|
On December 08 2009 07:45 Mooga wrote:
For you Colemak users: Are you able to switch between qwerty and colemak easily? How much conditioning does this take, and do you ever mix up the keys while you are typing since they are somewhat similar?
BTW, one reason that I like Dvorak better is because it forces you to alternate hands while typing more than any other layout. Was Colemak designed with this in mind?
I'm a Colemak noob, but able to switch quite easily. QWERTY doesn't go away. A glance at the keyboard and you are reminded by it. Muscle memory is still quite strong.
http://www.colemak.com/Hand_alternation
What's wrong with the Dvorak layout?
The main problem with Dvorak is that it's too difficult and frustrating to learn for existing QWERTY typists because it's so different from QWERTY. Colemak has been designed to be easy to learn.
Placing 'L' on the QWERTY 'P' position causes excessive strain on the right pinky. Colemak doesn't place frequent letters where the pinkies stretch.
'F' is on the QWERTY 'Y' position which is a difficult stretch on normal keyboards.
'I' is very frequent but isn't on the home position.
'R' is very frequent but isn't on the home row.
It is significantly lopsided so that the right hand does too much work.
It's not comfortable to use Ctrl-Z/X/C/V shortcuts with the left hand while holding the mouse with the right hand. Colemak conserves those shortcuts in their QWERTY positions.
Even though the design principles are sound, the implementation isn't optimal because it was designed without the aid of computers.
'L' and 'S' form a frequent same-finger digraph on the right pinky. Same-finger for the pinky is very rare in Colemak. In particular, Unix commands such as 'ls -l' are very uncomfortable to type.
Some punctuation (in particular the curly/square brackets) is less comfortable to type on Dvorak. This affects mainly programmers and advanced Unix users.
|
i saw [Q] Dvorak and i immideaitly thought, " I LOVE NEW WORLD SYMPHONY!" lol yay for being a band nerd
|
On December 08 2009 08:02 Liquid_Turbo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2009 07:45 Mooga wrote:
For you Colemak users: Are you able to switch between qwerty and colemak easily? How much conditioning does this take, and do you ever mix up the keys while you are typing since they are somewhat similar?
BTW, one reason that I like Dvorak better is because it forces you to alternate hands while typing more than any other layout. Was Colemak designed with this in mind? I'm a Colemak noob, but able to switch quite easily. QWERTY doesn't go away. A glance at the keyboard and you are reminded by it. Muscle memory is still quite strong.
When I first switched to Dvorak, I still had qwerty in the back of my mind and I knew that I could revert back at any moment if I wanted to and type at 80 wpm. But after a month or two of relearning the layout and typing exclusively in Dvorak, I realized that I couldn't revert back anymore. So I'm skeptical of your statement because when I was a Dvorak "noob" qwerty didn't go away for me either, but after completely relearning it did go away. Is this is somehow different for Colemak users?
Maybe I just haven't tried very hard to maintain qwerty speed. Muscle memory for qwerty is gone for me after a couple years of using the Dvorak layout. How hard is it to maintain two sets of muscle memory and switch between them? Any other experienced Colemak users have any opinions on how hard it is switch in between the two?
|
On December 08 2009 08:32 Mooga wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2009 08:02 Liquid_Turbo wrote:On December 08 2009 07:45 Mooga wrote:
For you Colemak users: Are you able to switch between qwerty and colemak easily? How much conditioning does this take, and do you ever mix up the keys while you are typing since they are somewhat similar?
BTW, one reason that I like Dvorak better is because it forces you to alternate hands while typing more than any other layout. Was Colemak designed with this in mind? I'm a Colemak noob, but able to switch quite easily. QWERTY doesn't go away. A glance at the keyboard and you are reminded by it. Muscle memory is still quite strong. When I first switched to Dvorak, I still had qwerty in the back of my mind and I knew that I could revert back at any moment if I wanted to and type at 80 wpm. But after a month or two of relearning the layout and typing exclusively in Dvorak, I realized that I couldn't revert back anymore. So I'm skeptical of your statement because when I was a Dvorak "noob" qwerty didn't go away for me either, but after completely relearning it did go away. Is this is somehow different for Colemak users? Maybe I just haven't tried very hard to maintain qwerty speed. Muscle memory for qwerty is gone for me after a couple years of using the Dvorak layout. How hard is it to maintain two sets of muscle memory and switch between them? Any other experienced Colemak users have any opinions on how hard it is switch in between the two?
http://forum.colemak.com/viewforum.php?id=6
|
How much do you guys actually write to make something like this worth the effort?
|
England2669 Posts
On December 05 2009 06:29 MasterOfChaos wrote:
Some month ago switched from qwertz(german) to qwerty(US), and I still haven't really gotten used to it. Especially the special chars...
No idea how good dvorak is, but qwertz(german) sucks.
And usually you can change to layout on school comps since it doesn't require admin privilegues.
A lot of us had annoyances with QWERTZ at the Freiburg Lan. A lot of wondering why we had no Zealots or Zerglings. Twice I wondered why I couldn't build a cycore either. That's just two keys difference in Starcraft. Must be a pain learning a whole new keyboard.
|
Haven't had time to read all the replies, but here's my experience:
Exclusive use helps! When I was learning I kept a printed out copy of the layout next to my keyboard so that I could cheat a bit.
Don't do a hardware keyboad, imho. Best to use software. However, using public computers SUCKS big time if you're expecting Dvorak and you can't swap layouts. I've found that in general, most internet cafes and even academic machines tend to allow it.
I've found a few shortcomings of Dvorak:
Games and many other applications' hotkeys are designed with a QWERTY layout in mind. Sometimes Dvorak makes things kind of awkward here. I personally often will do a switch/switch back motion to hotkey, depending.
If you're a programmer, it can be a little tough getting used to the positioning of all the brackets/braces. I find they're not quite as convenient as with qwerty. Note that there is a layout called "Programmer Dvorak," but I personally haven't looked into it yet. If you use vi or emacs, you may want to remap your keys to match the new layout.
Dvorak's biggest strength is when you're writing ENGLISH characters. That's what it's optimized for.
So, personally, I program in Qwerty and word process/IM in Dvorak.
Hope that helps!
|
Depends how fast you are in QWERTY, I suppose - If you're at already 120-130 wpm in QWERTY, even if you switch to DVORAK you'll maybe get 15-20 wpm faster, a small gain for losing a lot of compatibility with the world (it's like switching from PC to Unix or something). Pushing beyond 150-160 wpm boundary requires more than just a decent finger speed/reflexes and a favourable keyboard layout - and even if you can peak over 160, I find that it's extremely difficult to keep your accuracy at an acceptable level for lengthy typing (more than just a few paragraphs).
If you're thinking you can improve your wpm by a lot more significant margin and you need that speed to become more efficient at whatever, then I guess it'll be worth it.
|
I've decided to give colemak (which is ironically an awkward word to type on this keyboard) a try. It seems a lot more comfortable, even though I'm typing at 8 WPM. E will seriously consider it when I get the time to do so.
Ghur ur mf gj;ukd QWFPGJ rgjif yk ghf cyifmae efjbyaps. Kucf fkcpj;guyk, urk'g ug?
(Have fun with that  )
|
On December 10 2009 12:22 Archaic wrote:
Ghur ur mf gj;ukd QWFPGJ rgjif yk ghf cyifmae efjbyaps. Kucf fkcpj;guyk, urk'g ug?
Haha, I had fun with that. It says:
"This is me typing QWERTY style on the colemak keyboard. Nice encryption, isn't it?"
To decode it, you must set your keyboard to Qwerty, then type the letters as if you were typing in Colemak. I've had a lot of fun with that in IM messages with friends.
|
On December 05 2009 06:06 inkblot wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2009 05:50 Archaic wrote:
QWERTY was originally designed to intentionally slow people down because typing too fast on type writers would jam them.
Myth. QWERTY was designed to allow people to type faster without jamming the typewriter.
Correct, but notice the clause "without jamming the typewriter". That is no longer a issue, and a layout that doesn't concern itself with that could be faster. Whether or not Dvorak is actually faster I can't say, but QWERTY, while not designed to slow you down, was also not designed for maximum speed as it also had to fulfill the requirement of not jamming.
|
well not sure if its faster, but the distance of "finger movement" for Dvorak is a lot less than qwerty. just because the way keys are designed are better suited for modern english. but i mean if you type random string of letters then it makes no difference.
|
On December 06 2009 17:04 Dental Floss wrote:
I don't see any reason to buy a blu-ray player, I mean, none of my friends have blu-ray players, and they wouldn't be able to borrow my movies!
And besides, DVDs are just as good. Are there any tests that show people can even tell the difference???
You can tell the difference.
|
I've just started getting into math, and I decided to see if there was a more reasonable layout for typing LaTeX. I started with Dvorak (I type like this at around 120WPM in qwerty) and it took me a day to get to around 30-40 WPM, but it doesn't seem any better for math input. I found Dvorak programmer layout, but the number layout and the fact that you have to use shift for a number is very difficult to accept.
Are there any programmers/LaTeX users here who have used Dvorak/Colemak (at a fairly high WPM) who know if it's worth it to make the switch? I might just stick with qwerty, or find a way to make my own layout.
|
On December 12 2009 03:30 Vedic wrote:
I've just started getting into math, and I decided to see if there was a more reasonable layout for typing LaTeX. I started with Dvorak (I type like this at around 120WPM in qwerty) and it took me a day to get to around 30-40 WPM, but it doesn't seem any better for math input. I found Dvorak programmer layout, but the number layout and the fact that you have to use shift for a number is very difficult to accept.
Are there any programmers/LaTeX users here who have used Dvorak/Colemak (at a fairly high WPM) who know if it's worth it to make the switch? I might just stick with qwerty, or find a way to make my own layout.
I installed portable Colemak at my school. Though I still typed mostly in QWERTY, I tried it a bit on typeracer, and it was pretty easy to remember. I could remember most of the letters, hit ~12 WPM, most letters without looking at the picture after about... 10-15 minutes. I normally type ~120 on QWERTY.
|
I think the main issue with the QWERTY layout is the location of the letter A.
Lately, I did a typing course to see if I could improve my WPM, which oscillates around 70-90 WPM.
First thing I noticed, I position my hand badly in the keyboard. I almost NEVER use my small finger, and the course advices to press:
-A with your small finger
-S with your ring finger
-D with the middle finer
-F,G with the index finger.
I do:
A = Ring
S, D = Middle
F, G = Index
I dont get tired at all typing with QWERTY, but if I ever start using my small finger I get tired REALLY fast.
|
It's been about a week and I'm getting 30wpm on Colemak. Definitely a higher overall efficiency..
|
On December 12 2009 05:18 Archaic wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2009 03:30 Vedic wrote:
I've just started getting into math, and I decided to see if there was a more reasonable layout for typing LaTeX. I started with Dvorak (I type like this at around 120WPM in qwerty) and it took me a day to get to around 30-40 WPM, but it doesn't seem any better for math input. I found Dvorak programmer layout, but the number layout and the fact that you have to use shift for a number is very difficult to accept.
Are there any programmers/LaTeX users here who have used Dvorak/Colemak (at a fairly high WPM) who know if it's worth it to make the switch? I might just stick with qwerty, or find a way to make my own layout. I installed portable Colemak at my school. Though I still typed mostly in QWERTY, I tried it a bit on typeracer, and it was pretty easy to remember. I could remember most of the letters, hit ~12 WPM, most letters without looking at the picture after about... 10-15 minutes. I normally type ~120 on QWERTY.
I have a feeling you'll be able to beat 120. If you type at that speed in QWERTY, then your limiting factor is pretty much your finger physically moving, and since Colemak reduces that, you'll be able to achieve higher speeds.
|
On December 08 2009 08:32 Mooga wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2009 08:02 Liquid_Turbo wrote:On December 08 2009 07:45 Mooga wrote:
For you Colemak users: Are you able to switch between qwerty and colemak easily? How much conditioning does this take, and do you ever mix up the keys while you are typing since they are somewhat similar?
BTW, one reason that I like Dvorak better is because it forces you to alternate hands while typing more than any other layout. Was Colemak designed with this in mind? I'm a Colemak noob, but able to switch quite easily. QWERTY doesn't go away. A glance at the keyboard and you are reminded by it. Muscle memory is still quite strong. When I first switched to Dvorak, I still had qwerty in the back of my mind and I knew that I could revert back at any moment if I wanted to and type at 80 wpm. But after a month or two of relearning the layout and typing exclusively in Dvorak, I realized that I couldn't revert back anymore. So I'm skeptical of your statement because when I was a Dvorak "noob" qwerty didn't go away for me either, but after completely relearning it did go away. Is this is somehow different for Colemak users? Maybe I just haven't tried very hard to maintain qwerty speed. Muscle memory for qwerty is gone for me after a couple years of using the Dvorak layout. How hard is it to maintain two sets of muscle memory and switch between them? Any other experienced Colemak users have any opinions on how hard it is switch in between the two?
My QWERTY muscle memory is completely gone, and its only been 2 weeks. I didn't expect it to go so quickly. On another note, I'll never look back (unless to play SC of course. That's an entirely new muscle memory!)
|
I thought this was going to be a thread on Anton Dvorak the composer.
Disappointed I am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
