numbers

[SKIQUATTRO]

Why is a telephone keypad the reverse of a calculator keypad?? why??

 

[drjeff]

Why is a telephone keypad the reverse of a calculator keypad?? why??

Oh I can see the need to consume some alcohol for this thread :beer:

 

[ctenidae]

Oh I can see the need to consume some alcohol for this thread :beer:

Messes me up entirely. My phone is out of alignment with the rest of my desk just so I have to look at it so I don't 10-key it.

 

[drjeff]

That raises another question. Do you actually have to think of what your home phone # is now that speed dial is such a part of most peoples lives???

Me, I will admit to being momentarily stumped from time to time when someone asks me my home phone #, just second nature to hold down my #1 key on my cell phone :roll:

 

[Paul]

Calculators grew out of adding machines and cash registers where the numbers were arranged like you would expect them to be. Highest on top, lowest on the bottom, just like accounting forms etc...

Push-button phones (touch-tone) were adapted from old rotary phones. Rotary phones worked on pulses. 1 for 1, 2 for 2 etc... therefore, it made sense for a rotary phone to go in ascending order. When Bell Labs developed touch-tone, it made sense to not confuse the customer, and keep the arrangement. Also, it helped because the "ABC" on 1 "DEF" on 2 etc.. would make more sense moving L to R down the pad, instead of up the pad.

 

[Paul]

That raises another question. Do you actually have to think of what your home phone # is now that speed dial is such a part of most peoples lives???

Me, I will admit to being momentarily stumped from time to time when someone asks me my home phone #, just second nature to hold down my #1 key on my cell phone :roll:

This is one of many reasons why I never put numbers into speed dial.

 

[ckofer]

Calculators grew out of adding machines and cash registers where the numbers were arranged like you would expect them to be. Highest on top, lowest on the bottom, just like accounting forms etc...

Push-button phones (touch-tone) were adapted from old rotary phones. Rotary phones worked on pulses. 1 for 1, 2 for 2 etc... therefore, it made sense for a rotary phone to go in ascending order. When Bell Labs developed touch-tone, it made sense to not confuse the customer, and keep the arrangement. Also, it helped because the "ABC" on 1 "DEF" on 2 etc.. would make more sense moving L to R down the pad, instead of up the pad.

Thanks a lot Paul. I thought a realistic answer should wait till page 9 of this discussion. :razz:

 

[drjeff]

Thanks a lot Paul. I thought a realistic answer should wait till page 9 of this discussion. :razz:

You also forgot about the mandatory 3 to 4 hijacks that need to happen 1st!

 

[ctenidae]

therefore, it made sense for a rotary phone to go in ascending order. When Bell Labs developed touch-tone, it made sense to not confuse the customer, and keep the arrangement. Also, it helped because the "ABC" on 1 "DEF" on 2 etc.. would make more sense moving L to R down the pad, instead of up the pad.

But the rotary dial increased counterclockwise, which isn't intuitive. Also, "ABC" is on 2, not 1.

 

[Paul]

But the rotary dial increased counterclockwise, which isn't intuitive. Also, "ABC" is on 2, not 1.

It increased counter-clockwise, because you rotated it clockwise, and the pulses would pulse as it rotated back. Its more intuitive, and far easier for the vast majority of the population who is right-handed to rotate the dial in a clock-wise direction. Also, I said that it was intuitive to keep the pattern from the dial to the TT keypad, not that the dial itself was an intuitive design to begin with.

So, in regards to both points you made (yes, I realized later that the alpha part of the dial started on 2, many modern keypads start on 1 since the addition of the letters Q and Z) Keep on pickin'

 

[SKIQUATTRO]

speaking of dialing/technology...if i call somewhere and have to spell a name on my Blackberry keypad, I cant as teh Q,W, A, S, Z, X, O,P,L are keys by themselves, they are not on a number key...

 

[ctenidae]

It increased counter-clockwise, because you rotated it clockwise, and the pulses would pulse as it rotated back. Its more intuitive, and far easier for the vast majority of the population who is right-handed to rotate the dial in a clock-wise direction. Also, I said that it was intuitive to keep the pattern from the dial to the TT keypad, not that the dial itself was an intuitive design to begin with.

But if they kept the pattern from the dial to the keypad, 1 would be where 9 is, 2 would be at 6, 3 would stay where it is, 4 would replace 2, 5 in place of 1, on around until 9 occupies 5's place. 0 would stay where it was, because that's what you have to do to fit a circle in a square.

My cell phone and office phone (and probably my home phone) have ABC on 2.

I'd say the phone pad is the way it is because it makes sense- we read left to right, top to bottom, so the numbers go that way. As for the calculator, well, that's a different story. Pascal's original 1672 adding machine used dials, configured the same as a rotary dial phone (turn the dial clockwise to add, counterclockwise to subtract). The first to have push buttons, which ran from 1 at the bottom to 9 at the top, was introduced in 1872. That layout continued to be used until the Dalton introduced a 10-key in 1902, which used two rows of buttons, with 1 at the bottom left, 2 above it, 3 in the 2nd left bottom position, 4 above that, and so on. The Remington Rand, introduced in the 1930's, was the first 10-key with a layout similar to what we have today, and clearly took its inspiration from the original push buttons, with 1 at the bottom. The full keyboard and 10-key models co-existed for some time, with many manufacturers making both models. Friden introduced a motor-driven model in teh late 1940's that had both a full keyboard and a 10-key, and introduced the SRW in 1952 that could do square roots (and had both layouts). Friden introduced an electronic calculator in 1964, featuring an "11-key" pad, as it added a decimal point.

Now you know more than you wanted to (and so do I).

 

[Paul]

But if they kept the pattern from the dial to the keypad, 1 would be where 9 is, 2 would be at 6, 3 would stay where it is, 4 would replace 2, 5 in place of 1, on around until 9 occupies 5's place. 0 would stay where it was, because that's what you have to do to fit a circle in a square.

My cell phone and office phone (and probably my home phone) have ABC on 2.

I'd say the phone pad is the way it is because it makes sense- we read left to right, top to bottom, so the numbers go that way. As for the calculator, well, that's a different story. Pascal's original 1672 adding machine used dials, configured the same as a rotary dial phone (turn the dial clockwise to add, counterclockwise to subtract). The first to have push buttons, which ran from 1 at the bottom to 9 at the top, was introduced in 1872. That layout continued to be used until the Dalton introduced a 10-key in 1902, which used two rows of buttons, with 1 at the bottom left, 2 above it, 3 in the 2nd left bottom position, 4 above that, and so on. The Remington Rand, introduced in the 1930's, was the first 10-key with a layout similar to what we have today, and clearly took its inspiration from the original push buttons, with 1 at the bottom. The full keyboard and 10-key models co-existed for some time, with many manufacturers making both models. Friden introduced a motor-driven model in teh late 1940's that had both a full keyboard and a 10-key, and introduced the SRW in 1952 that could do square roots (and had both layouts). Friden introduced an electronic calculator in 1964, featuring an "11-key" pad, as it added a decimal point.

Now you know more than you wanted to (and so do I).

kewl...u no how 2 use teh go0glez!!!

My office phone starts ABC at 1.
Its a way kewl ISDN set.
I work for teh AT&T

But if they kept the pattern from the dial to the keypad, 1 would be where 9 is, 2 would be at 6, 3 would stay where it is, 4 would replace 2, 5 in place of 1, on around until 9 occupies 5's place. 0 would stay where it was, because that's what you have to do to fit a circle in a square.

Now you're just being silly.:dunce:

 

[ctenidae]

I r teh googlez xpirt.

We have the whole Avaya/voip thing going on here.

As for being silly, I think we crossed that line a while ago.

 

[Paul]

I r teh googlez xpirt.

We have the whole Avaya/voip thing going on here.

As for being silly, I think we crossed that line a while ago.

Right! Now this thread is just getting silly. It must stop immediately!

 

[SkiDork]