On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:20 AM Eric Smith via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> IMNSHO, there's a special place in hell reserved for those who have > designed equipment to (ab)use modular connectors other than for telephone > lines and 10BASEx Ethernet, and I really think a better connector should > have been chosen for 10BASEx. > The whole concept of "if the plug fits, it will at least not blow up" is kind of a late invention. And I'm amazed when this actually holds true in situations where I wouldn't quite expect that to be the case (e.g. all those electrically not quite compatible PCI/PCI-X/PCIe variants that have coded notches to prevent you from frying your computer/card. Except that you can stick a PCI card backwards into a PCIe slot) DEC using MMJ may get a pass because they at least attempted to prevent > connecting the wrong stuff together. > Any ideas why it took so much longer for keyboard interfaces to converge than most other peripherals? Display interfaces, HDDs/floppies/tapes etc., serial ports, and even mice converged on only a few variants more or less the moment they became commonplace. I'd really like some first hand insight into why anyone would want to invent a new interface/protocol from scratch every time they start developing a new machine (I'm mostly talking about the "simple async serial protocol sending up/down events" kind). Luckily there are only 12 different ways to wire a 4P4C, but there exist way more incompatible keyboards using that connector. Is it really easier to develop an incompatible serial keyboard interface from scratch than to re-use one that already exists? [actually, I kinda know, because of course it's easier to do a one-off and not care about documentation, licensing, extensibility, or forwards/backwards compatibility]