And the goal with switching to DVORAK would be to get faster, and if it is more ergonomic as well, that's just a plus :)Switching to Dvorak layout is unlikely to make you super dramatically faster than your current speed, unless you put incredible amounts of practice in, in which case you might get up to 20-30% faster. Indeed, for the first several months, you’ll be slower (initially a lot slower).
Layout | hand alternation | same finger movements | left hand | right hand | in/out roll | home row | adjacent outer finger pairs | adjacent middle/index finger |
QWERTY | 52.7% | 6.8% | 56.9% | 43.1% | 1 | 31.6% | 8% | 13.5% |
Workman | 55% | 3% | 50.3% | 49.7% | 1 | 63.7% | 6.3% | 12% |
Colemak | 58% | 1.3% | 47.2% | 52.8% | 1 | 70% | 5.6% | 12% |
Dvorak type 1b | 70.6% | 2.5% | 45.0% | 55.0% | 1.5 | 66.6% | 4,1% | 6,8% |
Malt | 54.3% | 0.6% | 49.6% | 50.4% | 0.9 | 60.1% (71.7%) | 10,8% | 9.4% |
AdNW | 71.3% | 1% | 47.8% | 52.2% | 2.1 | 69.9% | 4,3% | 3,8% |
NoName32_en | 71.5% | 1% | 47.6% | 52.4% | 2.7 | 71.6% | 4% | 3,7% |
NoName30_en | 71.1% | 1% | 47.8% | 52.2% | 2.8 | 69.5% | 4% | 3,8% |
NoName32_en: ku.,q gpclxz hieao dtsnrw y---- vbfmj |
NoName30_en: ku.,q gpclx hieao dtsnr y-jz- vbfmw | NoName30_en mirrored: xlcpg q,.uk rnstd oaeih wmfbv -zj-y |
I think the one feature you are missing in your two created layouts vs dvorak is "rolling". (don't know it's prevalence in other layouts). If you look at the right-hand letters "htns" the bi-letter combinations th, sn, st etc are fairly common and can be achieved by rolling the hand (pinky first is way more comfortable than index first). Aside from that the layouts look good.
I tried getting the AdNW optimiser to generate a layout for me, but I couldn't understand the instructions properly and have not yet been able to get it to run with my own optimisation criteria.
Do you have a link to the program used to generate/test the layouts? I'm also interested in what would happen if you start messing with more punctuation and numbers in there - not just "." and ",".
Without going into the analytics, I would personally recommend Colemak over Dvorak for obvious reasons (among those discussed).
if you value Ctrl Z,X,C,V, Colemak is the better choiceThere are several layouts like Minimak. Those change even fewer keys, especially S is kept in its QWERTY position, while offering a big improvement over QWERTY.
Colemak is also based on more modern analytics and had the advantage of being able to learn from Dvorak and improve upon it.[citation needed]
Colemak looks really promising.
Are there online tools to practice typing with this alternative layouts? Most are targetted towards qwerty.
Colemak looks really promising.
Are there online tools to practice typing with this alternative layouts? Most are targetted towards qwerty.
Google "learn Colemak online" to get all websites you need
Are there online tools to practice typing with this alternative layouts?
One thing which tends to irritate me with most alternate layouts, though, is the optimisation for inward rolls. I find inward rolls really awkward, outward rolls are much more natural for me, but there isn't a layout designed for outward rolls. So I go for layouts with more hand and finger alternation instead. I know my preference for outward rolls is an exception, though, as most people seem to prefer inward rolls. Just makes it hard to find a layout that suits me. <sigh>
NoName30_en: ku.,q gpclx hieao dtsnr y-jz- vbfmw | NoName30_en flipped: q,.uy wlcpv oaeih rnstd -zj-k xmfbg |
Layout | hand alternation | same finger movements | left hand | right hand | in/out roll | home row | adjacent outer finger pairs | adjacent middle/index finger |
NoName30_en flipped | 71.1% | 2.7% | 47.8% | 52.2% | 0.4 | 69.5% | 3.5% | 7,7% |
NoName30_en | 71.1% | 1% | 47.8% | 52.2% | 2.8 | 69.5% | 4% | 3,8% |
Colemak looks really promising.
Colemak: qwfpg jluy; arstd hneio zxcvb km,./ | Colemak ||-patch: qfwpg jlyu; asrtd hnoei zxcvb km,/. |
Layout | hand alternation | same finger movements | left hand | right hand | in/out roll | home row | adjacent outer finger pairs | adjacent middle/index finger |
Colemak | 58% | 1.3% | 47.2% | 52.8% | 1 | 70% | 5.6% | 12% |
Colemak ||-patch | 58% | 1.4% | 47.2% | 52.8% | 1 | 70% | 4.9% | 7.8% |
Since movements with adjacent fingers are hard to coordinate and slow they should be prevented.This seems like a very oversimplified measure. Typing two keys with adjacent fingers on the same row is usually pretty fast. Typing keys with adjacent fingers from far-apart rows is relatively slow and difficult. And the direction matters too. I find typing a bottom-row index finger and a top-row middle finger is okay, but the reverse (top row index finger & same hand bottom row middle finger) is truly awful.
Since movements with adjacent fingers are hard to coordinate and slow they should be prevented.This seems like a very oversimplified measure. Typing two keys with adjacent fingers on the same row is usually pretty fast. Typing keys with adjacent fingers from far-apart rows is relatively slow and difficult.
[attach=2] | [attach=1] |
Malt | Colemak |
Its not fast typing with the pair of ring and middle finger. They are partly using common nervs and tendons. And at least for me making drum-rolls with ring an middle finger is slow motion compared to the pair of index and middle finger.Drum roll meaning alternating back and forth repeatedly? That’s a very different story than just typing one and then the other, once. If you go back and forth a bunch of times in a row, then you're going to need to be relaxing the flexor for one finger (and/or contracting the extensor) at the same time as you’re contracting the flexor for the other finger, and then vice versa. If you just type one and then the other, you can use any common flexors for pressing both, because there’s no special need to release one key before pressing the other [assuming your keyboard can handle 2-key rollover].
have heard bad things about ISO with colemak/dvorakHuh? Quite the opposite, it enables proper¹ angle/wide mods (like DreymaR's (http://forum.colemak.com/viewtopic.php?id=1438).
will the keycap heights interfere with the layoutHuh²? If you swap around keycaps that aren't uniform profile, it'll be an issue, but why would you do that? O_o
Huh? Quite the opposite, it enables proper¹ angle/wide mods (like DreymaR's (http://forum.colemak.com/viewtopic.php?id=1438).
Huh²? If you swap around keycaps that aren't uniform profile, it'll be an issue, but why would you do that? O_o
Welcome to GH anyway. ^_~
Huh? Quite the opposite, [ISO layout] enables proper¹ angle/wide mods (like DreymaR's (http://forum.colemak.com/viewtopic.php?id=1438).Huh, that’s quite interesting.
I’ve wondered for a while if it would be possible to:
1. Make an analysis of the most comfortable range of motion for each finger relative to the starting place for the wrist, assuming a 2-d keyboard layout. This would basically result in some kind of score for how hard it is to press a key with any particular finger at any arbitrary position relative to its starting location.
Well, what I mean is, ignore the existing specific places of any keys. Instead, if we have an assumption of a flat keyboard and an initial hand position, and no other assumptions, then what’s the comfortable movement range of each finger, relative to that initial hand position. So imagine all possible key positions, millimeter by millimeter, and figure out how easy it is for the finger to press them. Or in other words, for each finger, there’s some kind of mapping of two-dimensional position to ease of typing.I’ve wondered for a while if it would be possible to:
1. Make an analysis of the most comfortable range of motion for each finger relative to the starting place for the wrist, assuming a 2-d keyboard layout. This would basically result in some kind of score for how hard it is to press a key with any particular finger at any arbitrary position relative to its starting location.
Assuming that nice movements are faster than slow ones, one could get a key logger output to analyse the movement timings from key to key. In order to verify that this is layout independant the data should be gathered from different persons writing comfortable with different layouts.
I definitely don't recommend swapping caps around, because it kinda defeats the point of touch typing, doesn't it?Yeah ofc it does, i just figured it would be easier to change them so if i did go all retard i could just look down.
The only common uniform-profile keycaps (for MX stems) are SP's DSA.
But I definitely don't recommend swapping caps around, because it kinda defeats the point of touch typing, doesn't it?
Thinking about switching to colemak when i get an ANSI keyboard (have heard bad things about ISO with colemak/dvorak), but have been wondering about keycap heights and so on, will the keycap heights interfere with the layout? I guess the problem could be solved with blank keys but i dont know about switching layout and using blanks. Also does topre also have different heights on different rows?
I am a Colemak user and I don't switch any keycaps at all, even if I can. It helps me to get rid of the bad habit of looking at the keyboard while typing.
For reference you can print out the layout in a paper and a wallpaper on your screen. After a week you don't have to look at it anymore.
Tony, did you happen to take a look at Minimak? How do you like this in comparison to Colemak?
I'm debating whether to learn Colemak, or Minimak (probably the 6 key version).
I want to be able to still retain my QWERTY proficiency but have a better layout available for the times I am able to use it.
http://www.minimak.org/ (http://www.minimak.org/)
I am extremely interested in "Minimak" - it features a graduated learning transition and doesn't stray far from QWERTY. with only a 4 key change you can realize 60% of the benefit of DVORAK. With the 12 key change you get ~ 85% of DVORAK.
There is some typing lists available for the typing software trainer "TIPP10" that can help you learn it.
You can easily implement this in software in Linux/Windows/Mac with the files provided in the "Downloads" section on the website.
I've yet to try it as I am trying to first get to 100WPM in QWERTY (I train about 1 hour per day... I'm at ~80WPM now)
Anyone else have any experience w/ MINIMAK?
People loves to debate and to wait for the best. I think you guys can wait for another century or two and still there is no best layout at all.
I have switched to Colemak so I don't look at other layouts. I have paid the price; now I don't need to switch to any other layouts again (the switching time is really tough, takes at least 6 months to be fluent.).
For people who are at crossroads, I understand their attachments to Qwerty, since their fear of losing credibility is so imminent. Minimak is good at releasing that fear by give up 20% of efficiency that normally Colemak/Dvorak layout gives, just to make the switching roads easier.
But right now once I have switched, I see that fear has no establishments at all, that's purely psychological. Like that kind of fear you've experienced when you learn to walk or to swim. But you only know it when you have switched, not before.
So I let you guys debate forever, since it's impossible to me to know which layout is better than the other.
But I have converted to Colemak and I decide to call it done.
Tony, did you happen to take a look at Minimak? How do you like this in comparison to Colemak?
I'm debating whether to learn Colemak, or Minimak (probably the 6 key version).
I want to be able to still retain my QWERTY proficiency but have a better layout available for the times I am able to use it.
People love to debate and to wait for the best. I think you guys can wait for another century or two and still there is no best layout at all.
I have switched to Colemak so I don't look at other layouts. I have paid the price; now I don't need to switch to any other layouts again (the switching time is really tough, takes at least 6 months to be fluent.).
For people who are at crossroads, I understand their attachments to Qwerty, since their fear of losing credibility is so imminent. Minimak is good at releasing that fear by give up 20% of efficiency that normally Colemak/Dvorak layout gives, just to make the switching roads easier.
But right now once I have switched, I see that fear has no establishments at all, that's purely psychological. Like that kind of fear you've experienced when you learn to walk or to swim. But you only know it when you have switched, not before.
So I let you guys debate forever, since it's impossible to me to know which layout is better than the other.
But I have converted to Colemak and I decide to call it done.
p/s: I dropped Qwerty completely when I had reached 30wpm in Colemak . If you use two layouts, they share the same motor memory in your brain and the spinal cords, so the confusion is high.
Debate is part of the Rationalist nature and mind. Only some species follow the lead with no questions: e.g. sheeps.FTFY
Or a IBM model M where the caps can be relocated because the concave profile is generated by the switch mounting plate, not by row-unique cap angles. :DSo if i bought a Model M i wouldn't have to worry about anything? They are pretty cheap in my country since people just think it's some old piece of crap (not finding it in a thrift shop cheap but around 80-100$ brand new).
So if i bought a Model M i wouldn't have to worry about anything? They are pretty cheap in my country since people just think it's some old piece of crap (not finding it in a thrift shop cheap but around 80-100$ brand new).
So if i bought a Model M i wouldn't have to worry about anything? They are pretty cheap in my country since people just think it's some old piece of crap (not finding it in a thrift shop cheap but around 80-100$ brand new).
A Model M is indeed an old, stubborn piece of durable crap. I have one in my country for $15, sorted from dirty computer craps imported from the US.