|
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.
|
United States22883 Posts
Again, mechanical claims that are untied to evidence. This is how you sell golf clubs.
|
Wouldn't the whole question of distance for larger/smaller hands only be based on the size of the keyboard and spacing of the keys? The layout used doesn't really have much to do with that, no? Moving the shortest comfortable distances is obviously less stressful on the hands than moving larger distances.
Keyboard layouts and people who use them != companies. No one is selling Dvorak or Colemak, and no one is buying them - they are totally free. There are so many stories about the history of QWERTY it's hard not to be misinformed. And the purpose isn't simply medical. It's just... more efficient compared to QWERTY in pretty much every aspect. And that just happens to have potential health benefits, ie reduced strain due to less finger movement. Saying that Dvorak might feel better because you are going at 40wpm vs 90 with QWERTY doesn't really make sense because anyone who sticks with the new layout for any decent period of time will reach similar speeds and still say it is more comfortable to use. I'm not sure how much the placebo effect comes in to play, but I suppose it's possible...? Not sure how long that effect could last though.
|
For the people I know that care about typing speed they type much faster on dvorak (they type both qwerty and dvorak quickly) and believe they simply could not not reach the speeds of dvorak with qwerty as easily. With dvorak at full potential you are looking at a boost of roughly 50+ wpm.
On a time/practice basis, people achieved higher speeds in dvorak faster and easier than they would with qwerty.
This is not a placebo effect because a placebo doesn't take place when you are working at your limits, and has nothing to do with typing slower reducing the risk of rsi. However the side effect of an efficient and properly designed layout, is less stress on your hands.
|
On May 30 2013 09:02 Jibba wrote: Again, mechanical claims that are untied to evidence. This is how you sell golf clubs.
I played golf semi-seriously, and golf clubs make a huge difference to accuracy and power depending on what you are after. This is extremely noticeable, its nothing like the difference of a mechanical vs membrane keyboard.
If you played a lot of golf, you would know what I'm talking about. The difference was going from being a non-competitive player to a competitive one in highschool.
Even just a good driver for me would go from hitting outside the fairway non-stop to hitting the green off the tee on a par 4 hole. You can't placebo your tee shot length, or how much the ball curves mid air over many hits. If you don't have to hit as hard to get the ball where you wanna go, you are going to be a hell of a lot more accurate.
Of course like with anything, if you are terrible, nothing is going to make a difference, and middle aged super recreational players who never practice, are usually the ones that have the money to buy these things.
|
United States22883 Posts
It's not that there aren't good clubs and bad clubs. It's that differentiating between good clubs and bad clubs based on manufacturer claims of SCIENCE is impossible because they describe mechanical features that sound good but may actually be meaningless. That is what I mean.
In fact, outside of Dvorak's own poorly conducted and doctored study, I don't believe the speed claim has ever been proven in Dvorak's favor. Look at the studies conducted afterwards by the US military, Australian Post Office, IBM and Oregon State University. The speed claim is actually the weakest of them all. They're all within a couple % above or below each other. While Dvorak requires less distance, it's worse with regards to hand alteration since it favors the right hand more than QWERTY favors the left. Some believe hand alteration is the largest driver of typing speed, but I haven't seen much for that either. All I've seen is that they both have comparable performance after 100+ hours of training.
Again, distance traveled is a poor indicator because you still have to pay attention to which finger is making a movement and in what direction the movement is made. And for the RSI claim, you'd also have to show that distance is the main contributor to RSI and not something like angle instead. It's not like this is a difficult study to do. Keyboarding is super easy to conduct and of the 5+ that have been done on this subject, there's just not much to show for it.
|
On May 30 2013 11:40 Jibba wrote: It's not that there aren't good clubs and bad clubs. It's that differentiating between good clubs and bad clubs based on manufacturer claims of SCIENCE is impossible because they describe mechanical features that sound good but may actually be meaningless. That is what I mean.
In fact, outside of Dvorak's own poorly conducted and doctored study, I don't believe the speed claim has ever been proven in Dvorak's favor. Look at the studies conducted afterwards by the US military, Australian Post Office, IBM and Oregon State University. The speed claim is actually the weakest of them all. They're all within a couple % above or below each other.
Again, distance traveled is a poor indicator because you still have to pay attention to which finger is making a movement and in what direction the movement is made. And for the RSI claim, you'd also have to show that distance is the main contributor to RSI and not something like angle instead.
Hmmm, although I haven't seen the studies, the biggest problem with them might be the fact that these people are either not serious about learning dvorak or are not serious typists.
These kinds of studies would be very difficult to do. I think the best you could get is get the worlds fastest dvorak and qwerty typists and measure them. So far the official world record holder is a dvorak user.
Wikipedia
In 1933, Dvorak started entering typists trained on his keyboard into the International Commercial Schools Contest, which were typing contests sponsored by typewriter manufacturers consisting of professional and amateur contests. The professional contests had typists sponsored by typewriter companies to advertise their machines.
Ten times from 1934–41, Dvorak's typists won first in their class events. In the 1935 contest alone, nine Dvorak typists won twenty awards. Dvorak typists were so successful that in 1937 the Contest Committee barred Dvorak's typists for being "unfair competition" until Dvorak protested. In addition, QWERTY typists did not want to be placed near Dvorak typists because QWERTY typists were disconcerted by the noise produced from the fast typing speeds made by Dvorak typists.[11]
In the 1930s, the Tacoma, Washington, school district ran an experimental program in typing to determine whether to hold Dvorak layout classes. The experiment used 2,700 students to learn the Dvorak layout, and the district found that the Dvorak layout students learned the keyboard in one-third the time it took to learn QWERTY. When a new school board was elected, however, it chose to close the Dvorak layout classes.[11]
Writer Barbara Blackburn was the fastest English language typist in the world, according to The Guinness Book of World Records. Using the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard, she was able to maintain 150 words per minute (wpm) for 50 minutes, and 170 wpm for shorter periods. She has been clocked at a peak speed of 212 wpm. Blackburn, who failed her QWERTY typing class in high school, first encountered the Dvorak keyboard in 1938, quickly learned to achieve very high speeds, and occasionally toured giving speed-typing demonstrations during her secretarial career. Blackburn died in April 2008.[12]
From what I've seen typists who use dvorak see very noticeable gains. To me it just wouldn't make sense if it didn't.
There is a section about alternating hands, dvorak does this better, there are also 3 kinds of dvorak layouts.
The QWERTY layout has more than 3,000 words that are typed on the left hand alone and about 300 words that are typed on the right hand alone (the aforementioned word "minimum" is a right-hand-only word). In contrast, with the Dvorak layout, only a few words are typed using only the left hand and even fewer with the right hand.
+ Show Spoiler +Keyboard strokes [edit] Touch typing requires a typist to rest their fingers in the home row (QWERTY row starting with "ASDF"). The more strokes there are in the home row, the less movement the fingers must do, thus allowing a typist to type faster, more accurately, and with less strain to the hand and fingers. Motion picture studies prove not only that typing is done fastest in the home row, but also typing is the slowest on the bottom row. If the fingers must move, it is easier to move them up to the top row (QWERTY row starting with "QWERTY") rather than down to the bottom row (QWERTY row starting with "ZXCV").
It is notable that the vast majority of the Dvorak layout's key strokes (70%) are done in the home row (the easiest row to type because the fingers rest there). In addition, the Dvorak layout requires the fewest strokes on the bottom row (the most difficult row to type). On the other hand, QWERTY requires typists to move their fingers to the top row for a majority of strokes and has only 32% of the strokes done in the home row.[20]
Because the Dvorak layout concentrates the vast majority of key strokes to the home row, the Dvorak layout uses about 63% of the finger motion required by QWERTY, thus making the Dvorak layout more ergonomic.[21] Because the Dvorak layout requires less finger motion from the typist compared to QWERTY, many users with repetitive strain injuries have reported that switching from QWERTY to Dvorak alleviated or even eliminated their repetitive strain injuries.[22][23] The typing loads between hands differs for each of the keyboard layouts. On QWERTY keyboards, 56% of the typing strokes are done by the left hand. As the left hand is weaker for the majority of people, the Dvorak keyboard puts the more often used keys on the right hand side, thereby having 56% of the typing strokes done by the right hand.[20] Awkward strokes [edit]
Awkward strokes are undesirable because they slow down typing, increase typing errors, and increase finger strain. Hurdling is an awkward stroke requiring a single finger to jump directly from one row, over the home row to another row (e.g., typing "minimum" (which often comes out as "minimun" or "mimimum") on the QWERTY keyboard).[24] In the English language, there are about 1,200 words that require a hurdle on the QWERTY layout. In contrast, there is only a handful of words requiring a hurdle on the Dvorak layout and even fewer requiring a double hurdle.[24][25] Hand alternation [edit]
Alternating hands while typing is a desirable trait because while one hand is typing a letter, the other hand can get in position to type the next letter. Thus, a typist may fall into a steady rhythm and type quickly. However, when a string of letters is done with the same hand, the chances of stuttering are increased and a rhythm can be broken, thus decreasing speed and increasing errors and fatigue. The QWERTY layout has more than 3,000 words that are typed on the left hand alone and about 300 words that are typed on the right hand alone (the aforementioned word "minimum" is a right-hand-only word). In contrast, with the Dvorak layout, only a few words are typed using only the left hand and even fewer with the right hand.[20] This is because a syllable requires at least one vowel, and all the vowels (and "y") fall on the left side of the keyboard.
http://www.dvorak-keyboards.com/Dvorak_vs_qwerty_keyboard_tests.htm
![[image loading]](http://www.dvorak-keyboards.com/keyboard_comparason_string.jpg)
Finally, for the curious, a visual comparison between the movement patterns in typing the same paragraph A, in both Dvorak, and Qwerty, using the efficient movement patterns described above. The thread is like a track, or record of the least finger movement required to type the text of this 62 word paragraph. There is 35% less movement with the Dvorak, than with Qwerty. If one counts the movement of different typing habits of different people, as above, then the actual range is between 35% and 50%
Although you may find very fast qwerty typists, dvorak also seems to perform much better on longer and more difficult pieces. Which probably explains why in online websites, the difference between the two is much closer compared to official records.
|
United States22883 Posts
This is what the Wikipedia article is citing for all of that: http://infohost.nmt.edu/~shipman/ergo/parkinson.html
It begins with the first major myth "The existing keyboard was designed experimentally by Christopher Sholes, the inventor of the typewriter, to slow the typist down, because the keys in his 1873 machine fell back into place by gravity." and the rest of it is just repeating the claims that Dvorak made in his papers. His methodology was garbage, however, and he did a lot of manipulation to help his case.
|
Sure, but which parts of my post are actually invalid?
The images and the associated text did not come from wikipedia, and the guiness book of records nor the typing competitions were held by dvorak.
While there are many sources cited on the Wiki article, not just that one, I gave another link which also demonstrates the same theory showing a practical experiment and is not based off a study.
|
How did this thread turn from "this new keyboard and layout has done wonders for my rsi" to "you are wrong and were sold snake oil cos there is no objective evidence that your keyboard/layout is better than a qwerty dell keyboard and im going to disregard your personal experience." Its like you came here just to shit on OP's new purchase. Like if someone bought a new mouse and someone went off on a tangent about how laser technology is crap and their is no ergonomic benefit to those grips cos the razer guide on mouse grips isnt medically researched.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On May 30 2013 11:40 Jibba wrote: It's not that there aren't good clubs and bad clubs. It's that differentiating between good clubs and bad clubs based on manufacturer claims of SCIENCE is impossible because they describe mechanical features that sound good but may actually be meaningless. That is what I mean.
I agree on this regard, and a lot of the year-over-year "improvements" in golf club performance do seem dubious.
But there are real advances that have been made over the last few decades. Forged muscleback irons are far less forgiving of off-center hits compared to modern or mid-90s cavity back irons, for instance.
As for the qwerfy/dvorak debate, I honestly don't know what is "the truth" but this setup has helped my RSI issues so if any of you have the misfortune of developing such issues in the future, I urge you to give it a shot. This keyboard is quite expensive (almost $300) but I'm happy to pay that to increase my odds of being able to continue typing (since I enjoy writing and I think I'd have a hard time professionally without being able to type painlessly)
|
United States22883 Posts
On May 30 2013 13:21 T0fuuu wrote: How did this thread turn from "this new keyboard and layout has done wonders for my rsi" to "you are wrong and were sold snake oil cos there is no objective evidence that your keyboard/layout is better than a qwerty dell keyboard and im going to disregard your personal experience." Its like you came here just to shit on OP's new purchase. Like if someone bought a new mouse and someone went off on a tangent about how laser technology is crap and their is no ergonomic benefit to those grips cos the razer guide on mouse grips isnt medically researched.
Laser mice sensors are crap and you shouldn't waste money on them over an optical. It's to inform people, because there's so much misleading information floating around, particularly with regards to things that purport medical advantage.
And Haji didn't waste money on the keyboard. The Kinesis is great for dealing with wrist issues, and I've recommended it on TL before. I'm really glad it's working for him. We're talking about configuration, which is only a matter of time investment and moving keycaps around, and for that I think a discussion is fine. This is a discussion forum, not a place for plugs, so I think someone should present a counterargument if the subject at hand might convince people to sacrifice typing ability for a month+.
Finally, I never said it was a bad configuration, I said the claims about its outright universal superiority are questionable. I doubt there's a singular set up that's best for every person's biomechanics.
|
Fellow Dvorak user here:
What do you do about hotkeys like ctrl+c and ctrl+v? It's a pain to have to reach to the i and . positions on the keyboard. Dvorak is also less efficient on touchpad keyboards such as on your smartphone. Ironically the reasons that make qwerty worse than dvorak on a keyboard make it great on touchpads
I also feel like a dumbass when I have to look at the keyboard in CS lab courses ^_^
|
On May 30 2013 12:04 sluggaslamoo wrote:Wikipedia Show nested quote + Writer Barbara Blackburn was the fastest English language typist in the world, according to The Guinness Book of World Records. Using the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard, she was able to maintain 150 words per minute (wpm) for 50 minutes, and 170 wpm for shorter periods. She has been clocked at a peak speed of 212 wpm. Blackburn, who failed her QWERTY typing class in high school, first encountered the Dvorak keyboard in 1938, quickly learned to achieve very high speeds, and occasionally toured giving speed-typing demonstrations during her secretarial career. Blackburn died in April 2008.[12]
Even if the fastest person in the world uses a certain layout it does not make for a large enough statistical sample to prove anything. That being said, Sean Wrona uses QWERTY and has been recorded exceeding 170wpm for a 50 minute period, and being able to peak at 256wpm, so the argument would be kind of mute anyway, I guess. (Ultimate Typing Championship winner 2010 http://seanwrona.com/)
I used dvorak for a couple of months in highschool but my personal experience, aswell as most of the information I could find, suggested that no real speed increases could be gained if you were already above ~350cpm (dunno what wpm that translates to).. To me, again just my personal experience, having to mentally switch everytime I sat down at another computer wasn't worth the effort as I didn't notice any gain whatsoever, sitting at around 120wpm.
I also suffer from RSI, primarily on my ring and little fingers aswell as the wrists, and have started looking more and more into ways to relieve the symptoms. In my opinion switches and physical layout (distance, height, angles etc.) have a much greater impact than switching between qwerty/dvorak would have. I haven't tried any of the layouts that are actually designed to ease stress on the fingers, such as colemak, but might give it a go if finger yoga doesn't help
|
On May 30 2013 14:15 Jibba wrote:Finally, I never said it was a bad configuration, I said the claims about its outright universal superiority are questionable. I doubt there's a singular set up that's best for every person's biomechanics. No one is preventing you from making your own keyboard setup after all. If you can do better, then do. Besides there are improved version of Dvorak that keeps the name only because of history. For once the Bepo keyboard is created for french specifically and looks better than both dvorak-fr and azerty.
|
I have been using (a slightly altered German version of) Dvorak for around 2 years now. Started on my main machine and it took me around 4-5 months to get back to my QWERTY speed. I still have to use QWERTY-Keyboards at work but don't have any problems switching between the two. In my opinion the primary reason for switching shouldn't be hoping to increase your speed but the ergonomics. For me it feels more balanced and rounded whereas touch typing on QWERTY is a mess with fingers going everywhere. It's noticeable that your fingers move less with Dvorak, you can stay on the home row more often and if you have to reach out for a key it's mostly on the more easily reachable upper row. Additionaly, on OS X there is a layout that switches back to QWERTY whenever you press command so that shortcuts like copying, pasting and exiting programs can still be used with the left hand only.
My roommate has switched to a layout called NEO, which also follows the premise of more logical key arrangements and offers more layers to quickly access mathematical symbols and greek letters. His conclusions are basically the same as mine, not necessarily an increase in speed but in comfort and ergonomics.
|
Haha glad to read about another keyboard nerd. I myself have like 10 keyboards (bought in the past 2 years) and I often wondered if an ergonomic design was the way to go next. I'm currently typing in AZERTY with a French layout, which is really sucky for programming, I intended to switch to qwerty because that's already more convenient, and straight-forward, but I might as well switch to dvorak directly right?
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On May 30 2013 22:39 buddahbrot wrote: In my opinion the primary reason for switching shouldn't be hoping to increase your speed but the ergonomics. For me it feels more balanced and rounded whereas touch typing on QWERTY is a mess with fingers going everywhere. It's noticeable that your fingers move less with Dvorak, you can stay on the home row more often and if you have to reach out for a key it's mostly on the more easily reachable upper row.
Yup I've definitely noticed these points! 
Additionaly, on OS X there is a layout that switches back to QWERTY whenever you press command so that shortcuts like copying, pasting and exiting programs can still be used with the left hand only.
Good point.
On May 30 2013 15:19 GhostKorean wrote: Fellow Dvorak user here:
What do you do about hotkeys like ctrl+c and ctrl+v? It's a pain to have to reach to the i and . positions on the keyboard. Dvorak is also less efficient on touchpad keyboards such as on your smartphone. Ironically the reasons that make qwerty worse than dvorak on a keyboard make it great on touchpads
I also feel like a dumbass when I have to look at the keyboard in CS lab courses ^_^
Being an emacs user, I naturally like to have both hands on the keyboard and minimize mouse time. So C-c and C-v are done with both hands for me. The kineis keyboard has the left Ctrl key on the left thumb so this kind of two handed shortcut feels pretty natural.
|
The most interesting thing in this thread is definitely the history of the QWERTY *mind blown*
|
On May 30 2013 15:19 GhostKorean wrote: Fellow Dvorak user here:
What do you do about hotkeys like ctrl+c and ctrl+v? It's a pain to have to reach to the i and . positions on the keyboard. Dvorak is also less efficient on touchpad keyboards such as on your smartphone. Ironically the reasons that make qwerty worse than dvorak on a keyboard make it great on touchpads
I also feel like a dumbass when I have to look at the keyboard in CS lab courses ^_^ I use my left hand + right ctrl for those. It is not ideal, but I have gotten used to it. There are programs that switch the layout but keep the hotkeys the same. I have not used them because of the silly reason they might conflict with games, but I know that is a bad excuse since you can just switch it off.
|
I use three different keyboard layouts for the three languages I use primarily (QWERTY for English, AZERTY for French, and Kedmanee for Thai). It gets really confusing sometimes, especially between QWERTY and AZERTY. Overall, I like AZERTY's utility characters, but I've never been able to completely switch over and not use QWERTY after using it for so long. I can't even imagine how hard it would be to change your keyboard layout completely.
Overall, I make more mistakes as I keep switching between languages, and it doesn't help much that I've never learned proper touch typing. I still glance at my keyboard from time to time.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:50 HereBeDragons wrote: I use three different keyboard layouts for the three languages I use primarily (QWERTY for English, AZERTY for French, and Kedmanee for Thai). It gets really confusing sometimes, especially between QWERTY and AZERTY. Overall, I like AZERTY's utility characters, but I've never been able to completely switch over and not use QWERTY after using it for so long. I can't even imagine how hard it would be to change your keyboard layout completely.
Overall, I make more mistakes as I keep switching between languages, and it doesn't help much that I've never learned proper touch typing. I still glance at my keyboard from time to time.
oh that makes me realize that Dvorak is potentially great for Japanese because so many Japanese characters are 1 consonant + 1 vowel, which are often a right hand -> left hand sequence since all your vowels are on the left home row in Dvorak.
|
I've been using Dvorak for 5 years now (holy shit, I can't believe it's been that long). Funny thing is, I can touch-type on QWERTY as well, because I had to use my high-school's computers for the past 4 years. I absolutely prefer Dvorak over QWERTY in every aspect except for gaming (because most games have hotkeys set up for QWERTY keyboards). In terms of comfort, Dvorak completely outshines QWERTY. I rarely have to move my fingers far from the home row, which I love. As far as typing speed is concerned, I used to type 60 wpm on QWERTY and now can hit 90-100 wpm on Dvorak (oddly enough, I can still hit 60-70 wpm on QWERTY simply because I use it during school). The reason I switched to Dvorak is because my summer going into 8th grade I had pretty much nothing to do, and I talked to people on AIM quite a lot. I thought it would be fun just to try to learn the new layout, mainly because it gave me something to do. So I switched my keyboard config and I got a lot of practice talking to people on AIM, and after a month I could touch-type 40-50 wpm. Over the next few months I became faster and faster until I was totally proficient in Dvorak. One of the best things about learning it is that I was able to un-learn all my bad QWERTY habits. In QWERTY, I was a serious hunt-and-pecker, but since I tried learning Dvorak using a keyboard that was a physical QWERTY keyboard (I reassigned the keys to the Dvorak layout in Control Panel) I couldn't look at the keys even if I wanted to. It FORCED me to learn how to touch-type, a skill which I am really glad that I have now.
So if you can touch-type and do so fast on QWERTY, there is no real need to change other than comfort. But if you have a relatively low wpm and are not able to type without looking, I highly recommend learning Dvorak, as it will improve both.
|
I gave it a try for a while; but having to type so slowly for many days made me want to gouge my eyes out. It was really hard to adjust. The rest of the world uses qwerty and I use others' computers often. It was honestly a big pain going "oh wait, hold on, let me change something.." any time I wanted to use someone's pc. So I stopped using dvorak everywhere, and only used it on my pc. Then my improvement pretty much stalled as a result. I actually dreaded typing on my pc. It sucked. Plus I type really quick and accurate with qwerty, my fingers are really strong so I don't have any issues with that, so there's just no benefit to me personally. And, as I understood at the time, any health and speed benefits are questionable at best. So I switched back.
But hey, if it works for you, great! Good on ya. Just wanted to share my experience
|
I'm happy using QWERTY, Having a constant WPM of ~140 with high accuracy
|
|
|
|