Top
Best
New

Posted by SeenNotHeard 4 days ago

IBM didn't want Microsoft to use the Tab key to move between dialog fields(devblogs.microsoft.com)
393 points | 237 commentspage 2
jmclnx 4 days ago|
Interesting, I wonder if the "TAB" argument was IBM at the time wanting screen input to work just like they did on mainframes ?

Well before DOS was a thing, the mini I programed on was using Tabs to move between the TUI fields. Once you were happy you would press RETURN to process the data. At the time, seems IBM was trying to avoid doing anything similar to any of its competition.

torben-friis 4 days ago||
I've had to work with oracle people this very year and had the same style of interactions, funnily enough. They required constant input from higher ups in our mostly flat org, no matter how many times an annoyed VP had to email a "I agree with whatever my people say".
trollbridge 4 days ago||
CUA 87 (released in 1987) used the tab key to advance between fields unless there was a dedicated Next Field key. CUA 89 was likewise.
K7PJP 4 days ago||
I've been a Mac user for 30+ years, but I love Raymond Chen's historical posts.

I'm aware of folklore.org, but I wish there were something equivalent within Apple itself. Sadly, it's not part of Apple's culture.

sowbug 4 days ago|
I can't do anything about Apple's culture, but it's been long enough that I doubt anyone would mind if I shared a story.

It was 1992. I was a summer intern on the System Software team. One of my projects was to improve a Disk Initialization Package feature to mark bad blocks found during disk init. The existing feature worked, but it was super slow, it didn't show progress, and it wasn't cancellable.

The UI was the trickiest part. I'd improved the speed a lot, but we still couldn't know how long the whole process would take, so every heuristic I used to show remaining time was awful.

I noticed this guy a few cubicles down had a "User Interface" title, so I wondered whether he'd be able to help. I asked him if he had a minute, and sat down and hashed it out with Apple employee #4, Bill Fernandez, the person who introduced the two Steves to each other.

He was truly the nicest person I met that summer, other than my manager. He completely understood the problem instantly and came up with a great solution: ditch the time estimate and replace it with an indeterminate progress bar that advanced as each disk track was tested. It worked, people liked it, and it shipped with the point release after 7.1.

Not quite as gee-whiz as any of Raymond's articles, but it's a start!

bobomonkey 4 days ago||
What did IBM want? Arrow keys?
Terr_ 4 days ago||
Possibly, OS/2 co-development started in 1985, which is the same year IBM released the a keyboard with arrow keys.

Of course, that assumes it came from a place of corporate strategy rather than individual habit, which could have been learned from other older systems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_keyboard

kstrauser 4 days ago||
Enter/return commonly used elsewhere.
MrDOS 4 days ago|||
I'd never really thought about it before, but Enter to advance to the next field field and Ctrl + Enter to submit the whole form (which is the typical keyboard shortcut for submitting the form while a multi-line text input control has focus) does have a certain appeal to it.
bsimpson 4 days ago||
The overloading of return to either send a message or add a newline has become really annoying since chat apps (and then now AI) have become popular.

You have to keep a mental context of whether you need to hold shift before you press return. See also: every message I've ever sent that ended with I' because I fat-fingered the ' key while typing a contraction.

Joker_vD 4 days ago|||
Terminal keyboards generally used to have two separate ENTER (submit the form to the mainframe) and RETURN (insert a line break) keys. I mean, even the original 101-key PC keyboard has them: the RETURN key above the right Shift, and the ENTER key of the numpad.
tracker1 4 days ago|||
Shift+Enter will usually enter a newline in a message without triggering send... At least that's the convention used most of the time. No guarantees on specific applications, just my own experience with this.
Joker_vD 4 days ago||
Some applications annoyingly use the opposite convention: Shift+Enter is what commits the entered text, while plain Enter inserts a newline.
tracker1 4 days ago||
Yeah, it's not always consistent... hell, google voice's sms in the web app will take shift+enter but fail and just submit half the time anyway.
raverbashing 4 days ago||||
To me that sounds like the way MacOS avoids Home/End with alternative solutions that kinda work but are not great

(And yes I do miss those - with an external keyboard these get less painful but still don't work 100% like on a PC)

cosmotic 4 days ago|||
What would be 'submit' then?
CamperBob2 4 days ago||
Enter/return on the 'Submit' button, I suppose. The rationale may have been "Start at the beginning of the form, keep hitting Enter after filling in each field, and it will submit itself when you're done."
drivers99 4 days ago||
Some terminal software would use a function key that would be labelled "Execute". You'd usually have a template to put over the function keys to tell you what does what.
jonathanstrange 4 days ago||
I find keyboards fascinating because they have many anachronistic elements and design flaws, yet nobody outside of elitist mechanical keyboard circles seems to be willing to fix them. Everybody seems to just think "whatever, gotta live with it." Why do they still have an extra large Caps Lock key in such a prominent position? What does ScrLk key on my keyboard do? Why is there an Ins key when practically every text edit field is in insert mode anyway? How often do you actually use the Pause key and what does it do?
1718627440 3 days ago||
> Why do they still have an extra large Caps Lock key in such a prominent position?

Because sometimes you still do want to insert text with all caps, for example as part of an ID. Also Caps Lock as opposed to Shift Look is quite useful when you want to insert caps and numbers quickly, again as part of IDs.

> What does ScrLk key on my keyboard do?

It switches between the cursor or scroll wheel or the mouse moving the cursor or the viewport/document. It's quite useful. Firefox e.g. implements this functionality under F7.

> Why is there an Ins key when practically every text edit field is in insert mode anyway?

To switch, because sometimes you do want replacement mode. Also it is useful for the Ctrl-/Shift-Ins, which is the original CUA key for what people now know as Ctrl-C/V. It is quite useful for when the latter means something else.

> How often do you actually use the Pause key and what does it do?

It used to still work for a while in Linux, but sadly they removed it. Also it is still useful for the CTRL-ALT SysRQ, Pause sequence to advise the OS, when nothing else works, or you don't want to shutdown properly. Also it feels quite powerful to tell the computer to be off, and it basically immediately being off.

RetroTechie 3 days ago||
> yet nobody outside of elitist mechanical keyboard circles seems to be willing to fix them.

Mostly not to destroy people's muscle memory, I think.

People have gotten used to, and expect certain behaviour from OS+apps. Futz with that, and users become annoyed, frustrated, or ditch an otherwise fine piece of software.

In other words: history / inertia.

SwellJoe 4 days ago||
I have such a long history of thinking of Microsoft as the Big Bad in tech, that it's funny to think of them as the young upstart that's just coming into their own and standing up to the big guys for the first time. If it was early enough for folks to be arguing about what keys to use for functions, it must have been 1985, which means Microsoft was just coming to the end of their time needing to satisfy IBM in order to survive/thrive.

They still depended on IBM to some degree. If IBM stopped shipping Microsoft products on their PCs, it would hurt Microsoft quite a lot. But, clones had just begun to break out. Compaq and a few dozen other clone makers were exploding in popularity. I imagine Gates must have seen their orders from clone makers growing exponentially, and much faster than sales to IBM, and realized they didn't really have to kowtow to IBM, anymore.

A real shame about OS/2, though.

DocTomoe 3 days ago||
This reads so much like a story in Gates' 'The Road Ahead' about IBM refusing graphical printing because some of their printers just couldn't, while at the same time this iteration makes no sense at all and is a bit weak on the details (e.g. not giving a rationale), that I wonder if someone linkedin^1 this. With respect to Raymond Chen.

[1] to linkedin: making up anecdotes in order to create engagement in a professional setting. Often in the form of 'Today I learned' or '15 things my toddler taught me about stockpile management'.

Dwedit 4 days ago||
Also somewhat related to Microsoft and IBM:

"I may have invented it, but I think Bill made it famous." - David Bradley (IBM), creator of the Ctrl+Alt+Del shortcut key.

OhMeadhbh 4 days ago|
The thing I find funny here is that MicroSoft in the 80s and early 90s was a scrappy bunch of hackers trying to get something out the door. But over time they've sort of become IBM. Based on the way things have progressed...

Microsoft has become IBM. IBM has become CA. Apple has become Microsoft. Oracle has become DEC (if DEC had a few more lawyers.) Amazon has become Oracle.

vincent-manis 4 days ago|
So who became Xerox? (i.e., brilliant ideas, thrown away at the corporate level)
OhMeadhbh 2 days ago|||
Xerox was a weird mix. Insightful enough to fund PARC, but blind enough to not understand the computer market. There's a section in "Fumbling the Future" describing how Xerox higher-ups could not figure out why people thought the Alto, with it's bit-mapped / mouse-based interface was in any way different from SDS/XDS minis with a set of front panel switches and serial terminals hanging off the back.

MSFT maintains a research arm (MSR) which routinely produces interesting concepts. Not that they would ever try to turn them into products. So maybe MSFT also turned into Xerox.

xerox13ster 4 days ago|||
They died of Fatal Neglect because no one gives a shit about brilliant ideas anymore.
More comments...