You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

12-6-2016 13:30:21  #11

Re: IBM with 10-key

M. Höhne wrote:

Thanks for the research, Repartee, but this diagram is nothing at all like the keyboard in the OP's post.

I'm not sure why you would say this. The keypunch keyboard is quite a lot like the keyboard in the OP's post - especially in the number section, which was the principle non-standard thing about the Selectric keyboard: you have a numeric section in the same general area of the larger keyboard, four rows slanting to the left and the numbers are in the same places. Also, the model IBM keypunch whose description I posted a link to was introduced circa 1949 so its keyboard type was clearly the model for the typewriter's extra numeric section. It is true many of the special function keys on the keypunch are unrepresented on the typewriter.

I stand by my assertion that SouckeFan's picture is of a typewriter more widely used in general business and/or academia, and although it might have been used sometimes to train numerical-entry operators, that was not its main purpose.

Maybe.  What I verified from the trusted source was that the numeric keypad on the typewriter was so similar in layout to that on the keypunch that the design of the latter was essentially reproduced in the former. The idea that because of this design similarity the intention was to train keypunch operators might have been a folk etiology. But there was a job description "keypunch operator", horrible as it seems, and so like ordinary typists they would have benefited from some pre-assignment training. Is it far-fetched to speculate that IBM noted following the Selectrics introduction with its interchangeable type balls that they were far smaller and cheaper than keypunch machines for basic training?

My "confirmed" properly referred to the similarity of keyboard layout and not to the inferred function - but anybody who compares the photo to the diagram can see that the contradictory claim "this diagram is nothing at all like the keyboard in the OP's post" is wrong and frankly seems more than a little antagonistic. Classic Usenet, but a little out of place in a friendly interchange I think?

"Damn the torpedoes! Four bells, Captain Drayton".

12-6-2016 17:20:10  #12

Re: IBM with 10-key

Repartee, my reaction to your research has to do with your conclusion that the embedded 10-key pad on a consumer typewriter was primarily to train keypunch operators instead of to provide flexibility in business offices. And then presenting that as the explanation without even a nod to the possibility of a consumer business use case.I said that because, of the 45 keys on the IBM 026 keyboard, 10 “control” keys do not appear on the typewriter keyboard and the 026 does not have several keys that are practically essential for everyday usage, e.g., question, colon, and semicolon, and the period and comma are in awkward locations for typical usage. It apparently was not designed for the general consumer and that leads me to wonder what other non-standard features and techniques it supports or requires. It just does not seem reasonable to say that the uasge of that keyboard explains the reasons for offering an embedded 10-key pad on a consumer typewriter. That’s why I said it was nothing at all like the OP pic. OK, the biggest parts of the two keyboards are pretty much the same, but the differences are greater (more signaificant) than the similarities.Anyway, I could see IBM using this design to train keypunchers and especially coders, but in the business world it would have been way cheaper to give office staff cheap adding machines for the purpose. And the OP’s reference is to a consumer machine. Let’s see if someone can find some IBM promo material featuring this feature.The similarity of the arrangements of the number section does not seem significant to me, at least for right-handed operators; I see no reason to do it any differntly for coders vs bookkeepers. In fact I am much more concerned with the fact that it is the reverse of adding machine design, with the 123 at the top rather than the bottom. Why would IBM disrupt adding machine practice for entering many numbers quickly? So, maybe both of us are talking through our hats. Embedded 10-key pads on computer keyboards are usually 123 on the bottom. What do you make of that?You have mentioned your trusted source before. Citation needed.I am sorry for coming across as more than a little antagonistic. I did not mean to be more than a little antagonistic. Just the general uneasiness regarding internet assertions.


12-6-2016 17:22:13  #13

Re: IBM with 10-key

Jeez, sorry about the formatting above. I produced it with seven paragraphs. Uwe,....


12-6-2016 18:05:18  #14

Re: IBM with 10-key

You know, come to think of it, I think I've seen somewhere this kind of keyboard was used in schools for training purposes.  It was a long time ago, and mah pore ol' haid just happent to think of it.

Underwood--Speeds the World's Bidness

17-4-2020 12:47:58  #15

Re: IBM with 10-key

I know this thread is several years old, but I have authoritative info to add which may help previous posters or those to come.

In the IBM publication “Type Catalog - Typebars, Elements, Keybuttons, Fonts” (Form No. 241-5687-4, July 1978), it shows that this is the “016 1428 OCR KEYPUNCH SIMULATOR” keyboard arrangement.  It is distinguishable from the other 16 OCR keyboard layouts by the characters on the 7 key.  It corresponds to the typeball element part no. 1167016, the last three digits of which should be on the metal under the lever.



Board footera


Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum