▼
Posts: 1,107
Threads: 159
Joined: Jan 1970
I have one of these, a S/N 1932AXXXX unit.
Why do you think such a big fuss made over the keys being tall?
The exact same key dimensions had been used on the HP65 and HP67. They both had functions written on the front of the keys.
What was the big deal, do you think? Why was something OK from 1974 to 1979, but by early 1980 warranted a change in the type of key used?
▼
Posts: 562
Threads: 27
Joined: Oct 2006
Just a theory, but the optimum viewing angles for LCD and LED screens differ by several degrees (especially with the clear reflective covers on the 41C screens which can cause nasty reflections in certain lighting angles and make the screen illegible). That display change is enough to merit a change in key design so that the user can view both the keys and the screen at the same time.
▼
Posts: 1,841
Threads: 54
Joined: Jul 2005
Maybe the newer (flat) keys were cheaper to produce.
I like the 'newer' style keys much more than the steeper ones.
The blue alpha legends are much easier to read on the newer keys IMHO.
Slightly OT:
In my experience the keys on units made between 1984 and 1986
have the nicest tactile feedback, whereas the units from 1987 to 1989 have a 'weaker' click.
▼
Posts: 46
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2007
Quote:
Slightly OT:
In my experience the keys on units made between 1984 and 1986
have the nicest tactile feedback, whereas the units from 1987 to 1989 have a 'weaker' click.
I agree. MY HP-71, made in 1984, has the nicest key-feel of any HP I have experienced. Based on the "solidity" and ruggedness of the 71, I think this is the peak period of HP's, at least as mechanics are concerned.
Posts: 124
Threads: 17
Joined: Dec 2006
It could possibly be that the shorter keys were a little cheaper, maybe even only a penny a unit. Multiply that by 100,000 and you save $10,000. I don't know how many HP built, but that could be a lot of money.
▼
Posts: 1,322
Threads: 115
Joined: Jul 2005
.01 enter 100,000 X does not give 10,000 on my cx. Been using that token T.I. again, haven't you?
I remember reading or hearing that something over 2,000,000 of the 41 series were sold. If i remember correctly and that was true, add a few as warranty replacements, demos and give aways then multiply by 35. That is a whole bunch of keys.
Posts: 1,392
Threads: 142
Joined: Jun 2007
Come on, mad dog, an error in arithmetic is a mortal sin in THIS forum!
▼
Posts: 124
Threads: 17
Joined: Dec 2006
OOPS!!! I must have used the TI-89 Titanium I recently got off the unmentionable website for that!!!
TO ALL FORUM MEMBERS: My apologies!!!
Edited: 18 Feb 2007, 2:36 p.m.
Posts: 901
Threads: 113
Joined: Jun 2007
Was it the readability of the alphanumerics or was it something else? Somewhere I have read, but can't locate it right now, that the "tall keys" keyboard had tactile problems. I have a "tall keys" unit S/N 1944A01585 . The bottom two rows of keys have an entirely different feel than the rest of the keyboard.
▼
Posts: 111
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2007
Doubt that cost played a role. If you think you can save a penny PER key by shortening it...how MANY cents do you think each key cost? Consider that they'd have to make new tooling, which is not something appealing from mfg perspective. In those days, you'd really want to think hard before prematurely retiring tools just to save a ruple on each key.
As the "throw" of a hinged key is proportional to the radius it sweeps through, what feels good for a flat key may have your fingertip moving a quarter-inch for a very tall key. It feels weird.
It'd be clever if HP introduced a simple membrane-based key tension authority, similar to what we R/C airplane pilots can do with our control stick's tension.
Just some cents.
▼
Posts: 184
Threads: 1
Joined: May 2006
Quote:
It'd be clever if HP introduced a simple membrane-based key tension authority, similar to what we R/C airplane pilots can do with our control stick's tension.
Just some cents.
Hey, good idea! Maybe something based on air pressure - like the sneakers. Plug a pump into the side and you're ready to go!
C'mon HP, we're waiting!
Posts: 901
Threads: 113
Joined: Jun 2007
I wrote:
"Somewhere I have read, but can't locate it right now, that the "tall keys" keyboard had tactile problems. I have a "tall keys" unit S/N 1944A01585 . The bottom two rows of keys have an entirely different feel than the rest of the keyboard."
I found the reference. Re: HP-41 Related Repair Questions
Message #5 Posted by Randy on 30 Oct 2006, 10:35 p.m.,
in response to message #1 by Kevin Kitts
"It is common on tall key 41's for the 1, 2 and sometimes the 3 keys to be flat - that is to say they lack the normal tactile feedback. It shouldn't stay down though when pressed. That is usually caused by something sticky having been spilled onto the keys. ..."
None of the tall keys on my HP-67 have the lack of proper feel.
Gene: Do some of the tall keys on your HP-41C also have this defect?
▼
Posts: 1,107
Threads: 159
Joined: Jan 1970
No, none of the keys have a problem.
The LCD tilt/no-tilt would make sense.
I just don't think it was mechanical..after all, these style keys and keyboard had been used already for 6+ years by the time of the 41c.
Gene
Posts: 1,792
Threads: 62
Joined: Jan 2005
Hi, Gene --
Quote:
I have (an HP-41C "Tall key"), a S/N 1932AXXXX unit.
Why do you think such a big fuss made over the keys being tall?
The exact same key dimensions had been used on the HP65 and HP67. They both had functions written on the front of the keys.
What was the big deal, do you think? Why was something OK from 1974 to 1979, but by early 1980 warranted a change in the type of key used?
I believe that "allen" below gave the best answer. The LED display on the "tall key"-design HP-34C (and the HP-65 and HP-67 as well) were angled toward the user, while the HP-41C's display was not.
Tall keys with steep sides allowed them to have a more compact footprint, while leaving space for function legends printed on the sides and a larger top surface. However, the legends on the sides were very difficult to read from directly overhead. This was a particular bane for the HP-41C, given its display and intended utility as a handheld field calcuator as well as a portable desktop unit.
All this aside, I believe that much of the appeal of the "tall key" HP-41C's is that they are units of the original design (only one year out of eleven), are US-made, have the boldest display, and might even include an interesting bug or two...
My US-made HP-41C (S/N 2046Axxxxx) is a redesigned-key unit with no bugs, great key feel and display, and soild construction.
-- KS
Posts: 669
Threads: 63
Joined: Dec 2009
Gene on 17 Feb 2007, 7:45 p.m. wrote:
> Why do you think such a big fuss made over the keys being tall?
>
> The exact same key dimensions had been used on the HP65 and HP67.
> They both had functions written on the front of the keys.
>
> What was the big deal, do you think? Why was something OK from
> 1974 to 1979, but by early 1980 warranted a change in the type of
> key used?
Does the phrase "continuous improvement" ring a bell?
Its not like the key caps on the classics were the result of years and years of research. HP got feedback from the users of the 35 and 45 and redesigned the key caps resulting in the HP-65 / 67, the series 2x and 3x keyboards.
The HP-41 was also introduced in that time-frame, and early models got the "tall" keys. Eventually HP got some more feedback from the users and decided to introduce the low profile keys for their new series (the Voyagers).
Since the HP-41 family was still in production, there was no need to keep the old manufacturing facility open just for one calculator, so they transitioned the 41 family to the low-profile keycaps as well.
Since HP (apparently) believed that the new keycaps were "better", it makes sense that they would want their top-of-the-line model to benefit from the redesigned keys.
So no "big fuss", just evolution.
**vp
▼
Posts: 1,107
Threads: 159
Joined: Jan 1970
Again, this all makes sense.
I had always heard people say that users couldn't read the letters on the front of the tall keys very well. But that didn't make sense to me, since I never heard anyone say they couldn't read the symbols on the front of the keys on the HP65, HP67 etc.
The display tilt of the older models makes more sense than a sudden change in user tastes. :-)
▼
Posts: 515
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2006
I don't know but I like the tall keys better.
|
