deskthority

I just have to share this hilarious quote after reading a review of the Cherry G80-3000 on Verge. I laughed harder than I did when I first saw their pitiful "How to build a PC video...":

Cherry MX switches have long been the gold standard for mechanical keyboards. But as with most products in this category, they have one fatal flaw: the iconic click and clacks that accompany any typing on them.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker ... k-ces-2017

Can you say clueless?

I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets, which however
i) have proven to not be detrimental to the reputation of certain keyboards and
ii) Cherry does not feature anyway.

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 11:46 I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets, which however
i) have proven to not be detrimental to the reputation of certain keyboards and
ii) Cherry does not feature anyway.

Nor Topre.

But why ever do you mention it? We already live in the timeline where Cherry MX is entirely synonymous with mechanical keyboards. You don’t have to root for the underdog, your side has overwhelming market dominance. Why still the nervous hint of inferiority?

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 11:46 I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets, which however
…

If it can be fixed (and routinely is) and have the keyboard back into service for three more decades, it can't be thought of as a "fatal flaw", can it?

I know. Every time someone says Cherry is the gold standard I want to

depletedvespene wrote: 15 May 2020, 15:24

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 11:46 I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets, which however
…

If it can be fixed (and routinely is) and have the keyboard back into service for three more decades, it can't be thought of as a "fatal flaw", can it?

For the average user (lacking not only modding skills and interest, but even the niche knowledge of what’s wrong with it),
a keyboard that has to be brought "back into service" is just garbage.
Rightly so

To be fair, the gold standard is also something that people ascribe far too much value to.

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 11:46 I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets

I didn't realize model Fs had rivets

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 17:09

depletedvespene wrote: 15 May 2020, 15:24 If it can be fixed…

For the average user (lacking not only modding skills and interest, but even the niche knowledge of what’s wrong with it),
a keyboard that has to be brought "back into service" is just garbage.
Rightly so

Gah, Vespene, way to set him up for the easy shot! You let him off my hook entirely.

The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F, which deserves no more praise than Cherry MY! So he’s quite right about that.

Yet, we do not live in the world where Model M reigns dominant, and everyone looking for their first “mech” is automatically going IBM. Cherry owns this space. So why is Kbdfr still so defensive about an all but dead rival? It’s like he’s visiting from a chocolatey land of Big Blue supreme! A whole other universe, which insists on intruding into our merry, complacent, MX monoculture.

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 17:09

depletedvespene wrote: 15 May 2020, 15:24

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 11:46 I always thought the "fatal flaw" were breaking rivets, which however
…

If it can be fixed (and routinely is) and have the keyboard back into service for three more decades, it can't be thought of as a "fatal flaw", can it?

For the average user (lacking not only modding skills and interest, but even the niche knowledge of what’s wrong with it),
a keyboard that has to be brought "back into service" is just garbage.
Rightly so

This means we can buy them off for peanuts, fix them and add them to our collections, sell them for a healthy profit or even give them away to someone who will appreciate them, too.

Rightly so, indeed!

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12

kbdfr wrote: 15 May 2020, 17:09

depletedvespene wrote: 15 May 2020, 15:24 If it can be fixed…

For the average user (lacking not only modding skills and interest, but even the niche knowledge of what’s wrong with it),
a keyboard that has to be brought "back into service" is just garbage.
Rightly so

Gah, Vespene, way to set him up for the easy shot! You let him off my hook entirely.

Did I? Read again.

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12
The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F, which deserves no more praise than Cherry MY! So he’s quite right about that.

No.

A Cherry MY keyboard is insufferable, whether or not you've tried anything else in the mech world. OTOH, a Model M keyboard is great, even AFTER you've met the even better alternative (Model F, XT discounted).

depletedvespene wrote: 15 May 2020, 19:03[…] A Cherry MY keyboard is insufferable, whether or not you've tried anything else in the mech world.[…]

You think so, I think so, my LP thinks otherwise (even if she admits MX is somewhat better).
She’s a professional typist, by the way.
And she would never even try to open a malfunctioning keyboard, but would simply discard it and buy a new one.

Fortunately, she never had to - she types on a Cherry keyboard

I’m glad you have another life partner besides your faithful Tipro! She too must be a keeper!

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12 The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F

The thing is: Model F is garbage. A ruthless cost¹ cutting exercise on beam springs.

¹ and thickness, if you want to be pedantic

I mean, your right. Beamsprings are better than any MX-style switch I've tried as well as Cap BS.

kps wrote: 16 May 2020, 20:07

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12 The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F

The thing is: Model F is garbage. A ruthless cost¹ cutting exercise on beam springs.

¹ and thickness, if you want to be pedantic

... and height. Don't forget about the height.

Shots fired!

Can't say I really cared much for the beamspring boards I've owned though.

If I had to choose between Cap BS and beamspring, I'd probably take a nice Cap BS variant over a similar (aesthetically pleasing/pleasing layout) beamspring.

kps wrote: 16 May 2020, 20:07

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12 The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F

The thing is: Model F is garbage. A ruthless cost¹ cutting exercise on beam springs.

¹ and thickness, if you want to be pedantic

*Cough* contamination shield *cough*

Of course, the F then did go on to incorporate crumbling foam, though even in a degraded form it only becomes an issue if you open it up.

JBert wrote: 16 May 2020, 23:26

kps wrote: 16 May 2020, 20:07

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12 The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F

The thing is: Model F is garbage. A ruthless cost¹ cutting exercise on beam springs.

¹ and thickness, if you want to be pedantic

*Cough* contamination shield *cough*

Of course, the F then did go on to incorporate crumbling foam, though even in a degraded form it only becomes an issue if you open it up.

... an issue that can be repaired and have the (expensive) keyboard back into service, instead of having to dump it and having to buy a new one.

And beam springs were a ruthless cost-cutting exercise on the Selectric I/O, inferior to both the Selectric I/O that preceded them, and the Model F that succeeded them.

depletedvespene wrote: 17 May 2020, 00:18 […] ... an issue that can be repaired and have the (expensive) keyboard back into service, instead of having to dump it and having to buy a new one.

Seriously, only a tiny minority of users would consider repairing a keyboard.
It requires having a clue about exactly what is defective, knowing how to fix it, having the necessary skills, having the necessary equipment, investing time and of course money. That's something for a few aficionados, but certainly not for most people who (when buying Models M or F new) used keyboards simply as necessary tools and not to tinker with them.
So those flaws were in fact fatal.

Have you ever tried this?
Or this?
Imagine such flaws were already built-in at the time of purchase…

kbdfr wrote: 17 May 2020, 08:39

depletedvespene wrote: 17 May 2020, 00:18 […] ... an issue that can be repaired and have the (expensive) keyboard back into service, instead of having to dump it and having to buy a new one.

Seriously, only a tiny minority of users would consider repairing a keyboard.
It requires having a clue about exactly what is defective, knowing how to fix it, having the necessary skills, having the necessary equipment, investing time and of course money. That's something for a few aficionados, but certainly not for most people who (when buying Models M or F new) used keyboards simply as necessary tools and not to tinker with them.
So those flaws were in fact fatal.

Perhaps now, but back when Model F and Model M keyboards were new, computers were routinely repaired and so were its components (including keyboards). Large companies would be able to take a defective keyboard, replace it with another and then have the former one repaired and sent back to active usage. MANY individuals would have typewriters at their homes, and those required periodic maintenance and the occasional fix, for which there were technicians who advertised their services in the Yellow Pages.

Do you even remember the pest that was cleaning mouse balls and all the associated jokes?

It is clear and undisputable that your argument is fatally flawed (and there's no fixing it).

kps wrote: 16 May 2020, 20:07

Muirium wrote: 15 May 2020, 18:12 The thing is: Model M is garbage. A ruthless cost cutting exercise on Model F

The thing is: Model F is garbage. A ruthless cost¹ cutting exercise on beam springs.

¹ and thickness, if you want to be pedantic

Cost cutting and refinement are not the same thing. They sometimes happen at the same time.

The model F is a cost cutting measure to be sure but that is not all it is. It is an improvement over the beamspring that offers an extremely crisp click switch that is shorter for ergonomics, has less parts, easier to manufacture and is extremely durable.

The model F is a cost cutting measure but it is also an extremely elegant refinement of the beamspring spiritually. The Model M though is a cheapening of the Model F.

Isn't this topic a dead horse already? Knowing the history, cherry is really only still in the business because they kept making switches in volume when all other manufacturers stopped (and for the POS market which I think is an honest acronym for everything cherry makes that isn't linears) Once mechanical keyboards came back into vogue cherry already had molds and manufacturing going and so the "ecosystem" was already there and the industry adopted that as a standard. It has nothing to do with the strengths of the design but the realities of manufacturing. Anyone who thinks cherry won by virtue of quality is laughably out of touch and anyone who thinks IBM wins despite having no market presence is similarly wrong.

That being said, using the argument that most people are too lazy to repair things as a detriment to needing to repair model Ms is a bit silly. It isn't a fault of the design that people can't be bothered to responsibly maintain their things. That speaks more to their character than it does to the nature of their possessions, keyboard or otherwise.

^^ What these two said.

Model F is a tremendous space saver compared to Beamspring, and is one of the very finest clicky switches ever made, in its own right. To be honest, I quite prefer it. Beamspring has something else again—that swing in its throw—but Model F is the real deal all by itself in the kingdom of the clicks. And it’s so much smaller that its keyboards can be as compact as the Kishsaver.

Model M, meanwhile, was membrane sheets and plastic rivets. Pure cheapness.

And to Zrrion’s broader point: yes, it is all a dead, dead horse. (Perhaps even a parrot!) Which was the point of my original question to our Estimable Choc. Why even bring it up when your side won in the marketplace? Is there something bitter to the taste of victory?