Thanks to Arialdo Martini, a fellow keyboard and Emacs enthusiast, for gifting me these stands. You can read more on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/olkb/comments/1lk02oo/how_i_tilt_my_split_crab_broom/.

Works great and fits my needs

I have been using this configuration full-time for almost a week now. My first impression is highly positive. There is no wobble whatsoever where the board connects to the stands, while the base is sturdy. I am typing at a decent speed with a fairly heavy touch and do not notice any instability. The steep angle does not seem to affect the reliability of the switches: they are firmly attached to their sockets and have not popped off.

The tent is comfortable to type on both while standing and sitting. I am mostly standing when I work on the computer, though I did experiment for a couple of hours with a sitting position to have a more informed opinion. My initial concern was that the steep angle would force me to compromise on how I arrange my desk, but it so far seems to not be an issue. I can use the keyboard however I need to.

The other concern I had was about the effective weight of the switches. The initial touches felt a bit heavier than usual, which could be the result of the gravitational pull being different. Or I simply needed to warm up a bit and get back in the flow of typing at an angle. The switches have since felt the same as usual, which is great because I enjoy them a lot.

A neat way to increase comfort

Apart from its utility, I also appreciate how elegant of a tenting solution this is. The stand has an adjustable arm which we use to control the angle we are typing at. At its top we connect a circular magnet by screwing it in place. Then, at the bottom plate of each half of the keyboard we attach a thin metallic sheet that is sticky on one side and magnetic on the other. Once the sticky side is firmly glued to the board, we bring the two magnets in contact and—bang!—we are ready for action. It took me less than ten minutes to piece everything together and I did not need any specialised tools to make it happen.

I have always appreciated the option of tenting. It is yet another way to increase typing comfort and promote good posture. Though tenting can only deliver on its promise if it is stable and sufficiently flexible to allow for experimentation. If stability is not there and the typing angles cannot be tweaked reliably to match the user’s evolving needs, then tenting is an untenable compromise: better keep the keyboard flat on the desk.

Tenting has to be done right

That was the issue I had with my original tenting solution, which involved regular nuts and bolts. My keyboard’s case takes an optional middle layer between the top and bottom parts that enclose the circuit board. This middle layer shields the PCB from small particles and also provides openings for a makeshift tenting arrangement. By adding bolts to its inner sides, I managed to elevate the two pieces by about 4 centimetres. The typing angle was not as sharp as I would like, but it still offered some relief from prolonged pronation.

• The first problem was that I was constrained by the available length of the bolts. Those I found in the local hardware store were not as long as they needed to be to support a greater degree angle.
• The second problem was the instability of the bolts, owning to the small surface area of their base, its poor grip on my desk, even with a deskpad, and their lack of heft.

The bolt-supported tent was fine in the beginning because I was still adjusting to the split and columnar key layout. At the time I was also in pain, which made my key presses relatively weak. The otherwise flimsy setup was stable enough. Though once I got accustomed to the keyboard and the pain subsided, I could no longer type with momentum and keep the board in place. So I went back to placing it flat on the desk, much to my disappointment.

Typing with confidence

Right now I am typing comfortably without holding back on each key press. The stands have not moved at all. I also removed the middle layer, to gain a few extra degrees of tenting. Plus, it looks cooler this way.

What remains to be determined is whether my established preferences for cap profile (Cherry) and switch type (heavy linear) will stay the same. I am not keen on introducing further changes, though I might run some experiments in the future. Time will tell and I shall report on my progress, should anything change.

Details of what is shown in the picture:

• Iris keyboard, by Keebio, revision 8. Thanks to “Andreas” for this gift.
• The magnetic stands, courtesy of Arialdo Martini.
• Keychron Cherry profile Dolch Red keycaps. Thanks to the person who bought me these and who prefers to remain anonymous.
• Cherry MX2A Black Silent switches. Thanks to me for a fine purchase during last year’s sales.
• A second-hand coffee table I found on the side of the road. It is worn down but gets the job done.
• The bushlands around my hut in the mountains of Cyprus!

And here is my complete QMK firmware configuration for the Iris: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot.

Finally, remember that no matter how much we optimise the keyboard and desk, we still are not made to sit all day. Regular breaks are essential to our longevity.

To me, the most important quality of a keyboard is how easy it is to use for a single typing session of, say, 30 minutes to an hour (there should be a break afterwards). At the physical level, this refers to its layout, the feel of the key switches, and the shape of the key caps. Then there are other factors, which I consider secondary but still important, such as the sound profile.

Acoustics contribute to “comfort”, if we assume that a pleasantly sounding board ultimately does not distract you, while something you actively dislike will keep disturbing you.

There is no one answer on what to do, though I have arrived at some crystallised thoughts that I describe below.

Use one-shot modifiers or home-row modifiers

Before you even check a custom keyboard, research how you can use either your operating system or dedicated software to get “one-shot modifiers” (or “sticky modifiers”) or “home-row modifiers” (alias “home-row mods”).

These are two different styles of configuration for accessing modifier keys like Ctrl and Shift:

• The one-shot modifier scheme allows you to tap on a modifier and then hit a key to register a modifier+key input. For example, to input Ctrl-c, you press and release Ctrl and then type c. Modifiers can still be held down to perform their normal function, though the whole point of this approach is to ease the stress on any one finger by reducing how much each key needs to be held down.
• The home-row modifiers place the modifier keys on the home row (where f and j are on a Qwerty layout) under the existing keys and make them available as a press-and-hold actions. For example, the j key inputs its corresponding character on tap but acts as a Ctrl key when held down. This arrangement optimises for ease-of-reach, as the modifiers are where you rest your fingers, instead of being placed in the periphery of the board.

I personally prefer one-shot modifiers because (i) I prefer not to press and hold too frequently, thus overworking specific fingers, while (ii) I cannot get used to the more sensitive timing of home-row modifiers.

As noted, you do not need a mechanical keyboard to set those up: your existing hardware is enough. Though you can still benefit from a custom keyboard, such as by placing all the modifiers on a thumb cluster while still relying on one-shot modifiers, which is what I do.

Use modifiers on both sides of the keyboard

No matter what you do, get used to activating a modifier with the opposite hand to the one that inputs the desired character. For example, Ctrl-c is the right Ctrl key and then c with the left hand. On a custom mechanical keyboard you have the advantage of moving the modifiers exactly where you need them to be. Though even on the most generic board with one-shot modifiers, it is fairly easy to tap any modifier key to get the job done.

Emacs users, for instance, are well aware of the tweak that makes the Caps Lock a Ctrl key. While this is a good place for the left hand Ctrl modifier, it does not alter the fact that one-handed Ctrl-c is an awkward motion. More so if you get into the common Emacs key bindings of C-x C-s and C-x C-f, among many others that are on the left side of the Qwerty layout.

Same idea for all modifier keys: make an active effort to distribute the workload.

Since I mentioned Emacs, I find that regular keyboards benefit not only from one-shot modifiers but also from this arrangement around the spacebar:

Super Alt Ctrl Space Ctrl Alt Super Fn

This way, the more frequently used Ctrl modifier is under the thumbs and can be reached without curling those fingers too much, making it easier to type all those control character sequences.

More keys are easier than fewer keys

As you search around for mechanical keyboards, you will find a wide variety of boards with a small number of keys. While those can be as productive as a full sized board, they require heavier use of “layers” to access all the key codes.

A layer is the functional equivalent of the Shift key. When Shift is active, for example, the key 1 registers !. In the same spirit, we can have another physical key, e.g. the spacebar, function as a layer activation switch when it is held down, so that, say, j becomes an arrow motion.

Using layers is something you can get used to, but (i) it has a learning curve and (ii) too many layers may still be uncomfortable if you are constantly pressing and holding a key to input certain frequently needed characters.

A good compromise is a keyboard in the 50% to 65% range. This percentage refers to the number of keys relative to a full sized layout. Those smaller offerings do not have a number pad, the navigation cluster (Home, PgUp, etc.), and function keys (e.g. F1), depending on their exact size. The idea is that you get access to the most commonly needed key codes as dedicated physical keys, while the rest is to be done with the use of layers.

As an example, my keyboard (the Iris Revision 8 by Keebio that I got as a gift from “Andreas”) does not have a navigation cluster. I have defined the space and return keys as layer toggles when held, such that h, j, k, l correspond to the arrow keys left, down, up, and right, respectively. Similarly, y, u, i, and o perform the bigger analogous motions of home, pgdn, pgup, and end. Because space and enter are directly under my thumbs, it is very easy for me to move around when I need to.

[ Here is my complete configuration for the Iris: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot. ]

Even if you plan to experiment with fewer keys, it is easier to just disable, say, the number row than work at the outset without it.

Opt for a mainstream switch first

Once you spend enough time researching mechanical keyboards, you will know that there are many factors that contribute to the feel of a key switch, beside their classification as “linear”, “tactile”, and “clicky”. Those involve the material of its housing and stem, how long the pole and the spring are, and the amount of lubrication it has. Each configuration results in a different typing feedback and sound profile.

You can explore those options at your own pace, if you want, though I strongly encourage you to not overthink this step. Pick whichever mainstream switch the keyboard vendor is giving you. When in doubt, ask for their baseline “tactile” switch. This is a kind of switch with a bumpy typing feel, such that you are confident you pressed a key.

In terms of sound profile, the only real consideration for a newcomer is whether the switch is silent or not. Technically, no mechanical switch is ever “silent” due to the mechanics involved, though they are quiet enough that you could use them in an office setup without trouble.

If you work from home or in a place where you could disturb others, pick a silent tactile switch and then check what else you need to dampen the sound of your board. Rely on a deskmat, for example, and consider adding some foam to the inside of your keyboard’s housing.

Pick Cherry profile key caps

As with everything in this field, there is a ton of options for the kind of caps you install on top of your switches. Again, I suggest you stick to the mainstream, even though other designs have their merits and fervent proponents.

The “Cherry” profile keycaps, in reference to the company that pioneered them, strike a good balance between all the factors that go into a key cap’s design. They are typically thick enough to not feel brittle, have a decent surface area while still leaving sufficient space between keys to make it easier to type accurately, are short but still have varying height to make the keys further away from the home row easier to reach, and have a broad cylindrical top to not aggressively punish off-centre key presses.

Owning to its popularity, the Cherry profile offers the widest range of options for colourways to choose from, going from classical monotonous styles to flamboyant ones. And if you ever want to upgrade on higher quality materials, chances are you will find Cherry as the number one choice among premium offerings.

Make sure your keyboard is customisable

This typically means that it is powered by QMK. This is an open source project for keyboard firmware. It allows you to modify how your board works. In the most common case, you will have the freedom to map key codes to physical keys and implement your own layers. Then there is the whole setup with the modifiers, as I explained earlier, where you set the timing of what counts as “one-shot” or how long does a press take to qualify as a “hold” action instead of a “tap”. These sort of technicalities will ultimately affect how you type. You will find what works best for you through trial and error.

Whatever you do, avoid FOMO

The Fear Of Missing Out can be quite high when there are so many competing yet seemingly equally viable configurations to work towards. Understand that there are diminishing returns or even negative returns to scale. There is no such thing as the perfect setup. Find one that is comfortable enough and has an acceptable sound profile. In other words, tend towards minimum viable usability, which is not a difficult target, instead of maximal gratification, which forever remains an elusive goal.

Good luck!

XGF Mixed Signal buttery and coarse switch

XGF have done it again with another banger of a design! Mixed Signal holds nothing back in terms of tactility. The bump comes right at the start of the force-travel curve and extends all the way to the end at the unusual 3mm mark. Expect the affair to be short and bumpy throughout.

The top housing is made out of exclusive UOM blend, which industry insiders affirm is tougher than polycarbonate. The bottom housing stands at the opposite end of the spectrum with its patented “Easy Peasy” composition. Collisions on each key press thus produce a distinct sound signature that oscillates between buttery smoothness and crunching coarseness.

Tipsy Hidden Claptrap slippery slope switch

Tipsy switches are highly rated in enthusiast circles owning to their celebrated “thlatch” sound profile. Hidden Claptrap has earned all its plaudits through its brilliant performance since its release this past summer.

The best-in-class lubrication method of Tipsy ensures that the leaf, stem, and spring are bathed in the finest industrial oils. The linear feedback is smooth and slippery as an eel.

The stem pole is long, creating a noticeable bottom out event at 3.9mm. The switch housings are carved out of secret TLP material, which is optimised to contribute to the peerless “schlushness” of the thing.

K9 Yappy Puppy high pitched switch

K9 remind us why they remain the indisputable authority in the niche of “slinky” aesthetics. Yappy Puppy follows in the footsteps of modern classics like Flamboyant Chihuahua (loud “kratsch” effect) and Docile Werewolf (silent “dling”).

The robust scissor cut internals have the unmistakable effect of sharpening the stem as the switch is broken in. The shortened travel distance of 3.4mm combined with the early actuation point at 1.2mm make for a snappy typing experience.

Compared to K9’s other offerings from this year’s lineup, Yappy Puppy has more “beleh” than Boisterous Jackal and less “thung” than Irate Bear.

Bonus: innovative NIH keycap profile

In collaboration with Santa’s elves, our engineers have spent the last half decade reverse engineering the moulds of the esteemed Lettuce profile in order to gain intimate knowledge of its subtle flaws.

The result of their tireless endeavours is a masterpiece of originality: NIH. Compared to Lettuce, the top row is 1mm shorter on the bottom side with a slightly less acute angle at the edges, facilitating faster roll motions. The spacebar is marginally more concave, boosting comfort for typists and gamers alike. Legends are exactly 0.0001489% more compact than Lettuce, making them crisp and highly legible. There is no part of the process we did not consider thoroughly, while painstakingly going through these technical details.

We are proud to bring such a unique design to market and are confident you will combine it with one of the aforementioned trailblazing switches to reach endgame levels of “klong” in your new weekly build.

I have been using the titular switches full time for the past ~3 weeks. They are the culmination of my evolving preferences with mechanical keyboards. Namely, (i) linear feedback, (ii) medium to heavy weight, (iii) steep force curve, (iv) sufficiently quiet, (v) barely noticeable stem wobble, and (vi) reasonably smooth out-of-the-box.

When I switched to a split mechanical keyboard a bit more than a year ago (the Iris revision 8 model by Keebio), I gravitated through trials and errors towards linear and lightweight switches, specifically the Keychron K Pro Silver. Their low operating force made it easier for me to type without hurting my hands. Over time, and while recovering from repetitive strain injury, I noticed how my fingers were applying increasingly more pressure to the switch, so I decided to switch to the Gateron G Pro 3.0 Yellow switches. Those are heavier than the Silvers, though not by much. I merrily used the Yellows for a few months. In the meantime, I regained the strength in my fingers and I naturally kept increasing the force I was applying to each key press. I thus decided to buy the even heavier Silent Blacks.

The Yellows offered me a fine typing experience overall. Their medium weight helps minimise accidental key presses while not compromising on the ease of typing. I think that they are an excellent starting point for anyone wanting to experiment with a linear switch. I could not notice any scratch in the key stroke and was accurate with my key presses. What I never got used to though was their rather high-pitched sound and noticeable stem wobble. The bottom out noise produced by the Yellows is especially loud for my taste. This was also a subjective weakness of the Silvers, though at the time I was not applying enough pressure to trigger a bottom out event frequently enough.

It is why I wanted a switch with a high bottom out force: to not reach that point and, whenever I would reach it, to not do so with a lot of excess force. Put differently, my experience with the Silent Blacks is that of a cushioned bottom out event. When it happens, it is comfortable rather than being an abrupt crash against the plate of the keyboard. I retain my momentum as I type and never feel like I have to slow down.

As their name suggests, the Silent Blacks are designed to stay quiet. No mechanical switch will ever be absolutely silent, such as how a phone’s keyboard is when the volume is at zero. The Silent Blacks are quiet enough to not be calling for my attention while I am typing. In fact, now that I am trying to notice what I am hearing, the fan of the computer and the birds outside are louder than my typing. Great! No distractions for me and for the forms of life all around me. Because of the silencing mechanism built into the switch, the bottom out event does not provide the audible feedback of a standard linear switch, like that of the Yellows and the Silvers. To me, this is exactly what I want, though it is worth pointing out for users of linear switches who have gotten used to that unmistakable sound.

In terms of smoothness, the Silent Blacks are a bit more scratchy than the Yellows. This is barely felt while typing. I can only sense the scratch when I press a key off centre and do it slowly. Such is not a real world scenario though and I will thus dismiss it as irrelevant to my experience.

The force curve of the Silent Blacks is steep, much like that of the Yellows. This means that the bottom out force is clearly higher than the actuation force. Whereas the Silvers have a fairly flat curve: the force post-actuation is practically constant (it probably increases by a little, but I cannot notice it while typing). The difference between the Silent Blacks and the Yellows in this regard is in terms of the force values, with the former being heaving at all stages. From what I find online, the Yellows actuate at ~50gf and bottom out at 67gf, while what I get for the Silent Blacks is ~60gf and 85gf, respectively. While I do not have the means to verify these values myself, I can tell empirically that the Silent Blacks are much heavier to the touch.

Stylistically, the Silent Blacks I got come in an opaque housing, which is black in colour. These switches would make for a poor fit in a build that is designed around backlight effects, as they inhibit light coming through the keycaps. I disabled that effect a long time ago and my caps are not shine-through anyway. I do not really care how a switch looks as I am not staring at the keyboard while typing. For what it is worth though, the all-black appearance appeals to me. But again, I would not mind if they were styled using some flamboyant colour combination: what I care about is the performance while typing.

I have read about the difference the housing materials make, such as how nylon produces different sounds than polycarbonate. Though I do not have a large enough sample size to make useful comparisons. Is nylon contributing to the low noise coming out of the Silent Blacks? Is the polycarbonate top housing of the Yellows and the Silvers partly responsible for their fairly loud audible feedback? I cannot tell unless I control for that factor.

In conclusion, I am happy with the Cherry MX2A Silent Black switches. They meet all my expectations as they feature everything I have been working towards over the course of 1+ year with a split mechanical keyboard. My preferences have evolved to reflect my recovery post-injury. I am now at a point where I enjoy typing as (i) there is no pain anymore and (ii) the keyboard is optimised for my sensitivities and is thus comfortable—indeed fun—to use.

My approach is thus that of the pragmatist: if I can get something that is “good enough”, I can forget about the keyboard and focus on other tasks. I have been doing as much for a long time, having recovered almost completely from Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI). Though I have had my fair share of relatively small experiments along the way.

I am sharing what I have learnt to (i) keep a record of my progress hitherto and (ii) provide a resource for others who are interested in another user’s perspective on the matter.

One-shot keys are my favourite feature

Perhaps the biggest improvement to my setup is the firmware level (QMK) feature known as “one-shot keys”. I use this for the modifiers and some layer activation keys and, as such, call them “one-shot modifiers”, else OSM. With OSM configured, I type a modifier and then within a configurable time window any key press is registered as Mod+Key. I no longer put any pressure on thumbs or pinkies by forcing them to hold down keys for too long over the course of an extended typing session.

Another neat feature is the “modifier lock”. I double tap a modifier (the exact number of taps is configurable) to make it sticky. This means that a double tap on Shift followed by 1, 2, and 3 will produce !@#. A single tap on the locked modifier undoes the effect. This makes it extra nice to input all capital letters or those long key combinations in Emacs like C-x C-k C-p (bonus points if you know what this does without looking it up).

I tried the popular “home-row modifiers” option of QMK but could not make it work in a manner that is consistent with my typing. Whether my technique is not compatible with it or the setup is inherently limited is beside the point. What matters is that I cannot consistently type prose when some key combinations mistrigger a modifier. And I do not like to write prose by going back and forth in editing it—I prefer the continuous writing approach, followed by a final spell check (also why I activate the spell checker on demand).

The keyboard I am using is the Iris by Keebio (thanks to “Andreas” for the gift! (not affiliated with that company, by the way)). It has a thumb cluster where I place the modifiers I use the most. Check the implementation details here: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot. I think that with OSM I would be content to even use a traditional keyboard for a while without fear of suffering a relapse in my RSI. This is because I would not need to twist my wrists to press and hold any modifier. Make no mistake though: an ergonomic keyboard is the superior option, ceteris paribus.

Linear switches are my favourites

Taken in a vacuum, I find tactile switches very fun to type on. The feedback they provide is unmistakable: it does not fail to capture my attention. In a real-world scenario though, this quality is a major weakness. When I am typing out a wall of text such as this one, I do not need any extra indication that characters are printed on the screen. I see them and can still hear the keyboard (no mechanical keyboard is completely silent). Furthermore, the tactile bump is considerably higher than the actuation point of the switch, meaning that over the course of a prolonged typing session I will be exerting more effort than necessary for a feature that has no added value to me.

The Iris keyboard I got shipped with the Durock Shrimp switches (Durock Shrimp Silent T1). I picked them because I thought I liked this type of switch more than their linear or clicky counterparts. It turns out that I do not appreciate the added weight to each key press. Consider this: if you are comfortable typing on keys that actuate at 50gf, with tactiles you will be applying force that is closer to 60g. You need to look at the peak tactile point to get a better sense of how heavy the switches are: the actuation point will mislead you. (And if the tactile point is too close to the actuation point you might as well go directly for linears as the bump will be too small.)

When I started out with linear switches, I felt like typing against a pillow. I could not tell by touch alone if my key presses were being registered. There was no feedback other than an abrupt bottom out event. It was disorienting. I did give them a fair chance though, which helped me improve my technique as well become more familiar with the linear feedback in general. It also made me realise how the in vitro perception of a switch is distinct from its in vivo performance. When I was trying the linear feedback without actually doing any work, I was paying too close attention to where exactly the actuation point is. In practice, this is not how it unfolds: I am writing something, the fingers move around fairly quickly, and I am not focused on the feel of each key press.

Not all linears are the same

There is the obvious metric of weight as well as other qualities like sound profile and smoothness, but what I realised recently is that the real deal for me is the delta between the actuation point and the bottom out force. It has a noticeable effect on typing feel while writing. A fairly “horizontal” force curve like that of the Keychron K Pro Silver switches slows me down while writing at speed because the keys do not have anything to prevent me from bottoming out hard and losing momentum. By contrast, a more “diagonal” force curve provides extra resistance at the bottom of the spring. It makes it easier to notice you are past the actuation point and it also results in both a cushioned bottoming out as well as a stronger rebound event.

As such, when buying mechanical key switches, always pay close attention to the data. You want to get an accurate force curve or, at least, to understand how flat or steep that would look like. For my use-case, the flatter profile of the Keychron Silvers was appropriate when my RSI was at its worst state. Now I am all for a more pronounced slope to the force curve, like that of the Gateron G Pro 3.0 Yellow switches. There is no one-size-fits-all. What matters is to understand what your needs are.

Cherry keycaps are peerless

I tried low profile keys, the MT3 keycap set, OEM, and the MOA profile (check my Final thoughts on MOA keycaps and spherical tops in general). What practice has shown me is that Cherry are the best for me:

• The cylindrical tops are forgiving to off-centre key presses.
• The surface area of the cap tops is not too large, which balances out the above point when it comes to getting a feel of where you are on the keyboard.
• The cylindrical tops do not cradle the fingers and thus let them slide around easier.
• The sculptured or stepped heights between the rows further improve the sense of orientation through touch. For my Iris keyboard in particular, they also allow me to place taller keys at the furthest and closest point in the thumb cluster, thus reducing the amount of stretching or curling involved.

I admit that I was sceptical about the popularity of the Cherry profile. I was thinking that maybe the reason they are ubiquitous is because of market hype or some trendy fashion statement in picking the premium designs manufactured by GMK (the company that has the original Cherry company moulds). While I still have no interest in paying a small fortune for keycaps, I do recognise that the Cherry profile as such (which you can find for cheap everywhere), is the real deal and a testament to engineering excellence.

Looking at Keychron’s wide range of options to get a sense of some market dynamics, they seem to favour spherical tops (whenever they are not selling a board with Cherry caps). Their OSA and KSA sets are proof of that, with the latter looking very similar to MT3. If I was buying a keyboard from them right now, I would be opting for the barebones option and then picking up one of their Cherry sets.

For another comparison from a well-known manufacturer, Tai-Hao offers two types of sculptured profiles: OEM, which is basically Cherry with minor tweaks (I guess historically done to avoid patent issues?), and Cubic which have the OEM height but a bigger surface area at the top. If I had to make a choice between those two, it would be in favour of OEM: the smaller surface area must be understood holistically with the way cylindrical tops do not cradle the fingers, as I noted above.

Between Cherry and OEM, I cannot really tell the difference while typing. It all depends on the build quality of the specific set. What I am using right now is the Keychron Cherry Dolch Red set that a keyboard enthusiast who prefers to remain anonymous gave me as a gift. It is produced from PBT and is done using the double-shot technique. On this note, I do not care about PBT versus ABS materials. The MT3 set I have is made out of ABS and is very nice to work with, my dislike for the profile itself notwithstanding.

Determine what you are working towards

All my experiments with the keyboard are done to bring me closer to a comfortable typing experience. I write a lot and thus need a setup that empowers me accordingly. Understanding the “why” we are doing something is a precondition for refining it with intent. Otherwise, it is easy to get lost in the sea of options and end up paying exorbitant fees on gimmicks.

Market prices are a good indicator in this regard: a 30 EUR Cherry profile keycap set will deliver almost the same experience as those extra costly GMK designs. (More than 100 EUR for a base set!? Come on mate!) While you are still learning about your peculiar requirements, refrain from all those products that promise to deliver top-class quality: you might not like it and it is questionable how much you need it, anyway.

Unless you are specifically keen on tinkering with mechanical keyboards for the sake of exploration, consider this a trap: some experimentation is necessary to figure out what you need, but when it becomes a distraction from your duties you know you are overdoing it. Same principle if you are hoarding keyboards with the rationalisation that you are keeping them in your daily rotation. As such, try to maintain a pragmatic outlook in settling for a build that is “good enough” and, perhaps, committing to make incremental refinements to it over the longer-term.

Overall, linears are easier for me because they do not tire me out when I am writing prose and are perfectly fine for coding. Expository writing and programming feel very different to me. I write prose in one go, meaning that I produce a wall of text without going back and forth, and then follow it up with a quick review for typos. As such, I spend many minutes typing non-stop. Tactile switches create this at least tiny pulsating effect, which becomes especially noticeable after ~20 minutes of continuous writing. It leads to fatigue and breaks my flow. Tactiles are fine while programming, due to the fact that the pace is varied: part of the time is spent moving around in a text buffer with the intent of performing a surgical edit. But because most of my time involves email correspondence, journal entries, and essays, I default to linear switches.

As I am recovering from RSI, the Silvers are starting to feel too light and restrictive. I cannot avoid bottoming out hard and end up losing momentum as I type. I thus decided to make a quality-of-life refinement to my setup, in the form of the Gateron G Pro 3.0 Yellow switches. After a couple of weeks of full-time usage, I am happy with my decision.

How the Yellows compare to the Silvers

I got those numbers from the websites of Keychron and Gateron, respectively, but I am not providing any links because I am not affiliated with anyone and do not want this to be interpreted otherwise.

What these metrics mean in practice is that the Yellows feel more substantive than the Silvers. They are less likely to be activated by mistake due to the combination of their longer pre-travel and heavier weight. But they are not heavy by any means. Each switch still feels light to the touch, especially in the real world scenario of typing words at speed.

A measurement I have not been able to find on Keychron’s website is the bottom out force for the Silvers. That of the Yellows is 67gf. The Silvers feel considerably lighter in this regard, so I am inclined to put the value at ~50gf. This, in combination with the aforementioned mean that I do not bottom out hard with the Yellows even when I am writing at my maximum speed (which is not too high, by the way). The added resistance at the bottom offers a cushion and gives a small boost to my fingers as they move around the keyboard.

Based on this exposure, I can tell how the slope of the force curve contributes to the overall experience. In linear switches, when the delta between the operating and bottom-out forces is small, the key press feels like there is nothing there to prevent you from bottoming out at maximum speed and thus losing momentum. Whereas the greater delta results in an increasingly more resistant press that eases the bottoming out and propels the fingers back to the top, thus keeping the momentum going. This is my understanding based on real-world typing (e.g. writing this article), not some test involving isolated key presses.

In terms of build quality, both switches have about the same stem wobble in all directions. It is moderate, though my Cherry profile keycaps help minimise it. I assume that taller caps, such as the SA profile, would emphasise the wobbliness and thus highlight it as a weakness of both models.

The Silvers have a stem with the familiar MX cross shape, plus walls on the side. Those are touted as “dust-proof”, though I cannot tell how much of that is empty marketing palaver or a genuine improvement to the de facto standard shape. The Yellows have no such walls. Perhaps, this reinforced stem does make a difference, but I would need to compare, say, a Yellow with and without it (ceteris paribus) to form a better opinion. All I can point out now is that the two switches are both moderately wobbly.

Where the Yellows are the clear winner is on the smoothness front. I cannot sense any scratch while typing. Same for when I try to press down on keys off-centre. Furthermore, all switches are consistent across the entire batch. The Silvers have always been scratchy and they are inconsistent as well. However, I do not want to make this seem like a major issue because it never poses a problem while typing: I probably wrote tens of thousand of words in the past months with the Silvers and have no complaints about them. The scratch has an effect on the acoustics but, again, it is minor and I would never consider it a deal-breaker either way.

A small change to match my needs

When my RSI was at its peak, the Silvers felt like a blessing: their light weight and early actuation point required minimal effort from my side. Though I was always relatively slow with them. Now that I am stronger and faster, their relative strengths have turned into considerable hindrances.

By discovering how the slope of a linear switch contributes to its performance, I have learnt a valuable lesson for the future and will be able to make more informed decisions that match my needs. The gist is that there is no such thing as a perfect switch: it all depends on the use-case and particular needs.

The Yellows are a fine product that meets my expectations, especially given their budget-friendly cost. They are clearly not a top-tier offering, but have many merits. If I were to iterate on this platform, I would like to have the same metrics for the force curve as well as equally good smoothness, combined with little to no stem wobble, and, if possible, a slightly more subdued sound.

This is where we get into the dangerous zone with mechanical keyboards and my instinct is to hold myself back. We can spend inordinate amounts of money in pursuit of the unicorn of flawless performance, only to end up with something that is, at best, marginally better than the average offering. The Gateron G Pro 3.0 Yellow switches check all the boxes for me and comfortably pass the test of being “good enough”.

Uniform height is worse for my typing

One of the potential advantages of uniformly shaped caps is that you can position them anywhere you want on the board. This is especially useful for alternative layouts like Dvorak and Colemak. Sure, there are some kits that include extra keys for those cases, but (i) they add a considerable amount to the total cost of an already expensive set and (ii) the additional caps still are not as flexible in covering any kind of layout. Uniformly shaped caps can be shuffled around at any time, without affecting the typing feel. This is not relevant to me though, as I am using US Qwerty. What I care about is the experience while writing.

For the thumb cluster of the Iris, a uniform height is vastly inferior to a sculptured one. If you notice in the picture I share above, I use three different heights for maximum comfort. The two outermost keys for which the thumb needs to stretch or curl (those with the PlayStation-style legends) have the tallest height and are oriented to best meet the thumb from where it accesses them. The corner keys (2 and 3) have the lowest height, which is angled inward to make it easier to hit the largest possible surface area, be it at the centre or the edge. Finally, the keys 8 and 9 where my thumbs rest use a medium height which also has the least amount of angle: the contact is smooth across the top of the cap. This arrangement is particular to my hand shape and is further enhanced by the one-shot modifier setup I maintain (check my QMK configuration for the technicalities). The gist is that it works brilliantly for me.

With the MOA set I lose these crucial advantages. All keys being the same height means that the thumb must stretch and twist a lot more. The one-shot keys make this less of a problem, though it is an ergonomics penalty regardless. Furthermore, the spherical tops with the pronounced walls on all sides make all keys harder to hit, as the thumb is angled sideways and cannot easily aim for the centre.

As for the alphanumeric keys, I did not notice any improvement going from Cherry to MOA. I did get used to the latter’s uniformity quickly, which suggests that the sculpt is a minor factor here, though I never felt it was better than what I had before. As I am writing this on my Cherry set, I now realise that the numbers are a bit easier to access by stretching my fingers without lifting them as much. This is, in part, due to the varying heights, but also the subtle cylindrical tops. The cylinder shape allows the finger to move freely up and down from the centre of the cap beyond its bounds without encountering any obstacles: this is of paramount importance for my thumbs but it also is nice for the other fingers.

No more spherical tops for me

Compared to the MT3 set I have (I got an Ortho kit at a generous discount and still feel I paid too much), MOA’s tops are less aggressive because they are not very deep and thus have a fairly large surface area. MT3 has those deep, exaggerated dishes that cradle the fingertips if hit at the centre, but otherwise offend them with their acute edges. It is then not just the shape of the tops that matters, but also how deep they are. Between the two styles, MOA is a clear winner in my books. MT3 was uncomfortable even after a few weeks of full-time use.

Still, MOA’s spherical tops have a noticeable wall around them, which trap the finger and forces it to be raised a lot more than on Cherry in order to reach another key. In practice, this results in doing extra work for the same amount of typing. Cherry’s tops are cylindrical, though only barely so: instead of a wall, there is a small ramp on the left and right sides. With Cherry, I find that I can slide the finger sideways without any impediments, such as to go from j to h. Downward motions, like a to z are equally easy. But upward motions do require the finger to be lifted. With MOA—or MT3 for that matter—it is not possible to slide around the keyboard at all.

This granted, MOA’s edges are smooth, which makes off-centre presses quite forgiving. If there was a variant with a sculptured height, I would strongly consider it. I hypothesise that the best profile for my preferences would feature cylindrical tops like Cherry’s (or marginally flatter), but with a sculpt that allows upward sliding motions (so the whole profile would look like an open U when seen from the side). Until I find that, Cherry remains my top pick together with OEM.

For a long time now, I have been meaning to try a uniform shaped profile keycap set. The most popular options for MX type switches seem to be the DSA and XDA profiles. The former is produced by Signature Plastics. They are the shorter, uniform shaped counterpart of Signature Plastics’ acclaimed SA profile. Given the pedigree of their manufacturer, I shall assume that DSA is top-tier in terms of build quality—and this is reflected in its lofty price. Whereas XDA is produced by many manufacturers and I cannot tell if its quality is up to par. The price it commands on various marketplaces, combined with some opinions I have read, suggests that it is at least mid-tier.

Because I did not want to spend more than 30 EUR on a purchase that I could regret, I decided to opt for an alternative: the MOA profile that some Chinese vendors are peddling. If you check around for those, you will quickly realise that they are mostly cutesy and whimsical. I am surprised the marketing departments have not yet targeted the mountain-dwelling, hut-building, Emacs-using philosopher demographic out there. This is clearly a missed opportunity. 🙃 Still, I have no problem whatsoever with the available options. I do like pink, anyway. Below is a picture of my Iris keyboard by Keebio (thanks to “Andreas” for it!), showing the MOA Cherry Pudding set by Womier on the left half and the Cherry Dolch Red set on the right, by Keychron.

The Dolch Red is what I have been using for the past couple of months. These are a gift from a fellow mechanical keyboard user who prefers to remain anonymous (you know who you are, so thanks again!). I actually stopped using the red-coloured caps that give it its moniker, because I prefer the monotone aesthetic. The Cherry profile in general (also known as GMK CYL) is the de facto industry standard because it gets a lot of things right: its low-to-medium height makes it easy to adapt to, its cylindrically shaped tops provide a sufficiently spacious surface area to type accurately, and its sculptured shapes contribute to a comfortable experience. The particular set I was using is made out of thick PBT material and the legends are produced using the double-shot technique. In short, this is a top notch product.

But part of the appeal of mechanical keyboards is the ability to swap out different parts and try a variety of configurations. My primary goal is always ergonomics, with a secondary target of decent acoustics (basically, not too loud and exaggerated). I have thus been using the MOA keycaps for a full day now and am already prepared to share some first impressions.

The feel and acoustics are wonderful

Womier’s MOA set is made out of thick PBT plastic. I do not have an instrument to measure its exact width, though the eye test suggests that it is a bit thicker than the Dolch Red. Those are specified as 1.5mm on Keychron’s website, so I will go with ~1.6mm for Womier’s caps.

Unlike its unapologetically flamboyant looks, this MOA set’s acoustics are subdued and noticeably deeper than what I was using before. I am impressed by how I am not drawn to the sound while I am typing. It is perfectly balanced: enough to generate audible feedback but not to call for my immediate attention.

The top of an MOA cap is slightly spherical. When I rest my fingers on the home row, I can tell that there is a concave there, though it is not deep. Though I barely notice the dishes as I type. This, too, is an understated quality that I appreciate. Comparing it to the MT3 profile that I tried some months ago, I never have the feeling that MOA is trying to remind me of its properties. Whereas I could not avoid the feeling of intrusiveness coming from MT3, as if it would keep shouting at me “look at my deep dishes and, by the way, check out the rest of my shape!!!”.

I prefer designs that blend with the background and come to the foreground only when I shift my attention to them. MT3 never did that for me, whereas the two sets pictured above both pass the test with flying colours.

A uniform shape is mostly okay

I have already gotten used to the lack of a sculptured height. As I write this, I do not feel that I am missing the Cherry profile. This suggests that whatever benefits those varying heights have are marginal. My fingers are long enough to access all the rows and columns, including the outer one (where Insert and M5 are).

However, the case of the thumb cluster is different. While my thumb can easily actuate all four keys, my policy in the interest of ergonomics is to avoid scenaria where I either stretch or curl my thumb to reach the outermost keys (the Delete and triangle in this picture). With a uniform profile, the equivalent of the Delete key is a bit trickier to access because I have to either come from higher above or hit it from the side. If the key switches have a very low actuation force, this is a recipe for frequent mistyping and the resulting frustration. I do not like how the caps can thus dictate what kind of switch I opt for, though I will not overstate this point as it is not a problem per se—just a concern.

You will notice in the picture how I had laid out my Cherry profile caps on the thumb cluster. The outermost keys were the tallest, making it practically impossible for me to accidentally hit the wrong key. I am not making mistakes with the MOA set right now, though I consider this a weak point of a uniformly shaped design. I expect this to not be inherent to MOA: any uniform set would impose such constraints, mutatis mutandis.

The thumb cluster is where I put the Ctrl, Alt, and Shift keys. I configure those (and others) to function as one-shot keys. This means that I tap the modifier and then quickly follow it up with another key to register a Mod+Key event. As such, the shape of the caps is not a deal breaker because I never press and hold, potentially keeping my thumb in an awkward angle and tiring it out over the course of a typing session. If I was doing that, I would consider MOA (and probably every uniformly shaped set) unsuitable for my thumb cluster.

The experiment continues

As always, I will keep the current setup for a few weeks. The idea is to give it a fair chance, though I can already tell that it gets a lot of things right. I do suspect, though, that I will revert to the Cherry profile at least for the thumb cluster: it is clearly superior to an all-MOA arrangement there.

Assuming I like MOA as a long-term option, does this mean that I will then try DSA or XDA sets? The answer is most likely negative. I think that the considerably higher cost of those will not correspond to a proportionate increase in quality. This is further reinforced by my experience with Keychron’s Dolch Red, which is very nicely done while costing ~30 EUR. In my experience, “premium” products seldom live up to their price tag and I am not that picky, anyway.

Concretely, I discuss some features of QMK about one-shot modifiers, modifier/layer lock, and the repeat key. I also talk about the combination of those with sculptured keycaps and easy-to-actuate key switches.

Check my QMK setup: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot.

I also talk about keyboard enthusiast themes regarding switches, caps, and related issues.

Check my QMK setup: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot.

The suitability of those switches for writing is reflected in their accompanying promotional material. Manufacturers label them as a good choice for typists or, depending on the specific switch, an all-round capable option for gaming and office work alike.

Since I do not play any computer games with the keyboard, I can only judge the typing experience and, yes, tactile switches live up to their marketing. But are vendors right in all their claims? In particular, are linear switches intended for gaming and, perhaps, are ill-suited for other use-cases?

The little experiment

The tactile bump or unmistakable click are clear indicators for a successful key registration, but is such feedback necessary? To test whether I was benefiting from it, I devised a simple experiment: I put on headphones, played back a video while setting the audio level to a reasonably high level, and used my linear switch set (Keychron K Pro Silver, of which I wrote about in a previous publication: https://protesilaos.com/keeb/2024-07-02-keychron-banana-silver-switches/). The goal was to do some long-form writing and then reflect on how it felt.

It took me about 45 minutes to write an entry for my journal. I wrote it in my typical alla prima style, meaning that I did it in one go, only to quickly review the text at the end for typos. At no point did I feel I was inhibited by the lack of tactile or audible feedback. Words were flowing nicely and my fingers had no problem activating the keys with accuracy. The visual confirmation I was discerning on the screen while typing was enough for me to have confidence in my keystrokes, so I could keep the momentum going. I thus concluded that the switch type was not an irreducible factor of what I like in a switch. Further experiments were not necessary, as I had already noticed this phenomenon.

Factors such as how much force it takes to actuate the key and how scratchy or not the press feels are far more important to me. I value consistency and appreciate a setup that does not tire me out over the course of a prolonged writing session. Whether the switch type is linear, tactile, or clicky is relevant only to the extent that it enables the qualities I am seeking.

The marketing is fine, albeit simplistic

Linear switches are typically labelled as suitable for gaming. There probably is truth to this claim: the direct keystroke does not interfere with fast-paced repeated key presses, the absence of a noticeable click does not bother fellow players, while a lighter force helps minimise strain in extended press-and-hold events.

What I am interested in though is office work, where I think the gamer-focused narrative of linear switches is not helpful. I was originally negatively predisposed to linear switches because I thought I was not part of their target audience. But this changed quickly after I used clicky switches, which are supposed to be optimised for typists: the click felt gimmicky and was mostly a distraction. Instead of keeping my stream of consciousness uninterrupted, I was constantly being reminded “Hey, did you notice the click? Here… Here… The click!!!”

This kept happening for the whole duration of my typing session. I continued using clickies for a few more days to confirm I had gone through the adjustment period. I now think they are fine, though nothing special. I never developed an appreciation for the typist-friendly designation and consider it inaccurate. At best, those are suitable for someone who enjoys the added audible feedback which, I assume, can include gamers.

The lightness of typing

The linear switches I am using are smooth all across the keystroke. I do not notice any scratch. There also are no weird pinging sounds coming from inside the switch, something that did happen with other tactile switches, which made them borderline clicky.

Linear switches have the understated quality of blending into the background of your awareness, as they do not have any pronounced attribute that constantly reminds you of their presence. No tactile bumps; no clicks; no extraneous noises. Just a predictable press, which is simple and super effective.

My newfound fondness for linear switches has helped me understand myself better and develop a more refined taste for these mechanical components of my keyboard. Consistency is the best feature. Not feeling like I am typing against sandpaper is also essential. Then it all comes down to how sharp the rebound is, what the pre-travel should be, and the like.

I see myself using linear switches for the foreseeable future. I am happy with the Keychron K Pro Silver model, though I will try to experiment with some of their heavier counterparts at some point (not soon though, as this is working nicely).

The gist is that personal preference matters the most. Though we can only learn what we truly like—and thus who we are in this respect—by being out there in the world, trying things, and learning along the way. Perhaps this process of self-discovery is what fascinates the most beside the technicalities of having a keyboard setup that (i) helps alleviate my RSI and (ii) empowers me to write at length, which is my favourite activity on the computer.

In early spring 2024 Keychron was running a sale on all of their products. They have a line of switches called “Keychron K Pro” (not to be confused with the “K Pro” keyboards). The regular price of those switches is 16 USD for a tube of 110 items. For comparison, other models from manufacturers like Gateron and Kailh are priced above 20 USD, some even reaching closer to a 100 dollars. I decided to buy a set of Banana switches and another of the Silver ones for less than 20 dollars with the discount. This was such a great value for money and taught me a lot along the way.

The switches I was using before

The Iris keyboard I got from Keebio (thanks to “Andreas” for the donation) shipped with the Durock Shrimp switches. These have a tactile behaviour that is marketed as “silent”. Indeed, they are on the quiet side and I was originally impressed with their performance. Though after some weeks of daily usage, I started noticing metallic noises coming from some of the most heavily used switches. There was an unmistakable pinging and clicking.

I did not like this development, because it ran contrary to the idea of using a silent switch. I learnt about lubricants and did lube a few of the worst offenders. The results were not much better, so I decided to abandon that project. There probably is value to be had in lubing and also in filming switches, though I am not prepared to go to that end unless it is a game changer. My small sample size suggests this is more about marginal gains, to perfect an already outstanding build.

The extra noise coming from the Durock switches is not an annoyance per se. I do not mind using loud switches. Though if I really wanted something clicky, I would opt for something like the Kailh Box Jade/Navy and enjoy both the unapologetic clicks and the authoritative tactility.

The Keychron Silver switch

Those are light linear switches with an early pre-travel and short total travel for an MX style design. As with most (all?) linear switches of this sort, these are marketed for office and gaming. I am not a gamer, so my experience is limited to typing prose and code.

According to the manufacturer, these are the specifications, which I compare with the Red variant (the de facto standard linear switch):

My first impression with the Silver switches was that they were super light, perhaps “too light”. Coming from the heavier and tactile Durock Shrimps (50g actuation force at 2mm), the Keychron Silvers felt like typing in a vacuum. There was no perceptible resistance and I would frequently actuate the keys just by resting my fingers on them. The first days with this setup were really awkward, as I kept misfiring keys. Though I wanted to give the switches a fair chance, so I powered through.

Once I got used to the Silvers, I found their lightness to not be a hindrance anymore. It was the impetus I needed to improve my accuracy and technique. I learnt how to rest my fingers on the home row without accidentally typing the corresponding characters. As for the change from a tactile to a linear behaviour, I found this to not be a big issue either. I am perfectly happy working with linear switches, especially those super light ones, because I know that every minor motion counts as a key press: the tactile or audible feedback is not necessary once you get used to this workflow.

One downside of such light switches is that it is easy to bottom out with them, especially while you are getting used to their force/travel curve. During my “awkward phase” with them, I was bottoming out hard and ultimately had to slow down to avoid harming my RSI-ridden left arm and wrist. Perhaps it is this deliberate slowdown that allowed me to work on my technique. I still make the occasional mistake, though I find I am more accurate with my key presses and can touch type effectively (only on the columnar stagger of my Iris though, as the standard row stagger still is hard for me).

I could keep using the Silver switches and I would be a happy customer. Though I still had another set I needed to try…

The Keychron Banana switch

When I first got the package from Keychron, I tested the Silver and Banana switches without installing them on my keyboard. The Silver one was clearly different from what I was used to and is why I opted to try it first. While the Bananas felt strange. They had the expected tactile feedback (more on that below), but their behaviour was still a departure from the Durock Shrimps, as well as the Brown/Blue switches I have on my Keychron K5 Pro keyboard (thanks to Arialdo Martini for this gift).

Again, here is a table comparing the various switches. Note that the Durock Shrimps are, in my experience, closer to the Brown ones though the tactile bump is probably a bit more noticeable.

The tactility of the Banana switches is unique among all the switches I have tried. This is because of the distribution of force and travel required to actuate a key press. In common switch types like the Brown and Blue, the tactile bump is placed somewhere in the middle. You first press down a bit, then experience the bump where the resistance increases, and then you continue pressing down linearly again. Whereas in the Banana switch there is practically no pre-travel: it starts with the tactile bump and bottoms out early after that.

Before trying out the Bananas, my initial impression of them was negative. I thought they were too squishy for a tactile switch. But I know not to hold on to incomplete thoughts, so I was committed to try them out in earnest after forming an informed opinion about their Silver counterparts.

Moving from the Silvers to the Bananas was a revelation. The two switches share attributes of an early actuation and short total travel, so I was already used to typing in the optimal way for them without bottoming out.

What I like about the Bananas as opposed to the Silvers is the addition of the early tactility. Like the Silvers, they let me type by pressing at the tip of the key, though the Bananas also empower me to sense the “pulse” of the keyboard along the way. As a bonus, the added weight on the Bananas when compared to the Silvers reduces potential errors at higher typing speeds. It is an upgrade to my mechanical keyboard experience overall.

Keep an open mind

Both the Silver and Banana switches failed to capture my imagination at the outset. I know not to commit to early thoughts and was determined to give both of them a fair chance. I think they are high quality products. Once we factor in their comparatively low price point, they are extra good.

My appreciation for those switches was developed as that of an acquired taste rather than love at first sight. There is so much to learn about our own preferences while using mechanical keyboards. We continue to develop new ones as we go and we continuously adapt to evolving states of affairs. Right now, I am settled with the Banana switches, though I remain open to the possibility of experiencing something different. I will not write “better” because I cannot provide a reliable scoring system. This includes the Durock Shrimps as well: I think I dislike their added noise because of my expectation for them to be silent, but otherwise would not mind having extra audible feedback while typing, provided it was consistent.

I now expect this same kind of gradual appreciation to be made manifest as I revisit my MT3 ortholinear keycap set. What I wrote before about MT3 is that it is of high quality but I could not get used to the keycap profile itself. Perhaps I will change my opinion after trying it for a while with the Banana switches. My technique is different now, so there is a chance I will like the height and shape of MT3 this time (I always recognised its premium build quality). What matters though is that this deep dive into mechanical keyboards has helped me cope with my RSI as well as to fine-tune my sense for the little things involved in a typist’s everyday experience.

Colemak helped me use all fingers for touch typing

The time I spent with Colemak-DH was fruitful, as I forced myself to not rely on bad habits I had developed over time on standard, row stagger keyboards. I started using all fingers to actuate keys and learnt to move the right finger for the given column. What I got from this exercise is the practice of resting my fingers on the home row, something that I did not do before: I would curl the right hand to be somewhat diagonally on the board, with index where Qwerty N is and the pinky on P.

Another factor in this change is the column stagger of the Iris keyboard I have been using. It makes so much more sense to me, as I have an easier time predicting where my finger needs to move to input a character. On a row stagger, such as what I have on the laptop’s keyboard, I still make a ton of mistakes in terms of which fingers activates what character.

I do not get the home-row emphasis

One of the much-touted advantages of Colemak over Qwerty is the frequency of home row keys to type text in English. The argument is that this results in a more comfortable typing session, as overall finger movement is reduced. I was curious to try that for myself, only to realise that finger movement is actually a good thing for me, at least on the Iris.

Finger movement sounds more difficult because you are forced to cover more space. Though in my experience it is more relaxing to have a little bit of extra travel as fingers do not remain fixed in one position for too long: they stretch out more frequently. I liken this to any kind of stretching we do, which is better for us than remaining still for too long.

If less finger travel is good, then so are fewer keys

If you browse fora of keyboard enthusiasts who are into split ergonomic builds, you get the feeling that the fewer the keys, the greater the comfort. As with the premise of Colemak, the idea is plausible: keep everything close to the home row and take it one step further by limiting all motions to 1 key unit at most (“1 key unit” is the space occupied by an alphanumeric key and is often expressed as “1u”).

This contradicts my experience. Fewer keys make the keyboard less comfortable to me. Fingers travel less, i.e. they do not flex as much, and the firmware-level modifications to add more layers become increasingly complex.

I do use layers and do enjoy the QMK feature for one-shot modifiers. But there is a clear trade-off between compactness and simplicity: the more compact a design, the more complex and idiosyncratic it gets.

A few extra keys are fine

To this end, I reaffirmed my preference for a number row on my keyboard. Because numbers and their corresponding symbols are readily available, the layer 1 I use can combine special characters and movement keys while still being accessible from both halves of the keyboard. Whereas having many layers leads to other compromises with the layout of the thumb cluster, such as a key on the left hand activating layer 1 and a key on the right doing the same for layer 2. Then a third layer can be accessed by holding down both thumb keys… Just thinking about this triggers my RSI. The knock-on effect of more layers is the removal of one or more modifiers from the thumbs and the reliance on other techniques such as key combinations or home-row tap/hold configurations.

For me, home-row modifiers are not comfortable. They depend on precise timing to register a tap versus a hold and feel cognitively heavy as a result. I mistrigger them frequently and end up making a lot of mistakes which inevitably break my flow. This is especially problematic for the way I type prose, as I write words non-stop and only do a final spellcheck at the end. Every misfired home-row sequence adds considerable friction and engenders frustration.

A dedicated placement for modifiers, combined with the one-shot functionality, is the most comfortable setup I have ever used. The Iris has four keys on the thumb, which is the optimal number for me. More would be hard to reach, while fewer would lead to compromises along the lines of the aforementioned.

A lateral step at best

I ultimately switched back to Qwerty because I could not convince myself that Colemak was actually making my experience more comfortable. I suspect that the apparent comfort reported by many comes from a combination of factors not limited to the keyboard layout, such as being more mindful of one’s typing technique, fixing their posture, getting a split keyboard with a column stagger, finding the best key switches and the right keycap profile for them, and so on.

Is Colemak bad? No. Though I cannot consider it a clear improvement over the status quo either. It is a side step with, perhaps, some marginal gains. This is a subjective matter, anyway, as one size does not fit all. The gist is that any person who feels discomfort while typing needs to identify the source of their woes, learn from the community, though do not hesitate to think critically and apply judgement about the specifics of their case.

I realised that my problem was not with Qwerty per se but with the ulnar deviation imposed by the overall design of standard keyboards. The split of the Iris keyboard combined with its column stagger are a clear upgrade, as I can type for much longer without feeling any pain whatsoever (whereas before I would write for 5 minutes, feel numbness, and then pain shortly thereafter). In fact, I am gaining strength and suspect that I will eventually need to change to switches that require greater force to be actuated. This is fine, as comfort is relative to our current state.

The experience with Colemak was insightful. I learnt a lot about myself and am happy with the outcome.

[ I am not posting links to any of the mentioned items because I am not affiliated with anybody and want this to be clear. ]

The profile

MT3 is a tall, sculpted design, with spherical tops. I had never used anything like it and was interested to experience this new sensation. The deep dishes at the top give the feeling that your fingers are hugged by the caps. You get a clear tactile feedback when you are hitting the centre of the key. Depending on how accurate your typing is, this will feel inviting and you will enjoy typing for longer.

Unless your previous caps were also tall, a switch to MT3 will require further changes to your keyboard/office setup. In my case, I am tenting the Iris (using regular bolts) and I thus had to tinker with the exact angle: I lowered it a little bit.

Build quality

The set I got is black-on-white. It is made out of thick ABS material. One of the early impressions I had when I got started with mechanical keyboards is that ABS is inherently lower quality than PBT. This is simply not true, as the production process makes all the difference. MT3 is nicely done on this front. Its walls are thick and the texture is pleasant to the touch.

The legends on the caps are produced using the double-shot technique. This means that the cap consists of two separate pieces of plastic pieced together: first the legend is cast and then the rest of the housing is filled around it. These double-shot keycaps look much better to me than the dye-sublimated Cherry Icebergo set I got with my Iris out-of-the-box (those are fine in their own right, but the legends do not appeal to me).

I do not look at the keys and do not take my keyboard to any exhibition, so this is not a major point for me. I am mentioning it though as I am aware that it matters to a lot of people. If anything, it changes the looks of the board. Based on what I have seen here, I have developed a preference for double-shot over dye-sublimated caps, though I remain open-minded.

Acoustics

The combination of height and thickness makes MT3 produce a deep, base sound. I find it pleasant to work with. It combines nicely with my silent, tactile key switches (now using the Durock Shrimps that were shipped with the Iris).

Of course, the acoustics are not limited to keycaps. One must consider the specifics of their keyboard, the possible presence of sound dampeners, the properties of the desk’s material, etc. Ceteris paribus, then, I prefer MT3 over the Cherry Icebergo set: it sounds sturdier.

Too idosyncratic for me

Despite its high build quality and excellent acoustics, I cannot get used to the height and shape of MT3. The deep dishes at the top do not work well with the way I type, as I now realise that I do not hit all keys exactly at the centre. This is especially problematic for the thumb cluster, where I want to type the innermost and outermost keys without twisting or stretching my thumb.

With MT3, I got sloppier with my typing and would frequently mishit a modifier such that it would not register as a key press. I have configured the QMK firmware with one-shot modifiers, meaning that I tap the modifier and then within a limited amount of time the next key will count as if I was holding down the modifier all along. This is essential for my workflow, as I do not tire my fingers after a long typing session.

As a result of this sloppiness, I lost confidence in the tactility of my setup. I had to apply more force to each key press than what the underlying mechanical switches would require. In my current state, this is a major downside as I am still recovering from my keyboard-induced arm/wrist injury. I need keys that are easy to reach, actuate without much effort, and can work reliably even when pressed at a slight angle.

I suspect a lighter, linear switch with less pre-travel will solve the problem with the thumb cluster. Basically, a slight touch will register a key press. Though such a tweak will inevitably introduce another problem: I will accidentally actuate keys just by trying to rest my fingers on the home row which will, either make me sloppy again or force me to change how I rest my hands between typing sprees.

A mixed set of switches may be an optimal arrangement to accommodate MT3, though I am concerned that the lack of uniform tactile feedback will require more cognitive effort to maintain momentum.

In other words, I am not going to try super smooth linear switches just to circumvent my issues with MT3.

Here is something I learnt in the process: trying a cap in isolation does not provide enough information about how the in vivo typing experience will turn out to be. Well, unless you are already highly experienced… If anything, testing it in a vacuum gives the wrong impression, as you will likely focus more on the acoustics and build quality than on whether the set is actually comfortable to use.

I cannot tell if height alone is an issue or if it is that in tandem with the deep dishes that unsettles me. Perhaps it is the latter, so I am not willing to give up on tall profiles altogether. I can, however, confirm that I dislike the pronounced spherical tops. A more gentle curve to that sphere may be fine, but not those scoops. It is as if I am constantly reminded that “this is MT3 you are using”, whereas I want something more neutral to get the job done but otherwise remain in the periphery of my conscious efforts.

Another area where MT3 is idiosyncratic is with how its homing keys are designed. Instead of those little bumps, they have a deeper dish. Perhaps this is only a matter of getting used to, though I could not and would lose sense of my F and J keys after a while.

I believe I spent enough time with this set to know that I gave it a fair chance. I think Drop and Matt3o have done a wonderful job with the build quality and I will happily try another product from them. My distaste for MT3 comes down to its shape: it has to do with how I am used to typing and what my priorities are right now, given my injury.

Perhaps you will love this profile the same way lots of other people do. I believe it is too opinionated and is thus more likely to evoke feelings that are closer to outright approval/disapproval than indifference.

For the time being, I am using Cherry Icebergo. I have also used the OEM profile, which I marginally prefer over Cherry because it is a bit taller and less aggressively sculpted. The reason I do not use my OEM caps is that they are low quality both in terms of touch and acoustics. Whereas the Cherry Icebergo set is a thick, single-shot PBT that feels pleasant and easy to operate. If it had the double-shot legends of MT3 and a sound profile similar to that, it would be a top tier set.

I am not affiliated with any of the entities I mention and am not providing any related links for this reason.

Requirements

I wanted a keyboard that consisted of two separate parts, so that I could space them apart to keep my arm and wrist aligned on each hand.

I thought that a columnar stagger (explained in the aforementioned video) would benefit me, as its combination with the split keyboard enforces benign typing patterns like typing b with the left index, not the right one (I use Qwerty, by the way).

The combined profile of the keys—cap and switch—should not be low. I find those harder to use, as I bottom out more easily.

Lastly, I wanted my keyboard to use QMK firmware, because it is a well-established open-source project. Programming the keyboard to do what you want is, in my opinion, the irreducible factor of this endeavour.

Why not buy a more established option like the ZSA Moonlander or Dygma Defy?

The ZSA Moonlander looks promising, though I got the impression that its thumb cluster would not work for me. I was concerned that those bespoke thumb keys would be hard to replace, should I ever want to try a different set of keycaps.

I also found its tenting setup strange with how it bends the thumb cluster (tenting is when we raise the inner side of the keyboard, or of each split in this case, to keep our arms closer to a more natural position—we avoid “pronation”).

As for other reasons not to opt for the Moonlander, its cost would have been much higher than that of the Iris. Plus, I did not like its appearance.

Another highly marketed option, based on my research, is the Dygma Defy. It too has its own unique thumb keys, which may work great though do entail limited compatibility. And it costs a small fortune (perhaps for very good reasons—not judging).

How about the MoErgo Glove80 or the Kinesis Advantage360?

Those keyboards are designed to create a well whose deepest point is somewhere along the home row. Their goal is to make the upper and lower rows easier to reach. I do not know if this is necessarily more ergonomic, because it must also depend on the length of the fingers, no? Due to this uncertainty, I did not want to take any risks.

Other than that, the Glove80 uses low-profile switches, which runs counter to my requirements. While the Advantage360 has a fixed length which has a built-in assumption about how far my hands are spaced out. I did not even check the rest because of these.

Why not build a keyboard for cheap using a kit?

A popular option among enthusiasts is to buy a kit and piece together their new keyboard. This is something I will most probably do in the future, though I did not want to take any chances at such an early stage because of my injury. Any delay in easing my pain would make my condition worse. I can always tinker with keyboard kits in the future.

In theory, the Do-It-Yourself route pushes the nominal price down as you assume the assembly costs, paying opportunity cost for the time spent tinkering. Though this will likely not be true for rookies, as they will need to experiment a bit, breaking—and paying for—stuff in the process, before they eventually get the hang of it.

Put differently, my understanding is that the argument in favour of DIY is not chiefly financial: it rather is about the customisation options it opens up and the feeling of accomplishment it engenders, both of which appeal to me in principle.

Number of keys and their firmware prerequisites

Many enthusiasts try to reduce the number of keys they are using to concentrate everything around the home row. They do this by defining more layers, using home-row modifiers, and combinations that translate into other keys like a simultaneous press of j and k to send Esc. As such, they do not need a number row or even a thumb cluster with modifiers. It is an interesting approach that I might explore in earnest at a later point.

I think going full reductionist without prior experience is a mistake. It is better to have more keys for experimentation and to take things slowly. The split and the columnar layout are already a huge change: adding too many of those all at once will feel overwhelming.

Having more keys gives you flexibility. You can retain your muscle memory and operate within your comfort zone. Once you are prepared to reduce the number of effective keys, you simply set up QMK to disable the extra keys on your board. If that works for you, then you know what you are buying next, while blithely working with your new layout. Otherwise you revert back to a known working setup.

That aside, the ultra-minimalist design relies on a well thought out implementation of the relevant firmware features. Without home-row modifiers and/or key combinations, it will be hard to use, if not outright unusable.

As someone who writes A LOT, I am not a fan of the home-row modifiers arrangement (where keys on the home row act as modifiers when held, but otherwise send their usual code when tapped): it is error prone as I keep misfiring no matter the tweaks I make to the firmware. Compounding the problem is the fact that I use Emacs for all my typing, so I might accidentally trigger some command that deletes too much text, which is annoying.

For the number row, I do not share the concern of this being troublesome to reach, given the columnar stagger. Though, yes, those keys are harder to type correctly with a row stagger.

As for key combinations, I suspect they will have the same issues as the home-row modifiers and I will keep mistriggering them. Well, unless we are talking about some keys that are too far apart from each other, in which case the combo will be more accurate but less convenient to access.

My concern is with complexity. While we can add a zillion layers and combinations with highly sophisticated interactions, I find it simpler to just stretch my finger a tiny bit. Come on! Thumb clusters are also easy to work with, but more on that below.

The thumb cluster of the Iris and one-shot modifiers

If you look at the Iris, you will notice that the thumb clusters have a shape like this on the left split:

                        ┼───4───┬
 ┬────────┬────────┬────┴───┬───┘
 └───1────┴───2────┴───3────┘

And its flipped version on the right…

The uppermost key, which I label as 4, may be hard to press. I personally do not have an issue here because:

• I use taller caps for the keys at either end of the cluster (1 and 4). This makes it easier to use my thumb without twisting it.

• I have set up one-shot modifiers, meaning that I do not have to press and hold those keys to do what I want.

One-shot keys are a QMK feature that allows us to register a “hold” action for the next key. Instead of holding down Shift and then typing a letter, we tap Shift and then the letter. The interval between the two key presses is configurable: after that the one-shot key expires (ESC produces the same effect on demand).

What is also configurable with QMK are one-shot keys that become “sticky”. This means that they pass their action to all following key presses until we manually abort them. Think about typing the word “QMK” by holding down Shift: you must press and hold the modifier and then type the three letters. With sticky modifiers, you activate the modifier, type Q, M, K, and then deactivate the modifier.

This “shift lock”, “control lock”, etc. is easy to access via a multi-tap of the one-shot key. What counts as “multi” is configurable: I set it to a double tap. Thus, I double tap Shift and then input the longer sequence of shifted key codes: no pressure for the thumb.

These work in combinations as well, such as if we want to input M-^ in Emacs a few times, where we lock both Shift and Alt and then type 6. Tap those modifiers once to cancel their stickiness.

For the technicalities, check my QMK files: https://github.com/protesilaos/qmk/tree/master/keyboards/keebio/iris/keymaps/prot.

The simple tenting setup of the Iris

What I am using right now is a middle layer that has holes where we can insert regular nuts and bolts. We place them in it and—voilá!— there is the tenting angle we desire. It is simple and effective. I have been typing this way for weeks and feel much better than before.

What about a nice case?

Keebio is selling an aluminium case for the Iris, though (i) it is expensive and (ii) it is not a requirement of mine. I guess the casing will change the keyboard’s acoustics, ceteris paribus, and will add an extra “wow” factor to its looks. These are marginal changes, which do not justify the price. The current sound profile is fine to me as-is, while I am not going anywhere with the keyboard to be concerned about its appearance: it looks good to me, which is all that matters.

Is this the “end game”?

I think so, yes, even though I know this is a bold claim for a newcomer. I did extensive research before making my decision. I knew what my needs were, had a clear goal in mind, and decided accordingly without hesitation. This is how I operate and do not renege on my decisions.

The few tweaks I still want to make pertain to inconsequential experiments with QMK (to refine RGB lighting feedback, mostly for fun). I do not want to implement any other changes to the keyboard itself, nor to further experiment with alternative switches or keycaps. The Iris works for me and I treat it as a tool that empowers me to do what I actually care about: to write at length.

If I ever choose to play around with keyboards, such as to build one by using a kit, that will be for the recreational value of it, not out of a pressing need for reform.

Sculpted or uniform

“Sculpted” keycaps have varying degrees of height and angling, based on where they are meant to be place on the keyboard. The idea is to have the home row keys (where asdfghjkl are on a regular US Qwerty layout) at a lower height than those below or above them to facilitate finger movement and to make distant keys easier to reach.

By contrast, “uniform” designs do not differentiate between the different rows on the keyboard. These keys can still have angles, though they are all the same moving up/down from the home row. These keys are ideal for experimenting with different layouts, such as Dvorak or Colemak, as they do not impose where a key must be to feel right.

The shape of the cap

Keys come in all sorts of shapes and heights. There are short and tall ones. Some look more squared, others are circular. What one likes depends on how they are typing, the position of their chair and desk, et cetera.

The top of the cap (where we hit the key) has its own distinctive features as well: it can be flat, cylindrical, or sphrerical.

A cylindrical top has a deeper scoop through the middle than at the left and right sides. It is as if we had pressed the side of a cylinder against it.

The spherical top is deeper at the centre, with all four sides having a more noticeable edge or curve. Think of how it would be if we would press a sphere into the key.

The top of the cap is not merely stylistic. If you are used to sliding your fingers to reach keys, you will probably find the cylindrical design easier to work with. Though the sculpt will also be a factor.

As with most things when it comes to keyboards, one has to experiment.

Common profiles

This is not exhaustive, though it provides the big picture. The sculpt differs from one profile to the other, as does the surface area at the top. There are many more profiles, many of which are variations of the above.

Suppliers may add their own spin to those profiles, such as OEM with a more spherical top or SA-like caps that are shorter than the originals.

The choice of material

The most common materials are types of plastic: ABS and PBT. Each has its own properties, with the former being more moldable than the latter. ABS plastic has more vivid colours combined with a smooth texture. Whereas PBT is sturdier and feels more coarse to the touch (which may be exactly what you prefer).

How high quality a cap is depends on the specifics of the production process and the thickness of the caps’ walls. Do not think that one kind of plastic is better than the other.

Acoustics

There are many factors that influence the acoustics of a mechanical keyboard: the materials of the board (metal or plastic), whether there are sound dampeners or other intermediate layers, the choice of key switch, and the properties of the underlying desk. When it comes to keycaps, the taller ones typically produce a deeper sound, while lower keycaps are more high-pitches. The thickness of the cap’s walls matters as well: a tall yet slim cap will sound hollow as opposed to a shorter but thicker one.

Where to start

If you are used to typing on a laptop that typically has uniformly shaped keys, then consider XDA as a first choice or a lower height sculpted profile like Cherry. Only go with very tall keycaps if you want to experiment with a more typewriter feel (and combine those with clicky switches for maximum effect).

Keep in mind that the profile of the key influences how you position yourself relative to the keyboard. Follow best ergonomic practices, so that (i) your palm and wrist are aligned and (ii) you are not typing at the keyboard from below. Arm rests and/or tilting and tenting the keyboard may be needed to get the right angle.

As with everything pertaining to mechanical keyboards, the choice of switch is subjective.

The most common switch is MX type

There are several switches, though by far the most common one is the MX. You can tell it apart by the shape of its stem (the top part that connects to the keycap), which has the shape of the plus sign.

Some MX switches have walls around the stem. They are marketed as “dust-proof”, “less wobbly”, and the like. They still count as MX switches for our purposes.

Knowing this is important when searching for keycaps. Those that are designed for “choc” switches, for example, are not compatible with the MX ones.

Note that the MX switches are of a “normal” height, though there are some switches that are “low-profile” yet still have the familiar MX stem. Those are not compatible with most keycaps that are designed for the normal height, as the bottom side of the cap will hit against the board, which will cause damages over time.

The low-profile switches look shorter as they have a compact body, whereas the normal height is considerably more blocky. Consider low-profile switches only if you understand the implications with regard to the keycaps you can combine them with (and if they are compatible with your keyboard).

Three types of switch

• Linear: The force required to actuate the switch is consistent from the top to the bottom. These switches are marketed for gamers or office use. They tend to be on the quiet side and are easy to work with when typing common keys repeatedly (what gamers have to do frequently).

• Tactile: There is a noticeable pressure point after which the key press registers. This “bump” can make it easier to notice a key press. Depending on the person’s typing habits, such feedback is important to avoid misfiring keys and be more accurate as a result.

• Clicky: Much like the tactile switches, these have a noticeable bump, but they also provide audible feedback. The exact sound profile depends on a number of factors, from the keycaps, to the materials below the switch and the keyboard, though these switches will always be on the noisier side of the spectrum. Some find the clicky sound pleasant to work with while othesr may consider it distracting at worst or a gimmick at best.

Switches are colour-coded

There is a plethora of switches differentiated by the aforementioned types but also by the speicific properties of their force curve . Perhaps the most common ones are red (linear), brown (tactile), and blue (clicky). People with no prior experience should consider one of these before experimenting with more specialised options.

Mind the curve

Suppliers provide graphs that show how much pressure is required to register a key press, as well as other characteristics of the switch. Beginners will not have a point of reference: they best opt for whichever is the default for the type of switch they are expecting to like the most.

Those curves are informative, though one does not need to be an engineer to make an informed decision. Plain terms such as “silent and tactile” will still give a good idea of what the switch is about.

Consider the noise factor

As noted above, the clicky switches will produce audible feedback. Though the other types are not completely silent. There exist switches which are designed specifically with that goal in mind, but the average mechanical switch still produces more noise than, say, a laptop’s keyboard.

Keyboard enthusiasts go to great lengths to get the exact sound profile they like, which usually involves changes to the keyboard and desk setup.

If one really cares about being silent, they must search for switches that are marketed as such and must further check for community resources on the matter to form an opinion. Plus there is the option of applying lube to the switches and other such postmarket modifications.

Where to start

A tactile switch provides that “mechanical” feel without deviating too much from mainstream keyboards. Linear switches might be too “boring” for newcomers, as they feel like what everyone is already used to (which is perfectly fine in its own right, though may not kindle that excitement to further explore mechanical keyboards). Clicky switches add that typewriter-esque feeling, which some may like, though they probably are too noisy and disturbing for people around the typist.