Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Portables Hardware

(Yet Another) Mobile Keypad 220

Posted by Hemos from the and-then-you-do-a-handstand-and dept.
A reader wrote to us about Intel's newly unveiled mobile keypad, which, all things considered, doesn't look nearly as terrible as most mobile keypads. Still not exactly stirring, but not too bad either. Of course, there's getting it into production, licensing etc etc
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

(Yet Another) Mobile Keypad More

(Yet Another) Mobile Keypad

Comments Filter:

  • Why the confounded close-ups? (Score:5, Informative)

    by casio282 ( 468834 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:07AM (#7024764) Homepage
    Both pictures available in the article are too close-up to see the entire keypad...Here's a better pic:

    http://www.futurebytes.ch/images/news/fastpad.jpg [futurebytes.ch]

    • Re:Why the confounded close-ups? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by InfiniteWisdom ( 530090 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:18AM (#7024860) Homepage
      Ah now I know why.... in your picture the phenomenal ugliness of the keypad is much too obvious

    • Ick. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kaki Nix Sain ( 124686 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @11:09AM (#7025336)
      Why did they put the keys in alphabetical order. Bad, bad, bad.

      Would have been better to pick this layout [chicagologic.com]

      • Hmmm... I've typed on a TI83 for a while, and the A-Z layout might be more comfy than the qwerty layout.

      • Re:Ick. (Score:3, Interesting)

        by DarkSarin ( 651985 )
        ACk!
        why use a qwerty based layout? QWERTY was designed to slow typists down, since old typewriters couldn't keep up with ultra-fast typists. Sure the concept of pc keyboarding helping is nice (technically this is called priming, borrowed from pouring water down a pump to start it going), but priming effects only go so far, and are frequently cancelled out by other cognitive and linguistic factors (such as letter frequency in any given set of words).

        The layout you show in your link is interesting, but har
      • I just recently started doing email on my Palm PDA, and while I'm darn good at Graffiti, writing an email in graffiti gets tiring quickly and I'm looking for a thumbboard.

        So... when I saw the phone layout above, It immediately made sense, and I'm sure I could type twice as fast as with the alphabetical layout.

        Probably the biggest hurdle to the adoption of this layout is the general perception that John Q. Public is a moron. Seriously, though, I bet that there are a lot of cell phone makers that would GREA
    • I don't know about you, but with my large sausages it would be very hard to use the PRIMARY functionality of the phone keyboard -- hitting the number keys.

      Well, there is no way to determine the scale of the image, so if the phone is 12" tall, I might be able to use it...

      A more reasonable design might be to use hat switches, which would give you even more keys in less space, without forcing people to put their fingers through pencil sharpeners.

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
      • I remember reading Levy's comments on it. When you press the number buttons, accidental FasTap presses are disregarded. I couldn't give you technical detail, however.
        • I remember reading Levy's comments on it. When you press the number buttons, accidental FasTap presses are disregarded. I couldn't give you technical detail, however.

          Based on the picture, I doubt I would be able to reach the number buttons with my big fingers.

          Regards,
          --
          *Art

  • A good mobile keyboard is . . (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Brahmastra ( 685988 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:07AM (#7024765)
    . . . a dead mobile keyboard. Every mobile input device I've used until now is slow and sucks arse. A good speech based input device may help but you can't use that everywhere. It'll be like the annoying cellphone freaks who think we want to listen to their conversation in a restaurant.
    • I never understood people who think talking on a cell phone in a restaurant is rude.

      It'll be like the annoying cellphone freaks who think we want to listen to their conversation in a restaurant.

      Oh now it all makes sense. I completely agree, I never want to listen to someone's conversation in a restaurant. I mean come on, it's time to study and you've got all this work to do, why the hell do people have to talk while you're at a restaurant! Those pricks should all be shot. Wait a restaurant is a wha

  • Sweet (Score:5, Funny)

    by -Grover ( 105474 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:07AM (#7024770)
    j4Ust W1h1a8t we al3l ne21ed!!!

    Okay, obligitory funny out of the way, it actually might just work out. As far as I'm concerned the extra $2 bucks a month I spend on unlimited text messaging on my phone saves me a ton of money because I'm not using minutes. Anything to help facilitate me using it more, I'm all for.
  • I haven't used text on my phone enough for the text entry method (typing each number up to four times) to be a hassle.

    What I DO use my phone for, however, is dialing numbers. And if I have to have to press FOUR buttons to enter ONE number, then this keyboard would create more problems than it would solve for me.

    Just my two pence.

    William

    • Re:Perhaps mobile phones have come a long way, but (Score:4, Informative)

      by b!arg ( 622192 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:23AM (#7024922) Homepage Journal
      I think the idea is that by pressing a number you are essentially pressing all four letters that surround that number at the same time and it interprets it as that number. That's how I see it it anyway. It does seem like a bit of a kludge no doubt, but I couldn't really say until I used it. It also seems to work under the assumption that everyone's fingers are the same size.
  • I think this is a diversion from where technology in user input design should be heading. I actually find it increasingly frustrating to get information into any kind of portable device using mini-keyboards. No matter how clever they are.

    The future lies with Hand-writing recognition and good high resolution screens. We have used to pen for well over 2000 years and it is both comfortable, easy to understand and use and fits the requirements of being small and usable on the train/bus/airplane.

    Yes it is possible to shrink a keyboard down to the size of a pin-head but our fingers are not getting any smaller...

    • You're totally missing the point... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by WIAKywbfatw ( 307557 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:17AM (#7024856) Journal
      This isn't a keyboard for PDAs, it's a keyboard for mobile phones, hence the juxtaposition of alphabetical keys around a numeric keypad with the primary focus still on the numbers.

      The whole purpose of this layout is to make texting (sending text messages via SMS) easier but the primary focus is still on dialling.

      This isn't designed for PDA text entry. It's not even designed for PDA/phone convergence devices. It's designed for phones and phones only.

      • Re:You're totally missing the point... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by b!arg ( 622192 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:27AM (#7024949) Homepage Journal
        I've always wondered about touch screen pads. Why can't you have a phone that is the same form factor but is essentially just a touch screen? And depending on what you want to do it shouws you a numberpad, keyboard of your choice or handwriting recognition.
        • I have one -- the Samsung i300. The interface sucks. Try checking your voicemail or using any phone menu system. Instead of feeling where the key is to erase your message, you have to take the damned phone off of your ear, look at the pad, and find the button. If someone would make an lcd that would allow the app designer to specify that certain areas should be raise (probably by air injection or magnetism), then this would be useful. Until then, its just a PITA.
          • I see your point. Because I know how often I rely on tactile sense when I'm dialing my phone or trying to get to my voicemail while driving...errr...I mean when I'm pulled to the side of the road. The raised screen or whatever would have to be added for sure. An added feature would be voice interaction where you could just say "delete." I just worry about those people around you in a restaurant saying "delete" all night long. :) But it would be a good option while driving or whatnot. And that's obviou
          • Something like this would revolutionize keyboard interface.

            Nobody better have a patent on this yet cause i'm gonna personally drive down to their house and kick them in the ass for not producing it yet. So when someone does get a patent on it, its gonna be your responsibility to block it proving prior art through this post.

            But a magnetic pressure point... you wouldn't even need true touchscreen just a flexible lcd. The magnet array would sit behind the lcd normally closed. When a button is avalable the ma
        • Onscreen keypads/keyboards don't work well for that sort of thing. Too easy to enter keys by accident, and too difficult to use without looking at the keypad. Small touch screens really only work well for things that use a stylus, like handwriting recognition, and that requires two hands.
        • Why can't you have a phone that is the same form factor but is essentially just a touch screen?
          If you've got the money or plan you can...

          The Sony Ericsson P800 [sonyericsson.com]...

    • Let's break this into two problems:

      1) This input design is primarily for a phone handset. What instance do you think that it's a good idea to insist on two hands and a pen (one hand to hold the phone, one to write hieroglyphics) to enter data? There are those chuckleheads who are attempting to dial by searching through the contacts on their phone, whilst driving on the freeway in a 2 ton SUV. Whoops! I just dropped my pen. Now where did that sucker go?

      2) What about those instances where we don't have two
      • Personally, I think voice recognition is the way to go for situations like this. Granted, there still remains a great deal of work to improve recognition and user interface, but in the long run "writers cramp" will be a thing of the past...

    • I think this is a diversion from where technology in user input design should be heading. I actually find it increasingly frustrating to get information into any kind of portable device using mini-keyboards. No matter how clever they are. The future lies with Hand-writing recognition and good high resolution screens. We have used to pen for well over 2000 years and it is both comfortable, easy to understand and use and fits the requirements of being small and usable on the train/bus/airplane. Yes it is

  • What about us with big fingers? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GuyinVA ( 707456 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:09AM (#7024790)
    I already have a hard enough time with a regular key pad, now I have to deal with this too? The idea is good, but will not be usefull for me.

  • wep (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane ( 209368 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:09AM (#7024792)
    Yorks peally hre4t

  • Quite frankly... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Soukyan ( 613538 )
    keyboards are the next bit of technology that need to be brought into the 21st century. While they have come a long way, you'd think we'd have some more intuitive device to use by now. I think the concentration isn't in the right area with respect to keyboards. I'm thinking light sensor keyboard that could project on any smooth surface.

  • Fat fingers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gpinzone ( 531794 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:09AM (#7024796) Homepage Journal
    Most people have typos with regular keyboards. I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.
    • I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

      You didn't read the aritcle then... the object is to hit the four letter keys surrounding the number you want, not the number itself. --this in itself could lead to even more typos and frustration.

    • Re:Fat fingers (Score:3, Informative)

      by Ugmo ( 36922 )
      I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

      This is just a wild guess but I think that this keypad depends on you "fat-fingering" it, meaning hitting more keys than you intended. I could imagine a keypad that takes into account the surrounding extra keys that are hit and averaging that into a center key. This is like a touch screen that localizes pressure in an area and translates that into a single point. If this keyp

    • Re:Fat fingers (Score:4, Insightful)

      by poot_rootbeer ( 188613 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @11:49AM (#7025690)
      I doubt anyone is going to have the dexterity to not hit those letter keys while meaning to just use the numeric part of the keypad.

      RTFA.

      You're supposed to hit the letter keys when you're trying to type a number. That's how it works. If all four letter keys surrounding a number are pressed together, it registers as the number rather than the letters. In fact, I don't think the number 'buttons' even have any switches under them.

      (Actually, I would hope that they register a number-press when any THREE letters are chorded -- that's enough to determine which number is intended, and makes it less important to distribute your finger pressure evenly across all four corners, which must be unnatural.)
      • even hitting 1 would probably suffice... if I'm typing in a number I wouldn't be needing text input and vice-versa, well that's another point. Maybe 3rd press of a letter? eg: a, A, 1?

  • *slaps forehead* (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cybermace5 ( 446439 ) <g.ryan@macetech.com> on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:10AM (#7024800) Homepage Journal
    Too obvious! This is a "why didn't I think of that five years ago" moment.

    Mobile input is THE barrier to true interactive use of wireless data. I could see a keypad like this speeding up my mobile text input by at least four to five times, yet still non-clunky enough to fit in a flip-phone.
    • I had a Nokia 5510 [nokia.com] .That allowed me to use both my thumbs to type.I can type at an average speed on a keyboard, and on the 5510 I can find the keys easily enough(its QWERTY). Even then, my friends with an ordinary keypad (with T9en autocomplete) could atleast keep up with me most of the time (we timed it a couple of times). Now this new Intel keypad has all the keys, but you can only use one thumb to type ,moreover Im sure I'll have to look at the keypad to type since I wont know where the keys are (sure

  • See also... (Score:3, Informative)

    by azzy ( 86427 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:11AM (#7024807) Journal
    The BBC covered this keypad in May [bbc.co.uk] last year and again in November [bbc.co.uk] .

  • Nope (Score:2, Interesting)

    by stratjakt ( 596332 )
    Get speech recognition, or improve handwriting recognition.

    Scre any and all cheesy ass miniature keyboard thumb twiddling little clusterfuck pain in the ass monkey boards. They'll never come up with something truly usable.

    And I hate those stupid thumbpads and twizzle sticks on laptops too. Put a damn trackball down in the lower right (fuck lefties!), you insensitive clods!
    • And I hate those stupid thumbpads and twizzle sticks on laptops too. Put a damn trackball down in the lower right

      Trackballs suck...your thumb is usually nowhere near as accurate at positioning stuff as your fingers. (Why else would the only thing your thumb hits on a keyboard be the spacebar--the largest key?) Trackpads and TrackPoints aren't quite as easy to use as a mouse, but either is a big improvement over a trackball.

  • Pah, who needs all this new fangled rubbish, my Amstrad portable is more than compact enough for me, and as a bonus doubles as a great offensive weapon for use in riots or indeed small wars.
  • I saw one of those ages ago in San Diego... hasn't that existed for a while already?
    Still, it is pretty neat looking. I'd really have to try one, because I can imagine a huge problem being the pressing of "K" at an odd angle might output the numbers 5,6,8,9 in some sequence, if K is simply programmed to be "press 5,6,8,9 at the same time", and the button just overlaps the sensors... that would suck!

  • Just glad it's not QWERTY. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Thinkit3 ( 671998 ) * on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:13AM (#7024819)
    Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.
    • QWERTY is better because it is consistent. Alphabetic keyboards vary from device to device because the number of columns change. With a QWERTY you can always be sure of the basic layout (the letters at least, which are most important). But with alphabetic you're never sure what each device is going to look like. It's like relearning how to type every time you pick up a new device.

      Maybe it is time for change, but definitely NOT to alphabetic.
      • But QWERTY was designed to put commonly used letters far apart to prevent typewriters from sticking and such.

        So this is "better" just because it is consistent?

        I could hit my head against the wall every hour on the hour...but this isnt necessarily a great idea, even if it is consistent.

        Alphabetic isnt all bad, im sure you could type the same speed on a normal keyboard if you were used to alphabetic. Perhaps even faster than a QWERTY since some common letters will be close together, thus making less fi
        • So this is "better" just because it is consistent?

          Exactly. Consistency is better, even if the design isn't ideal. Alphabetic surely isn't designed for efficiency either, so your argument is flawed. Why replace one inefficient design with another, more inefficient, design? Just to "rebel"? You might be able to type just as fast with alphabetic eventually, but that's assuming that you're using the same device the whole time. All of that speed would be lost, though, as soon as you go to another device
      • Think mass market and not the techno-gadget of the month.

        Try fitting "QWERTY" on a mobile device. It would require a longer and skinnier pad, or in the case of that phone, you'd be making it shorter and wider.

        The world doesn't need another typewriter keyboard crammed into a tiny device.

        Believe it or not, fewer people have learned to type than you think, and not everyone bothers. For a device like this, I think it would be better, it's not as if there would be any easy way to standardize on any one key
        • That's the first valid argument I've heard, and I was waiting for someone to bring it up. And since most phones will have the same layout (3 columns), the inconsistency of alphabetic keyboards isn't as bad for mobile phones. It's still a problem with the alphabetic system in general, though.
      • QWERTY is better because it is consistent.

        Actually, this discussion is confusing two different metrics. One metric is the maximum speed limit of a given keyboard based on letter frequencies and Fitt's law. A second metric is the learning time needed to get close to that maximum speed.

        If you are interested you can get some background from this paper [nec.com], for example. The paper references previous work on a "metropolis" keyboard with hexagonal keys to improve key packing. Better key packing means maximum k

    • Re:Just glad it's not QWERTY. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cybermace5 ( 446439 ) <g.ryan@macetech.com> on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:29AM (#7024960) Homepage Journal
      Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.

      You deserve a +5, Funny. What exactly is alphabetical order, if not a layout people have been afraid to change for a few thousand years?
      • Plain alphabetical order is better than a poorly designed layout that sticks around because most people are afraid of change.

        You deserve a +5, Funny. What exactly is alphabetical order, if not a layout people have been afraid to change for a few thousand years?

        YHBT (presumably by one of those Dvorak freaks). YHL. HAND.

    • When I looked at this, I thought it stupid that it didn't use QWERTY. In fact, it should use a layout similar to the keyboard of the region where it's being sold, and it should be changeable (either to change region or satisfy the technologically phobic who aren't used to a normal keyboard.)

  • Even smaller keys? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fruey ( 563914 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:13AM (#7024822) Homepage Journal
    What are these mobile designers on? Acid, probably, if they suddenly develop a random love of small things, maybe to them it looks "massive"?

    Now, I love the T1 predictive typing thing. As long as you can spell more or less accurately then you can get very fast on that, and you still only need the letter keys. However, having seen proof from many people I tell about it who never switch it on because they don't "get it" or get frustrated... maybe it's not the way forward. Also, ppl cnt wrt abbrvs in thr texts w dicts...

    I also liked the look of that system where letters sort of scrolled in front of you and you picked the one you wanted, automatically likely choices for the next letter were bigger and so on. Wasn't particularly intuitive though, even less so than T1 dictionary stuff.

    But now, tiny keys, and not in the QWERTY pattern either? How is this helping? And you have to press multiple keys to get numbers, once the basis of all telephone dialling circuit I/O?

    Just another gimmick. There's a proverb from some oriental culture that says 'there are those that will try to sell the same thing with an extra spurious (useless) addition on the merits of the spurious addition, and win the marketing war'

    Rough translation, obviously.

    • they suddenly develop a random love of small things, maybe to them it looks "massive"?

      This is the same reason I prefer to date women with tiny hands.
    • But now, tiny keys, and not in the QWERTY pattern either? How is this helping?

      How would having it in the QWERTY pattern help anyone? You can't do ten-finger touch-typing on a cell phone, so there's no advantage for touch-typists. Hunt-and-peck typists are going to need time to locate each letter anyway, whether the layout is QWERTY or Dvorak or alphabetical or anything.

      Text entry on small devices is an entirely different beast than text entry on a full-size keyboard, and I commend the designers for rec

  • I dunno (Score:3, Funny)

    by rde ( 17364 ) * on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:14AM (#7024825)
    Maybe it's just because I've become so adept at using the traditional one, but I have my doubts about this one, for two main reasons...

    1. At this stage I, and indeed the rest of the texting universe, know where 'R' is; just press 7 three times. I don't even need to look at the keypad any more. Just because I've to press it three times doesn't make it a chore. With use, it's easy. That may be true of the new keyboard, but more keys doesn't make it simpler. Which brings me to point two:

    2. As I said, I don't need to look at the keyboard any more; that's because there are just four rows of three keys. With this one, if I want to text without looking I'd have to feel my way from one of the corners. That, or stop texting while I walk. That, or bump into a lot of lampposts. 4x7 is not simpler than 3x4.

    And anyway, unless the protruding keys are huge (making the numbers difficult to use), punctuation is still going to have to be shifted. Unless, of course, UR 1 F THSE FKRS HO DNT UZ PNKTN.
    • And with T9 predictive text, R is just one press of 7, assuming you are writing a word.

      I think that kids spelling must improve with predictive text though because of the use of dictionaries, although getting punctuation and numbers is annoyingly slow - a few more buttons on a keypad for ",", "!", "?" would be useful even with T9 - there would be still many fewer buttons than on this Intel keypad, or the DeltaII or alphabetic layouts.

      And T9 is handily fast for a one handed, one finger/thumb typing system.

      • Re:I dunno (Score:3, Interesting)

        by rde ( 17364 ) *
        A lot of people I know use predictive text; a lot don't. I'm among the latter; I tried it briefly on my nokia, but after the constant cycling between 'on' and 'no' and similar sets of words, I decided I was better off without it. 'night' is still a pain in the arse to type, though.

        I don't know about that 'ugly' thing; granted, many people are obsessed with frippery like polyphonic ring tones and ridiculous logos, but as far as I'm concerned, as long as a phone has bluetooth, a data port and a moderately de

  • proper no-look dialing == better interfaces (Score:3, Insightful)

    by *weasel ( 174362 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:14AM (#7024828)
    why is it that with this generation's phones, I can record a simple clip to voice-activate dialing a particular number, but i can't enter a voice-activated dialing mode where i speak the numbers to the phone? (eg. "dial: 8, 6, 7, 5, 3, 0, 9" )

    once you do that, we won't need tacticle buttons for no-look dialing; removing their last advantage over touch-pad dialing.

    and once we're doing touch-pad interfaces - then we're free to do a -good- interface. such as tossing in a stylus and doing handwriting->text conversion a la tabletPC. (writing will always be faster/easier/more accessible than thumb tapping.)

    come to think of it, writing phone numbers to dial/store them would completely remove the necessity to even emulate a traditional dialing pad. now we're talking convergence device...
    • Umm do you understand how difficult it would be to have a phone that recognizes numbers from millions of different people's voices? It's easier for them to have a recording of your voice to compare with (how many different ways will you say "Dial Jim") besides can't you just make the recording for 9 dial the number 9? And have one for each number? And then just combine them all? I dunno, I never use any voice recognition type stuff, I really hate anything that doesn't take physical input because somethi
      • preprogrammed numbers are the way to go, certainly - but dialing a number you've never dialed before, or don't have stored for whatever reason, when you're not looking - is the last feature of a physical 'button' interface that touch pads cannot replicate/do better (because by definition they can't have raised buttons).

        the current crop of touch-screen dialpads drive me insane because there's no telling what number you're pressing if you're not looking. your traditional phones have 12, easily distinguished
    • Well, AT&T Wireless has a pretty nice voicedial feature. You can enter people's names and phone numbers into your address book through the internet. Then you tell the phone "call home" and it'll dial it. There's no need to prerecord the names, although they do give you that option for hard to pronounce names. As long as the name is pronounced phoentetically, then the voice dial works perfectly. Other people can pick up your phone and use it too.

      It wouldn't surprise me if they have a mode where you can

  • Words can be typed by pressing the raised keys, and numbers by pressing the four keys that surround a particular number.

    Are things getting so overboard that companies are now just reinventing a round wheel. What purpose would this otherwise serve. Sure it might make things easier, hell could even save you a second or two, but is it really necessary. Is it even worth writing an article over.

    Sometimes I question where companies get some of these quirky ideas from, I for one do not use my phone for email n

  • They forgot one thing... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by darkscorp ( 194918 ) <darkscorp@h[ ]ail.com ['otm' in gap]> on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:16AM (#7024849)
    After taking another look at the keyboard, I have to point out the obvious design flaw... No QWERTY.
    This is the standard we are all use to -- how can a keyboard be successful without it.
  • I've seen several references in the past to a chorded key device [griffins.ca] (scroll down) roughly the shape of an egg, which fits in your fist. It uses chords (multiple keys down at the same time), so that with just four or five keys in each hand, you can input a whole keyboards worth.

    As usual with things like this (and dvorak keyboards), it takes a while to learn, but once you do, you can type pretty fast. Also, it would take up a lot less room, and be much less intrusive than even the smallest "standard" keyboar

  • I may be being a bit of a luddite over this but predictive text works well once you get used to it. If Symbian/Nokia/Whovever could just get it sorted so it remembered what words you used the most it would be even better.
    This just seems really fiddly and you will have to spend the first couple of months working out where all the keys are. It may be OK for some people but can't see myself using it.

  • Surely a better investment would be... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Channard ( 693317 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:21AM (#7024892) Journal
    in voice recognition. Some mobiles recognize certain spoken words - as evidenced by the amusing sight of a colleague yelling 'home!' into his phone when trying to ring his wife. But what if one day we could have a phone that could actually recognize what people say and translate it into text? And then perhaps translate the text back into synthesised speech at the other end. Some day, maybe this could be done real time so that people could use these 'mobiles' to communicate instantaneously. Er.. hang on a minute...

  • Great.... (Score:3, Redundant)

    by Stonent1 ( 594886 ) <stonent AT stone ... intclark DOT net> on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:27AM (#7024953) Journal
    Now I can type on my phone but intel has made it impossible to dial!

  • Keyboard Innovation is a Good Thing (TM) (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kb3edk ( 463011 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:33AM (#7025003)
    Thank god at least someone still cares about trying to come up with a better interface for a cell phone keypad. I was beginning to get worried that everything was going to converge on the standard, kludgey keypad ("Hit 7 three times for R")... while it looks like some people in this thread have gotten used to it, I can't stand it. Think about it... the interface is 40 years old (first touch tone telephone, 1963) and was never intended for text entry. The engineered inefficiency and its overwhelming rate of adoption is a creepy repeat of how QWERTY still dominates over Dvorak.

    (Not that QWERTY is all bad, it still is much faster than a numeric keypad. I can type 15 words per minute on my Treo using just two thumbs... Of course, 15 years of Nintendo served as excellent training :-)
    • Fifteen *tick tock tick* words *tick tock tick* per *tick tock tick* minute *tick tock tick* would *tick tock tick* drive *tick tock tick* me *tick tock tick* crazy!

      No fast typing and no beer makes Homer something something...and i dont mind if i do!

  • T9 word for me (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:34AM (#7025015) Homepage
    Like most other modern cell phones, my Sanyo 6400 has a T9 predictive input mode... Once you get used to it, it's really not so bad.

    I really don't think the extra keys are worth it considering how much they'll get in the way, so this is not a feature I'd want my next cell phone to have. Besides, if I need to use a real keyboard, I can just plug the phone into my laptop and use the phone as a wireless Internet connection.

    I have seen some phones that have fold-up keyboards they can "dock" with... That seems like a much better idea and it would be nice if more phones supported it. I think adding more buttons is really just another example of cell phone designers forgetting the primary use of the device is a phone. I don't need a full alpha numeric keypad to dial phone numbers.
  • The Fastap keypad does away with the need to press keys several times to scroll through the letters associated with each number.

    There is a (partial) software solution. Try sending SMS messages from a Nokia 6210 or 6310 phone: there is this nifty dictionary that "knows" which word you are typing. As a result, you practically never need to press a key more than once to get the right letter.

    This leaves inputting new telephone numbers, addresses, calendar entries, etc. Those usually contain names and other
  • > Numbers are typed by pressing the four letter keys surrounding each numeral.

    Umm... am I missing something obvious or is this incredibly stupid?
    Why press FOUR keys to get a numeral instead of pressing THE NUMBER KEY ITSELF?!

  • Again? (Score:2)

    by waldoj ( 8229 ) *
    We talked about this on May 18, 2002 [slashdot.org]. The BBC had pretty much the same article [bbc.co.uk] back then, only it was marginally more informative.

    -Waldo Jaquith

  • Emergency! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Baby_with_a_nailgun ( 669757 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @10:46AM (#7025114)
    Quick, dial KLOP KLOP ABEF !
  • well, i'm glad this got posted.

    i'd hate to miss out on this ambiguously interesting news.

  • button mashing (Score:5, Informative)

    by pavon ( 30274 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @11:02AM (#7025279)
    There have been several incorrect statements about how the input will work. Here's the facts that I found from a manufacturer of this device [digitwireless.com]:

    1) If you have small fingers you can press the inset button to get a number.
    2) If you have large fingers you can press the four buttons surrounding the number.

    But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button. This mistake could happen if you were trying to hit the letter or the number, so there is no real smarts that could be added to the device to make it "forgiving" to these types of mistakes. So, without using the device I will still have concerns about how easy it is to mash the wrong button combinations.

    Also, full blown handwritting or speach recognition not panaceas, when you concider that it is not uncommon for a people to make mistakes reading their own handwritting, or listening to other people.

    Although it would be interesting if hand printing and diction started being taught in school again to help with computer interfaces, I don't think that they will ever become the primary input method for a computer. Typing is faster than handwriting, and more accurate. And having cubicles full of people talking to computers all day would be too annoying (then again I've never worked in a call center :).

    For cell phones, eatoni's WordWise [eatoni.com] is the best thing I have seen yet. It is a predictive method. And let me tell you I hate most predictive input methods, and usually end up switching back to multi-tap. But with wordwise you use a shift key to provide a little more info, which lets it do an incredably good job at guessing. The site has a bunch of research that shows how the number of keystrokes is smaller than both predictive and multitap methods. Plus, unlike predictive methods where your next keypress can dependant on what the current guess is, WordWise is non-modal, allowing your actions to become habituated, and thus even faster (ie you can touch type on it).

    For PDA's Quick Writing [nyu.edu] is very cool. It requires you to learn the input method, just like you have to learn how to type, but is it damn fast. Faster than grafitti, and often even faster than handwriting. Think of it as cursive on amphetamines :)

    - jackson
    • But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button.

      I think it would be hard to hit an alpha and a digit -- the alphas are raised, so youur finger would stop before triggering the digit.

      Personally I like the Ericson keypad+slide varient on multi-tap. 3 characters per key are available because you have a double shift, slider up or slider down.

    • Re:button mashing (Score:2, Insightful)

      by dude123 ( 180438 )
      But what happens when you hit 2 of the surrounding buttons? Or one alpabetic button and a one numeric button. This mistake could happen if you were trying to hit the letter or the number, so there is no real smarts that could be added to the device to make it "forgiving" to these types of mistakes. So, without using the device I will still have concerns about how easy it is to mash the wrong button combinations.

      The letters are raised and the numbers are recessed, so presumably it would be hard to accident
    • WordWise looks nice indeed. I also like MessageEase (I've only used it on my Palm, but it looks like it'd be really nice on a cell phone as well), which is based on sliding. In short, your 9 keys are assigned to the nine most common letters, and slides from one key to another are assigned to less common letters.

      Nice and quick, and non-predictive, so words don't change while you're typing them. Oh, and a HUGE number of possible characters, so you can program using it :-), or create macros.

      -Billy
      • I just spent some time looking at MessageEase, and agree that it looks very interesting, especially the fact that it can work on both keypad and stylus input devices. Out of curiosity I did an off-the-cuff analysis.

        MessageEase (on a keypad) requires a double tap 70% of the time and two taps about 30% of the time. Wordwise requires a single tap about 50% of the time and a shift-tap about 50% of the time. Since one usually keeps a finger on the shift key when using WordWise, the shift-tap would take about as
  • I think the solution to the mobile keyboard problem would be for everyone to learn stenography -- like court reporters use. The key boards on the stenography devices use a minimal key set. This would be perfect for moble devices. Check the the key pad lay out. [depo.com] Not only is the key board layout greatly simplifiet, but a court reporters can kick the the ass of the best typest on the plannet using a standard key board.

  • QWERTY keyboard (Score:3, Interesting)

    by JaCKeL 1.0 ( 670980 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @11:11AM (#7025352)
    I know someone might steal this idea but, anyway, I want to help the development. Why not keep this great concept and by rotating the phone right, we can have a QWERTY type keyboard instead of the ABCD type proposed by the prototype. You just have to add a little sensor able to rotate de display in the direction the phone is rotated and now IM will sell like hot bread.

  • Why don't they just? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by yotto ( 590067 )
    I have no problem with the '4 type' rule, but they could make it even easier.

    You could even work on it to mix common and uncommon letters, putting the common ones first and the uncommon ones 2nd, and the damn right rare ones last.

    Like so: (Taken from 'etaoinshrdlu' and just tossed the rest of the letters in there)

    1 2 3
    edm tlp auq

    4 5 6
    obv icw nfx

    7 8 9
    sgy hjz rk.

    # 0 *
    ... ... ...

    The periods signify 'common symbols' that I don't really care to think about. Enter, backspace, and space seem good ideas

  • All I can think of when I look at gizmos like this is that all this tinkering will become obsolete when voice recognition gets to a usable state. Maybe that's still a few years off, but personally I can wait for it.

  • Original Slashdot article on this technology (Score:3, Informative)

    by dude123 ( 180438 ) on Monday September 22, 2003 @11:47AM (#7025669)
    Here's [slashdot.org] the original Slashdot article from last year. It sounded like a brilliant idea to me at the time, I was wondering if they were getting anywhere...
  • ObSimpsons [ahajokes.com]

  • Chording Keyboard (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Matimus ( 598096 )
    I think it would be nice if a good chording keyboard standard caught on. It would be a lot easier to make a smaller keyboard if it only had five buttons.

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close