Sunday, April 28, 2019

physical - What are the benefits of non-QWERTY keyboards?


I'm stuck with QWERTY, but have been tempted to try Dvorak. Dvorak advocates claim it's faster.



Are there any studies that compare these two (main) keyboard layouts? Are there other layouts out there that are more productive than these?



Answer



If you are already used to a QWERTY keyboard and you feel that the benefit of changing (which doesn't include speed) will be worth the time taken, as well as not easily being able to use someone else's keyboard, then you should take a look at the Colemak layout.


It has fewer changes from QWERTY than Dvorak, and keeps the position of many of the shortcut keys in particular (cut, copy, paste). In tests, it is as good as Dvorak in terms of finger distance travelled (in English) and moves high frequency keys from your small fingers (which is a weakness of Dvorak).


Overall though, there is little evidence that Dvorak or Colemak is faster than QWERTY (see http://hi-games.net/typing-test/ as an example), but there is evidence that it helps with fatigue, RSI and carpel tunnel syndrome.




Fun fact: It's a common misconception that QWERTY was designed to slow down speed - one held to almost as doctrine by many people. It was designed by Christopher Latham Sholes based on a letter frequency study (by Amos Densmore) and some general trial and error to prevent key sticking. It did this by alternating left and right hands (which is what helped with keys not sticking). As it turns out, his also happens to help with faster typing, and is exactly what most other layouts also do. (For a speed comparison between different layouts, see http://hi-games.net/typing-test/)


In fact, a major study in 1956 conducted by the U.S. General Service Administration found Dvorak to be no faster than QWERTY. This was followed up by other studies into the 1970's all confirming the 1956 study.


No comments:

Post a Comment

technique - How credible is wikipedia?

I understand that this question relates more to wikipedia than it does writing but... If I was going to use wikipedia for a source for a res...