An Argument for Dvorak (2003)

As far as I know there are several keyboard layouts obviously better than QWERTY, because QWERTY was designed to be far from ideal. It was required by old type writes to get slow input.

how easy it is to switch back to Qwerty in those cases when you have to use another computer. How long have you been using Dvorak, and how well do you cope when forced to use Qwerty.

Here is a diagram of the Dvorak layout.

What dvorak doesn't consider is that all fingers are not of the same length. If you keep your pointer finger on the F and J keys, your middle fingers naturally rest between the E and R or I and O, respectively.

Not only that but the pinky is a very versatile finger, in that it does most of the shift work, though I myself never use the left shift key, because it's uncomfortable. Dvorak makes you move your fingers around in different ways that are not natural for your hands to move.

The reason it's harder to push a key on the lower row then the upper is because your entire hand has to move down, rather than up. It has nothing to do with your fingers, and if you do type with your hands in one place at all times I think you're a moron though it would be sort of funny to watch you type.

Finally, I'd like to point out that Qwerty does a better job taking care of a broader range of keys. It's no good to do a few things well and the rest shitty, as Dvorak does.

I'd say that this is something which can be acquired. With practice, you can get all your fingers to the level of strength and/or endurance required to put in a full day of typing without aching. The required muscles for finger movement are not in the hands, after all, but are located in the forearm. Ask any experienced guitarist to wiggle his left fingers and you'll see the muscles flexing - in his arm. Speaking of guitarists, I heard somewhere that the late great Stevie Ray Vaughn could do a full-tone bend on a guitar strung with .13's - with his pinky!

Huh?
We are united, we are fools, and we are America!

Hypothosis: people that learn Dvorak are faster at typing because they typically put more time and energy into typing properly than people who learn QWERTY.

Prediction: if the amount of time and energy put into learning to type with a particular system is the largest predictor of future typing speeds, then different groups of new typists that put equal effort into learning QWERTY and Dvorak will have similar typing rates after equal amounts of training.

Procedure: take two groups of people. Train one to use Dvorak and one to use QWERTY. Have each group train for equal spans of time. Offer equivalent rewards for achieving high speeds of touch typing. Measure typing speed for each group before and after training.

Any of the string quartets.

Absolutely gorgeous.

Actually, come to think of it, I haven't heard any chamber music that hasn't been at least extremely listenable.

. . .because QWERTY is still around and is as strong as ever. If the innovations of the DVORAK layout made it more attractive than QWERTY, DVORAK would long ago have been adopted by every business and keyboard manufacturer. As it is, the increased typing speed conferred by DVORAK is not worth the trouble of learning it and replacing the QWERTY keyboards.

Betamax.

Evolution doesn't take prisoners

Of course Dvorak is better. I'm surprised that you found articles claiming that it wasn't.

The trouble is that it isn't better enough. The world is full of things that are better. Carbon steel knives are better than stainless steel knives. The Kenwood mixer is better than Kitchen Aid. Laser discs are better than DVDs. Beta is better than VHS. The thing is that they're not better enough for most people to care. The mediocre but good enough product generally wins.

The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.--Terry Pratchett

The minimum investment in dvorak is printing out a keyboard layout and simply switching the codepage for you keyboard from qwerty to dvorak.

If you *want* to spend a few bucks on a properly labeled keyboard you may do so as well.

I switched my home computers to dvorak a few years ago and find it *much* easier on my stubby italian fingers... However I find it very difficult to switch back and forth between the different layouts at work ...

Religion is a gateway psychosis. - Dave Foley

You forgot to mention that commonly used key pairs are placed near to each other for easy use. For example, th, nt, sn, qu, and cr.

The biggest single advantage to a Dvorak keyboard layout: No-one, ever, touches my computer when I'm not there. :)

Are there any advantages other than "faster typing?" Does Dvorak lead to less fatigue, not that I get any? One reason I am wondering is because I don't type via the "asdf hjkl" method. I keep my finger off all the keys unless I am pressing them at that moment. It's slower but I like it. I don't use the "hunt and peck" method but I'm still not an orthodox typer.

The layout, not your article :)

While I do spend a certain amount of my keyboard time typing english text (like this post), the vast majority of my keyboard time is spent directly interfacing with my computer.  In my case this mostly amounts to using standard unix commandline stuff (with lots of complex piping and grouping at times) in the bash shell, editing files in "vi", and writing code in perl, C, and C++.  I'm not really sure which of those tasks are more prevalant than the others in terms of keystrokes for me - but in any case I'm quite certain that my average keyboard usage over time doesn't fit the statistical model of english.  While many of the keywords in bash, perl and C are english words, the statistical distribution of the letters is probably markedly different.  On top of that, it's a fair bet that semicolons, parentheses, square and curly backets, etc... figure higher on my list than many of the english letters.

Yd. x.oy ydcbi axrgy gocbi a eakrptaj t.fxrape nafrgy co yday frg jab yfl. jrmln.nyf jpflycj m.ooai.o ,dcjd br!rb. jab gbe.poyabev Xgy o.pcrgonfw yd. xcii.oy lprxn.m co yd. ycm. cy yat.o yr p.n.apbv

Gun fire is the sound of freedom.

The most commonly used letters in the English language are, in order, ETAOIN SHRDLU. I've never really read about DVORAK or seen a keyboard, but now that I look at it, I'm going to have to give it a shot. I'm at about 70WPM with QWERTY, so maybe I can improve that with key change. The home row is what caught me, though. I'd probably save a whole fuckload of time typing if I switched.
--
someday I'll find something to put here.

Now and then I run into a Dvorak user. I am not a trained psychologist, but most of them seem to do it mostly just to appear special. Luckily it is not a highly annoying kind of behavior, it's just a social strategy people employ. It may not even be conscious. Less geeky personalities get a weird hobby for the same effect.

I am a fairly proficient piano player, so perhaps I'm biased when I cannot see what all the fuss with alternating keyboard layouts is all about. It's just hitting a couple of buttons in a co-ordinated effort in sequence. Once you know where the buttons are, it really doesn't matter. Modern computer keyboards do not even strain you 10% of the torture you get from a piano, so unless if you have particularily weak fingers it's really not a problem to do for longer stretches.

The amount of energy that can be saved by a more efficient layout can be neglected. The best you can achieve is that you make it easier to co-ordinate specific arbitrary sequences. However, if you have gained procifient experience typing under any layout, most common sequences become a part of your kinetic memory and really take no effort to recall.

Firstly: Facts 5 and 7 -

5. It is easier if the hands alternate when typing as much as possible.
7. Consonants and vowels are commonly found in pairs.

Surely the logical conclusion to be lept to from these starting points is that it would be better to have half the vowels on one side of the keyboard and half on the other; ditto consonants. As presently constructed, the dvorak layout lends itself to an alternating double-tapping at opposite ends of the keyboard, with your fingers behaving like a spasmodic tap-dancer.

The second point is general. Having used the qwerty layout for getting towards twenty years now, there's a kind of pavlovian barrier preventing me from investigating other layouts. I've spent years training myself on a qwerty layout, to the point where it's possible to fly through reams of text / code as and when it is necessary (those last-minute college essays were a great trainer in this regard). I have concerns about switching layouts because I don't want to have to spend further years getting to the same speed-levels.

Thirdly: Having not been 'classically-taught' (if there is such a thing) I, and I suspect many here, type in a kind of bastardized freehand, whereby all the fingers are used, but not in any consistent fashion, with much of the 'weight' taken up by the thumb, index and middle fingers, with the ring and little finger saved for 'stretch' moves (backspace, shift, enter etc.). The position that my hands tend to adopt is therefore by no means a 'standard' one, and the benefits of the repositioned keys are, I imagine, diminished.

+1 when it gets to voting, anyway. It's exactly this sort of interesting, academic navel-gazing that's been missing around here of late.

yicky yacky
**************
'The actual reasonable Britons are correct, you're being a cock.' - Hide The Hamster.

single handed dvorak

Unless you're a stenographer (do any even exist in today's world?), its extremely unlikely that your typing speed is the bottleneck for communication. Think for a moment about how long you took to compose this article. What fraction of that time did you spend actually hitting keys? 5%? So the point is that as long as you're a touch typist, and don't have to take your eyes and your mind off what you're doing to "search" for your keys (like those OMG LOL WTF AOL 12 yr olds) your keyboard layout doesn't matter. I don't care if Dvorak is more efficient. I don't use it because the marginal gain in efficiency is easily offset by having to learn the new layout and having to switch keyboards constantly (you aren't going to force your school or your employer to change their keyboards are you?)

So you think your vocabulary's good?

Not only because I'm used to it, but because of the way I type. QWERTY has this soul that you can become One with and achieve a Zen in typing.

I thought that by now everyone had realised that all A vs. B arguments are stupid. vi vs. EMACS, Linux vs. Windows, Linux vs. FreeBSD, Linux vs. OpenBSD, FreeBSD vs. OpenBSD, Honda vs. BMW, QWERTY vs. Dvorak, it's all fucking annoying.

It's also well known that all articles matching /^(Hi\. |Hello\. )?I use (\w+).*(for|with|on my computer)?/ are stupid.

Synopsis: I hate you.
--
Any technology which is distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced.

Whenever a study is released for or against the Dvorak layout, both sides declare it to be flawed. The Fable of the Keys shoots down every major Dvorak study before it. They state the Navy study may not have chosen typists randomly, and point to Dvorak's involvement in the study.

The only major study against Dvorak, by Dr. Earl Strong, has been bashed heavily as well. Typists were put through an unusually heavy training course, and claims that all the experimental data was destroyed shortly after.

Even worse, there is very little interest in studying typing. You can pretty much count the number of studies on one hand, and all that I know of have been declared flawed by one side or the other.

That is why I don't cite many studies.

HJ Hornbeck

And that point would be, "How do you convert a billion QWERTY devices and a billion QWERTY users to Dvorak keyboards?"

I've been a Dvorak user for about 2 and a half years now. I think the greatest improvement that Dvorak gives is not speed, as commonly claimed. Dvorak, for me, is so great because of the ergonomic benefits. After a day of work, going home to the computer and the web sites/IRC I liked was almost tedious because of the dull pain in my wrists. With Dvorak, I can pretty much type all day and not feel any problems.

As for learning Dvorak, it was a little more difficult for me than some sites claim. At first, I tried switching back and forth, but found that this caused me to basically use QWERTY 99% of the time. After typing a few words in Dvorak, I would get frustrated, hit the hotkey and go on my way. What finally forced me to be able to switch was turning off the hotkey, switching my key caps, and forcing myself to use Dvorak. It took 2-3 months to regain a speed which was comparable to my QWERTY speed. In fact, I can still type faster with QWERTY than Dvorak (~85 vs. ~70).

qwertyuiopasdfhjkl;zxcvnm,./
This will get attached to your comments. Sigs are typically used for quotations or links.

We'd have much less population, and those left would be on Mars in a few years.
--Self.

I've always wondered about this U and I thing. What possessed the designer to put them in the wrong places?!!?

-- fae: but an atom in the great mass of humanity

this article is a few decades too late to incite any meaninful discussion for a change, -1

********************************

the problem is that the QWERTY design (I'm sure that can't be the proper name for the layout) has such widespread, near-universal acceptance in english text keyboards, and people have invested such time and effort in training to touch-type on QWERTY keyboards, that to ask them to change over to Dvorak would be to expect human nature to suspend itself for your pleasure. Even if you could concretely promise people faster typing after an equivalent time spent training on Dvorak, they will mostly pay attention to the fact that they will have to spend time retraining, and during that time, their typing speed will suffer.

Finally, the most important drawback is business. Simply put, business is conservative by its very nature, and most people use their touch-typing skills to perform their jobs (like, say, a secretary or data entry tech). These people may very well buy Dvorak keyboards as a home-use hobby - but do you seriously imagine they would be able to convince their employers to suddenly switch all (or even some of) their keyboards to Dvorak, and ask their employees to retrain, with the added drawback of a much smaller resume pool of qualified Dvorak typists available?

If Dvorak is better, then in time it will supplant QWERTY. But I don't expect it to do so within my lifetime.

-Kasreyn

"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."
R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.

...who only speak one language: English. Why should I care about an English-optimized keyboard if I regularly type in several other languages?

Even the reasonable-sounding statements here can become sketchy when looked in a proper linguistic perspective. E.g.: "Consonants and vowels are commonly found in pairs." There is a sense in which this is absolutely true--it's an approximation at a statement of a linguistic universal of syllable structure. The problem is that what counts as a "vowel" and what counts as a "consonant" in each language[*] is variable from one to the next; the Dvorak layout has "n" as a consonant, but in many languages nasal stops can be syllable nuclei. Designing a single keyboard for all languages is probably impossible. [*] Ok, the articulatory features by which the notions "vowel" and "consonant" are actually defined belies this. I'm using the term "vowel" loosely to mean a segment that can be a syllable nucleus, and "consonant" for the opposite.

--em

This is an article about an 80-year-old keyboard layout... Is there really that much discussion here?

I've gotten so used to C-this-C-that, that it would become nearly impossible for me to become productive at the same level with the Dvorak layout. Only if they would have chosen to go Dvorak a long time ago...

I could at one point use either keyboard, and can probably still type (slowly) on a Dvorak layout. However, I didn't use the same computer all the time (occasionally having to type something into someone else's computer for them), so I needed to keep my QWERTY skills. In the end, it wasn't worth the effort to be proficient in both.

Besides, I do a lot of coding, so my typing is inherently slowed by all the punctuation I'm typing.

Unless you learned to type on Dvorak, the sheer amount of time needed to learn another layout far offsets the very slight gains you might make in speed and ergonomics. It's purely a matter of personal preference.

And, for people like me, I already type plenty fast enough. If I'm not distracted, I type at roughly 95wpm. This isn't a guess. I've clocked it with typing programs. If I push myself, I can break 100.

Now, here's the catch: I do nearly all my typing with my two index fingers. I only use my other fingers for keys such as the backspace, backslash, enter, tilde, and modifier keys (right fourth finger for backspace/backslash/enter, right fourth for ~, left pinky or thumb for modifiers). Sometimes I use my left thumb to hit the space bar, but more often than not, I use my right index finger. However, I do not look at the keyboard when typing.

I do this because I have completely memorised the QWERTY layout, over my years of typing. I am almost 19, and I can estimate that I have been using computers regularly since I was three years old.

I can type no other way. Other keyboard layouts, even minor ones, throw my typing off badly. I cannot use keyboards with reverse-L-shaped enter keys. ``Ergonomic'' keyboards are anything but. Multimedia keyboards are useless. CompUSA has keyboards with all kinds of screwy layouts (usually involving the arrow keys and the ins/del/home/end/pgup/pgdn block) I'm perfectly happy with my perfectly standard IBM Active Response keyboard.

The only nonstandard keyboards I can use are laptop keyboards, and that's only because I've used them frequently over the years. And the fact that they're completely flat, which aids my typing. For me, flatness is better. I always pull back the support tabs on any keyboard I use, and IMO, the perfect keyboard would have a standard 104-key layout (QWERTY, of course) and be completely flat (like a laptop keyboard). AFAIK, that doesn't exist, but I can dream.

Switching to Dvorak would be nearly impossible for me. And even if I do learn the layout, it would be years before I could even come close to being as fast as I am now.

Why does dvorak attract such kooks? Beats me. Perhaps because it attracts people who are naturally anti-establishment and convinced that They Know Better.

Regardless, any mindless dvorak advocate would probably be well served by having a read of The Fable of the Keys, a timeless demolition of the arguments dvorak fanboys endlessly spew - namely, the faster, better, easier arguments. In fact, in the only studies not funded or performed by acolytes with commercial interests in the success of dvorak, qwerty comes out ahead. The claims that Dvorak is faster seem to go back to studies performed by Dvorak himself - a man with a direct interest in the success of dvorak. Further, those studies have deep methodological flaws - they would compare professional typists with 3 weeks training on a dvorak keyboard and a high grade with raw high school students who had never seen a keyboard before. Nasty!

Another myth of the dvorak-lovers is that qwerty is "designed to be slow" because the typewriters of the day could not handle great speeds. What the origin of this myth is, I don't know, but the real fact is that in the late 19th century there was enormous competition between typewriter firms, each with their own layout. Public competitions were frequently held, each with a champ typing at a keyboard with a particular layout, where the manufacturers would show off the speed of their layout. It was this highly Darwinian environment that spawned QWERTY - it was genuinely the fastest layout found for typing on, under harsh market conditions!

Qwerty is an excellent keyboard layout for speed and ergonomics. Ergonomic studies have shown no clear advantage to dvorak. In qwerty, the most pressed keys are located above and below the central row. In short, ergonomicists contend that:

For optimal typing speed. keyboards should be designed so that:

A. The loads on the right and left hands are equalized.

B. The load on the home (middle) row is maximized.

C. The frequency of alternating hand sequences is maximized and the frequency of same-finger typing is minimized.

The reason for C is that during a keystroke, the idle hand is preparing for its next keystroke. Dvorak does fairly well at A and B, but shittily at C, while qwerty does well at A and C but reasonably at B. There is no clear advantage for dvorak at all ergonomically, if anything, quite the reverse.

There exist no studies showing dvorak to be superior ergonomically or in terms of raw speed, in fact, the advantage lies with qwerty for both. Dvorak has the additional difficulty of being, lets face it, utterly non-standard. The only people who like dvorak are the aforementioned anti-establishment types who are impressively gullible and wont to think they know better than everybody else because they take some stupid decision on the "rational" basis that "oh, all the most commonly pressed keys are on the home row, obviously it is better" and because they think themselves smarter than anyone they won't bother to look into their own prejudices and idiiocy. Yes that's right, I'm talking about g**ks, who are precisely the constituency fond of dvorak. Nobody else is.

--
Improvement makes strait roads, but the crooked roads without Improvement, are roads of Genius.

Another argument is that there are many people who don't use the 'correct' method of typing. I've been typing since I was about 6 (now 19, first was on an Apple II) and I developed my own method of typing.
It involves mostly my thumb, index and middle finger, though occasionally the ring finger will jump in to assist. Pinky is used for shifts/ctrl's only. My left hand seems to dominate my typing.

are not much worse than dvorak in terms of speed for most users after a period of adjustment...

let me see, where's the link...

well, here's what i was thinking of. it's from some wiki somewhere. here you are:

Donald Norman and David Rumelhart tested a number of alphabetically-organised keyboards and a random keyboard as well as the Sholes (QWERTY) and the Dvorak. They found that alphabetic keyboards were between 2 and 9% slower than Sholes, and Dvorak maybe 5% faster. They concluded that it is possible to make a bad layout, and Sholes is better than some of the others they tested. They argue that for optimal typing speed,

The loads on the right and left hands are equalised.
The load on the home (middle) row is maximised
The frequency of alternating hand sequences is maximised and the frequency of same finger typing is minimised.

The Dvorak keyboard does a good job [...], especially on 1 and 2; 67% of the typing is done on the home row and the left-right hand balance is 47-53%. Sholes fails on 1 and 2 (most typing is done on the top row and the hand balance is 57-43%) but the policy to put successively typed keys as far apart as possible favours factor 3, leading to relatively rapid typing.

For companies to re-equip the environment with Dvorak keyboards, then re-train all their users, does not therefore make much economic sense. The outlay would be many hours of lost work and the cost of re-labelling the keyboards or purchasing new ones, then reconfiguring the computer so the behaviour actually follows the legends. A small speed advantage, between 2 and 6%, is not worth it.

_____ intellectual tiddlywinks

I have written vast mounds of long-forgotten software over the decades. My mother is a writer, and my wife is a translator. Ask any of us about productivity, and I promise that none of us will shake our heads in sadness and say "if only my keyboard was 4% faster, yes if only it had been 4% faster"...

When they start an official Olympic Competition for speed typing I'll take Dvorak seriously, but in real-life use speed is absolutely irrelevant: it's more important that the qwerty keyboard has become a ubiquitous, generic, input device that anybody can stumble onto and use without thinking.

I think you people are missing the point. For many Dvorak typers, it's not about speed. It's about alleviating pain. My wrists used to hurt all the time. By the end of the day, they'd be really sore. I'd always have to have my wife massage them. After switching to Dvorak, the problem has completely gone away. I'm only 27, so the fact that my wrists were hurting at the end of the day, every day, really worried me. With RSI at 27, what would my wrists have been like when I turned 50 if I had stuck with Qwerty? I didn't even want to think about it, so I sought a solution. If your wrists hurt at the end of the day, and proper ergonomics don't fix it, perhaps you should give Dvorak a try.

I hasve beenmn sstruggling wiuth my QQWETRY keyboiard lately, amnd hjave beenm lookjking for alternatfives.

is the Jank? Keyboard.

The normal piano layout is the way it is because it was originally intended as a compositional aid, not an instrument. You play it in the key of C and that's that. Only later did it start getting used as an actual performing instrument.

Transposing to other keys is ridiculous; you essentially have to re-learn how to play a scale twelve times over. With the Jank?, you need only learn one scale; the others are dont by simply shifting your hand position.

In addition, because of the added depth dimension your hand has a much greater reach, and harmonic progressions lay themselves out in a natural geometric fashion.

The Jank? keyboard has vast advantages over the regular layout, yet after 150 years it has still made little headway because despite its serious disadvantages, the regular keyboard has the overwhelming advantage of being ubiquitous. That's the stupid keyboard that I learned to play on, because that's what my piano teacher learned to play on, and that's the kind of piano we owned and he owned.

I have tried using Dvorak, but I couldn't stick with it because it is non standard. But I knew it was better the first time I type the wrod the, because the is entirely on the home row, and it was fast to type, even after only a short time. It's very easy to just twitch your finger when they're already on the right buttons.

On QWERTY, from the home row, you can type things like:
had a sad dad
dads a fag; lads
hall ass; lass

And see how useful the semicolon is?
Now under Dvorak, from the home row (aeioudhtns):
the hound is not a sane dane
i had not seen it then
soon this stain is no dot
a sound to the south
ten tons hidden in the undies

Now to recap: the short common words you can type easily with QWERTY:
a as ass all had has ha ad

With dvorak:(aeioudhtns)
a I as is it in on an as all had has the then than at oh us ...

I don't touch type. I do not sit according to established ergonomic practice - frequently (on the train, airport and so on), I cannot even sit straight ahed of the machine. Apart from the letter keys, I am a very frequent user of the touchpad and various punctuation and control-key combinations. Oh, and whatever letter frequency scheme you have is wrong for me, as I write in Swedish as well, which has different letter frequencies from those you quote, as well as three letters that do not exist on English keyboards.

So, Dvorak has the wrong key layout, missing letters, and will have a suboptimal layout even without the language factor as it assumes a mode of use that I do not - and frequently could not - utilize.

I've wanted to learn DVORAK for a while, but the main problem has been how to learn the layout. I don't want to buy a keyboard, or even switch layouts temporarily. What I'd like is an application that:

• is free, since I'm not interested enough to fork out $$$
• runs on Linux or OS X (or ideally both)
• contains good lessons that
  • introduce the home row keys
  • let you practice the keys
  • progressively introduce more keys
• Doesn't require remapping the keyboard, it just interprets QWERTY keystrokes as their DVORAK equivalents (so I can flip between applications without having to keep flipping keyboards)

Now that's a pretty tall order, I know, but I have found one program that almost does what I want. Typist, a free Java application / applet lets me do most of this. The one area I found was weak was the lessons, but from what I could tell they were customizable. Strangely, the author is apparently an SCO employee. Who knew they actually did useful things too?

Anybody else have any good DVORAK learning tools or tips?

It is likely lost by the time it will take to replace your dvorak keyboard.

I agree that if the only place you work is at home, or on one keyboard and your job is data entry a Dvorak might have advantages with its 4-6% speed increase.

But lets face it, as I look around my office, there is NO dvorak keyboards around. In all the times I've gone to a customer, library, friends house or Kinkos I've never seen a Dvorak. I've never seen a Dvorak laptop (you can't readily replace the keys on that).  Basically, if you want to learn ONE keyboard layout, so that you can work most optimal in most programming jobs, you're best to learn qwerty.

As for ergonomic reasons, it is completly invalid to say that people with RSI who switched to dvorak can credit all their success to the layout. Most likely, you self-taught yourself qwerty, and picked up a tonne of bad habits. By FORCING yourself to learn a new layout, and learn it properly, you are better able avoid your old bad habits.

Give accents like ? and ? their own darn keys.

The Maltron layout is better anyway. But layout is not my problem, my problem is that almost every keyboard is arranged like a typwriter, not in vertical rows.
--
Can you know that you are omniscient?

Check at how much better dvorak crapflooding is:

DVORAK

henasuhe tuashecurshacduiatdiesauhtehautnbeihtha eudean uthea udehaiehuthihduasicued idegiasheoutda,iha-hetudsiahte-ntuah tjaid ensahut dsuahedahtedus aednsuaehuditnsehatunsedaichauetahut edus ehotaude asdiheushac.u abueha uidshpdsatheadisade niatheuhadi-atnhue di -aeheutda-ithtat eaudahtt ne d uantohitade uh-antd eusthnaedideou heodsuaheyacgdkol aedsihgsca yidktenshihudtoahesaudehidsre ueadleasrnhisadintahu ehisbn-oashduaoi n-thaeus hdisadei hsdeusc,.divmjbkathsid a-hetuasoed iatoad-inc.ahtunet uatedi-/ra,ndtsoenahtiesant uda-hiteasdi-aehtuheanistd anuhetid -atnuheadi nsahteait-eoatuheasnthoseanid snhtsnthoensthtnshaoeuntashoaeuontashuaoeueoau hnsoahoesuhsoaheunshtn sheuhoeadshtnhsathdeaonshut easoditn-ehtaud.rac,htuwbmu teiad/rcehuatnh hid/-arnteah jadoic/eahutnseah idsatuheasridtadxune-ahwth eiadei-;ntoeuahr,c.huatnh enshtnseh aitesa udesatuhsn

QWERTY

djs;aflk dfal;jdk ;ajkghl ;asjf;lsahg ;lkjaf; ldkhflk;ajd kf;hdkl;gjksl;fhkgaj;kljf; ldjsahglkjdafl;k da;kj fllg;kjsfo;weijfack; vuhgoaiwje khagkldaj'k;ohgiuo;jkaf dahg;oieja;kldhf jk;ajgko;dajfi dhag;kjdaf;jdha;kgja;fjd akjhgdf;akjfeo;waihvcmka ng;oaiejao;iejf dgh48hfdsfjl;adi fa;wgh;sajfe;ioahg;lksajfdlk ahgioawejgkd ahgjk; asfhdio;agh ds;afjklsd; aghjkodf;sajkfld;ajgkhdf;fajdkl;ahgio;ejzkjfad;l gjkl;hdf;lskagj; ldshdflksja gh;dlsajfdklsagh lskajfdl;kgajhsdfagfldjafdkjfgdhga;kjfkdjgkjhzfo;iwaheg;jdhfdshagoijdo;i fjdoa eodhaga;kejf odiahgeroajd;kahgoidhf k sah;d shag;h fd;h gkjahfd ;sahghlsaf kdj;safhdalkfhdaig;jh fliahdf

cmon, now you tell me which crapflooding os more plseant to view... that dvorak shit's just superior!

--------
The fuck happened to Nigga?

This whole QWERTY vs Dvo?ák is amuzing, but they're meant for english keyboards. Granted, i'm using a slightly modified qwerty.

Why do people call it DVORAK? C'mon, is PYFGCR that hard to pronounce? :)

I was just playing around with grep, looking for words that can be typed with only one hand, in both Dvorak and QWERTY. These break the left/right hand alternation that allows efficient typing, so these words should be kept to a minimum. Without further ado:

[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ wc /usr/share/dict/words
45425 45425 409286 /usr/share/dict/words
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[asdfgqwertzxcvb]+$' /usr/share/dict/words | wc
1302 1302 8941
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[yuiopjklnm]+$' /usr/share/dict/words | wc
112 112 580
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[pqkjxyaoeui]+$' /usr/share/dict/words | wc
53 53 247
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[fgcrlhtnsbmwvz]+$' /usr/share/dict/words | wc
0 0 0
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[pqkjxyaoeui]{6,}$' /usr/share/dict/words
opaque
upkeep
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$ egrep '^[asdfgqwertzxcvb]{6,}$' /usr/share/dict/words | wc
748 748 5984
[hjhornbeck@localhost hjhornbeck]$

HJ Hornbeck

Never mind the layout of the keys, why not think about the layout of the keyboard itself? Ever since I'm using a mouse I've been wondering where to put it. If I'm right behind the keyboard (so my centerline is right between 'B' and 'N') the numeric keypad sticks out to the right, to such an extent that putting the mouse next to that results in major neckpain. But moving the whole KB a couple of inches to the left (to make room for the mouse) makes typing very unpleasant. How do you cope with this, and why have I still not bought a keyboard sans numeric part...

besides the fact that it's better to alternate hands (in other words, if we're talking about optimization functions, there should be a penalty for using the same hand twice in a row), an even worse thing to have to do is to use the same finger to type two different letters in a row (e.g. "ed" or "un" in QWERTY). The worst is to have to go from the bottom row to the top (or vice-versa).

I switched a few years ago.  After about a year, I switched back.  I never got speedier, never noticed and better comfort, and things like programming and using EMACS were more difficult.  Plus I still had to use qwerty when going to the computer lab or use someone else's computer.  About the only advantage was the thrill of watching someone as they sat down to my keyboard, looked at the keys, and realized that their entire world had crumbled beneath them.  I only wish I hadn't switched the keys, so I could see the looks on their faces as they typed gibberish on the screen.

heard about it and then figured that the most common buttons I press are probably:
space
shift
tab
backspace
delete
control
open paren
close paren
equals
open curly
close curly
period
semi-colon
colon

I don't think dvorak will help.

I use the Dvorak layout, primarily because it reduces the amount my hands and fingers move. I read somewhere that Dvorak reduces finger movement by a factor of 20 (sorry, can't find the source). In fact, many people, not knowing about my use of Dvorak, ask how my hands move so little while typing. There seem to be lots of inconclusive typing speed comparison studies; how about some studies on hand movement instead?

By the way, are there any Dvorak keyboards sold? Just swapping the keys doesn't work because (1) on many keyboards, the keys on each row are slightly differently inclined (2) the "home" keys, with the little nubs on them, can't be swapped.

Learn to touch-type. It'll make an amazing difference. It's easy to do: (1) print your chosen layout (Dvorak or QWERTY) on a piece of paper, and hang it at eye level near your monitor (2) paste little blank pieces of paper on each key, to get out of the habit of looking at the keys (3) optional, but recommended, learn the typical finger placements, which are mostly a matter of common sense. - Rujith.

One area of "keyboard layout" I havent seen commented on is the physical design of a keyboard, beyond the location of letters and so on ... I'm referring to the difference of the, what I call, "linear" layout versus "natural" (or split) layout. My first exposure to typing text was the use of a teletype machine during my four-year stint in the Navy as a Radioman (we also used computer/ keyboards) to compose messages). After leaving the Navy, my next immediate typing exposure was to a computer keyboard as a programmer (to this day, although I'm more of a consultant now). I compose a lot of documents (beyond writing code) during my daily activities and I've also written a couple of [computer] books - I spend a LOT of time in front of the keyboard. I've tried the Dvorak keyboard and what I find as a negative is the difficulty in switching layouts when at a client's office or in the lab. Carrying around a Dvorak keyboard would be a nuisance at best. Although I think the Dvorak layout is superior, what I find a better alternative to the standard QWERTY keyboard is the "natural" (or split) keyboard. The MOST UNCOMFORTABLE hand position is to have to force your hands to twist inward to compensate for a linear layout (all keys on the same linear plane). Do this: sit at your keyboard and place your hands on the home-row keys. Now, examine the angle of your arms [from the elbow] and your hands. Notice how your hands must turn inward (at the wrist) so that your digits can rest on the home-row keys. A more "natural" solution is to use a split keyboard, which allows your hands/digits to rest on the keys, without your hands having to twist to rest on the keys. Michael J. Tobler

The New World Symphony makes me think of bread.
People say that anal sex is unhealthy. Well it cured my hiccups.

DHIATENSOR is the obviously superior keyboard layout.

---
"You don't even have to drink it. You just rub it on your hips and it eats its way through to your liver."

I switched to Dvorak this summer. It always hurt for me to type at my keyboard for an extended period of time. I heard that Dvorak was better, so I gave it a try. I'm never going back. I type at about the same speed as I did before, but it is much more comfortable and it doesn't hurt anymore.

As for learning the new layout, I was surprised at how little time it took. I printed out a picture of the layout and taped it to the top of my screen. After about a month, I was as good on Dvorak as Qwerty.

--
-- American Weblog in London

Firstly, I'm a Dvorak typist. Like many of you, I'm a bit of a 'net wh0r', ie IRC, ICQ, & forum windows open for a large portion of my computer time, ie I do a lot of conversational typing. While I use Linux at home, I use windows computers thoughout the day at college. Anyway;

*) Coding
Dvorak is good for coding. I do Java programming regularly.
*) Cost
I havn't payed a damn thing for Dvorak- Those who think you need a new keyboard need to go get a clue. Most new Dvorak'ists end up moving the keys around on their existing keyboard, and thats fine (/me hugs his Model M :))
*) Adjusting
Just like learning anything major all over again, it takes time. For the first 2 weeks, I needed to tell my colleagues not to expect an immediate reply to their messages so they didn't think I went idle. You'll get over it. Like many of you, I grew up with qwerty, and had habits to get rid of. But I got over them. Don't be a pussy :)
*) Using qwerty
Qwerty is (unfortuanatelly, many would say) here to stay. I do a reasonable bit of tech support, and usually I don't have a choice whether I use qwerty or not. But heres the thing- Most keyboards are in qwerty. When typing in qwerty, I look at the keyboard, when typing in Dvorak, I generally touchtype (or look when I need an infrequently used character).
*) Availability
Dvorak should be supported in most new OS's, although it seems more % of Linux users use Dvorak than windows users. Dvorak in Linux isn't a problem- 1 line of console code changes it. In windows it easy as well- its in regional settings, so if you can change between 'English (US)' and 'English (your_country_here)', you'll be right. I have Dvorak input settings on my windows profile at college, and it 'follows me around'.

Things that suck-

*) Old windows games
Old windows games use qwerty. When it says 'press f to continue', you need to press 'u' on the Dvorak keyboard. Apart from old games, most games thesedays adjust the controls for the keyboard. Battlefield: 1942, for instance. 'wasd'=',aoe'.
*) Qwerty-orientated programs
Vi, for instance. I was an enthusiastic vim'er in qwerty, and while I can still use it, I ended up moving to Emacs (glad I did though :)), because 'hjkl' got annoying. Although C-x is harder to 'hit' in Emacs (theres probably a fix somewhere), I find Dvorak works well with Emacs' keys (C-f & C-b are 'opposites'- take a look).

If you have 1 or 2 weeks to spare, consider changing to Dvorak. If you just turn on your computer soley to play CS or whatever, then don't bother. But if you do a lot of typing through the day or want a better keyboard, seriously consider it. I'm glad I changed.

-----== This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time.

Most people use the "Hunt and Peck" method when they type. They search for the key they want to press, then peck at it with the index/middle finger of one hand.

Some would argue that Dvorak wouldn't do well here, since it was designed for touch typing. I disagree.

Most of your time in the Hunt and Peck method is spent hunting. You can minimize this by trying to memorize the keyboard layout, but if you've managed that you are probably better served by touch typing.

So instead, it would be handy if there was a pattern to the keyboard layout. Anything that made it easier to find a key would reduce hunting, and speed your typing up.

QWERTY places about half your keypresses on the top row, so if you look there first you'll be more likely to find the key than on any other row. That is about as far as you could go, though.

Dvorak, in comparison, places almost three-quarters of all keypresses on the home row; if you looked there first, you'd be more likely to find the right key than QWERTY's top row. In addition, if the key you're looking for is a vowel, you can just search the left of the home row; one of those five keys will be right over 90% of the time.

That's the theory, anyway. In practise, you need to look at the keyboard for Hunt and Peck. Since your keyboard is almost certainly laid out as per QWERTY, you couldn't use Dvorak. You need to physically switch your keys around, use felts or stickers, or buy a Dvorak keyboard to make use of Dvorak.

HJ Hornbeck

Yeah, frequency use of letters hasn't changed much. but I setup a keylogger once to find out exactly which keys I pressed the most and my results were interested. Basically, upon looking at the log the most common keypresses were BY FAR the backspace key and the arrow keys.
1: OPERATION: HAMMERTIME!
2: A website affiliate program that doesn't suck!

is quite like dvorak - most common wovels are the right half of the middle row, most common consonants are left halves of top and middle row.

I love turning my choice to change to Dvorak into a melodramatic battle against the bonds of conservatism, so if I start sounding too fervent, remember that it is probably in a joking manner.

Anyway, I don't see a reason not to switch to Dvorak, provided one has the time to learn it and is typing in English.  I have converted, and I type much faster (not a simple 4-6% difference... more like 10%), am a much more skilled touch-typer, and can type for hours on end without experiencing any sort of cramping.  

Compatibility is an issue for a Dvorak user, but I can easily switch between the two layouts if it is necessary, I can still type just about as fast as I could in Qwerty when it was my primary.  Now, though, when I use Qwerty, I may type the same speed but my hands feel significantly more tense after I have been using it for a while.  Being that I use my computer with great frequency, this kind of tension can only be destructive.

With all the benefits that Dvorak provides, the people that don't switch can only be labeled as conservative, change-resistant, and unwilling to progress when given the opportunity to do so with minimal effort.  But, that is the kind of person one finds all too often in the English-speaking world...

that in most conversations/arguments about keyboard layout, the physical layout of the keys to begin with is rarely/never brought up. QWERTY/Dvorak/etc are basically different key mappings for the same dime-a-dozen standard 101-110 key keyboards we're all used to.

There are several things that always struck me as odd about the standard keyboard:

1) Why are the keys on each row of a standard keyboard slightly offset from the other? While a mere small feat for human dexterity, this constant side-to-side motion can be, as we now know, disastrous for anyone who spends their life typing. Six million years in primate evolution has left us with hands that are, for the most part, designed for simply grasping things. The fingers on the human hand have a natural tendency to migrate towards eachother as the hand is closed. This is partially due to the shifting of the metacarpals (the long bones in your hand between the carpus (wrist), and the phalanges (fingers)). The fact that your fingers spread out when your hand is open and come together when your hand is closed is natural because of this. If one makes these motions when the metacarpals do not shift, it ceases to be a natural motion. Almost anyone who has an open hand and repeatedly spreads their fingers and brings them back together again can feel that this is NOT entirely natural. Just because you are capable of a motion, does not make it natural. I don't know how this got overlooked for so long.

2) I understand that most keyboards are flat for one simple reason, production costs. Though some keyboards like the Microsoft split and contoured keyboard attempt to adress the issue, they still neglect the fact that your fingers are _not_ the same length. For the average person, if they hold their fingers out straight, the profile slightly resembles a bell curve. When you naturally coil your fingers downward as if to type, this profile remains.

3) The dexterity of the human thumb is grossly underestimated. As any piano player might know, the thumb is a valueable resource. Relegating the thumb to space-bar duty seems like a waste of resources, particularly since both thumbs are assigned the same task.

4) Various brackets, meta-keys, arrow keys, and the like are ignored as if not important. I understand that, brackets, ticks, tocks, and slashes aren't important to most people, but even the most basic of computer users still need to access arrow keys, pg up/down, home/end, delete, and most importantly backspace (heh).

In the end, all of these short-comings in the standard keyboard are no big deal for the average computer user. But for those of use who spend most hours of the day in front of the computer, and particularly for those of us who code, these seem like major oversights.

About 3 years ago I was introduced to a line of keyboards made by a company called Kinesis (kinesis.com or specifically http://www.kinesis-ergo.com/advantage.htm). They attempt to address all of the issues I have been wondering about for years and years. Though a pretty penny, I found it to be a great investment. It has paid off countless times over in increased productivity and decreased strain. The models which are listed in the link I have provided are particuarly expensive, I purchased "The Essential" for about half the price several years back. The keys are laid out in a linear fashion so you fingers go up and down, not up and slightly left/right each time. The keys follow a concave surface which closely mimics the natural shape of your curled hand. And the most commonly used control keys are easily accessed by your thumbs.

I've always been a quick learner in regards to "muscle memory", particularly concerning my fingers (A month after learning qwerty at 13 I could easily hit 100-130wpm, I can "remember" a piano piece after playing it only once or twice). I'm not sure how/if that plays into my success using this form of keyboard.

It took me a good week of fumbling around to get the hang of it, and in the end it ended up not being truly optimal for a programmer. However, it is fully re-programmable so you can change around any key maps you don't agree with. After a bit of experimenting I truly love this keyboard. No more cold stiff hands.

Of course, I don't mean to say these are for everyone... after all, the darn things are very pricey for keyboards.

Yes, we all know that Dvorak is much more efficient. It's born out of efficiency and research, as shown in the article. BUT, there are two main reasons why it will never become prevalent:

• The switching costs associated with switching to the Dvorak layout are too huge
• A huge network of users are already locked in to the QWERTY layout

A company would never train their typists in the Dvorak keyboard. No matter how much you argue the efficiencies of the layout, the switch is just not worth it. For each person that is a QWERTY user, the stronger and more standard the QWERTY layout is. This is somewhat like the network effect seen with goods and services. It's already too late, we are locked in to the QWERTY system as a society just as much as we are locked into the VHS standard for tapes (as opposed to the failed Beta).

I don't see how anyone could doubt Dvorak's amazing grooviness. I'm not sure where the notion came that qwerty is here to stay, because a shift in standards could actually be applied fairly quickly, if many people are willing to take the initiative. I don't know enough about business and economics to continue expanding upon the idea, though. I think one would have to start with keyboard manufacturers, get them to start selling dvorak models at the same price (they don't cost any more to make...) and then get computer manufacturers to sell systems with the option of dvorak keyboard, making it well-known that dvorak is much less... of a health hazard.
?This is Mr. Yoshida on your favorite vegetables.?

One thing seems to be lacking from your post;
Why QWERTY? How did it come into existance?
If I recall correctly, the QWERTY keyboard was originally designed for typewriters.
The layout has been chosen to have the least chance of a collision (remember, these things used the be pure mechanical).

---
Life is hard...but so is the wall *ouch*

Learning Dvorak in the beginning was naturally quite painful and I felt like a cripple especially since my QWERTY speed was quite fast (90-100 wpm).

Interestingly, once you've mastered Dvorak, retraining back to QWERTY is not that difficult and like the other people I know who have tried, switching between the two even in the middle of typing is easy.

Dvorak is indeed noticeably less stressful on the fingers (part of the reason I considered it imperative to switch was I was experiencing some wristaches).  However, I've noticed that this mostly applies only when typing out english sentences.  When coding or when working on a command line, dvorak seems to yield little benefit over QWERTY and in fact makes certain things confusing (like when using vi).  Your fingers can eventually learn the dvorak mapping for these keys but I find that it offers little benefit in these situations.

So now I generally switch to Dvorak only when typing stuff like email and forum replies and use QWERTY when doing technical stuff.

The principle advantage of the Dvorak is number 1 on hjhornbeck's list, the most common letters rest on the home keys. The problem is that learning Dvorak puts one in such deep water. I have corresponded with three former Dvorak users who loved the layout but gave it up in frustration, it is afterall a qwerty world out there. On a qwerty layout about 26% of text is typed from the home keys, for a Dvorak it is almost 60%. Simply swapping etni with dfjk would allow more than 55% of text to be typed without lifting a finger. After a couple of weeks and perhaps a couple thousand words, I have found this keyboard modification to be comfortable and fast. The msklc (keyboard layout creator) and net.framework are available from microsoft. A far easier approach is to use KeyTweak, which is available from PC magazines website as well as other freeware providers.