|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
One Month with Dvorak + Kinesis
I've been using the Dvorak keyboard layout for the last month combined with the Kinesis keyboard. Here are my impressions.
Keystroke Balance
One of the touted benefits of the Dvorak layout in better balance between left hand and right hand use of the keyboard. Furthermore, the layout places the most frequently used keys (I assume for the English language) on the home row. This is meant to improve the ergonomics of typing.
As someone with RSI issues on my right wrist and right thumb, I can definitely agree that my fingers seem to move much less than when using Qwerty. My left hand also seems to have to contort much less than before. However, using the Kinesis keyboard has meant that I use my right thumb for the space key, and so that has been a nuisance.
Simultaneously Changing Physical Keyboard
I used to use a Qsenn DT35 keyboard prior to this past month of Dvorak. In hindsight, the DT35's key spacing was slightly too close for my hands, so the change has alleviated my hand-crampness (which tends to be exacerbated by my use of the emacs text editor).
The major benefit of changing to a radically different keyboard design has been the negation of my years of muscle memory built up using Qwerty + a traditional keyboard. Had I started using Dvorak on say, my Macbook Air keyboard, I would have had to fight against my muscle memory which would have essentially been "bad habits". This would have been akin to fighting bad habits in sports or in musical performance. It's often easier to start from complete scratch.
Speed
Another one of Dvorak's purported benefits is speed. Because of the even distribution of the keys between the two hands and the placement of commonly used characters is easy to reach locations, Dvorak is supposed to let you type faster. This was actually the original reason I was attracted to Dvorak, before I developed RSI. The verdict is still out, since I'm still only at about 20% of the speed I was at with Qwerty. I read a blog post by a programmer saying that it took him 3-4 months to get used to Dvorak, and that sounds pretty accurate to me looking at my rate of improvement. To be honest though, this is no longer really a priority for me.
Factors of Typing Speed: Physical Distance, Memory Map, and Character Grouping
Other than the physical layout optimization, I've noticed two other factors that improve typing speed.
One factor is the memory map of characters to the key locations on the keyboard. This is pretty straight forward, but it's surprising how badly my speed suffered when I (a) lost the ability to instantly know where a character is and (b) would need a lot of time to translate the "key location identification" to the actual movement of my fingers.
Another realization has been that much of our typing speed comes from recognizing familiar patterns of letters and being able to type those quickly as a group, without having to mentally seek out each individual key. There is a huge difference being able to type "that" in one go, versus "t-h-a-t" with slight pauses in between.
Kinesis
The Kinesis keyboard is typically used by programmers (the first time I saw one was at Stripe's office) but it's a worthwhile tool for anyone who types a significant amount. Not having to reach and twist for things like the backspace key or the CTRL key have been wonderful for me. Even compared to mapping CTRL to Caps Lock, the Kinesis layout is nicer for me since my thumb is much stronger than my pinky.
The columns of the keybroard are vertically aligned, which makes it easier to find the keys in the column.
The one problem for me is that I initially found that the keyboard was slightly too large for me. This has turned out to be less of a problem than I originally anticipated, but the -/_ and =/+ keys (the upperleftmost and upperrightmost keys) are still a bit annoying to reach. So far the benefits have outweighed this drawback though.
This keyboard also has a hardware between Qwerty and Dvorak inputs, and the non-alphanumeric keys don't move between the layouts (though they are already quite different from Qwerty), which is a very nice feature (software Dvorak toggle would remap these keys to different locations, making the mapping worse).
Total Confusion Using Qwerty + Macbook Keyboard
After a month with Dvorak + Kinesis, I tried using my Qwerty + standard keyboard setup on my Mac. The result was ugly, confusing some of the key locations (E in particular) and just generally being clumsy and being unable to remember the Qwerty layout on a subconscious level (which is needed to type quickly and accurately). This is a bit worrying since I may become completely inept on a standard keyboard even when using Dvorak, so I may need to "practice" using Dvorak on a regular keyboard and totally commit to forgetting about Qwerty.
Conclusion
Overall I'm happy to have switched to a Dvorak + Kinesis layout. It's probably not for everyone, but since I am a keyboard nerd (I own 6 or 7 keyboards) and have RSI, it's been an enjoyable process for me. The cherry switches on the keys feel nice (though those can be found on other high quality keyboards as well), and the feeling of banging out words quickly (where I had struggled before) is an awesome feeling. Many words alternate left and right keystrokes, and those feel particularly good when I'm able to type them out quickly. I'm afraid of becoming completely dependant on this keyboard, but for now I'm going to keep at this.
-----
crosspost: http://www.hkmurakami.com/blog/2013-05-29_One_Month_with_Dvorak___Kinesis.html
 
|
I've always been intrigued by switching to Dvorak to potentially increase my typing speed, but the seemingly arduous process of re-learning a completely different layout has always deterred me, on top of using having to go back to the standard keyboards of friends, family, clients, etc... in outside computer usage. I've also been lucky enough in my 15+ years of heavy computer use to avoid RSI.
Perhaps one day, though, I will give it a try.
|
I've been using dvorak for about 2 years, and the most annoying thing I find is when using a qwerty keyboard on a shared computer I'll instinctively press ctrl-i and ctrl-. for copy and paste, which I have to take my hand off the mouse to do, and of course it does nothing... The major downside of dvorak are these unintuitive shortcuts imo, but once you are used to them they become second nature.
Perhaps if I went back and did it again I might consider learning colemak instead of dvorak, but dvorak is fine.
|
Have you given Colemak a try? I've always wanted to try Colemak or Dvorak, but I feel like I type fast "enough" with QWERTY that it wouldn't be worthwhile.
|
this is crazy. who the hell designed qwerty. I would switch but it doesn't make sense when all the keyboards in the world are qwerty
|
Nice! I know the feeling man. i used to get alot of wrist pains from qwerty and after i switched to colemak layout topre variable force keyboardit all went away. Colemak and dvorak are both very good at keeping fingers alternating and on the home row but i chose to go with colemak cos ZXCVB were in the right locations for shortcuts.
|
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak??
|
United States7481 Posts
On May 30 2013 00:01 Cambium wrote:
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak??
Some games just natively adjust the shortcuts based on key location. For the rest, you can just hit your layout-switch hotkey (although this will make in-game chatting somewhat uneasy).
also for most people the actual lettering on the keys doesn't matter, past the learning phase. When I was learning I just swapped the keycaps around on my laptop, but maybe a mechanical keyboard has differently contoured keycaps based on where they're "supposed" to go that would not make that possible.
|
United States22883 Posts
http://www.economist.com/node/196071
http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.html
There's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing.
Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true.
It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science.
|
On May 30 2013 00:01 Cambium wrote:
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak??
I actually suggest Colemak. I switched a little over one year ago. It took about 6months to reach acceptable speeds. At the moment I'm finally over 100wpm again. (Absolute max with QWERTY was about 120).
I'm not sure what kind of utilities Dvorak has, but Colemak has a portable version which I take with me to places I know I'll be using a computer, such as school. Even though my QWERTY speeds have dropped, it's still bearable when I'm forced to use it.
Colemak keeps zxcvb in the same place so you don't have to relearn as many shortcuts. More words can be typed on homerow only compared to Dvorak also.
Here are stats of my reply:
Distance (meters)
QWERTY, 14.93
Colemak, 8.761
Dvorak, 9.066
Same hand repeated
QWERTY, 37.92%
Colemak, 33.73%
Dvorak, 19.76%
Same finger
QWERTY, 5.788%
Colemak, 1.596%
Dvorak, 1.996%
Colemak is easier to learn and in the long run offers the least finger movement. This is why I chose colemak over Dvorak. Typing on QWERTY for any period of time longer than just a few minutes started to hurt my hands. With colemak the lowered distance and increased efficiency allows me to type for very long periods without any pain.
On May 30 2013 01:26 Jibba wrote:http://www.economist.com/node/196071http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.htmlThere's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing. Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true. It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science.
Go actually research studies done comparing major keyboard layouts. QWERTY is by far the worst.
Using market studies to say that QWERTY is up to par is not a solid argument. Look at Firewire vs USB when it came out. Firewire was way ahead in terms of speed, but USB won.
http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?
|
I tried dvorak for a while in college, but it was just too much of a hassle. Convenient keyboard shortcuts become inconvenient, have to remap every key in games, using other computers is a pain, etc. Typing speed was definitely not an issue for me either, as I don't think I've ever had a need to type faster in my life. Thinking about what to type takes a whole lot more time than physically pressing the keys.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 30 2013 01:41 Marimokkori wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 00:01 Cambium wrote:
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak?? I actually suggest Colemak. I switched a little over one year ago. It took about 6months to reach acceptable speeds. At the moment I'm finally over 100wpm again. (Absolute max with QWERTY was about 120). I'm not sure what kind of utilities Dvorak has, but Colemak has a portable version which I take with me to places I know I'll be using a computer, such as school. Even though my QWERTY speeds have dropped, it's still bearable when I'm forced to use it. Colemak keeps zxcvb in the same place so you don't have to relearn as many shortcuts. More words can be typed on homerow only compared to Dvorak also. Show nested quote +
Here are stats of my reply:
Distance (meters)
QWERTY, 14.93
Colemak, 8.761
Dvorak, 9.066
Same hand repeated
QWERTY, 37.92%
Colemak, 33.73%
Dvorak, 19.76%
Same finger
QWERTY, 5.788%
Colemak, 1.596%
Dvorak, 1.996%
Colemak is easier to learn and in the long run offers the least finger movement. This is why I chose colemak over Dvorak. Typing on QWERTY for any period of time longer than just a few minutes started to hurt my hands. With colemak the lowered distance and increased efficiency allows me to type for very long periods without any pain. Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 01:26 Jibba wrote:http://www.economist.com/node/196071http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.htmlThere's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing. Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true. It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science. Go actually research studies done comparing major keyboard layouts. QWERTY is by far the worst. Using market studies to say that QWERTY is up to par is not a solid argument. Look at Firewire vs USB when it came out. Firewire was way ahead in terms of speed, but USB won. http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?
Like I said, there are no well conducted studies. Most of the evidence is based on unproven claims about human mechanics, which includes the efficiency and distance numbers.
Distance sounds like a good measurement but lower isn't necessarily better as it can also cramp fingers and it doesn't take into account angles and repetition of the same finger or even which finger does the typing (ideal distance and movement type for each finger is likely different.)
It actually kind of resembles the way golf clubs are sold. We can describe physical characteristics but I haven't read anything showing why those characteristics are better.
|
On May 30 2013 01:41 Marimokkori wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 01:26 Jibba wrote:http://www.economist.com/node/196071http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.htmlThere's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing. Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true. It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science. Go actually research studies done comparing major keyboard layouts. QWERTY is by far the worst. Using market studies to say that QWERTY is up to par is not a solid argument. Look at Firewire vs USB when it came out. Firewire was way ahead in terms of speed, but USB won. http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?
I would suggest that *you* be the one to actually do the research, because Jibba is wholly correct that Dvorak and Colemak have no real advantages over qwerty. The resource you linked still purports that qwerty was developed to prevent the jamming of typewriters, which is an instant sign that it is not a reliable source. See: http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2433/139379/1/42_161.pdf
I don't really care what keyboard layout you decide to use on your own, but don't spread a bunch of bullshit while you do it.
|
I cold switched to dvorak about 3 months ago. I didn't use any typing program as I didn't like how slow they felt. For the first month I found myself not using the computer as much as typing any word took forever. Now I have unfortunately plateaued at around 35WPM (compared to my 75WPM QWERTY) around a month ago. I just have no reason to type faster. I kind of miss being able to spam words out though.
|
On May 30 2013 01:59 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 01:41 Marimokkori wrote:On May 30 2013 00:01 Cambium wrote:
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak?? I actually suggest Colemak. I switched a little over one year ago. It took about 6months to reach acceptable speeds. At the moment I'm finally over 100wpm again. (Absolute max with QWERTY was about 120). I'm not sure what kind of utilities Dvorak has, but Colemak has a portable version which I take with me to places I know I'll be using a computer, such as school. Even though my QWERTY speeds have dropped, it's still bearable when I'm forced to use it. Colemak keeps zxcvb in the same place so you don't have to relearn as many shortcuts. More words can be typed on homerow only compared to Dvorak also.
Here are stats of my reply:
Distance (meters)
QWERTY, 14.93
Colemak, 8.761
Dvorak, 9.066
Same hand repeated
QWERTY, 37.92%
Colemak, 33.73%
Dvorak, 19.76%
Same finger
QWERTY, 5.788%
Colemak, 1.596%
Dvorak, 1.996%
Colemak is easier to learn and in the long run offers the least finger movement. This is why I chose colemak over Dvorak. Typing on QWERTY for any period of time longer than just a few minutes started to hurt my hands. With colemak the lowered distance and increased efficiency allows me to type for very long periods without any pain. On May 30 2013 01:26 Jibba wrote:http://www.economist.com/node/196071http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.htmlThere's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing. Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true. It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science. Go actually research studies done comparing major keyboard layouts. QWERTY is by far the worst. Using market studies to say that QWERTY is up to par is not a solid argument. Look at Firewire vs USB when it came out. Firewire was way ahead in terms of speed, but USB won. http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/? Like I said, there are no well conducted studies. Most of the evidence is based on unproven claims about human mechanics, which includes the efficiency and distance numbers. Distance sounds like a good measurement but lower isn't necessarily better as it can also cramp fingers and it doesn't take into account angles and repetition of the same finger or even which finger does the typing (ideal distance and movement type for each finger is likely different.) It actually kind of resembles the way golf clubs are sold. We can describe physical characteristics but I haven't read anything showing why those characteristics are better.
I see where you're coming from, but it still seems logical, no? I'd feel a lot better after running a short distance than a long one. When playing a wind instrument you don't purposely move your fingers farther than what is necessary, it's just not as efficient. Perhaps these analogies aren't that great heh.
Finger repetition and which finger does the typing is included in some of the things I've read. I even included finger repetition stats in my previous post. I have not seen anything about angles or possible cramping... due to lack of finger movement? I haven't experienced any kind of cramping, and I don't even have my chair/desk in good ergonomic positions. I guess all I can really say is that I'm glad I got away from QWERTY. Colemak feels so much better for me. You may be right about the unproven human mechanics thing, but I'd like to hear what you think after using Dvorak or Colemak for a few months. I think it would be very interesting if you still feel the same way.
On May 30 2013 03:10 iTzSnypah wrote:
I cold switched to dvorak about 3 months ago. I didn't use any typing program as I didn't like how slow they felt. For the first month I found myself not using the computer as much as typing any word took forever. Now I have unfortunately plateaued at around 35WPM (compared to my 75WPM QWERTY) around a month ago. I just have no reason to type faster. I kind of miss being able to spam words out though.
That's why you peaked at 35wpm. If you don't actively try to improve, it will take a very long time to reach your old speeds. I maintained the amount of time I spent on the computer and it still took a year of just casual typing to hit 90+wpm for me. If you actively practice and focus on getting faster then you should be able to hit 75wpm within 6 months.
|
Tried to switch once in high school, never again. QWERTY is for me. Also Jibba is right on, like anything else on the internet, the alternative keyboard setup vs. QWERTY "debate" is rife with misinformation, poorly utilized/conducted research, and chest puffing. Ergonomics and proper ancillary typing support will solve wrist/hand issues far more effectively with far less impact on efficiency than switching key setup will.
|
Hmm, RSI, emacs... have I ever heard of that before? 
For me I feel that the overhead of switching layouts when QWERTY has influenced decades of software development--and therefore keybindings is too significant. 'hjkl' being the most prominent example. Of course, it's possible to work around these kinds of things by using one layout while in insert mode (using vi as an example) and so on, but essentially you go from being proficient on 99% of devices to handicapped on 99% of devices until you can switch the keyboard layout. It's very possible to be comfortable with both layouts, but I suspect that using QWERTY when you have a strong preference for Dvorak firmly established is no fun.
One of the things I always keep in the back of my mind is portability. Sure, I could spend endless amounts of time customizing whatever I pleased, but I try to keep whatever setup I'm familiar as portable as possible. That means being used to an environment as close to the default as possible. A kinesis sounds great, but for me I'm troubled by the idea of having to switch between it and "standard" keyboards. I do take little luxuries from time to time though e.g. using the Vimperator plugin in Firefox knowing full well that it's highly unlikely to ever become a default.
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
From a programmer's point of view, I have never understood the point of potentially marginally faster typing at a cost of fucking with your brain for quite a while. Even when using a disgustingly verbose language like Java I have never felt that typing speed was at any point a limiting factor. On the other hand, I have never had any wrist problems so more hand movement is not an issue for me. In fact, I strangely enjoy moving my hands a lot when typing.
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 30 2013 03:22 Marimokkori wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2013 01:59 Jibba wrote:On May 30 2013 01:41 Marimokkori wrote:On May 30 2013 00:01 Cambium wrote:
qwerty is absolutely retarded, I applaud you for switching, too bad it's going to make playing games a complete nightmare haha
I'm just about to purchase a filco keyboard (qwerty ofc), but now I have some thinking to do... maybe a dvorak?? I actually suggest Colemak. I switched a little over one year ago. It took about 6months to reach acceptable speeds. At the moment I'm finally over 100wpm again. (Absolute max with QWERTY was about 120). I'm not sure what kind of utilities Dvorak has, but Colemak has a portable version which I take with me to places I know I'll be using a computer, such as school. Even though my QWERTY speeds have dropped, it's still bearable when I'm forced to use it. Colemak keeps zxcvb in the same place so you don't have to relearn as many shortcuts. More words can be typed on homerow only compared to Dvorak also.
Here are stats of my reply:
Distance (meters)
QWERTY, 14.93
Colemak, 8.761
Dvorak, 9.066
Same hand repeated
QWERTY, 37.92%
Colemak, 33.73%
Dvorak, 19.76%
Same finger
QWERTY, 5.788%
Colemak, 1.596%
Dvorak, 1.996%
Colemak is easier to learn and in the long run offers the least finger movement. This is why I chose colemak over Dvorak. Typing on QWERTY for any period of time longer than just a few minutes started to hurt my hands. With colemak the lowered distance and increased efficiency allows me to type for very long periods without any pain. On May 30 2013 01:26 Jibba wrote:http://www.economist.com/node/196071http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.htmlThere's really not much demonstrable value in switching to Dvorak. Like a lot of keyboard/mouse information, most of the popular information is based on myth. QWERTY is not as inefficient as Dvorak and Colemak supporters claim, and Dvorak's evidence was pretty spurious. Not sure about Colemak, but I haven't seen anything convincing. Even for RSI, you're really just better off changing keyboard shape. Kinesis is good, but there might be other configurations that are even better, depending on you and where your pain is. That said, there's not much reliable evidence regarding RSI and keyboard configuration/types either (including mechanical vs. membrane.) It's mostly unproven claims about human mechanics, that may or may not be true. It's basically like "some people with RSI have reported slight improvement with _______" which to me is like the people claiming you can halt psoriasis by rubbing banana peels on your skin. If you think it helps you, go for it but uh... science. Go actually research studies done comparing major keyboard layouts. QWERTY is by far the worst. Using market studies to say that QWERTY is up to par is not a solid argument. Look at Firewire vs USB when it came out. Firewire was way ahead in terms of speed, but USB won. http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/? Like I said, there are no well conducted studies. Most of the evidence is based on unproven claims about human mechanics, which includes the efficiency and distance numbers. Distance sounds like a good measurement but lower isn't necessarily better as it can also cramp fingers and it doesn't take into account angles and repetition of the same finger or even which finger does the typing (ideal distance and movement type for each finger is likely different.) It actually kind of resembles the way golf clubs are sold. We can describe physical characteristics but I haven't read anything showing why those characteristics are better. I see where you're coming from, but it still seems logical, no? I'd feel a lot better after running a short distance than a long one. When playing a wind instrument you don't purposely move your fingers farther than what is necessary, it's just not as efficient. Perhaps these analogies aren't that great heh. The issue is that the ideal distance for your pinkie might be painful for your middle finger. It's the same reason people with larger hands find small phones uncomfortable and vice versa. Lowest possible distance is not a good measure, because there's both a minimum and maximum threshhold for every person and each of their fingers. So just going by shortest distance ignores those threshholds.
By angle I mean that even though I hit both 'E' and 'T' with my index finger, it's doing it at a different angle and one is likely less comfortable than the other (although possibly imperceptibly so.) Perhaps a better example is your pinkie finger with QWERTY and trying to hit Tab or Shift. They're essentially equidistant from where I hold my hands (even though Shift extends further, it'd be really uncomfortable to hit it on its right-most side) yet hitting Tab is significantly easier for me than hitting Shift. That's where the angles come in and need to be accounted for.
How each of those works might be different for everyone, which is why I think it's problematic to say one is universally better than the other. For some people, Dvorak or Colemak might be better, but there's not evidence of it being objectively or intrinsically better. While there are people who switch to alternatives and find it more comfortable, people tend to ignore the other possible explanations for increased comfort, such as placebo or even typing slower. I don't know that the benefit of 90 wpm QWERTY vs 40 wpm Dvorak, which is what people experience upon first switching, is any different than 90 wpm QWERTY vs 40 wpm QWERTY. If you're moving at a slower rate, you'll have less strain so it feels good initially. Furthermore, the switch is often made in conjunction with upgrading peripherals, as haji has done, and that's another point of improvement.
Finally, because everyone starts with QWERTY, we don't know how many people find QWERTY more comfortable than Dvorak. We only know about people switching one direction but it's possible that just as many people find the QWERTY configuration more comfortable, and they just haven't had to switch.
For people who want to type faster, they'd probably be best served by putting in the extra effort to type faster with what they already know, rather than trying to re-learn a different style. The effort made to re-learn Y could surely be used to make you faster with X, as well.
I just think configurations are overblown, and I've read too many boring papers on typing that have yet to prove one style is universally better. Same with mechanical switches being better than membrane switches. There's a whole bunch of variables people forget to account for that may also explain their relief, and I don't like the idea of selling/buying a product with a medical purpose without proof of efficacy. Especially once companies start lying about their competitors (like websites saying QWERTY was designed to slow typists down.)
|
On May 30 2013 07:17 Jibba wrote:I just think configurations are overblown, and I've read too many boring papers on typing that have yet to prove one style is universally better. Same with mechanical switches being better than membrane switches. There's a whole bunch of variables people forget to account for that may also explain their relief, and I don't like the idea of selling/buying a product with a medical purpose without proof of efficacy. Especially once companies start lying about their competitors (like websites saying QWERTY was designed to slow typists down.)
Results may vary and could be overblown but unless one plans to conduct an experiment with kids learning to type over a few years you will never know. In the mean time, there are convincing logical arguments in favor of Dvorak (the most used keys are under the most used fingers, fingers move less) which are undeniable. Whether or not those result in significant health or typing speed improvement is irrelevant to these perks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
