I've seen attempts by others to repair keypads of the KIM-1 sort. It's doomed
to frustration. They cost MUCH less than $1 US in the quantity in which they
were purchased in '76, and that was >50% shipping and packaging. The KIM-1 was
designed more as a novelty than as a computer, since it was really just a
demo/evaluation kit for their ROM/I/O etc. devices. It was designed to see <
1-2 hr of power-on time. Clearly they didn't need a seriously serviceable
keypad for that.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Duell" <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: Kim / Commie keypads
> >
> > Well, clearly, one has to know what sort of switches are in place before
>
> Exactly. I can think of a few keyboards that I know to be made up of
> individual switches, but all of them are over 10 years old, and hence
> should be restored themselves, not stripped.
>
> > deciding to use a given keyboard. Being Microswitch, it's NOT genuine IBM.
If
> > the IBM real-McCoys are unuseable there's no point in attempting to use one
of
>
> That was my original comment. The true IBM 'clicky' keyboards are not
> suitable for this, for all they have a lovely feel (I am using one right
> now).
>
> > them. Hall-effect switches are probably too expensive to appear in a
cheapie as
> > one would expect to see on a PC clone. What's called for in the KIM-1 case
is
>
> Again, agreed, but you might come across them in some (high-end) classic
> computers.
>
> > clearly a switch, however. There's some question as to whether the
relatively
>
> We're agreeing on everything. Yes, no point in making life difficult. The
> Kim was designed to use a switch, and that's what should be used to make
> a new keypad -- especially as suitable switches are available.
>
> Incidentally, has the chap with the Kim tried taking the old keypad
> apart. Somethimes they can be mended -- broken contacts resoldered or
> replaced, for example.
>
> -tony
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 14 2001 - 23:49:30 BST