----------------------- Mail item text follows ---------------
To: I1002812--IBMMAIL NFB R&D Committee
FROM: Steve Jacobson - IT Order Proc. Mktg. and Dist.
3M Company - 555-01-03 Phone: (612) 733-9780
St. Paul, MN 55144 FAX: (612) 736-6037
Subject: Scientific Calculator
Dr. Nemeth, your point is well taken. As I said in my previous note, I
can readily see that there are too many keys to group in any meaningful
manner around the numeric pad. If keystrokes are read in a manner that
maintains compatibility with other systems, which generally means that
extended key codes are not processed, the numeric keypad option will
still be there if anyone wants to use it. Someone using the calculator
for statical analysis may find the numeric keypad worth the
hand-hopping, and someone entering coordinates to be fed to our future
graphing option might also fall into this category. My original reason
for opening this can of worms was for the very same reason that you
proposed some of the other key assignments, that this is to be a
calculator and not a computer.
My original feeling was that since even a scientific calculator has
its keys arranged into the equivelent of the numeric keypad that we
should try to maintain that arrangement for consistency. However, I can
see that basing the arrangement of keys on the numeric keypad would be a
mistake. Having said that, I'll stop beating this point to death.
Your posts make interesting reading, and the discussion that is
generated certainly gives one insight into what product developers must
endure.
Regards,
Steve Jacobson
IBMMAIL: USMMMXBL
INTERNET: USMMMXBL@IBMMAIL.COM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 02 2012 - 01:30:03 PST