The Model M - Black Label vs Blue Label vs Unicomp - Did Quality Decline?? - Discussion

ripster · 17 July 2009

The drainage holes on the IBM Mini are the three rectangular cutouts.

Huh? This was worth a Wikipedia entry? Actually, it's remarkable the similarity in construction in all of these shells.

The IBM feet are definitely beefier than the IBM's.

So, to conclude the casing differences I couldn't see any real difference in a Blue vs Grey label IBM Model M. The Unicomp was definitely cost reduced.

ripster · 17 July 2009

It's METAL time.

Yep, the Unicomp metal plate is bit lighter. This was also shown by weighing the plates including keys and controller board. (I was too lazy to detach all those but the differences would be minor).

So where the "pedal meets the metal" portion of the keyboards are pretty similar, with once again the Unicomp being maybe 20% lighter. Not a big deal.

Next up, electronics.

ripster · 17 July 2009

Probably the biggest differences in IBM over the years was the different controller boards they used.

The Unicomp's chip is covered by a rubber bump. Now I'm not an EE but from a practical viewpoint the failure rate of these controllers is so low that it's not really a useful exercise to start comparing one versus the other. I do like the carbon resistors though. Anybody who builds guitar amps prefer carbons - too bad the IBM Model M speaker is missing

The attachment method DID vary. Unicomp's doesn't inspire confidence. I added the black electrical tape is to prevent accidental shorts.

Another minor difference is the LED ribbon. A pic of the 1391401.

Here's one from Hak Foo's 1987 Model M 1391401 - now THAT is a solid connection.

Of course, I've yet to hear of anybody losing their LED lights. So all in all I'm having a hard time getting excited about electronic differences from a functional viewpoint.

CONCLUSION

There are DEFINITE differences in the Unicomp - but then the keyfeel is often preferred by many users because it is a tad lighter (the springs? - I don't have a micrometer). Also, it has been modernized to USB and the company provides excellent support if you do have problems. Try getting support from an EBay seller sometime.

IBM seemed to change electronics on a regular basis. It looked liked they changed vendors for the plastics periodically but the molds are almost identical. There WERE stabilizing bars on the early M's on the numpad (pic from Hak Foo) but I don't know if anybody finds that significant.

Keys were always dye impregnated and varied more by the age of the contact sheet than the year. The whole two part vs single part key debate is up in the air. How old and well used the springs were does matter.

Early results indicate the whole Black/Gray/Blue label debate is bogus. I'd like to see someone with earlier Model M's try some measurements when they get a chance and post here. I've never seen the innards of a fixed cable Lexmark.

NIB older 1391401's go for a significant premium. You may want to take a look at a Blue Label Lexmark sometime. And I still like the keyfeel of the Unicomp's best.

ripster · 18 July 2009

It looks like the IBM 42H1292 (Greenock built) innards with fixed cord is identical to the Unicomp design. May be why some people actually prefer the later year IBM Ms - probably lighter key feel as well.

from Dansdata

Here's an interesting variant on controller boards - the 1390131's grounding strap is pretty impressive. Next time there is a thunderstorm try hanging a Model M on your kitestring.

Another view of those numpad stabilizers. Just to continue to be the skeptic that I am this website claims that they removed the stabilizers after tightening the tolerances of the keystem wells - it wasn't a cost cutting move.

Model M 1390120 from the dawn of civilization. Nice metal logo but I'd miss those LEDs. Same controller, just didn't bother to hook up LEDs.

So far I've seen some fairly cosmetic only variations in the earliest of IBM Model Ms. The fixed cable IBM Model Ms may be identical to the current Unicomps (if somebody has one and can weigh the casing we'd know for sure).

wellington1869 · 18 July 2009

this is an interesting thread - wonder if we should enter some of the info here into a 'everything about ibms' entry on the wiki...

ripster · 18 July 2009

Good idea. Somebody with more IBM Ms than me can do it though. I personally kinda think they are big clunkers.

Now the Blue Label IBM Mini 1397681 PLT F7 2/9/93 ID 5046200 Red Dot that I have nicknamed "Zarabeth", she's special!

I just did it because of Wikipedia's Model M entry. In the words of Xsphat, I'd pee on that!

ch_123 · 18 July 2009

Considering that the Spacesaver retained it's speaker grille and didn't get drainage holes, I don't think Lexmark changed it around all that much. Not all Lexmark made keyboards went down in quality or were modified, take those late-made 1390131s for example. I think it was just certain mass production models they made, like the 42H et al. that were designed to be cheaper than the old IBM models and corners were cut as a consequence. The only way you could properly determine whether that wiki statement was true or false would be to get a 42H and do your test on that. Your test is an 'apples and oranges' comparison.

ripster · 18 July 2009

Quote:

Considering that the Spacesaver retained it's speaker grille and didn't get drainage holes

? See the pic top of page.

Quote:

The drainage holes on the IBM Mini are the three rectangular cutouts.

Quote:

Your test is an 'apples and oranges' comparison.

Well, like I said in the OP, it's more of a method to test for quality. Takes a $2 socket, a $25 scale and a $10 digital vernier. Use the scale for weightwatchers or drug deals depending on your demographic.

Anyway the 42H Dansdata pic clearly (albeit in a micro picture) shows the Unicomp style controller and I betcha the same metal plate. It's that plastic I don't know about.

ch_123 · 18 July 2009

Woops, didn't know that they put in the drainage holes, and managed to miss your post about it. I'd bet you though that if you got a black-labeled Spacesaver, it would probably be identical to your one except for the aforementioned drainage holes.

I think the "Blue labels are shit" thing came from people comparing the '1401 with the 42H, after all, the latter were only made after the former were discontinued, and to the casual observer, they look identical except for the label. It would be easy to think that the quality drop was as a result of Lexmark making the boards, as opposed to a decision by Lexmark (and probably by IBM) to make a cheap new model. Of course, most of the blue Model Ms are 42Hs and similar, so it's reasonably sound advice, if not entirely true for things like Spacesavers.

ripster · 18 July 2009

I was disappointed that the drainage holes were just cutouts. I thought I was going to find some wonderful exercise in fluid dynamic research. Using this definition my Topre has drainage channels where the tabs are.

I'm pretty sure if someone DID open up a 42H (or any of the fixed cable models) and weighed it they would find it to be 465 gms, just like a Unicomp. Unicomp did buy the Lexmark plant and probably did not inherit the orginal molds. If they ever do a mini it'll be with lighter plastic unless they have a trick up their sleeve.

P.S. I bought the scale to measure coffee beans for my espresso maker, not drug deals or weightwatchers. I don't bother with that anymore (I'm talking coffee beans here).

microsoft windows · 18 July 2009

I wonder if the lack of stablizers on the + and Enter keys for the number pad affect the sound of them. It could be a possible explanation for the clacky + key but it could have also been damaged.

I always believed that "IBM versus Lexmark" argument was silly. All model M's, even Unicomps, are very high-quality equipment which could easily outlast most other keyboards. Honestly, who cares if the steel plate or the construction weighs an ounce less? The keyboards will still all work very well.

ripster · 18 July 2009

Well, the shell of the Unicomp is actually 13.1571 oz (stupid metric system) less so you can argue either way. Buy yeah, I hear you.

If the choice was between a $50 NIB Lexmark and a $50 clean but well used IBM 1391401 I'd go for the Lexmark for the crispness of new springs alone. It doesn't look like there is a cheap way to do a spring swap for the entire board.

keyb_gr · 18 July 2009

I have three 1391403 Model Ms, from 1989, 1991 and 1993, respectively, all made in Scotland and subjectively all weighing the same (a ton). Only the newest one has a blue logo and drain holes. The oldest one does not have a grounded space bar, and the metallic ringing heard after the keystroke has a lower pitch. (This might also be the sample that came with the short SDL cable, but I can't say for sure.) The 1991 sample has the least case flex but the keys seem to have the most friction (while the 1993 sample gives the smoothest feel - seems to be related to the plastic base plate rather than the stems).

Overall I'd say there was some variation depending on ordinary production tolerances, production date and possibly the computer the board was supposed to go with. No idea about later boards.

microsoft windows · 18 July 2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ripster

Well, the shell of the Unicomp is actually 13.1571 oz (stupid metric system) less so you can argue either way. Buy yeah, I hear you.

If the choice was between a $50 NIB Lexmark and a $50 clean but well used IBM 1391401 I'd go for the Lexmark for the crispness of new springs alone. It doesn't look like there is a cheap way to do a spring swap for the entire board.

It would probably be easier to just swap the internals. After disassembling Model M's, I have found that the keyboard unit takes the same ribbon cable in any IBM with a separate cable. This includes the keyboard part in Model M variants with pointing devices.

But, I wouldn't really waste my time swapping the internals to just have a differently-coloured logo in the corner and no drainage holes. Oh, and another thing I just remembered...If I recall, the internals on the Lexmark M's were slightly adjusted to allow water to flow into the drainage holes (just little indentations in the plastic construction round the holes). So, spawwing the internals of those keyboards would be, for me, a waste of time to morph together some thing where the drainage holes don't work.

ripster · 18 July 2009

More on the wonderful world of plastics.

I now think that Unicomp may use a blended version of Polycarbonate and ABS (the pic shows PC + ABS). Don't know what the IBM folks used but I would think it would be ABS since I believe most computers of that vintage were built with ABS and it makes sense they would match the plastics used.

A nice discussion by Anime folks on plastics is here. I'll never look at my Darth Vader action figure the same.

18 July 2009	#4
ripster Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Ugly American Comments: 22,946	It looks like the IBM 42H1292 (Greenock built) innards with fixed cord is identical to the Unicomp design. May be why some people actually prefer the later year IBM Ms - probably lighter key feel as well. from Dansdata Here's an interesting variant on controller boards - the 1390131's grounding strap is pretty impressive. Next time there is a thunderstorm try hanging a Model M on your kitestring. Another view of those numpad stabilizers. Just to continue to be the skeptic that I am this website claims that they removed the stabilizers after tightening the tolerances of the keystem wells - it wasn't a cost cutting move. Model M 1390120 from the dawn of civilization. Nice metal logo but I'd miss those LEDs. Same controller, just didn't bother to hook up LEDs. So far I've seen some fairly cosmetic only variations in the earliest of IBM Model Ms. The fixed cable IBM Model Ms may be identical to the current Unicomps (if somebody has one and can weigh the casing we'd know for sure). ________________ (ordered by current faves) Filco Blue Cherry Tenkeyless - IBM Model M Space SavING Keyboard (mini) - Modded Realforce 87U - Filco Brown Cherry Tenkeyless - Unicomp Space SavER with black key/red led mod - IBM Model M 1391401 - IBM Model F AT - Model M 1397000 - IBM Model M13 - IBM M4 - Chicony 5181 (Montereys) - Anything with ALPS (Focus 2001,SGI Granite,Apple AEKII, Apple M0110, ALPS MCL-101,NeXT) - SmarTrex Rubber Dome - Poor Boscom, I Knew Him Well. OTHER STUFF: Kinesis Keypad - the ALPSulator - CH DT225 Trackball - CST LaserTrac Trackball - Evoluent mouse - Balls Of Steel - IBM Selectric, The Ultimate Gaming Device: Cherry Modded Nostromo N52

18 July 2009	#5
wellington1869 chairman beaker Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: NYC Comments: 7,258	this is an interesting thread - wonder if we should enter some of the info here into a 'everything about ibms' entry on the wiki... ________________ "Blah blah blah grade school blah blah blah IBM PS/2s blah blah blah I like Model Ms." -- Kishy Using Now: Microsoft Wireless Laser Desktop 7000; Das S Professional In Storage: Scissor/Domes: IBM Ultranav Travel USB; Stock Dell RT7D50 "Midnight Grey" Previously Owned: Topre: Realforce 87U (all 45g mod); White "Cherries": Qtronix KT305; Blue Cherries: TVS Gold, DAS III Pro, Scorpius M10; Brown Cherries: Compaq MX 11800; Black Cherries: SMK88; White Alps: Macally MK96, AEK II; Black Alps: Dell AT101W (dampened sliders mod); Grey Strongman: SMK85; Fukka Type I White Alps: Filco Tenkeyless Zero, Matias TP2; Fukka Type I Black Alps: ABS M1; Buckling Springs: '91 M 1391401 Grey logo; IBM Model F, '96 M 1391401; IBM M13 (13H6705, 1996); Unicomp Endurapro (greased springs mod); Notable Domes: Keytronic 3600 Tried Once: Topre: Megarat's HHKB Wishlist: "I'm done buying keyboards. Really, I mean it this time." (Unless someone makes a Fukka board that actually works). Dreamboard: DSI (or Lowpoly's) Modular PC w/ Fukkas or BSprings (Update: Dream was crushed!) GH has an ignore list. Use it!

18 July 2009	#6
ripster Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Ugly American Comments: 22,946	Good idea. Somebody with more IBM Ms than me can do it though. I personally kinda think they are big clunkers. Now the Blue Label IBM Mini 1397681 PLT F7 2/9/93 ID 5046200 Red Dot that I have nicknamed "Zarabeth", she's special! I just did it because of Wikipedia's Model M entry. In the words of Xsphat, I'd pee on that! ________________ (ordered by current faves) Filco Blue Cherry Tenkeyless - IBM Model M Space SavING Keyboard (mini) - Modded Realforce 87U - Filco Brown Cherry Tenkeyless - Unicomp Space SavER with black key/red led mod - IBM Model M 1391401 - IBM Model F AT - Model M 1397000 - IBM Model M13 - IBM M4 - Chicony 5181 (Montereys) - Anything with ALPS (Focus 2001,SGI Granite,Apple AEKII, Apple M0110, ALPS MCL-101,NeXT) - SmarTrex Rubber Dome - Poor Boscom, I Knew Him Well. OTHER STUFF: Kinesis Keypad - the ALPSulator - CH DT225 Trackball - CST LaserTrac Trackball - Evoluent mouse - Balls Of Steel - IBM Selectric, The Ultimate Gaming Device: Cherry Modded Nostromo N52

18 July 2009	#10
ripster Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Ugly American Comments: 22,946	I was disappointed that the drainage holes were just cutouts. I thought I was going to find some wonderful exercise in fluid dynamic research. Using this definition my Topre has drainage channels where the tabs are. I'm pretty sure if someone DID open up a 42H (or any of the fixed cable models) and weighed it they would find it to be 465 gms, just like a Unicomp. Unicomp did buy the Lexmark plant and probably did not inherit the orginal molds. If they ever do a mini it'll be with lighter plastic unless they have a trick up their sleeve. P.S. I bought the scale to measure coffee beans for my espresso maker, not drug deals or weightwatchers. I don't bother with that anymore (I'm talking coffee beans here). ________________ (ordered by current faves) Filco Blue Cherry Tenkeyless - IBM Model M Space SavING Keyboard (mini) - Modded Realforce 87U - Filco Brown Cherry Tenkeyless - Unicomp Space SavER with black key/red led mod - IBM Model M 1391401 - IBM Model F AT - Model M 1397000 - IBM Model M13 - IBM M4 - Chicony 5181 (Montereys) - Anything with ALPS (Focus 2001,SGI Granite,Apple AEKII, Apple M0110, ALPS MCL-101,NeXT) - SmarTrex Rubber Dome - Poor Boscom, I Knew Him Well. OTHER STUFF: Kinesis Keypad - the ALPSulator - CH DT225 Trackball - CST LaserTrac Trackball - Evoluent mouse - Balls Of Steel - IBM Selectric, The Ultimate Gaming Device: Cherry Modded Nostromo N52 Last edited by ripster; 18 July 2009 at 19:03.

18 July 2009	#11
microsoft windows Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: In a world without walls Comments: 4,402	I wonder if the lack of stablizers on the + and Enter keys for the number pad affect the sound of them. It could be a possible explanation for the clacky + key but it could have also been damaged. I always believed that "IBM versus Lexmark" argument was silly. All model M's, even Unicomps, are very high-quality equipment which could easily outlast most other keyboards. Honestly, who cares if the steel plate or the construction weighs an ounce less? The keyboards will still all work very well. ________________ Proud user of Windows 3.1 Computer System: 1996 Gateway2000 P5-200 *For Sale (PM for details) The Statue of Liberty* Did you know that more people use Internet Explorer 6 than the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome combined? Best Viewed With

18 July 2009	#7
ch_123 Monarchist Provocateur Join Date: Jul 2008 Comments: 8,261	Considering that the Spacesaver retained it's speaker grille and didn't get drainage holes, I don't think Lexmark changed it around all that much. Not all Lexmark made keyboards went down in quality or were modified, take those late-made 1390131s for example. I think it was just certain mass production models they made, like the 42H et al. that were designed to be cheaper than the old IBM models and corners were cut as a consequence. The only way you could properly determine whether that wiki statement was true or false would be to get a 42H and do your test on that. Your test is an 'apples and oranges' comparison.

18 July 2009	#13
keyb_gr Cherrified User Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Germany Comments: 1,721	I have three 1391403 Model Ms, from 1989, 1991 and 1993, respectively, all made in Scotland and subjectively all weighing the same (a ton). Only the newest one has a blue logo and drain holes. The oldest one does not have a grounded space bar, and the metallic ringing heard after the keystroke has a lower pitch. (This might also be the sample that came with the short SDL cable, but I can't say for sure.) The 1991 sample has the least case flex but the keys seem to have the most friction (while the 1993 sample gives the smoothest feel - seems to be related to the plastic base plate rather than the stems). Overall I'd say there was some variation depending on ordinary production tolerances, production date and possibly the computer the board was supposed to go with. No idea about later boards.