<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Ibm-Pc on Karpoke - Just Another Blog</title><link>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/tags/ibm-pc/</link><description>Recent content in Ibm-Pc on Karpoke - Just Another Blog</description><generator>Hugo -- 0.167.0</generator><language>es</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:20:00 +0100</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/tags/ibm-pc/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>PC Keyboard: The First Five Years</title><link>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/2019/10/27/pc-keyboard-the-first-five-years/</link><pubDate>Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:20:00 +0100</pubDate><guid>http://karpoke.ignaciocano.com/2019/10/27/pc-keyboard-the-first-five-years/</guid><description>&lt;blockquote&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The vast majority of PC users today have no memory of what PC keyboards
looked like before the standard 101/102-key layout arrived, even though
various OEMs do their best to mangle the standard layout in order to minimize
usability, especially on laptops. OEM-specific modifications aside, the basic
layout of the main block of alphanumeric keys has not changed in over 30
years, since 1986.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, up until that point the PC keyboard layout and the keyboard hardware
changed quite a bit, and looking at the 1981-1986 IBM Technical References is
key to understanding a) why the standard keyboard scan codes are so complex,
and b) why there are so many seemingly odd vendor-specific modifications of
the standard layout.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>