X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using our website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

I agree
Learn More
Visit the New Technabob Shop!Get Technabob Daily: Join our Mailing List! | Follow Us: Facebook | Twitter
Awesomer Media Sites: THE AWESOMER | MIGHTYMEGA | 95OCTANE
subscribe to our rss feedsubscribe via e-mailfollow technabob on twittertechnabob facebook fan pageGoogle+follow us in feedly
Follow Us:

Keyboard Rubik’s Cube: Can’t Ctrl+Alt+Delete This

by Lambert Varias

Here’s a fun project to do if you have a couple of unused keyboards lying around – a picture Rubik’s Cube with function and number keys on it instead of colors. Making one’s not as easy as Ctrl+X, Ctrl+V though.

keyboard_rubiks_cube

Instructables member Overlord5 used two groups each of the function keys, the numpad keys and the row of numbers on top of the letters to make his Rubik’s cube, but obviously you’re free to make your own combination.

Check out Instructables for the full walkthrough. If you’re not familiar with picture Rubik’s Cubes, Overlord5 recommends you watch this video that shows how they’re solved. I wonder if anyone’s made a Rubik’s Cube using touchscreens on all six sides.

[via Unconsumption via DudeCraft]

 




Comments are closed for posts older than 90 days.

Recent Posts

Macintosh Classic Turned from Trash to Trash Bin

Macintosh Classic Turned from Trash to Trash Bin

Pikachu-shaped Pork Patties: I Choose You, Porkachu!

Pikachu-shaped Pork Patties: I Choose You, Porkachu!

Legend of Zelda Navi LED Lamp Is Asking to Be Thrown

Legend of Zelda Navi LED Lamp Is Asking to Be Thrown

Disney Scented Candles Smell Like the Haunted Mansion

Disney Scented Candles Smell Like the Haunted Mansion

Frinkiac Is a Search Engine That Finds Screencaps from the Simpsons

Frinkiac Is a Search Engine That Finds Screencaps from the Simpsons

More from Awesomer Media...

The Awesomer Logo MightyMega Logo 95octane Logo
Win Prizes in the Technabob Shop
discussion by