First impressions of the cute MOA profile keycaps
[ I am not affiliated with any of the companies mentioned herein and am not posting any links just to be sure. ]
For a long time now, I have been meaning to try a uniform shaped profile keycap set. The most popular options for MX type switches seem to be the DSA and XDA profiles. The former is produced by Signature Plastics. They are the shorter, uniform shaped counterpart of Signature Plasticsâ acclaimed SA profile. Given the pedigree of their manufacturer, I shall assume that DSA is top-tier in terms of build qualityâand this is reflected in its lofty price. Whereas XDA is produced by many manufacturers and I cannot tell if its quality is up to par. The price it commands on various marketplaces, combined with some opinions I have read, suggests that it is at least mid-tier.
Because I did not want to spend more than 30 EUR on a purchase that I could regret, I decided to opt for an alternative: the MOA profile that some Chinese vendors are peddling. If you check around for those, you will quickly realise that they are mostly cutesy and whimsical. I am surprised the marketing departments have not yet targeted the mountain-dwelling, hut-building, Emacs-using philosopher demographic out there. This is clearly a missed opportunity. đ Still, I have no problem whatsoever with the available options. I do like pink, anyway. Below is a picture of my Iris keyboard by Keebio (thanks to âAndreasâ for it!), showing the MOA Cherry Pudding set by Womier on the left half and the Cherry Dolch Red set on the right, by Keychron.
The Dolch Red is what I have been using for the past couple of months. These are a gift from a fellow mechanical keyboard user who prefers to remain anonymous (you know who you are, so thanks again!). I actually stopped using the red-coloured caps that give it its moniker, because I prefer the monotone aesthetic. The Cherry profile in general (also known as GMK CYL) is the de facto industry standard because it gets a lot of things right: its low-to-medium height makes it easy to adapt to, its cylindrically shaped tops provide a sufficiently spacious surface area to type accurately, and its sculptured shapes contribute to a comfortable experience. The particular set I was using is made out of thick PBT material and the legends are produced using the double-shot technique. In short, this is a top notch product.
But part of the appeal of mechanical keyboards is the ability to swap out different parts and try a variety of configurations. My primary goal is always ergonomics, with a secondary target of decent acoustics (basically, not too loud and exaggerated). I have thus been using the MOA keycaps for a full day now and am already prepared to share some first impressions.
The feel and acoustics are wonderful
Womierâs MOA set is made out of thick PBT plastic. I do not have an instrument to measure its exact width, though the eye test suggests that it is a bit thicker than the Dolch Red. Those are specified as 1.5mm on Keychronâs website, so I will go with ~1.6mm for Womierâs caps.
Unlike its unapologetically flamboyant looks, this MOA setâs acoustics are subdued and noticeably deeper than what I was using before. I am impressed by how I am not drawn to the sound while I am typing. It is perfectly balanced: enough to generate audible feedback but not to call for my immediate attention.
The top of an MOA cap is slightly spherical. When I rest my fingers on the home row, I can tell that there is a concave there, though it is not deep. Though I barely notice the dishes as I type. This, too, is an understated quality that I appreciate. Comparing it to the MT3 profile that I tried some months ago, I never have the feeling that MOA is trying to remind me of its properties. Whereas I could not avoid the feeling of intrusiveness coming from MT3, as if it would keep shouting at me âlook at my deep dishes and, by the way, check out the rest of my shape!!!â.
I prefer designs that blend with the background and come to the foreground only when I shift my attention to them. MT3 never did that for me, whereas the two sets pictured above both pass the test with flying colours.
A uniform shape is mostly okay
I have already gotten used to the lack of a sculptured height. As I
write this, I do not feel that I am missing the Cherry profile. This
suggests that whatever benefits those varying heights have are
marginal. My fingers are long enough to access all the rows and
columns, including the outer one (where Insert and M5 are).
However, the case of the thumb cluster is different. While my thumb
can easily actuate all four keys, my policy in the interest of
ergonomics is to avoid scenaria where I either stretch or curl my
thumb to reach the outermost keys (the Delete and triangle in this
picture). With a uniform profile, the equivalent of the Delete key
is a bit trickier to access because I have to either come from higher
above or hit it from the side. If the key switches have a very low
actuation force, this is a recipe for frequent mistyping and the
resulting frustration. I do not like how the caps can thus dictate
what kind of switch I opt for, though I will not overstate this point
as it is not a problem per seâjust a concern.
You will notice in the picture how I had laid out my Cherry profile caps on the thumb cluster. The outermost keys were the tallest, making it practically impossible for me to accidentally hit the wrong key. I am not making mistakes with the MOA set right now, though I consider this a weak point of a uniformly shaped design. I expect this to not be inherent to MOA: any uniform set would impose such constraints, mutatis mutandis.
The thumb cluster is where I put the Ctrl, Alt, and Shift keys.
I configure those (and others) to function as one-shot keys. This
means that I tap the modifier and then quickly follow it up with
another key to register a Mod+Key event. As such, the shape of the
caps is not a deal breaker because I never press and hold, potentially
keeping my thumb in an awkward angle and tiring it out over the course
of a typing session. If I was doing that, I would consider MOA (and
probably every uniformly shaped set) unsuitable for my thumb cluster.
The experiment continues
As always, I will keep the current setup for a few weeks. The idea is to give it a fair chance, though I can already tell that it gets a lot of things right. I do suspect, though, that I will revert to the Cherry profile at least for the thumb cluster: it is clearly superior to an all-MOA arrangement there.
Assuming I like MOA as a long-term option, does this mean that I will then try DSA or XDA sets? The answer is most likely negative. I think that the considerably higher cost of those will not correspond to a proportionate increase in quality. This is further reinforced by my experience with Keychronâs Dolch Red, which is very nicely done while costing ~30 EUR. In my experience, âpremiumâ products seldom live up to their price tag and I am not that picky, anyway.