43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

General discussion about calculators, Swiss Micros or otherwise
User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Jaymos » Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:53 am

H2X wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:25 am
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:20 am
... So both MODE and DISP are as per the HP42S yellow labels.

The CLR remains reversed, as I want the UNDO on the easier accessible button. So this item is ticked off too.
I'm (to nobody's surprise) happy with that, and UNDO CLR is well supported. I notice that it also conforms with the principle of menus to the right, non-menus to the left. This could be considered an improvement of the legacy. All good!

I also think that the layout is starting to look very pleasing, but are the INFO and DISP labels a bit too close to each other?
1. I agree that some labels are too close together.
2. The problem is that the emulator arranges the spacing automatically. I can intervene, but I do not want to.
3. The physical template will be another matter. The spacing depends on fonts, which will not be the same as on the emulator.
4. With real fonts we have more manual spacing opportunities and I will probably make it work by adjusting kerning and condensing horisontal letter width.

So, another day’s problem.

Yes, the layout is approaching stability, but we need to be critical going forward to make practical changes if and when required.
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
WP34C, HP42S, DM42 for complex math; 35S, 28C, 32Sii, WP34S, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; owned FX702P & 11C; used 67 & 85. iOS: 42s (Byron), Free42, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
WP43C running on DM42 sn. 03818 .

User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Jaymos » Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:05 am

H2X wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:25 am

I also think that the layout is starting to look very pleasing
I would really like input from everyone as to the idea of shaded menu items as opposed to underlined.

Image
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
WP34C, HP42S, DM42 for complex math; 35S, 28C, 32Sii, WP34S, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; owned FX702P & 11C; used 67 & 85. iOS: 42s (Byron), Free42, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
WP43C running on DM42 sn. 03818 .

Dani R.
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Dani R. » Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:08 am

H2X wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:25 am
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:20 am
... So both MODE and DISP are as per the HP42S yellow labels.

The CLR remains reversed, as I want the UNDO on the easier accessible button. So this item is ticked off too.
I'm (to nobody's surprise) happy with that, and UNDO CLR is well supported. I notice that it also conforms with the principle of menus to the right, non-menus to the left. This could be considered an improvement of the legacy. All good!

I also think that the layout is starting to look very pleasing, but are the INFO and DISP labels a bit too close to each other?
I agree with all this.

If you look at the lettering of the DM42, you can see that the font, font size, etc. is already very balanced and optimized in terms of readability. But then you also see that there is not much space for the second shift functions/menus. I don't think you'll get a much better user experience in the emulator. Probably in CorelDraw you will have to compress the label a bit at certain points, if this is done skillfully, it won't attract much attention.

EDIT: Crossed with the contribution of Jaco.
Last edited by Dani R. on Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
DM42 SN:00032

Dani R.
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Dani R. » Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:26 am

Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:05 am
H2X wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 8:25 am

I also think that the layout is starting to look very pleasing
I would really like input from everyone as to the idea of shaded menu items as opposed to underlined.
My concerns are that instead of using one color, you are already using three colors. With the 28C the menus were not shaded yet, but with the 28S they were. I think there can be problems to produce something like this for a small manufacturer like SwissMicros.
What the 28S doesn't have compared to the 43S/C; It only has one shift function and therefore doesn't have the display problem function/menu or menu/menu. Difficult. But maybe inautilus has a realizable idea, with the points for [f] and [g] he already succeeded.


Here is a small update for the dots you can try occasionally. It's just try and error until it fits.
Attachments
190804.png
190804.png (10.92 KiB) Viewed 938 times
DM42 SN:00032

Dani R.
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Dani R. » Sun Aug 04, 2019 10:38 am

Hello Jaco


I'm not asking you to throw everything back over the top again. And in any case you should also wait and see what comes from inautilus. And I definitely don't have time today to throw paper snippets around me.
But an idea that might be worth looking at. What still disturbs, what are the exceptions? CPX on [g] [SIN] and EXP on [g] [COS]. Away with it!

For example EXP on [g] [CHS], CPX on [g] [x<>y] and STK somewhere close to the programming functions, is mostly only needed for programming. INFO somewhere to go.
Assign [g] SIN and [g] COS with meaningful functions.
The function SHOW can be anywhere. The function VIEW is, I think, only needed for programming, otherwise you can use R.BR, redundant. Away with it. The function SAVE, as important as it is, can be hidden in a menu, belongs to "SETUP".
That TIMER and PRGM are functions can be remembered. That means to rethink the positions of the menus in the digits and operator area and to make sure that the functions are grouped. And from [Sigam+] to [TAN] nowhere a menu.

I think this would make it easier to remember what a function is and what a menu is. This would somewhat defuse the problem of labelling menus.

Just such a spontaneous thought.


Regads Dani
DM42 SN:00032

User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Jaymos » Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:02 pm

Dani R. wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 10:38 am


... What still disturbs, what are the exceptions? CPX on [g] [SIN] and EXP on [g] [COS]...

For example EXP on [g] [CHS], CPX on [g] [x<>y] and STK somewhere close to the programming functions, is mostly only needed for programming. INFO somewhere to go.
Assign [g] SIN and [g] COS with meaningful functions.
The function SHOW can be anywhere. The function VIEW is, I think, only needed for programming, otherwise you can use R.BR, redundant. Away with it. The function SAVE, as important as it is, can be hidden in a menu, belongs to "SETUP".
That TIMER and PRGM are functions can be remembered. That means to rethink the positions of the menus in the digits and operator area and to make sure that the functions are grouped. And from [Sigam+] to [TAN] nowhere a menu.

I think this would make it easier to remember what a function is and what a menu is. This would somewhat defuse the problem of labelling menus.

The only way to do this is the paper print and snippets again. But I really don’t want to start again 🤪

I agree that (most of) your thoughts above are valid and with all the goals in mind, a better compromise could be possible.

I will scrutinise the opportunities that you mention, and comment when I have done it.
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
WP34C, HP42S, DM42 for complex math; 35S, 28C, 32Sii, WP34S, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; owned FX702P & 11C; used 67 & 85. iOS: 42s (Byron), Free42, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
WP43C running on DM42 sn. 03818 .

rprosperi
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 5:48 pm
Location: New York

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by rprosperi » Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:31 pm

Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 9:05 am

I would really like input from everyone as to the idea of shaded menu items as opposed to underlined.
I prefer the shaded menu choices as compared to underlined. The overall appearance, for me, is much less cluttered and therefor more clear. It's possible I've been influenced by years of using a 42S and other HP machines, but to me it feels more comfortable. To be really effective, the coloring used on the actual overlay is critical of course, but that can be solved in time.

Though I'm not a fan of this alternate keyboard layout, I prefer the original 43S approach, it has been quite interesting to watch this design evolve; it's nice seeing folks contribute not only layout ideas but also graphics files, etc. In such a collaboration, it's especially hard to keep one's mind open to continual improvement, after having already thought through what is "best" several times. The process cannot be finished of course until the 43S has much more complete functionality and users can test drive (well, test calculate) for a while, but these discussions are helpful to learn how other folks plan to use the machine, what they find intuitive (or not), etc. Thanks for sharing the discussion here.
--bob p

DM42: β00071 & 00282, DM41X: β00071, DM10L: 071/100

Dani R.
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 8:23 pm

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Dani R. » Sun Aug 04, 2019 4:14 pm

Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:02 pm
...

I will scrutinise the opportunities that you mention, and comment when I have done it.
Just to make sure I'm not misunderstood. The current layout works great. I have no problem finding VIEW and SAVE on it. For me, these features are candidates that you could do without if someone actually will creating a second alternative layout. But we still can't know if there are any other pitfalls. And then you might find out that it wasn't worth creating another mock up.
DM42 SN:00032

User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Jaymos » Sun Aug 04, 2019 5:15 pm

Dani R. wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 4:14 pm
Jaymos wrote:
Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:02 pm
...

I will scrutinise the opportunities that you mention, and comment when I have done it.
Just to make sure I'm not misunderstood. The current layout works great. I have no problem finding VIEW and SAVE on it. For me, these features are candidates that you could do without if someone actually will creating a second alternative layout. But we still can't know if there are any other pitfalls. And then you might find out that it wasn't worth creating another mock up.
I understand.

Let me first discuss before I make paper snippets which ones I see as opportunities:
CPX on [g] [SIN] and EXP on [g] [COS]
And from [Sigam+] to [TAN] nowhere a menu.
I love the idea to have no menu items in rows 2 & 3. I do want the top part of the calculator for direct math.
Love the clear thinking.
For example EXP on [g] [CHS], CPX on [g] [x<>y] and STK somewhere close to the programming functions, is mostly only needed for programming. INFO somewhere to go.
[g] [X<>Y] and [g] [CHS] are close to the top, so here I can agree to have CPX and EXP here.

So, STK and INFO go down to the arrows.
And >R and >P go to [g] [SIN} and [g] [COS].

BRILLIANT !!

The function SHOW can be anywhere. The function VIEW is, I think, only needed for programming, otherwise you can use R.BR, redundant. Away with it. The function SAVE, as important as it is, can be hidden in a menu, belongs to "SETUP".
I agree with the removal of SAVE. LOAD already sits in the I/O menu, and I see no reason why SAVE cannot sit directly next to LOAD in the menu.In my view, the SAVE position is available if needed.

I disagree with VIEW. I think it is important the VIEW is on a key, and R.BR does not replace it. The problem with R.BR is that you browse to the register, and there are 112 registers. The sequence [f][R.BR] [5][6] will immediately navigate to reg 56 at the bottom of the browser screen. The font is small, and there are 11 more registers on the screen, so I still see the need for a simple single register view button. So I believe VIEW stays.
That TIMER and PRGM are functions can be remembered. That means to rethink the positions of the menus in the digits and operator area and to make sure that the functions are grouped.
I disagree.
I definitely need PRGM on a button.
TIMER is debatable and may simply go sit in the I/O menu. So there, possibly, I would say maybe for an available space.


I am quite excited about this proposal. I will think a bit more on the SAVE position. I also find that HOME must be closer, maybe on the down arrow, maybe SHOW must go to the HP42S position [f][.] which means LOOP must go to where HOME was. And maybe FILL comes from the freezer on the side of the field ... let me edit the layout ...
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
WP34C, HP42S, DM42 for complex math; 35S, 28C, 32Sii, WP34S, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; owned FX702P & 11C; used 67 & 85. iOS: 42s (Byron), Free42, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
WP43C running on DM42 sn. 03818 .

User avatar
Jaymos
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:03 pm
Location: Cape Town

Re: 43S Alternative key layout --> WP43C

Post by Jaymos » Sun Aug 04, 2019 5:41 pm

The last proposal executed.

Brilliant Dani !!

I absolutely love the how clean and clear rows 2 & 3 are now !

Comments?

The question now is easier. On the new layout, we could indeed throw away SAVE (the I/O menu is shown on the screen below), STK could move to [g][1].

FILL could re-appear at [g][Up]. Or we could leave it like this for now. Instead of FILL, we could consider CLRSTK on [g][Up] directly below ENTER.

Comments?

In this example I use the shaded labels. They are growing on me and I'm liking them more). As said earlier, the emulator reads in a CSS file with the colours, so it is so easy to exchange shaded labels and underlined labels.

Image
Last edited by Jaymos on Sun Aug 04, 2019 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jaco Mostert
Elec Eng, South Africa
WP34C, HP42S, DM42 for complex math; 35S, 28C, 32Sii, WP34S, EL-506P, EL-W506, PB700; owned FX702P & 11C; used 67 & 85. iOS: 42s (Byron), Free42, WP31S/34S, HCalc.
WP43C running on DM42 sn. 03818 .

Post Reply