Reviewing feature requests, and adding my own thoughts


I have been using the UHK v2 for a few years now I think. I think I got it January of '22? Or maybe it was '23? I really like it. Well I was kind of bored and started seeing other interesting split ergo keyboards. Either the Kinesis boards, or the newer Glove80, something like the Moonlander, or whatever your wallet, skills, and time would get you from a building a custom board. I was getting keyboard envy. My UHK doesn’t have a keyboard well. Home row modifiers? Would they help me? I don’t remember them in the Agent, but let me check. It’s there! Secondary roles and I just never bothered to even try them out. I shoulda known - the UHK software is like half the reason I wanted this board. Either way, it’s good to be delighted by my investment. I realized after being dazzled by all these other cool and expensive boards, they’re all good but most of them won’t work for me. The UHK has all the things. I may be a software engineer like these other ergo keyboard reviewers, but the demands of my niche of our landscape is different from theirs and the UHK serves me well in that regard. I won’t get a different board yet, but I would get a UHK v3 if it bridged the gap even more.

I think the compromises in the UHK v2 are well reasoned. I hope a v3 can make meaningfully different compromises while keeping the real possibility that there could be a place for the v2 still. With all this in mind, I was curious what kind of hardware feature requests others have shared and started browsing our forums. I put together a spreadsheet I could share with mediafire or something, but for now let me just do my best to recap what I found here. I haven’t noticed a feature request tracker/recap thing anywhere else so I hope this could be a useful review.

To open, mlac was very clear we won’t get per-key OLEDs. (Thank god! I don’t want the extra price for novelty.) But otherwise, myself and 22 posters (a few over multiple posts) left feedback or feature requests for a v3 (mine is this post). There was quite the range of requests, but I noticed some common ground alongside some not common ground. I excluded software feedback/features requests, bugs, macro and layout feedback, or other seemingly more obscure and specific problems in this review. I did take notes of some of this in my spreadsheet.

Common Ground

  • Wireless: 10/23 - Strongest common ground. Most mentioned connectivity is bluetooth. I think there should be room for a dongle, and for it to be entirely optional for cost consideration. There was some split here. I think a well founded request is to keep the option to be entirely wired there - either wired w/ wireless as the only product offering or excluding wireless at checkout.
  • Key Cluster module on the Right 7/23: Very common request. I love it. If I could escape my mouse usage, this could really take the board up to another level. I would definitely get one and test it out as a replacement to my trackpoint module.
  • Ortholinear key layout: 5/23 - This, and it being a staggered ortholinear layout is the #1 update I would love to have from a new UHK release. (This would make a mod or fn layer for number pad users be a super simple design since numbpads are ortholinear :slight_smile:)
  • Low(er) profile switches: 5/23 - I hope to see Choc switches and OEM low profile keykaps. Maybe this is a good opportunity for a UHK v3 to move away from standard key layouts. Incorporating a (staggered) ortholinear layout with low profile switch compatibility really seems to make a v3 stand apart from a v2. Less of a UHK v3, more of a UHK B v1, and v2 becomes a UHK A v2. I’m no businessperson though; I’d love to hear the perspective of others.
  • USB-C Positioning: 5/23 - It’s nice a tucked away which is neat, but people find it problematic. I for one, have already broken one of the little plastic fingers when I was taking my board into the office pre-pandemic with all plugging and unplugging.
  • More: 5/23 or Less Keys 2/23: I included it because I saw others wanting something more similar to a 75%. I quite like the 60%. I came from a full-sized board and was missing my dedicated escape key and function keys (I use function keys frequently at my work to navigate) until in a short span of time I got used to using layers. I couldn’t imagine not using layers for those keys now! Layers are great. I think if someone is unwilling to lean into layering then the UHK v2 wouldn’t be a good fit for them. Not because of the board, but because sometimes we have to go through a rough patch of learning and adjustment and perhaps they’re not ready. I know when I got my UHK I swapped from QWERTY to Colemak and my ~95 WPM dropped to all of 8… Now, I am better for it and love the improved ergonomics of the Colemak layout. I digress.

Less Common Ground (In no particular order except mine is first :slight_smile:, and they all have my own perspective and comment.)

I may stand apart from others here, I don’t wish to see the sins of feature bloat on the UHK and subsequently would dislike most of these. Additionally, the UHK team is small and I would not want to see the cost of the UHK balloon to be out of control. I want to put them down still, since I’ve seen others mention these features, and they may stand by them strongly, disagreeing with me.

  • Ergo Well 1/23: My own - I would dislike a welled keyboard for ergonomics on a v3. The Kinesis, now the Glove80, and others have this ergo market on dial and have spent countless man hours narrowing their product. For me, none of them work. I need a flat keyboard. I find I quite like the robust UHK v2 build and connecting capability. When commuting, I found it perfectly reasonable to connect the board and put it in its own backpack pocket as is.
  • More Tilting 2/23: Our board is already mountable, so it has the ultimate tilting capability in that way, but I understand this request. We did recently get a more robust tilting option that I think maybe satisfies these needs.
  • Rich LED display 2/23: I would be sad to see this, especially if cost and power usage go up. Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad, but I quite like our purpose built professional, workhorse styled keyboard. I was even sad to see the segmented display change from red, but such pure opinionated aesthetic choices are my own. I wouldn’t mark against any revisions because of this most likely.
  • OEM Case 2/23: I agree this could be a good offering. With the current build quality and strength, it only feels necessary for rugged handling like a checked bag on an airplane. I would think a board with no bevel would benefit from this more since. (I would love a board with no bevel BTW)
  • A volume knob, a speaker, OEM low profile keycaps, fingerprint scanner, docking station if wireless, don’t use the 4P4C connector between halves 1/22: All these are individual suggestions. My own was OEM low profile keycaps. My dream change to the UHK would be low profile Choc switches with low profile keycaps in a staggered ortholinear layout. And tweak the key layout in whichever way while keeping the 60% profile. I’m not much of a modder, but I did see the mod that Zetaphor did to get something like this. Perhaps I try on a V3 if it supports Choc switches by default even if it doesn’t ship with them :slight_smile:.

And lastly, I noticed some feedback about the mousing keys on the modules and the bevel keys are quite useless. And yes, I agree. I use the bevel key on the right rarely, but would happily replace it with a key cluster. I also agree with some others that the top key of the 3-key cluster is pretty useless while touch typing. Where my opinion probably splits is that I prefer keeping my hot keys on home row or 1 away from home row (so 3 keys in an arc for my thumb “home row”) and add less frequent toggle type keys to those non-touch typing friendly key positions. I wouldn’t want to use such a limited board like a 40% or less. It doesn’t bother me to have infrequently used keys places for my obscure needs. Perhaps adjusting the key cluster module to remove the mousing keys could lower the cost a bit?

Actually lastly, I saw one mention of a ‘module dev kit’. That could be something pretty neat! Probably not an offering for me, but I’m not the only UHK user.

I hope this read was okay for anyone dedicated to sit through it! Let me know if you agree with these points as a review of the content you’ve seen here on the forums or if individually you disagree or have more to add. I also wonder how closely the feedback we see here in the forums matches direct feedback to UHK from the survey and other direct email feedback. My spreadsheet I put together I tracked the individual post and handle of user requests. I can share it if anyone cares to double check my assessment.


Thank you for taking the time to elaborate on all this!

Your findings mostly correlate with the surveys based on which new products are being developed. We won’t implement everything you suggest, but we’ll implement plenty, and I think you’ll enjoy our upcoming products.

I remain deliberately tight-lipped about the details and schedule. We’ll announce new products as they become available via the UHK newsletter.