Ask Slashdot: Calculators With 1-2-3 Number Pads? 393
dotancohen writes "Although the telephone has the 1-2-3 key on the top row, most calculators and keyboards have 7-8-9 on the top row. Switching between the two destroys muscle- and spatial- memory. Do any slashdotters use a scientific calculator with 1-2-3 on the top row? I've already scraped and resoldered my Casio fx-82 calculator to have 1-2-3 on the top, and remapped the numpad in Kubuntu, but if there exist any calculators like this already on the market, I'd buy two."
Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't blame the person who submitted the question.
Blame the person who posted it.
Or blame no-one and JFGI [android.com].
OCD Much? (Score:5, Insightful)
Touch-Tone with three fingers (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I dial all my phones with my thumb since 1) I have the manual dexterity to do so and 2) they stopped making rotary dial phones years ago.
Re:Touch-Tone with three fingers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:OCD goes wrong? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow, submitter is doing it wrong. It has got to be *much* easier to change phone dialpads than computer/calculator dialpads.
The random public phone you encounter would be slow, but how often does that happen? I mean, maybe a little more often than when you're forced to use someone else's calculator (like, say, during an engineering exam?) but still...
Re:OCD Much? (Score:5, Funny)
I learned to tell time at a much younger age then I learned how to use a phone or a calculator. And so I learned that numbers are arranged in a circle, with 1 just to the right of the top most point, 3 straight across to the right, 6 at the bottom, and 9 to the left.
Clearly the correct layout for a numeric keypad should reflect this!
Using mod 10 (or, looking at the last digit), the correct layout to match clocks would look something like this:
X 2 X
9 X 3
X 6 X
with the extra key going on the bottom somewhere. Filling in the corner numbers, rounding down, it should look like this:
0 2 1
9 X 3
7 6 4
The middle of a clock often has a couple of circles on an axle - one for the hour hand and one for the minute hand, so it probably makes sense to put the number 8 in the middle (which also has two circles). This leaves 5 for the extra key, and a final configuration of:
0 2 1
9 8 3
7 6 4
- 5 -
Does anybody know where I can get calculators and phones that match this obviously superior design?
-D. Vorak
Re: (Score:3)
http://thomasokken.com/free42/ [thomasokken.com] Runs on just about anything, including Android. Very good HP experience.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, The last person I heard complaining about this issue was a 029 keypunch operator. [columbia.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, the new model keypunch! I used one of those in college in the mid-70s, but I learned keypunching on a Model 026, running a Boy Scout mailing list in ~1971. So no, you're not close to old...
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:4, Interesting)
Since the whole thread has gone into ridicule, let me defend myself (OP):
I use Anki [ankisrs.net] to learn and memorize facts. When memorizing phone numbers and the like, I type them in so that Anki can check my answer. Then when I get to the phone I find that my muscle-memory is not only useless, it is actually a hindrance.
I have no problem operating either type of device, but the dichotomy puts up barriers where there could be bridges. When you need to remember a phone number, do you not mentally punch it into an imaginary phone? That spatial-memory device won't work if you sometimes type the number on a 1-2-3 keypad and other times on a 7-8-9 keypad.
I know that there are those of us who like to learn, and therefore use efficient memory techniques, and that there are those who ridicule those of us who learn. On a website for geeks, I had expected to find the former, not the latter.
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:4, Interesting)
Another post covered this material, but you should realize that geeks hate spatial memory and systems that use spatial memory. This is the community that embraces vi and hated Classic Mac OS... do the math.
Re: (Score:2)
Some geeks dislike spatial memory, but on the other hand how else would you describe understanding the "shape" of a program, or the way it fits together? I'm sure some geeks DO leverage spatial memory.
Re: (Score:3)
You must be new here ... or you never read slashdot on Troll Tuesday [tt]
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Insightful)
You have an interesting question there. I don't consciously imagine punching in a phone number, but as I do it my muscle memory helps me know when I've done it wrong. (Thanks for the link to Anki, also.) However, I almost never need to type in phone numbers on a computer, and it sounds like the only reason you do is so that you can use the memory aid tools. Do you do a lot of work with calculators? The way I type in numbers on a phone is normally with my thumbs, rather than my fingers, so it's (for me) a very different mental task than keying in on a keyboard. I don't think I'd have much overlap between the memory of typing numbers on my phone versus typing them on a keyboard.
A sibling commenter mentioned that they are terrible at remembering phone numbers. I am too -- that's why I use a tool to remember them for me. Why do you find yourself caring whether you have it in your head versus in the phone's memory?
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:4, Insightful)
Y'know, it seems to me that you have entirely over-engineered your solution. You've remapped your keyboard in X and switched the keycaps around. You've physically rewired your calculator and re-labelled the keytops. And now you're on the hunt for rare devices that breach established convention. Because you want every keypad you use to work like a telephone keypad. Why? Because you use a phone to practice entering non-phone numbers.
Dude, UR doin' it wrong! That's like trying to write by holding a pencil still and moving the paper underneath it - it works, but there's an easier way. Decide how you will use the number you want to remember. If it's a phone number you are trying to remember, you should use a phone keypad to commit it to muscle memory. If it's a number that you will rarely, if ever have to enter into a phone, use a computer keypad or calculator to do the same, or if you have a smartphone, fire up your calculator app of choice and use that instead.
Of course, if you have a smartphone, you'll realise that most phone numbers aren't worth expending effort to remember, because your phone will do it for you. If a phone number is worth remembering, it's worth keeping in your phone's memory.
Re: (Score:3)
I know that there are those of us who like to learn, and therefore use efficient memory techniques, and that there are those who ridicule those of us who learn. On a website for geeks, I had expected to find the former, not the latter.
Even on a site for geeks you have to understand the signal to noise ratio is not wonderful. There certainly are actual geeks and nerds here who appreciate mnemonic techniques and sympathize with your desire for prefab technology to make those techniques easier. I read your post and thought, "huh, interesting, but I don't know of any off the shelf calculators with that arrangement." Then I kept my mouth shut and moved on until I had something to say.
Ignore the idiots and the haters and chalk the lack of us
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Funny)
I rarely call people on my calculator.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who memorizes phone numbers anymore? Twenty years ago, I probably knew 100 phone numbers, and now I know maybe 10. My phone knows the numbers of the people I call, not me.
The calculator layout is much more important in terms of spatial memory than the phone layout. Data entry operators and spreadsheet power users have been using the 10-key format for many decades. If you need to make a change, make it on the phone, not on the calculator.
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Informative)
There are good reasons for the two layouts. They're lost in the mist of time, but they are good reasons.
Calculators derive their layout from a strictly mathematical perspective, and is probably the most sensible layout to work with if you want to practice your muscle memory.
The phone layout is that way due to the mapping of letters to the digits, which was defined back in the days of rotary dial phones. Putting the 'ABC' key at the top of the keypad made it easier to read. In addition, the in old pulse-dial system, the zero digit actually represented ten, not zero, and on rotary dials it was placed at the end after nine. That also helped to make the chosen key layout for phones seem more logical at the time, both for the phone manufacturers and for users who were used to rotary dials.
One thing you certainly aren't going to achieve is to get calculator or phone manufacturers to change their layouts. Both layouts are highly ingrained in the collective consciousness of their users, and no-one is going to buy a product which deviates from the norm. You may as well try to persuade everyone to go and buy a Dvorak keyboard.
So the short answer to your plea is: no. It ain't gonna happen.
But I can see hope for you: Smart phones.
While you aren't going to get calculators to change, smart phones have touch screen interfaces. I don't see any reason at all why there couldn't be an app that displays the phone keypad in calculator-like style. It may be the opposite of what you're asking for, but it would achieve the consistency that you're looking for between the two.
The only problem then is if you ever have to use someone else's phone to make a call....
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say the telephone pad is "upside down".
The "10 key" layout has been a standard for number crunching for ages. It's more efficient to have the low numbers on the bottom because they are statistically used more often, speeding up input.
Re: (Score:3)
He was waiting at Home Depot for the job, but they didn't take him.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Don't you have anything better to do? (Score:5, Informative)
Either way, it's a wasted question. Years ago, when Ma Bell was the only phone company and they came out with touch-tone phones, they patented the arrangement with 1-2-3 at the top. So if you want to make a calculator that uses that, you'll have to pay a fee.
That's not true. There's no patent for the 1-2-3 keypad (nor was Bell/AT&T the only phone company in the US, but that's not relevant here). Calculators in the form of mechanical adding machines predated the DTMF keypad by decades. When Bell came up with the touch-tone system, they actually spent a lot of money researching whether it should be adding machine layout, or 1-2-3 from the top. As it turned out, even experienced ten-key operators were able to dial phone numbers faster on the 1-2-3 pad because everyone--- even tenkey operators--- approached the task of dialing a phone with their index finger alone, regardless of whether it was pushbuttons or dial, because they were already in the habit of doing so with dial phones. 1-2-3 keypads are faster to use when visually hunting and pecking with one finger. Given that no one was ever going to be doing rapid data entry on a phone, it made more sense to use top-to-bottom order, because the reverse order of tenkey exists only to make rapid multi-digit data entry faster (i.e. zero under the thumb, pinkie for enter, and most common digits under the fingers as per Benford's Law)
I don't know what the hell is wrong with the OP that his brain doesn't have room for two different keypad layouts.
Really?? (Score:3, Funny)
Really? It's that hard to switch between number pads on calculators and phones? That's what you're posting to slashdot?
Have you considered getting out more often?
Re:Really?? (Score:5, Insightful)
While I don't enjoy it, I switch between my own home dvorak and qwerty at clients multiple times a week. It look a lot to get used to... but I did with a lot of stumbles on the way. I can understand the frustration, I guess, but I'd just stick with the calculator numpad. Dialing phone numbers is largely on the way out, isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, I was just going to say the same thing because I use Dvorak and Qwerty layouts, but add something else. What's wrong for the brain to learn both layouts?
Re: (Score:2)
You can answer that question yourself if you ask "What's wrong with the brain having to learn 1000 layouts". Even our flexible neurons have limits, and at least some people value their time too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I work for ma bell, and frequently have to call enough different numbers that there's no point in putting it in speed dial (some of which only ever get called once). That said, while I do have muscle memory for the dialling, there's a really easy solution that I'm surprised that the submitter hadn't considered:
Use your left hand to dial a phone, your right hand to use a calculator/numpad. *gasp* different set of muscles, different muscle memory. That's assuming you're actually in a situation where you could
Re: (Score:2)
Have you considered getting out more often?
Or less often.
Its the phone company that caused the problem (Score:2, Informative)
When ATT went to push button phones, they intentionally put the numbers backwards from 10 key adding machines everyone used back then. Then didn't want the fast typers to outpace their new phone system and punch the numbers in to fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod down as nonsense.
Pushbuttons didn't arrive until they had digital switching which was fully capable of buffering even into the old crossbar switches.
Re:Its the phone company that caused the problem (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if true, that proves nothing in regard to the claim that the button arrangement was designed to slow users down.
People who dial phones all day can get lightening fast.
You never had to wait for the buttons, they buffered it, even in the earliest pushbutton phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I did a bunch of searching in the Google Patent Search tool, but couldn't find a patent for it. I'm sure there is one, but there are so many others I just did not notice it. Hopefully someone can dig up a patent for this, as it might give a reason for why they arranged it that way.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I did a bunch of searching in the Google Patent Search tool, but couldn't find a patent for it. I'm sure there is one, but there are so many others I just did not notice it. Hopefully someone can dig up a patent for this, as it might give a reason for why they arranged it that way.
Don't believe it was patented, and if so, certainly not by AT&T.
That keyboard arrangement appeared in 1946, way before push button phones,
on the 026 keypunch from IBM. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/026.html [columbia.edu]
So if anything, AT&T was paying IBM royalties.
Re: (Score:2)
The phone company was simply following the example of the longest running keyboard manufacturers in existence at that time. The top row 123 keyboard dates from way prior to 1946.
Re: (Score:2)
When ATT went to push button phones, they intentionally put the numbers backwards from 10 key adding machines everyone used back then. Then didn't want the fast typers to outpace their new phone system and punch the numbers in to fast.
I doubt it. *MY* unverified explanation that I remember hearing somewhere is: They put the one in the upper left to make it more similar to the familiar rotary dial, where the numbers increase clockwise starting from upper left.
Anyway, is there a calculator on the market that has a phone-style rotary dial? Now that's something I might buy.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, is there a calculator on the market that has a phone-style rotary dial? Now that's something I might buy.
http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/curta_i.html [vintagecalculators.com]
Re:Its the phone company that caused the problem (Score:5, Informative)
Not true:
http://www.vcalc.net/Keyboard.htm [vcalc.net]
On a side note, back in my teens, I would make $5 for swapping the top and third rows of buttons on a standard WECO 25xx phone so that they matched an adding machine. The ladies in the office loved it.
Re:Its the phone company that caused the problem (Score:4, Informative)
My understanding is that Bell Labs tested a number of layouts before settling on the 1-2-3 matrix we use now as being simplest to master (see R. L. Deininger, Human Factors Engineering Studies of the Design and Use of Pushhutton Telephone Sets [alcatel-lucent.com], 1960, Bell System Technical Journal [PDF]).
I'm not sure if calculator / comptometer manufacturers had their competing studies; I've heard that when Bell asked for an explanation, the answer was a shrug...comptometers were about 80 years by then, so I think the origins of their layout are as opaque and full of folk explanations as the QWERTY layout.
Regardless, I've encountered OP's request before...but for phone layouts which matched calculator layouts. I was working in an operations office a few years ago run by a person who was a fan of "Cheaper by the Dozen" who wanted to optimize our phone dialing speed (this was a fun place to work, even if this request sounds odd). We didn't have any success, but it was an interesting thought.
The real question was where to put Q and Z (Score:2)
Some time back in the mid-80s we had a session at a symposium at Bell Labs on "The Question that Just Won't Die - Where to put the Q and the Z". TouchTone(tm) was pretty much universal by then, and phone-type number pads were showing up on cash machines, and there were starting to be all sorts of input systems for text on the pads. The problem is that it's really arbitrary and none of the answers are perfect, and also it's a simple enough question that everybody knows enough to comment on it.
The two most
I'd rather have a phone with 789 at the top... (Score:4, Insightful)
...given that I use keyboards more frequently than telephone number pads.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People still use land-lines without so much as caller-ID for backup phones, for odd locations, for apartment phones (in buildings not rigged to use cell-phones) and in a few other contexts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's fewer keystrokes even if you know the phone number. (unless the phone UI sucks, which is possible)
If you're on a dumbphone without a QWERTY keypad, and you don't live in a city with millions of people that straddles area codes and demands 10-digit dialing, entering a 7-digit number can be faster than entering a 5-letter name.
if you've done both since childhood (Score:3)
Then the muscle memories for each should be well compartmentalized such that you may switch between the two with high competency in either layout.
Aha! (Score:2)
Did you (Score:3)
Did you mean 2 or 8 ?
Fail (Score:2)
Switching doesn't destroy muscle or spacial memory. The problem is simply of increasing the amount of memory used.
Considering that numpads get longer use, and millions of people are very fast on them already, that is the correct mapping to use, not the telephone. The telephone is usually only used for 10 keypresses at a time when used for the numbers.
As for phones, on modern smart phones you can just swap them in software.
You can also use voice dialing to help avoid spending memory on the physical dialing.
WTF (Score:2)
Sounds like you are calling far too many people to have time to be doing calculations.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like you are calling far too many people to have time to be doing calculations.
Calling too many people without the use of an automated directory of some sort (of which there are many many available). I mean hell, are you sitting there with a paper phone book just calling people for shits?
Re: (Score:2)
And if so, does it really matter if you hit the wrong number ?
Get a smart phone (Score:4, Insightful)
Get an Android smart phone and write some custom Android software.
Either customize a scientific calculator program to match the phone dialing keypad, or write your own phone dialing software with a calculator keypad.
Plus there is the option of calling your friends from your address book and not even dialing the phone, or using Google Voice Search and just saying the digits.
I don't know what to tell you about lock keypads, public phone keypads, and the like. Just avoid them I guess? (Where I work, I can't use a bathroom without using a phone-style keypad.)
I agree with you that the incompatibility is annoying. I never bothered to do anything about it; I just adapt. But if you want to make your own custom solution, that doesn't seem sillier to me than the people who insist on using Dvorak keyboards or whatever.
steveha
Re: (Score:2)
So I pay for Wolfram Alpha on my iPhone and do everything that I used to do on my HP is about half the time.
Ask Slahdot: Calculators with Rotary Dial? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Although the telephone has a rotary dial for dialing numbers, most calculators and keyboards have button pads. Switching between the two destroys muscle- and spatial- memory, as well as ability to use commas. Do any slashdoters use a scientific calculator with a rotary dial on it? I've already scraped and resoldered my Casio fx-9000 calculator to have a rotor, and plugged a USB rotor phone into Gentoo, but if there exists any calculators like this already on the market, I'd buy three.
I'm looking for a car with a wheel to turn to put on the breaks and a string pull horn. Switching from a steam locomotive to an Audi destroys muscle- and spatial- memory
Re: (Score:2)
Witness the unintended acceleration associated with the Audi 5000. Casey Jones, you better watch your speed.
Nope. (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't dial a phone with the same fingers you punch a calculator with. At least, not if you're a touch-typist. And if you aren't, why would you worry about this in the first place?
I learned the 10-key calculator in middle school and have never, ever had a problem with the fact that some keypads are upside-down from the standard 10-key layout.
This is seriously a non-issue in every regard.
The different layouts are kind of the point (Score:2)
You can read more about Bell/Western Electric's development of the teleph [porticus.org]
remap (Score:2)
I think I'd rather remap my phone's keypad to have 7-8-9 on the top. Especially since so many phones now have the keypad on a touchscreen, where it all can be done in software.
"Destroys muscle memory" (Score:2)
No, it doesn't. I can type with either very quickly without looking at what I'm doing. The brain is a wonderful thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Two distinct spacial/muscle maps is possible (Score:3)
Have you considered holding you hands slightly different between the keypads? For example I touch type 7-8-9 number pads like it was a normal keyboard with the hand normal hovering over the home row centered on the five. Where as with 1-2-3 keypads I normally type those using my thumbs. This allows me to have two different special memory patterns that I can switch between and use without thinking about it. I actually do something similar with Dvorak vs Qwerty keyboards. Depending on how I hold my hands near the keyboard a different set of spacial memory is triggered. I still occasionally while type using the wrong style but then notice that I was holding my hands wrong and instantly switch without having to really think about the differences between the layouts. I use a more normal home position for Dvorak and angle my hands slightly more for qwerty. Urp .qamln. cu C abin. mf dabeo gl nct. ydco C yfl. ',.pyf and now with my hands back to the other position I switch back to Dvorak. ( I had to tweak the previous since auto-correct messed up angle to "a bin." instead of "abin.". I was surprised it didn't change more of it. )
Are you kidding? (Score:4, Funny)
How 20th Century (Score:2)
Why use keypads?
I've learned to do verbal calculations with my Android phone. Just say the calculation you want into voice search and Google will return the results. There is no need to carry both a phone and a calculator, and speaking the formula is much easier than trying to use a miniature calculator keyboard.
I always figured the phone was wrong (Score:2)
Really, when was the last time you dialed something on your phone by its number? Every number I call often on my phone is in the memory of my phone, so I'm dialing by name. The memory of my phone far exceeds the total number of people and places I have an
Wrong question for geeks (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the wrong question to ask geeks. They have no muscle or spatial memory, and don't care whether anyone else does.
Or haven't you noticed?
Across all of your free/OSS software:
1) What keys do you type to search for text?
2) What keys do you type to activate File->Save?
2a) Is File->Save greyed out if there are no changes?
3) When you hit shift-ctrl-end-del, does this take out the trailing CR/LF or not?
4) Where are the preferences - under "File", "Help", "Document", "Edit", "Tools"?
5) Are the preferences called "preferences", "options", "settings"?
6) Using the debugger - which F keys activate step-in/step-out/step-over?
7) When you click in a text box, does it insert the cursor or select the entire line?
Geeks care not one whit about compatibility. They make their interfaces by what "seems" right at the time, with no regard for the greater universe of programs in the world.
Good luck with your answer. Maybe you can create your own calculator online.
Re: (Score:2)
VIM!
1) : / .vimrc
2) : w
2a) Everything is grey!
3) d $
4)
5) Good question.
6) Good point.
7) What is this "click" you speak of?
You make a good point about FOSS. The lack of standardization is a headache and led me to just write everything I can in Vim.
However I think the issue has more to do with the users than the programers. Geeks tend to learn everything about the programs they use, and this can be a serious time investment. It would take a very long to become as proficient in program B af
It's a fair point (Score:2)
That's a fair point. Geeks aren't intimidated by learning a completely new paradigm.
That's one reason that older folks have such a hard time with newer systems - they have to learn something new every time. It would be nice if there were some type of "conceptual consistency" across applications; so that, for instance, burning a CD-ROM would involve conceptually the same actions across all programs.
The poster specifically called out muscle memory, which has always been a big headache for me. My system has a
Why can't they... (Score:2)
Make a phone pad like the number line on the top of my keyboard... all digits straight in a row... duh!
One of the most stupid /. questions EVER (Score:3)
I am rich with mod points, but almost every comment is bang on the nose - I can't seperate them. Consider yourself +1 insightful, if you posted.
(I used to struggle a bit with this myself, 20 years ago, but these days I hardly ever dial a number. The PC layout is what I like now. )
Odd pads (Score:2)
But only because the GF has a phone with a calculator style keyboard, it confuses me every time!
Gimme a break (Score:3, Interesting)
It is not difficult to "rememberize" 10-key layout versus reverse 10-key. This "feat" is well within the capabilities of subhumans who live in flyover territory, much less elite geeks who can get their questions approved on slashdot.org. I had no problem with it myself, back when I worked for a phone company and had to switch back and forth between the IBM-PC 10-key pad and the telephone reverse 10-key. The mouthbreathers I worked with picked it up after a few weeks.
Actually, now that I think about it, what's the big deal? Any uber-geek should be able to adjust to these circumstances quite quickly. And honestly: times aren't like they were years ago when I had to dial 50 phone numbers per day, and enter 50 results into the computer. Who the hell, in this day and age, sits down next to a "push-button" landline telephone and keys in the numbers for his friends? We all use mobile phones these days, it's all in the phone book. In the last...five, ten years? I've had to use my 31337 ten-key skillz exactly...zero times. When you meet a new person, you just punch in their number once: either by soft keyboard (iPhone) or by 1234567890 above qwertyuiop (one of those old-fashioned "blackberry" phones).
Oh, I think I see. On the submitter's web page [dotancohen.com], we can see the following bit of sublime insight:
Yeah, he's an idiot.
swap hands? (Score:2)
I'm can't tell if this is a dumb idea or a brilliant one. What about training yourself to type phone numbers with your left hand? It might be just enough to segregate out the muscle memory. It would be moderately annoying while you're training yourself, but if you're re-wiring calculators and remapping keyboards it can't be much more troublesome.
Unfortunately I don't use either kind of numpad much myself so I can't try it - I would just to see if it works.
Something of interest (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2019/why-do-telephone-keypads-count-from-the-top-down-while-calculators-count-from-the-bottom-up [straightdope.com]
The story begins back in pre-calculator days, when there were cash registers. We're not talking cash registers that scan, but mechanical things where you actually had to push the keys hard to punch numbers. The cash registers were designed with 0 at the bottom, and the numbers going up. Why did cash registers choose this organization? I was unable to find any clear answer. These were the days before customer surveys and mass marketing opinion polls. The people who designed cash registers evidently just thought it was the obvious approach--lowest numbers at the bottom, highest numbers at the top.
In fact, the earliest cash registers had multiple keys. You didn't enter 7 and 9 and 5 for $7.95; there was a separate column of keys for each decimal place. Think of a matrix, with the bottom row of 0's, next a row of 1's, then a row of 2's, going up. The right hand column would represent single units (cents), the next column for tens, then hundreds, etc. So, to enter $7.95, you'd actually enter 700, then 90, then 5.
When calculators made their appearance, they copied the cash register format. In fact, some of the earliest mechanical calculators (ah, how my wife loved her Friden!) had multiple columns, like the cash register. The earliest calculators had keypads that were ten rows high and generally 8 or 9 columns across.
When hand-held and electronic calculators made their appearance, they copied the keypad arrangement of the existing calculators--0 at the bottom, 1-2-3 in the next row, 4-5-6 in the next row, and 7-8-9 in the top row, from left to right. So, basically, they evolved from the cash register.
The Touch-Tone phone emerged in the early 1960s. Before that, there were rotary dials, with the numbers starting at 1 at the top right and then running counterclockwise around the dial to 8-9-0 across the bottom. Why would "0" be on the bottom? Probably because the dialing mechanism was pulse, not tone. Since they couldn't do zero pulses for 0, they did ten pulses, and hence put the 0 at the end. (Thanks to Radu Serban for this suggestion.)
There seem to be three reasons that the Touch-Tone phone keypad was designed as it was:
(1) Tradition. People were used to dialing with 1-2-3 on top, and it seemed reasonable to keep it that way.
(2) AT&T (the only phone company at the time) did some research that concluded there were fewer dialing errors with the 1-2-3 on top (possibly related to the traditional rotary dial layout).
(3) Phone numbers years ago used alphabetic prefixes for the exchange (BUtterfield 8, etc.). In the days of rotary dials, no doubt it seemed logical to put the letters in alphabetical order, and to associate them with numbers in numerical order. The number 1 was set aside for "flag" functions, so ABC went with 2, DEF with 3, and so on. When Touch-Tone phones came in, keeping the alphabet in alphabetical order meant putting 1-2-3 at the top.
So there we have it. Basically, calculator keypad design evolved from cash registers, while telephone keypad design evolved from the rotary dial. Tradition has kept them that way ever since.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not the whole story. I know that at least in Sweden a different rotary phone system was used. With the numbers the other way around or something like that. Memories are from 25+ years ago, so a bit hazy, but I definitely remember being baffled the first time I had to use a Swedish phone.
I also know that early "Adding machines", before cash registers, also used the lowest at the bottom layout. I think it was mechanically easier to build. I still have a 100 year old one here, once used by my grandfath
Fix yourself first (Score:2)
In fact, you've decided that the telephone way is "right" and that every computer keyboard is "wrong". Since you only interact with a couple of phones, probably, might it not be easier to change them than it is to change every computer, TI calculator, keypad, etc? Shouldn't be too hard to write an "inverted dialer" app for whatever phone you have.
I fly on a numeric keypad, I can also dial my phone fast. Th
Stick with PC layout, use software dialers (Score:2)
In general, this goes beyond a waste of time into the level of trolling.
The only person this could possible be a problem (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be easier to change the phone instead? (Score:2)
Let's do some simple math. From your description, you've got one phone, one computer and one calculator. Two of those devices use the same number layout - the calc and the comp. So wouldn't it be more logical to change the one device (the phone), not the other two? I can't speak from experience, but I imagine it wouldn't be hard to do on an Android phone, and you've already shown a willingness to do minor soldering if necessary.
In any case, I don't think muscle memory is really an issue. When typing on a co
If you're really that concerned (Score:2)
Buy yourself a rotary phone - problem solved.
Oh, and you may have to build another intermediate device that converts the click/pulses to duo-tones.
Or, better yet - build an intermediate device that converts the pulses and analog audio signal to IP, hook it up to your cable modem and cancel your phone service. Call it an "Internet Telephone" - you'll make millions. Be sure you're first to file though.
More importantly... (Score:2)
More important than the orientation of the keypad is a calculator that takes full advantage of a keyboard and full-size screen.
It turns out >99.9% of PC calculators don't feature a full multi-line notepad/scratchpad style, or on-the-fly 'answer-as-you-type' functionality. A bit like the amazing Soulver on the Mac actually, which was the only calc so far to realize that traditional paper-roll calcs are doing it all wrong.
Hence the inevitable quick shameless plug for my 'OpalCalc' calculator which I only j
hsilop (Score:2)
The problem I have with calculators is not being able to find the ENTER key
This applies elsewhere, too! (Score:3)
This notion of not destroying muscle memory through similar but opposite motions is really important!
For instance, I often turn right with my car. Doing so involves turning the steering wheel clockwise until the car is going the direction I want. However, I often have to turn left, and doing so involves a motion that is precisely the opposite of turning right.
Dear Slashdot: is there a car that will allow me to turn both right and left by only turning the steering wheel to the right? Alternately, a car that turns right from a counter-clockwise turn of the wheel, and then I'll just use whichever car is appropriate for the turning I will be making, such that I am only ever turning the wheel in one direction. Either solution would be fine: I'm a pretty flexible guy.
TIA!
What's wrong with the question? (Score:3)
Why do so many people object so vehemently to the question?
I personally don't have much trouble with the difference between calculator and telephone keypads; I can switch between them without much mental effort. (I can also switch between vi and emacs, and between bash and tcsh.)
But on every system I use, one of the first things I do is figure out how to remap the caps-lock key so it acts as a control key. In decades of effort, I've never gotten used to having the control key in a position other than immediately to the left of 'A'. If it works for most people, that's terrific, but it doesn't work for me.
But the OP does have a problem with it. The "destroys muscle- and spatial- memory" part seems exaggerated, but it may well be accurate *for the person asking the question*.
Different people have different mental models and usage patterns. Devices and software are supposed to be designed for users, not the other way around.
It's not a stupid question at all.
Re: (Score:2)
This is something that has bugged me for years: why do people still use calculators? Take an interpreter for your scripting language of choice or take emacs or whatever and you can do anything a calculator does and even more. For example you will never have to type all those number columns because you can just copy and paste them or read them from files.
There are still occasions when I use a real calculatot. Like going to the hardware store to buy tiles and working out how many of each size I would need and what it will cost. Yes I could take a computer but a calculator in my jeans pocket is much more practical. Plus if I drop it when stacking the tiles in the car its not much of a loss compared to a computer
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just turn of the radios (aka airplane mode). Or put a PIN on your SIM, reboot and don't enter the PIN if you want to be sure your cellphone manufacturer turns of the GSM radio. The paranoid can always remove the SIM card and put the device in a faraday cage for the appropriate signals.
Re: (Score:2)
You've spent years -- years -- wondering why people use calculators instead of carrying a computer with them at all times in case they need to use emacs or matlab or wolfram or python or tex or metapost or c++ templates to add a couple numbers together?
At any point did you consider asking someone that was using a calculator?
You know what, maybe you should submit it to ask slashdot. It could be front page material.
Re: (Score:2)
Better idea: either use the phone pad as a calculator or write an app for it that uses the layout you prefer.
Re:Easy (Score:4, Funny)
You've clearly never looked at a photo of a girl on MySpace or a dating website. Phones are always held in front of bathroom mirrors, so it all works out.
Re: (Score:3)
Spatial memory, maybe; but this has nothing to do with muscle memory. The way you hold a cell phone is very different from the way you "hold" a PC keyboard. I for one have never wanted to type on my PC's numpad using my two thumbs...
You might have a point, but my right thumb is inoperable. Thus, I often use the phone keypad with the same fingers as I type with. (I'm the OP).