> Why can't there just be a manufacturer that goes for the niche of standard ISO rather than ergonomic, or with too few keys, or with some emphasis on buckling spring style feel?
Those features are what the mass consumer market wants. Also, I'm sure Logitech and Microsoft have always offered a standard ISO keyboard.
> Ergonomic
People value the long-term health of their wrists.
> Too few keys
Usually to reduce desk space. In the case of the Planck, it's also to reduce finger travel.
> Emphasis on key feel
If I'm typing at my job all day, I want the thousands of keypresses I do to feel good.
> niche of standard ISO
Honestly, I think standard ISO/ANSI is awful -- the vast amount of design decisions are a relic of the typewriter age.
The rows are staggered because typewriter keyboards had physical vertical bars under the keys that would otherwise overlap. An ortholinear solution makes much more sense in the modern age.
The second most-used key, backspace, is positioned in the far right corner of the keyboard. One must move their entire right hand (or have a long pinky) to hit it. The spacebar, on the other hand, is wasted real estate because it completely occupies two of the strongest digits -- the thumbs. Thus, a better solution would be to split the spacebar with one half being backspace.
This isn't even going into the nightmare that is QWERTY. Regardless of keyboard, almost everyone is using an inefficient layout designed to place common keys away from each other.
Conclusion: just because it's standard doesn't mean it's the best choice. IMO, when it comes to keyboard layouts, the standard is the worst choice.
US keyboards don't. There is a backslash key above the single row enter key. Which is a key I have no real great use for. Maybe it rocked in the MS-DOS days but backslash doesn't really need that priority place.
So look at the Logitech keyboards for the UK. They offer one model with the true layout, i.e. a double height enter key. The rest have some US keys with UK labels on.
Now look at Microsoft. Again there is some massive backslash key instead of an ISO UK keyboard in all its glory.
What happens is that they take the US board and change a few of the key caps. They do not go to the effort of doing it properly.
There are other layouts, for example, German, that should have the big enter key.
Standards might not be optimal solutions. But at least you know where you are. You know what to expect. But with keyboards nobody sticks to the standards. If you look at the Logitech ones for instance they all have different fudges, such as arrow keys mangled together differently, just enough to trip you up if swapping between Logitech keyboards. Then things like rounding off the corner keys including escape. They do these awful design decisions on far too many of their keyboards.
The tenkeyless requirement is reasonable, laptops don't tend to have the num-pad. But is there a tkl keyboard out there with a standard ISO layout? Not if you combine that feature with wireless or a desire for backlighting. Nevermind switch choice.
Some people struggle with an Apple keypad due to the different modifier keys. God help anyone having to press a few keys on any of the ZSA boards. Might as well learn Dvorak keyboards. Or go all the way with a chord keyboard. QWERTY works and we all know it is not the best. But standards are not kept to when you move out of the US layout.
Those features are what the mass consumer market wants. Also, I'm sure Logitech and Microsoft have always offered a standard ISO keyboard.
> Ergonomic
People value the long-term health of their wrists.
> Too few keys
Usually to reduce desk space. In the case of the Planck, it's also to reduce finger travel.
> Emphasis on key feel
If I'm typing at my job all day, I want the thousands of keypresses I do to feel good.
> niche of standard ISO
Honestly, I think standard ISO/ANSI is awful -- the vast amount of design decisions are a relic of the typewriter age.
The rows are staggered because typewriter keyboards had physical vertical bars under the keys that would otherwise overlap. An ortholinear solution makes much more sense in the modern age.
The second most-used key, backspace, is positioned in the far right corner of the keyboard. One must move their entire right hand (or have a long pinky) to hit it. The spacebar, on the other hand, is wasted real estate because it completely occupies two of the strongest digits -- the thumbs. Thus, a better solution would be to split the spacebar with one half being backspace.
This isn't even going into the nightmare that is QWERTY. Regardless of keyboard, almost everyone is using an inefficient layout designed to place common keys away from each other.
Conclusion: just because it's standard doesn't mean it's the best choice. IMO, when it comes to keyboard layouts, the standard is the worst choice.