I’ve read in forums that people are dissapointed with the Kohjinsha SA1 keyboard. Its time to do some testing!

The Kohjinsha SA1 is so small that the keyboard could almost be called a a thumbboard. In some respects it’s an advantage because one of the great things about the SA1is that you can flip the screen flat, in line with the keyboard, and use it on a sofa in two-handed browsing and thumb-keyboard mode. In other respects its a disadvantage and to be honest, its not just the size of the keys that’s a problem, its the quality. The travel is ‘thick’ and unpredictable which, if you use your normal keyboard typing style, is likely to end up with the Kohji in pieces on the other side of the room! The keyboard, even at this size, could be a lot better. Its disappointing.

I’ve put the keyboard through a test that I used a while back to test the Eleksen fabric keyboard, the Pepperpad and the i7210 with an on-screen keyboard to see how it really compares. Here’s the detail of the test and the result from the SA1.

Test 1 – Starting with an open browser [assumption: already logged into a Google account], type the URL www.Google.com, open docs and spreadsheets through the ‘more’ and ‘even more’ menu, start a new document and type “The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.” rename the file [using the menu option] and press return.

Result: (average of 3)

1. i7210 + full size USB keyboard – 34 seconds
2. i7210 + Eleksen fabric keyboard - 45 seconds
3. Kohjinsha – 47 seconds.
4. Pepperpad 3 (thumbboard) – 50 seconds
5. i7210 + On screen keyboard – 70 seconds.

Test 2 – Type “The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog” 5 times. [220 characters]

Result: (CPM=Characters per minute) (CE = Speed coefficient)

1. i7210 + full size USB keyboard – 40 seconds (330 CPM) (CE 1)
2. i7210 + mystery portable keyboard - 63 seconds (209 CPM [CE 0.6 - Corrected from a previous calculation error. Its faster that I had previously reported.] 
3. Kohjinsha – 73 seconds (180 CPM) [CE 0.55]
4. Pepperpad 3 (thumbboard) - 81 seconds (162 CPM) [CE 0.5]
5. i7210 + On screen keyboard – 118 seconds (111 CPM) [CE 0.3]

Here’s another speed co-efficient from someone else’s test of the Sony UX.
Sony UX series: 0.37 – 0.4 (from comments in this blog)

For these tests I gave myself about 10 minutes practice. On the first attempts I was using my normal typing style which is close to touch typing. It was terrible. Although the keys look like normal keys they aren’t. But by trying out different methods and adjusting my style, it got a lot better. Granted, I can type on a fabric keyboard faster than on the SA1 but its more functional than a fabric keyboard, way faster than the Sony UX and nearly twice as fast as a standard on-screen keyboard.

But how much of a disadvantage is it to be typing at 50% of normal typing speed?  How much more would you pay for a better keyboard? Take the P1510 and P1610 from Fujitsu as a comparison. They are a comparable size and have a better keyboard but you’ll have to pay a lot more and if you don’t need the relatively high spec of those UMPCs, why pay so much more for the keyboard?

The Kohjinsha SA1 has almost exactly the same size as the P1610. In fact, its slightly smaller.

According to the specs it’s only 27mm thick but that’s a bit misleading. At its thickest point its as thick as the P1610. 36mm. The battery life is much better and its a tad lighter.

The P1610 will be in my mind as I go through the Kohjinsha testing along with the Flybook range of convertible tablets. Again these are bigger and much more expensive. The other device I keep thinking of is the still wonderful JVC XP741. It was end-of-life’d (just as Origami was launched in 2006) but a few days ago, one was sold on EBay in Germany for a bargain 780 Euros.

Full report will be available in a few weeks.

Steve.

• Medion keyboard speed
• UMPC typing speed tests.
• I’m testing the Eleksen Fabric Keyboard too!