The 10 Worst PC Keyboards of All Time
November 2nd, 2007 by Benj Edwards
My first feature on PCWorld.com is now live — The 10 Worst PC Keyboards of All Time. The article started as a pet project of mine over a year ago, although it took far longer to complete than I expected. Between other projects, I anguished and wrestled with myself over the final ten entries after considering (and using) twenty-plus keyboards in detail. Perhaps I put too much work into it, but I wanted to create the most definitive list I could. The end result will never be truly definitive, of course, since any list like this — by its very nature — is based on subjective criteria defined by the author.
The final work turned out to be much longer than the version published, but the pictures turned out so well (taken by both myself and Steven Stengel of oldcomputers.net), that PC World decided to turn it into a slide show. The result, I think, speaks for itself. Still, an unabridged version might make it to the Net some day, with more info on my ranking and inclusion criteria. Just so you know, I considered only non-laptop QWERTY keyboards that shipped with a computer in the United States for the list.
I’d like to thank Steven Stengel for help with the pictures, and especially Harry McCracken of PC World for doing an excellent job of condensing my lengthy epic for a mainstream audience. Last, but not least, thanks to the PC World staff, who did a great job of putting it all together.
Now that the love-fest is over, you can check out the article here. Let me know what you think. And while you’re at it, feel free to tell us which keyboards you’d nominate for the worst (or the best) of all time.
November 3rd, 2007 at 2:14 am
Congratulations on your first PCWorld.com feature. Now that we’ve dispensed with the polite chit-chat, it’s time to open up a can of whoop ass. 30% of your picks for worst keyboards are from Commodore? Why I oughta…
I’ve typed more strokes on a Commodore 64 keyboard than you’ve had hot meals and I’m telling you that it’s a fine keyboard and once you get the hang of it, you can type at terrifying speeds all while making a machine-gune like noise that will scare animals and small children.
That’s good keyboarding!
November 3rd, 2007 at 2:39 am
I was happy to see a comment about Apple’s new keyboard at the start there. I’ve been using it at work for awhile now, and it just feels… wrong. I like my keyboards requiring a bit more force to use. Plus, there just doesn’t seem to be enough differentiation between keys, too easy to slip up and make mistakes when typing fast.
The slideshow version was fun, but the full article sounds even better. I’d certainly like to see it.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 am
Thanks for being polite with your whoop-ass, Bjorn. You’ll notice that the C64 is #10, which makes it the most usable keyboard of the bunch. 🙂 I believe your story about typing like a machine gun on the beast, which could probably be said of any reasonable keyboard once you get the hang of it (and the C64 keyboard is probably the only “reasonable” one on the list).
Disagreements are bound to happen with any “Top 10” list, and it’s OK. In fact, that’s almost what they’re for and why they’re so popular. You either love ’em or hate ’em, and they get people’s attention. Nothing personal, of course!
Benj
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:41 am
The Commodore 64 has the least offensive keyboard of the ten worst PC keyboards of all time? That’s not much of a consolation, I’m afraid. What can I say, I adore my 64, my Commodore 64 (warts and all).
Tell me this though, how could you leave the ZX Spectrum off that list? It has an awful keyboard. Every time you press a key the button sticks and you have to use something to get it to pop back out. Proficient users can use it to type upwards of ten characters per minute! Egads.
November 3rd, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Unfortunately, one of the things that was cut out of my article was my criteria for inclusion. Since 99% of the worst keyboards were from obscure units made in the Soviet Union, I decided to focus on U.S. computers only. I also didn’t include the Spectrum since its US counterpart, the 2068, is on the list — it’s a balance thing (but believe me, it was tempting). Also, I left off some stinkers that are so obscure that most people never used them. But trust me, I probably considered any computer you could think of (and more). A few months’ worth of solid research went into this.
In the end, passions aside, every computer is on the list for a very good reason, including the C64. You — and millions of others — may love it, and it may be a classic piece of hardware, but that doesn’t magically change the nature of its keyboard.
November 3rd, 2007 at 5:36 pm
Neat article, hehe – I’ve not used any apart from the briefly mentioned new Mac keyboards (which now populate on of my labs at university) which are terrible, nay, horrific for some touch typing and coding.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Hi Why wasnt the Atari 400 on the list ?? you list alot of chicklet keyboards not a membrane one?? the 400 you could barely type anything I use mine for games.
I have to be one of those that also disagrees with the c64 and the rest of the Commodore’s listed might as well have included the c128 also
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:28 pm
The Atari 400 is on the list. It’s #5.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:49 pm
musta missed it sorry
and thanks for the quick response 🙂
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Though I agree with your comment about the height of the c64 keyboard, I think your objection to the extended graphics character symbols on the keys is an unfair criticism.
The extended character set was a very useful addition, and I’d say it’s far preferable to have the symbols for those characters on the keys themselves rather than requiring a separate reference table that the user would have to check whenever they wanted to use characters from the extended set.
And because they were printed upon the front face of the keys, rather than the upper face, they really weren’t distracting in any way. Instead they just lurked in the shadows, easily ignored when you wished to concentrate only on standard letter characters, yet waiting right there when you needed them.
November 4th, 2007 at 1:10 am
Something I’d just like to point out here, on #2 you say “For reasons lost to history, Commodore built a horrifyingly terrible keyboard into the original PET”. The reasons are not really lost to history. Jack Tramiel’s company, Commodore Business Machines, prior to getting into the computer business, had made calculators. He just adapted the calculator style “keyboard” to his new computer. I’ll agree with you, though… It was a terrible idea. This original PET 2001 with chicklet keyboard is, however, highly collectible today due to its rarity.
I’ll also chime in a bit on the subject of the Commodore 64… In your last sentence on that section, you say, “Luckily, most C64 owners remained oblivious to these problems: More often than not, they used the C64 for playing games with joysticks, saving the heavy computing work for dad’s IBM PC.” Well, the fact is that the C64 was the ONLY computer in my home, so all computer work was done on it. The same was true for most people I know. Only the more wealthy families could even consider buying an IBM PC at that time.
-Andrew
November 4th, 2007 at 4:51 am
I think the c64 had one of the best keyboards of that particular era and it definitely doesn’t deserve to be in the list. I spent hundreds of hours typing basic programs and school assignments on this classic system and never suffered any discomfort.
November 4th, 2007 at 7:20 am
The Commodore 64? Get real! Do you know how many software titles where coded on this machine? There exist well over 20,000 unique game titles for the Commodore 64. There may even be more. That doesnt include appliction based software.
Not to mention (But I Will!) that according to the 2001 edition of Guinness book of records, the C64 was the most “prolific computing device ever manufactured”. During its production run from 1982 to… 1993, about 30 million units were sold. To put this number in perspective, that’s more than all the Macintoshes in the world.
November 4th, 2007 at 7:42 am
The reviewer is only right about one aspect of the C64 keyboard; the unergonomic height of the keyboard. Nonstandard keys? This was the 80s, there werent very many standard keys outside qwerty, caps lock, cntl, and shit. There was nothing visually confusing about the commodore keyboard. OMG! 3 things printed on one key! This ‘clutter’ allowed us to use those graphics without having to lean esc-xxx sequences likeon the PC. All and all this was the single most user friendly keyboard of the 80s.
Remember; this was the single best selling home personal computer of all time. A quick search on the internet will find that people are still developing software for it, discovering ways to trick the hardware into working outside its defined specs, and there is a huge cult following of people who listen to commodore 64 remixes.
Commodore users saved their money to buy a machine with no sound and graphics and with less ram to buy PCs? No. We used our C64s for games, communications, record keeping, programming, etc and absolutely despised weaker machines such as IBMs, Ataris, and Apples. We gave up our commodores begrudgingly.
Like all lists like this, they shouldnt be made by ppl not really in the know. Some young kid, who wasnt there, comments out of his arse…
November 4th, 2007 at 11:03 am
C64 fans sound a lot like the retrocomputing equivalent of Mac zealots today. Any perceived sleight, and they’re on you like a swarm of angry bees.
Just ignore them, Benj. That’s bound to happen whenever you slaughter a sacred cow. Great job on the article.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Benj, perhaps you do not know your history. One of the main reasons why the Commodore 64 took over the 8 bit computer market en mass was because of its keyboard, not in spite of it. It was one of the few computers in its price range that a person could actually touch type on with reasonable comfort, allowing it to compete and win against more technically sophisticated computers of the day.
I’ve read some of the comments, and I see you’re focusing on US-based machines; so I wonder, why didn’t the Spectravideo SV-318 make the list? The only reason I can think of is, yet again, you do not know your computer history very well.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:28 am
All I can say is this: Some day I’ll publish the full version of the article and some of my selections (and exceptions) will seem a lot less mysterious and flippant. Keep in mind that my original written text for the article was cut down by ~75% on each keyboard, including the introduction. PCW did a great job of condensing it, but obviously something is always lost whenever you chop that much text.
Yes, I considered the SV-318, along with the VTech Laser VZ-200, the Panasonic JR-200U, the Interact Home Computer System, the Jupiter ACE, the Tomy Tutor, the Timex-Sinclair 1500, the TRS-80 Color Computer, the Sinclair ZX Spectrum, the ORIC-1, the Casio FX9000P, and the Commodore MAX, among others, including obscure foreign and more prominent keyboards. Those did not make the list because either (1) they didn’t fit my inclusion criteria, (2) they didn’t rank low enough, or (3) some were so obscure that no one really had to put up with them. One of my decisions as a writer was to make a readable and entertaining list that people could identify with, instead of a string of low-production-run computers no one has ever heard of.
I respect everyone’s opinions (and passions) about the Commodore 64 and, yes, I know it’s the best selling computer model of all time. And no, I do not agree that the reason the C64 was successful was its keyboard. The reason is that it was a powerful, capable computer for about $300. Even if it had the best keyboard in its class of low-cost home computers, that’s not saying much, as you can see from the list.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Its about time someone called the C64 out for its travesty of a keyboard. I got way too many cramps programming on that beast as a kid.
November 4th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
I have to say, that list is disapointing, not knowing why the original PET got the calculator keyboard, or claiming the the PET 2001-32 had no backspace key (can you tell me what the INS/DEL key is for then?)
And the inclusion of the c64 in the list, even if as the best of the worst, is insulting. Whoever got cramps using a c64 surely was doing something wrong; the simbols are on the front on the key and don’t get in the way when typing.
The non standart layout? according to what? to a IBM-PC keyboard? that’s too subjetive. I can say now that I’ve been using a PC keyboard for as long as I used a C64, and I still find the C64 more intuitive in certain aspects.
If some computer deserves the 10 place for most of the faults you encountered on the 64 is the Atari 800XL, it’s keyboard is tall, the layour is even more ‘unstandart’ and the break key is besides the backspace.
And what about the Apple II? IIRC originally it had the reset ‘key’ besides de space bar.
November 4th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
With all due respect, the Spectravideo SV-318 wasn’t any more obscure than the Timex Sinclair 2068; in fact, both machines enjoyed full page color ads in the leading publications at the time. Also, when introduced, the price of the Commodore 64 wasn’t $300; it was $595.
Clearly, you’re writing from the perspective of someone who wasn’t there. I’m not saying that the Commodore 64 had the best keyboard; however, it’s a long way from making a top 10 list of worst keyboards, even given your own criteria. Ever try to type on an Atari 130XE?
November 4th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
now that we’ve heard from all the diehard C64 fans rallied up from the lemon64 forum, does anyone else want to comment?
November 4th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
really putting the c64 on the list is like putting the ford T model into a list of world’s top 10 worst cars / worst engine / worst transmission / worst steering wheel / worst seat /etc. you’re taking the computer out of context, where the machine certainly was NOT in the top 10 worst keyboard list rather the situation was the exact opposite. you article belongs to the ones like cosmopolitan’s “best 10 sex tricks”.
November 4th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
John Tower said: “C64 fans sound a lot like the retrocomputing equivalent of Mac zealots today. Any perceived sleight, and they’re on you like a swarm of angry bees.”
A ‘perceived slight’ such as ‘the c64 has one of the worst keyboards of all time’?
You really can’t paint the people who express disagreement with some of the comments in this article as over-sensitive zealots who see negative comments when there are none, considering the thrust of the article is so clear.
Let’s face it, when someone includes the top selling computer of all time on a list like this, and attempts to justify their choice with quite subjective reasons, there are going to be people who wish to chip in with their own perspective. It doesn’t mean they’re all crazy, diehard loonies. They may simply disagree.
It really is unfair to portray someone who criticises something popular as boldly slaughtering a sacred cow, while dismissing those who critique those criticisms as a bunch of raving zealots.
November 4th, 2007 at 8:16 pm
Great article, Benj! And entertaining! I enjoyed your comments about each candidate and can imagine how hard it must have been to select 10 keyboards from the myriad crappy keyboards that have been on the market over the years. Of course, the reason for many of those crummy keyboards was the necessity of low manufacturing cost. Still, that doesn’t excuse poor layout. And speaking of the Commodore 64, the keyboard isn’t the only thing bad about that computer; the physical design of it was just plain ugly: bulbous and gross. Maybe your next article could be about the 10 worst cases of computer industrial design!
November 4th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
We could all argue about the C64 until the sun comes up and none of us would ever win. Lists like this — by their very nature — are based on subjective criteria determined by the author, so complaining that the reasons for including a particular keyboard in the list are subjective is irrelevant. If anyone determines an accurate scientific process of repeatably and quantifiably measuring keyboard “greatness” or “worstness,” let me know. Until then, we’re stuck with nothing more than educated opinions.
I’m just happy that you guys cared enough to comment. Thanks for the rousing debate.
November 4th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
Is it just me, or is only one of those keyboards actually a “PC keyboard” . . ? PC meaning IBM PC (and its successive clones). Shouldn’t the article be titled “Worst Home Computer Keyboards” . . ?
November 4th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
When I think of bad keyboards, the Atari 400 and the PET’s tiny keys come immediately into my mind.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:11 am
Just to address Mr. Gentlegamer’s comment: Absolutely not!
It irritates me, and many others, to no end when people say that “PC means IBM PC”. PC means Personal Computer. Just because people may use the acronym to mean an IBM PC doesn’t mean that’s what it is. Any Personal Computer qualifies as a PC. Atari PC’s, Amiga PC’s, Commodore PC’s, Apple PC’s… Whatever…
Although there is quite a bit of controversy over the content of this article, this is one part that the author definately got right. 😉
-Andrew
November 6th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Huh…? Not sure why I am surprised by the anger displayed by a few of the C64 lovers, but I am anyway.
It is laughable to attack the critisisim of Commodore’s keyboard by touting how wildly popular the entire system was, and obviously continues to be.
Did the keyboard deserve to be on the list, maybe not. But just maybe the keyboard seems crappier due to the greatness of the rest of the system.
November 6th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
I think it’s much more laughable that c64’s keyboard made it on the list. I can see the reason aswell: the article had to feature well known systems, so at the end of the day its a list of old popular systems nothing more. Taking the c64’s keyboard for ‘visually confusing’ is not valid. look at your own pc keyboard, how many things are printed on the number or numpad keys or even others ? Do you find it visually confusing? No! Eventho everything is printed on the top of the keys, while the c64 had that in the front face. Then the second reason: numerous unstandard keys. In 82 there was no standard for keyboard, every machine had its own layout. c64 had only a few (3) and not numerous. Also whats the problem with non standard keys is over me. Did you found the first keyboards featuring ‘windows’ ‘sleep’ ’email’ etc bad just because they had non standard keys? In a world full of calculator, rubber and touch type keyboards the c64 had a proper one.
look at the appleII, the keyboard is almost a copy of the c64, the keys are placed too high aswell, features a few non standard keys, etc. still its not on the list.
bbc micro is in the same situation.
well I could go on forever, the c64 has definitly not one of the worst 10 keyboards machine, it had one of the best keyboards in its time.
also its over me how can one run a vintage computer blog, and at the same time write down stuff like ‘arent you glad you’re not using them anymore’. I wonder why are you interested in machines you’re ‘glad not to use anymore’
November 6th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Actually, I didn’t write this paragraph at all:
“Missing keys. Misplaced keys. Misshapen keys. These computers made typing confusing and uncomfortable–and sometimes nearly impossible. Aren’t you glad you’re not using any of them today?”
It was written by PC World staff. Most people don’t know this, but it’s amazing how much writers’ articles are actually written by editors under the author’s name. I’ve had trouble with that in other publications recently, and it bugs me. But that’s the way it is. PC World did an excellent job editing my piece, though, and I have no complaints. 98% of the sentences are mine. The rest, aside from that tagline paragraph I quoted above, are pretty much my thoughts rephrased. Like I said before, about 75% of the original article’s text was cut.
To the person who commented on the PET-2001-32-N’s INS/DEL key: it doesn’t work like a backspace key by default. How do I know? I have one and I tested it.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:58 am
Your article “got the juices flowing”. In the past I’ve owned a Vic20, C64 and now a C128 which believe it or not, I just purchased. As I type this reply on my Dell notebook, I think back on the Remington typewriter we used in high school for business admin and all the keyboards I’ve just mentioned. Much depends on what era you grew up in, comparing the “yesterdays” to today. Some of the keyboards mentioned such as the membrane type are obviously poor while others become more subjective. An earlier post commented on “IBM PC” as the default meaning of “PC”. In the early 1980s that was the case. Similar as “Kleenx” is to tissue in comparison. Everybody, well most people, knew what Commodore meant and still do. Ask a kid what is a Sinclair is. Many years ago I worked on a mainframe computer back when any computer was known as an “IBM” computer. Oh, the mainframe we used was not an IBM. Getting off the subject, well not really. Remember, it’s called a Commodore ,bad keyboard and all, that most folks know, not Atari, etc.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Did I miss something, or are people mistaking the PC Jr mentioned in the article with the “regular” IBM PC? The Jr had achiclet keyboard, which I’m guessing was used to make it more kid cleanup friendly.
November 11th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Just one more comment, People might be making comments on the C64 “Breadbin”‘s keyboard being to high, But have they taken into consideration the C64-C’s keyboard? Dude, I frown on the C64 blasphemy.
November 19th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
I would like to know what your PET do when you push INS/DEL, I’ve been testing the 2 PET keyboard layouts (graphics and business) on the XPET emulator (which does a good job simulating the PET layout on a PC keyboard), and reading the PET manual, and the INS/DEL key does what it’s supossed to do: It DELetes a character in normal mode, or INSerts a blank space in shifted mode. Just like it does in every other 8-bit Commodore computer.
I noted that the TI99/4 has what seems to be a space bar, is it functional or just a cosmetic piece of plastic?
December 5th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Hi, this is really a great article, I linked it at my site: http://digitaltools.node3000.com/blog/10_reviews_on_old_computing_keyboards.php
From my point-of-view this is not only about bad keyboards. In fact, mostly the latest entries are failures upon ergonomics and functionality, but on the other hand we could today lend some graphic design wisdom from the old pioneers.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
Thanks for the comment and the blog link, Digital Tools. I’m happy that you liked the article.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Only a total dingbat would shift-q their computer and quit when they have been working in a shiftless environment ALL day. -_-
None of these are keyboards by themselves anyways. These are all self contained computers. Its only normal to have specific keys like Run/Stop……
C64 was the most expandable of the stuff mentioned, and the keyboard works nearly like a typewriter. … I think the haters are just sissies.
Im only 19. I can use the thing as fast as this IBM keyboard. I dont gimp up when I press keys….. -_-
at least you got the Timex crap up there. Nothing says lame like a buncha giant pocket calculators.
January 11th, 2008 at 6:36 am
Sir you made an article entitled the “The 10 worst keyboards of all time” then you proceed to cut on the best selling computer of all time. It looks like you wanted controversy. Btw the 99/4 did have a crappy keyboard but the 99/4as was just as bad because they tried to fit a normal keyboard in the space the chicklet one took up. Did you put the C128 keyboard on the list of the best keyboards ever? I have a 128d the only keyboard I like better than it is the Ibm Model m.
January 12th, 2008 at 1:24 am
Would it completely violate PC World’s first publication rights in your contract to let all of these worrisome folks know why you picked the C64?
As far as I can tell, the most significant problems with that keyboard were some aspects of key placement, but CLR/HOME being next to INST/DEL was not one of them. The RUN/STOP key being right next to SHIFT LOCK was much more of an issue. The RESTORE key that didn’t do anything (unless you were also holding down RUN/STOP and basically just slapped it) was another. Another would have been the function keys, which probably should have been labeled F1 F2 F3 F4 and shifted values of F5 F6 F7 F8. The replacement of Esc with left-arrow.
And, of course, the cursor keys. Instead of having four keys arranged in a logical layout, there were only two keys. Unshifted, they led right and down; shifted, they led left and up.
But a nice, full-size, full-stroke keyboard was under your fingers. Most other common characters were in their more-or-less standard positions. And the legends on the front of the keys were much less distracting than the examples set by the Timex Sinclair machines mentioned in your article. Those things went a long way in compensating for the flaws.
Did your thinking go anywhere along these lines?
January 13th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I used most of the computers on the list. I find the C64 keyboard least objectionable of all the keyboards on the list. I’ll agree the IBM 5150 keyboard was excellent and one one of a few that still work without incident as do my C64 and 128.
I’d like to see an article on the 10 best keyboards. Keyboards like the Northgate and etc. are worthy of honor. I look forward to your comment.
May 25th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
el mejor teclado del mundo es el del t99/4a y si no estan deacuerdo conmigo chupenme la verga hijitos mios
May 25th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
jejejejejeje se me olvidaba decir que los teclados actuales son muy malos jajajajaja
chupadla!!!
November 5th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
The Commodore 64 keyboard took some getting used to, I will admit that. However, it was easily solved with proper height and placement and once keys are memorized, you never forgot if you did any serious typing, programming, or key animation on a regular basis. This includes all manner of CTRL key, Shift key, and Commodore key combinations. Sitting and typing for many hours on color graphics BBSs and multi-line chat systems was nothing for me. No strains, shoulder pains. Honest!
If all you did was type ASCII, or Commodore Business Machine’s variation of it, then yes, all those other keys and key combinations would be a serious pain in the whatsis any time you did need to use them, and just what IS a Run/Stop key doing on our standard keyboard anywa? … Oh yes… It’s a computer, after all! Not a Smith Corona or Olivetti.
But the solution to this problem would be what?! Another 50 keys? An “alt ###” solution substituting the Commodore key instead (with an added 17 or 12 key keypad?)? Jack Tramiel would have scoffed at that expensive solution, and users given either of these options would scoff too. Once mastered, the Commodore 64 keyboard setup, while difficult at first, is highly compact with each key serving a multitude of purposes. A serious user of it loved it, and wouldn’t part with it for all the standard IBM keyboards in China… or Cape Breton! The only deficiency we will gladly admit to is the lack of a keypad.
I can see how typists can “get used to” easily pressed keys that require feather-like touch typing. Ditto for someone transitioning to a Commodore keyboard after having used a Selectric or other computer keyboard that follows “the standard”. But guess what? I transitioned from the Commie keyboard to others, and while the easy keys of a circa 1990 IBM clone were much easier to use, they certainly were no easier to master or memorize for me. Quite the contrary.
Let’s also forget a small bit of trivia today that wasn’t so trivial in the late 70’s and early 80’s and is quite relevant to this discussion. The vast majority of the teeming masses did not type! No sir, they didn’t until that home computer found it’s way in their front door! So whatever they brought home became “the standard” keyboard for them, as it did for me, unless they had regular access and use of other standard keyboards in their lives.
The proof of this for me is that about four months ago, I found and began using a Commodore 64 emulator, and began typing in a very large application whose program listing I dumped 20 years ago to printer (No online source of the program available). I immediately began using the emulator a lot. I was then, and am now, flipping between using my IBM clone’s standard keyboard for both Commodore 64 work (the emulator changes key functions to that of a Commdore), and normal IBM clone work. And wonder of wonders, now that I have a “Commodore keyboard” again, I’m hitting my clone’s Shift-2 for the Commodore double-quote character on a regular basis when I am not using the emulator! I had not used a Commodore 64 in nearly 15 years, and “my standard” keyboard came back to me within two days, one of which was spent learning where a few odd-ball key substitions which, unhelpfully, are NOT within reach from home row like they were on the Commodore.
So for all those that grew up with a standard keyboard, yes, I feel for you if you’ve suddenly found yourself time-warped, and forced to use the lowly Commodore 64 keyboard. It would seem to be one of the worst case scenarios to deal with. But you will never convince a generation who grew up and learned to on and became super-typists with a Commodore 64 keyboard that it was deficient. No sir, it just is not so! They, like me, found it a joy, and it still remains a friend, even if it is long lost, and you would as well had you been in our shoes.
November 5th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Great comment, Jay. I appreciate your thoughts on the subject.
December 5th, 2015 at 9:01 am
99% of all laptop keyboards are far worse than the C64’s