TE
테크에코
홈24시간 인기최신베스트질문쇼채용
GitHubTwitter
홈

테크에코

Next.js로 구축된 기술 뉴스 플랫폼으로 글로벌 기술 뉴스와 토론을 제공합니다.

GitHubTwitter

홈

홈최신베스트질문쇼채용

리소스

HackerNews API원본 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 테크에코. 모든 권리 보유.

A brief history of the numeric keypad

74 포인트작성자: ThomPete7일 전

10 comments

crazygringo4일 전
The article doesn&#x27;t make it explicit, but from the facts it presents it seems like the fundamental difference between the numeric keypad and telephone keypad is:<p>- With the numeric keypad, you want an extra-large 0 at the <i>bottom</i> that can be operated with your thumb, because zeros are so disproportionately common in real-life numbers like prices. And smaller numbers are used more than larger numbers, so you put the smaller numbers closer to the 0 so you have to reach the least, and wind up with 7-8-9 at the <i>top</i>.<p>- With dialing phone numbers, zeros <i>aren&#x27;t</i> more frequent -- in fact they&#x27;re <i>less</i> because phone numbers can&#x27;t start with them (in the US). For local numbers, all digits 1-9 are used with approximately equal frequency. So the keypad starts with a natural numeric order of 1-2-3 at the top in reading order, and puts 0 at the bottom since it feels weird to start counting with zero (just like QWERTY keyboards start with 1, and puts 0 after 9), and because it has the special function of calling the operator.<p>So there seems to be an actual logic to it.
abanana4일 전
A line early on in the article caught my eye:<p><i>&gt; they serve the same functional goal — input numbers</i><p>Well, yes and no. Same as how, when it comes to data types, it often has to be pointed out to inexperienced developers that a phone &quot;number&quot; isn&#x27;t a <i>number</i> in the mathematical sense - you can&#x27;t add or multiply 2 of them together to get anything meaningful. It&#x27;s an identifying string, that happens to use only digit characters. &quot;123&quot; in a telephone number is three individual unrelated digits, whereas &quot;123&quot; in a calculator represents the number one hundred and twenty-three.<p>So the functional goal isn&#x27;t exactly the same. One is entering individual characters, but on the other you&#x27;re more likely to be thinking &quot;one hundred and twenty-three&quot; as you type its digits.<p>It may or may not be related to the actual reason for the inversion of layout, but the subtle difference felt like a (possibly minor) error in the initial premise.
评论 #43953107 未加载
评论 #43959183 未加载
cduzz4일 전
I worked for a couple summers as a &quot;relay operator&quot;; in the USA there is (was? give the hateful time I suppose...) a law, &quot;Americans with Disabilities Act&quot; to the effect that people unable to do a thing should be able to do the thing. Roughly it means &quot;people in wheelchairs should be able to access buildings&quot; and &quot;people unable to see should be able to read newspapers&quot; and &quot;people unable to hear should be able to talk on the telephone.&quot; and so on.<p>The &quot;let people unable to hear talk on the phone&quot; accommodation was to provide actual teletype machines to people who can&#x27;t hear (at the time, many of these devices were some hideous 75 baud 6 bit monsters where there were limited punctuation and only upper case); the phone company would then also run a service where they had operators (I was one, for a couple summers) where people would call this service and that service would act as a bridge (or, &quot;relay&quot;) to the other kind of device. So deaf people could order pizza, teenagers could call their friends and talk about teenager stuff, etc.<p>Specific to this conversation, the &quot;relay operator&quot; setup was a telephone system billing computer (that would also setup the phone call) and a standard terminal that&#x27;d interface with the person with the TTY. There were 2 800 numbers; one to connect to a TTY and one to connect to my ears; people would connect and ask to talk to a peer, and I&#x27;d enter the billing &#x2F; call info into the phone computer, then actually do the talking on the terminal.<p>Each of these systems had a very distinct keyboard (the phone co keyboard had deep wells on the home keys; the terminal had &quot;normal&quot; nubs on the home keys), and I spent a ton of time entering phone numbers on the phone co&#x27;s billing computer, with my right hand. To this day, my right hand touch-types &quot;phone company&quot; numbers and normal &quot;ten key&quot; (I did a lot of data entry at other points in my life) with my left hand.<p>[edit]<p>oh -- these things, though &quot;ttys&quot; were called &quot;TDD&quot; or &quot;TTD&quot; or some silly name to imply they were for deaf people, though they were just ttys; the cooler kids, calling that relay number, had 300 or 1200 or even 2400bps modems; I think that&#x27;s as fast as the phoneco&#x27;s relay terminal went, though)<p>GA
thenthenthen4일 전
I noticed ATM keypad in different countries use 1-2-3 or 7-8-9, I have yet to figure out if this is based on something, it seems fairly inconsistent with language&#x2F;history&#x2F;colonialism
评论 #43952656 未加载
userbinator4일 전
Relatedly, TV remote controls seem to have settled on the telephone layout with 1 in the top left.<p>I have also used a few kiosks with a keyboard that has its physical keys arranged in alphabetical order, which is just as confusing.
rmccue4일 전
Seems reasonable to have the most frequently used numbers close to the user; I wonder if there might be something of Benfold’s law involved, where lower digits are more frequently used. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Benford%27s_law" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Benford%27s_law</a>
评论 #43953932 未加载
teo_zero3일 전
Interesting research. Now I want an article about why in the top row of all computer keyboards 0 is right of 9 instead of left of 1.
tekla4일 전
&gt; Picture the keypad of a telephone and calculator side by side. Can you see the subtle difference between the two without resorting to your smartphone?<p>I sometimes wonder if people have ever used Excel to calculate anything ever
评论 #43957538 未加载
card_zero4일 전
&gt; Picture the keypad of a telephone and calculator side by side. Can you see the subtle difference between the two without resorting to your smartphone? Don’t worry if you can’t recall the design.<p>Pfft, I have both on the table beside me. I live in a different timeline, I suppose.
评论 #43955806 未加载
gitroom4일 전
Man, reading all this makes my brain itch, I still mess up on ATM keypads if the layout flips. You think people just adapt even if it never makes sense, or does frustration actually change design over time?