Yet another keypad idea

[Giles Jones]

On 8 Sep 2007, at 14:01, OJW wrote:

> On Saturday 08 September 2007 13:44, Thomas Gstädtner wrote:
>> Interesting concept, but I can't see an advantage to the standard  
>> numeric
>> keypads.
>> Maybe you can enlighten me? :)
>
> Compared to the standard "444 for I, 7777 for S"-type of keypad,  
> it's ease of
> learning/remembering the keystrokes (based on visual shapes of the  
> letters,
> rather than arbitrarily splitting-up the alphabet).  Maybe it's  
> only me who
> has difficulty remembering those without looking at the keypad.
>

Thing is there are 26 characters in the alphabet and 10 digits,  
that's a lot of shapes to remember.

The Graffiti (TM) input method used some special characters, but many  
of the shapes were the same.

I don't see how pressing three keys for one letter is faster than  
predictive?

Adding it as an input option is fine, but make T9 the default as  
people know it, you don't want to add any obstacles to usability by  
not having familiar tried and tested input methods available.