, it's a really, really terrible point since the numpad is > very useful. Or not. On my workstation (some years ago), it took me two years before noticing that my numpad was correctly configured (at that time, using Linux on an Alpha, such things were not always working out of the box). This means that I had programmed and typed text on that system for two years, without even once touching the numpad. I daresay that the numpad is very useless for me. (This is not so true on my home PC, because the numpad is useful to move units when playing Civilization.) --Thomas Pornin |