Considering Switching To Dvorak -- Thoughts?

[mashby]

I recently listened to Matt Mullenweg (of WordPress fame) on Tim Ferriss' podcast -- Matt Mullenweg on Polyphasic Sleep, Tequila, and Building Billion-Dollar Companies. In their conversation, Matt mentioned that he had switched to the Dvorak keyboard layout awhile back and that he was a fan of it to this day. In the show notes, they linked to http://www.dvzine.org to provide an over view and gave it a read.

Certainly I've heard of the layout before, but never really gave it much thought. I suppose I didn't like the idea of having to relearn how to type, but after reading the zine and listening to Matt wax poetic about it, I'm considering it.

Other than the fact that many key cap sets don't support it and the fact that I'm probably adding yet more potential complexity to my life -- anyone think this is a bad idea?

[ideus]

If you experiment with Dvorak, you might enlighten us on the switching, considering your long experience with keyboards.

[nubbinator]

I've never seen any studies supporting dvorak as being better.  I'd try Colemak or one of the other alternate layouts before dvorak.

[jacobolus]

There were a bunch of studies showing Dvorak better, but there’s some debate about how credible they are.

In any event, note that every alternative layout is designed based on some set of personal opinions/models about what constitutes a good layout. None of them as far as I can tell are backed by good empirical evidence about the hand motions involved in typing letter combinations. As such, the best guide when choosing layouts is your own personal preference. Just try typing on a few different layouts for a few weeks each, and settle with the one you like best.

Note that Dvorak layout was specifically designed for manual typewriters, in the 30s. Its goal is to reduce the use of the bottom row of the typewriter to the extent possible, because typing letters on the bottom row is a notable slowdown. I don’t think its design criteria make quite as much sense on computer keyboards, and especially not on e.g. flat laptop keyboards. On the other hand, I don’t think later layout designers did too much better a job figuring out great criteria either... or maybe a better way to say that: I think Dvorak is about as good as any of the others. I have friends who prefer Dvorak to Colemak, and other friends who prefer Colemak to Dvorak, and there are folks on this board who use Arensito, ADNW, Workman, Norman, Carpalx, Malt (on a Maltron), etc.

If you do a search of geekhack (either through the forum search box or through google), you’ll find plenty of discussion about alternative keyboard layouts.

Of course, there’s only so much you can do with such a broken keyboard arrangement as the one designed by IBM. If you split the keyboard in half, arrange the keys in columns instead of rows, and move backspace, enter, tab, escape, shift, and all the modifier keys to better spots, you can do dramatically better.

[brimborion]

Do you use more than one computer?
Can you switch on all of them, including laptops and work keyboards?
Is it important for you to be able to keep up your typing rate because of work or other uses while you learn Dvorak?
Do you game? Can you remap everything?
Wouldn't it be better to learn Colemak?

If you answered anything to any of the above, give it the old college try anyway and see what obstacles you hit .

[ideus]

Do you use more than one computer?
Can you switch on all of them, including laptops and work keyboards?
Is it important for you to be able to keep up your typing rate because of work or other uses while you learn Dvorak?
Do you game? Can you remap everything?
Wouldn't it be better to learn Colemak?

If you answered anything to any of the above, give it the old college try anyway and see what obstacles you hit .

Our favorite keyboard cannot be usede in all circumstances.

[SonOfSonOfSpock]

Dvorak wouldn't be my first choice if I was switching. I'd suggest looking at some positives/negatives to various keyboard layouts before trying one out. Taking a look at QWERTY vs other layouts it is pretty easy to see that nobody would create QWERTY nowadays and there are more efficient and ergonomic layouts. What are the reasons you're thinking of switching?

[Korth]

Tried it myself a few years ago.

It's much harder to learn to type when you already know how to type.  My wpm and accuracy sucked for months - on both dvorak and qwerty - while constantly hesitating to think and rethink once-automatic motor skills.

End result, I can now sustain a disappointing 45wpm on dvorak, and still test out about 75-80wpm on qwerty (same before and after my dvorak experiment).  Yeah, I could type a mucho faster 90wpm+ in my shady youth, but these days I don't work on a keyboard, I mostly just play on one.  I suppose I could've pushed myself to succeed at high-speed dvorak (and qwerty be damned!) if I had stuck through it for months or years.  But one day it occurred to me that qwerty dominates the world and is here to stay for a long while, dvorak is just for the mutant typing elitists - and just can't buy those cool gaming keyboards in dvorak, y'know. 

That being said, I do believe dvorak is the better layout.  A scientifically designed effort to make the most frequently-used letters and letter sequences more easy to reach faster, and with minimal effort.  As opposed to qwerty, which was essentially the exact opposite - a deliberate misarrangement of keys designed to slow typing down on ancient typewriters so that their mechanical levers wouldn't jam and tangle up as often.

[mashby]

Thanks for all the great feedback guys!

@nubbinator -- why would you pick Colemak over Dvorak?

@jacobolus -- I did a search, but I didn't see much. Perhaps my search-foo is a bit lacking, but most of the search results were about people asking for GB's to include a Dvorak kit.  :roll eyes:

@brimborion -- great questions. I think I can switch on all the computers that I use and I don't game, but why do you prefer Colemak to Dvorak?

@ideus -- The only deal break is the HHKB if I choose a different layout, but I think I'd just go with blanks if I found the legends to be an issue.

@SonOfSonOfSpock -- The main reason that I'm considering it is the idea that Dvorak is more efficient over QWERTY. I don't have RSI issues, or anything, but I like the idea of efficiency. One of the reasons I like the HHKB and 60% layouts. Why wouldn't you choose Dvorak?

@Korth -- That was my assumption too, that it's going to be harder to UNLEARN than anything. Interesting that you go back and forth. I hadn't thought about that, but I'm sure I would. I suppose it's just a more extreme example of switching between the Poker X and the HHKB. Each fn layer is different and I have to think about it a little until I get adjusted when I split.

[hoggy]

I switched to Dvorak when I was contemplating giving up programming as a career. It wasn't the only thing that helped, and I think switching to colemak or the Maltron layout would have helped at least as much.

It wasn't an easy transition for me, and I've pretty much lost my ability to type qwerty, but it was one of the best decisions of my life.

The best reason for switching is comfort, if you simply want to type faster, then take a look at text expansion software first.

[Oobly]

If you prefer inward rolls vs hand and finger alternation, choose Colemak. If you prefer alternation and don't mind that ZXCV are in a different place for shortcuts, choose Dvorak. If you want the ultimate in efficient layouts, use an optimised AdNW layout, customised to a corpus of the type of writing you do.

They're all only a marginal increase in efficiency over QWERTY, though (less than 20% in most cases), and it may not be worthwhile depending on how much of the day you spend typing and how much effort it takes to become proficient in each layout.

I only bothered learning an alternate character layout when I switched to an alternate physical layout, and the only one that took into account the different weighting values of the new physical layout was the AdNW software. So I use a variant of that, customised for my physical layout.

One reason not to learn Colemak on a standard layout board, though, is if you require your QWERTY skills and speed to remain around the same during the learning period. This is very difficult with Colemak since it has so many similarities with QWERTY that you'll inevitably be slow in both during while learning. Dvorak is different enough to interfere less with the QWERTY typing muscle memory, but it still can if it's on the same physical layout board.

This is the main reason I didn't learn Dvorak and only switched when I had my ergo board complete. My QWERTY speed actually increased slightly during the learning phase since I started using better (mechanical) QWERTY keyboards and paid more attention to the layout and the way I type.

So now I type well on QWERTY and decently on my ergo with AdNW. Eventually, I'm sure my ergo typing will equal or surpass the speed of my QWERTY typing. It's already less effort and more comfortable (and often a lot more fun).

The physical layout is more of a hindrance to typing efficiency than the character layout. The familiarity of QWERTY on a "normal" staggered board is hard to get around. So I didn't.

P.S. - if you use a Linux / Unix terminal often, Dvorak can be a pain.. "L" and "S" are both on the right hand pinkie...

[davkol]

DSK (incorrectly Dvorak) is great, if you're stuck with legacy hardware and everybody's software. All modern operating systems support DSK out of the box (shout-out to the awesome DSK-QWERTY in OS X), it's an ANSI standard, plenty of keyboards support it. Configuring any computer to DSK is no more difficult than switching it to a national layout (various QWERTZ, AZERTY, etc. variants), and hundreds of millions of people are doing it all the time. Although it's easier to maintain typing skills in more significantly different layouts (BTW do NOT *unlearn* QWERTY), there's no point in keeping both US QWERTY and DSK, because they're both more or less everywhere.

Colemak is wonderful, if and only if you type on some supported systems equipped with scissor-switch keyboards and appreciate the convenience of switching via Tarmak. In that case, Minimak is an option worth exploring too.

Other than that, there's a bunch of truly niche layouts, but the problem is... learning a new layout takes several weeks. Several painful weeks. And then several months to get a sense of rhythm or possible actual issues (because issues that arise during the learning process are rarely real problems in actuality). That's quite a price to pay for "trying it out".

[brimborion]

@brimborion -- great questions. I think I can switch on all the computers that I use and I don't game, but why do you prefer Colemak to Dvorak?

I don't, I was just ignorantly tossing out questions; my point was more that you should just try it and see what happens.

[nubbinator]

@nubbinator -- why would you pick Colemak over Dvorak?

Almost all the dvorak studies I've seen are highly biased with major flaws.  The few decent ones show no advantage in speed or ergonomics.  Choral also creates some incredibly awkward shortcuts (ctrl+c for example) that decreases efficiency.  Colemak and some other more modern niche layouts are less awkward.  From what I've seen, they also tend to have better evidence (but still a dearth of proper scientific study) to back them.

Additionally, most people tend to be slower with dvorak, though some do get faster.  I'd rather not type slower with a layout that has no scientifically backed ergonomic superiority.  Some of the other layouts like Colemak report minor ergonomic improvements and typically a return to the same speed.

It's really something you have to research and see if it's right for you.

[davkol]

Almost all the dvorak studies I've seen are highly biased with major flaws.

A honest question: What studies have you actually read?

Choral also creates some incredibly awkward shortcuts (ctrl+c for example) that decreases efficiency.  Colemak and some other more modern niche layouts are less awkward.

I believe mashby uses OS X. That system has built-in support for DSK with QWERTY shortcuts.

Additionally, most people tend to be slower with dvorak, though some do get faster.  I'd rather not type slower with a layout that has no scientifically backed ergonomic superiority.  Some of the other layouts like Colemak report minor ergonomic improvements and typically a return to the same speed.

...and the evidence is where? Isn't the reason for a lower speed exactly the same as the reason for low typing speeds in general? Because AFAIK most people revert to hunt'n'peck typing even after passing a touch typing course.

[nubbinator]

I'm on my phone, so I can't link, but most were done by Dvorak and his proponents.  The Wikipedia article discusses some.  There haven't been any rigorous studies that I've seen. 

Read around anywhere people switch.  A minority get back to Qwerty speeds even after years of switching.  Most report more comfort from Colemak and other more modern alternate layouts.  Again, since there are no proper studies, thus becomes a more tricky thing, but dvorak would be my last choice for a new layout.

[davkol]

The Wikipedia article links the Strong's study (a joke by itself) and the writing of Liebowitz&Margolis (cough, cough). That's all. Some other sources are poorly picked as well (e.g. The Curse of QWERTY).

[nubbinator]

There really aren't many studies.  When I was still in grad school and had access to all the big databases, I tried to find more studies and there were like one or two more, all of which sucked.  All the "studies" you see out there being touted as good measures are amateur studies that use spurious measures that really don't give any kind of scientific credence to the claims.  For example, some of the most touted "studies" are ones with heat maps where a user tracked their usage with different layouts.  They laughably concluded that since their fingers spent a majority of the time on the home row with one of the layouts, that it was the best layout for ergonomics and efficiency. 

[snipars]

i use dvorak, i've used it for like 2 or 3 years 
it's nice to type with but it's not worth spending ages learning

[ideus]

i use dvorak, i've used it for like 2 or 3 years 
it's nice to type with but it's not worth spending ages learning

Wise advising.

[dusan]

I switched to Dvorak when I was contemplating giving up programming as a career. It wasn't the only thing that helped, and I think switching to colemak or the Maltron layout would have helped at least as much.

It wasn't an easy transition for me, and I've pretty much lost my ability to type qwerty, but it was one of the best decisions of my life.

The best reason for switching is comfort, if you simply want to type faster, then take a look at text expansion software first.

+1.

One point more: I use Dvorak everywhere (although only 99% of the time), most keyboards I use are with QWERTY keycaps, so I don't think the lack of Dvorak keycap layout is any problem.

[Vibex]

I'm not a huge fan of dvorak. I tried it briefly, but it felt uncomfortable. I would recommend trying Colemak instead. I found it pretty nice to use. Or you could try out JAZ (my layout). Or you could just go the extra mile and make your own layout. I would be happy to help you with that if you would like.

[steve.v]

1. Qwerty 125 wpm
2. Dvorak 60 wpm
3. Workman 45 wpm
4. Colemak 100 wpm

I prefer finger rolls over alternations. Dvorak used too much of my right pinky. Colemak uses my right hand a little too much. I like capslock as my backspace on Colemak. No layout is worth changing unless your wrists hurts from typing; as mine did with qwerty and now there's no more pain. Expect a moment of not being able to type at all; kinetic finger memory collision.

[SonOfSonOfSpock]

@SonOfSonOfSpock -- The main reason that I'm considering it is the idea that Dvorak is more efficient over QWERTY. I don't have RSI issues, or anything, but I like the idea of efficiency. One of the reasons I like the HHKB and 60% layouts. Why wouldn't you choose Dvorak?

Some of the newer layouts make it easier for a qwerty typist to switch easier. Also the right pinky in dvorak gets a lot of use.

[davkol]

There really aren't many studies.  When I was still in grad school and had access to all the big databases, I tried to find more studies and there were like one or two more, all of which sucked.  All the "studies" you see out there being touted as good measures are amateur studies that use spurious measures that really don't give any kind of scientific credence to the claims.

There are actually plenty of academic research papers on the topic to my big surprise. Most of them really focus on one or two layout properties though... that's where many of the claims about "no advantage to DSK" stem from. It's kinda pointless to conclude anything (esp. typing speed estimates) from a "study" that consists of several typists repeatedly pressing isolated *bigrams* on camera.

[MajorMajor]

I chose DVORAK over Colemak due to Colemak not being built into major OS. I don't want to be in a position of looking like a goofus hunting and pecking when I need to use someone's PC.

[steve.v]

I chose DVORAK over Colemak due to Colemak not being built into major OS. I don't want to be in a position of looking like a goofus hunting and pecking when I need to use someone's PC.

Only Mac doesn't come loaded with Colemak; can be installed easily.

[Vibex]

I chose DVORAK over Colemak due to Colemak not being built into major OS. I don't want to be in a position of looking like a goofus hunting and pecking when I need to use someone's PC.

Only Mac doesn't come loaded with Colemak; can be installed easily.

Quite a few linux distros don't have colemak by default.

[jacobolus]

Only Mac doesn't come loaded with Colemak; can be installed easily.

I see Colemak as an option on my Mac (OS X 10.9), and I’m sure I never explicitly added it.

[jacobolus]

@jacobolus -- I did a search, but I didn't see much. Perhaps my search-foo is a bit lacking, but most of the search results were about people asking for GB's to include a Dvorak kit.  :roll eyes:

Well, I’m not going to read carefully through, but here are 60 threads that came up in my searching, I think at least 10–20 of them should be pretty relevant:

4379 5036 6435 6622 6998 7494 8110 8146 10794 14308
15306 16434 16559 16828 18590 19458 22183 23005 24167 25172
26197 26440 32621 33460 35196 37824 40611 40649 40823 43491
43994 46374 47278 47775 48292 48689 48834 48879 49138 50734
51563 51741 52387 53131 54544 55407 56312 57491 57559 59828
61586 61780 62065 63162 64293 64558 66390 66546 66802 67604

[jacobolus]

[...] Colemak and some other more modern niche layouts are less awkward.  From what I've seen, they also tend to have better evidence (but still a dearth of proper scientific study) to back them.

Which “better evidence” are you referring to?

[keyhopper]

I have never reordered the keycaps on my keyboards. It hasn't been an issue.

For starting to learn Dvorak I cannot recommend 'gtypist' enough. It has lessons specifically tuned for Dvorak. Like whole texts that you can type without moving from the home row, and which do give your brain AHA! moments.

It is a free program available on most linux distributions, and it is also available for windows:

           http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gtypist/w32_binaries/

It also seems to be available for Macs:

           https://packages.macports.org/gtypist/


When I switched to dvorak 10 years ago, I tried several typing tutors and found gtypist to be the best, though its UI isn't as good looking as the others.

For the dvorak lessons, select "Series D - Dvorak touch typing" in the main menu. To skip lessons, there is a trick: hit ESC during a lesson, then 'N' to go to the next one.

At the time, I printed the layout and kept it sticked on my monitor while I was learning.

Once you are comfortable touch typing, you can do speed lessons in gtypist or typeracer.com. The process took a few weeks to get me to my previous Qwerty speed. Now I type between 80wpm and 120wpm, but the most important thing is that the pain in my hands has been gone ever since.

Also, if you look at videos of people typing with dvorak, you'll notice that their hands barely move and don't contort as much while typing fast.

I don't think that dvorak will provide enough benefits for everybody to justify switching, but I do think that it is a more natural and relaxed layout, and that maybe cannot be quantified in a study...

I can still type in Qwerty but I choose to avoid it if possible. Funny note: in my cell phone I still type in Qwerty layout with my two thumbs, quite fast and don't use autocorrect.

Cheers!
.KeyHopper.

[mstechfreak]

Guys, whichever keyboard layout you use, I can suggest you http://www.typingstudy.com to help yourself to learn the layout (it has colemak and dvorak layouts too). It really helped me a lot! Maybe anyone else has tried?

[Oobly]

I chose DVORAK over Colemak due to Colemak not being built into major OS. I don't want to be in a position of looking like a goofus hunting and pecking when I need to use someone's PC.

This is a good reason to try to keep your QWERTY skills up while learning your new layout (and thus to choose a layout as unfamiliar / different from QWERTY as possible). In many cases if you have to work on someone else's PC they may not even allow you to switch the layout, let alone install a new one. I avoid these hassles simply by continuing to be proficient in QWERTY despite it's flaws.

There really aren't many studies.  When I was still in grad school and had access to all the big databases, I tried to find more studies and there were like one or two more, all of which sucked.  All the "studies" you see out there being touted as good measures are amateur studies that use spurious measures that really don't give any kind of scientific credence to the claims.

There are actually plenty of academic research papers on the topic to my big surprise. Most of them really focus on one or two layout properties though... that's where many of the claims about "no advantage to DSK" stem from. It's kinda pointless to conclude anything (esp. typing speed estimates) from a "study" that consists of several typists repeatedly pressing isolated *bigrams* on camera.

I have found the same as davkol, most research papers will focus on a single aspect or only a few aspects of layout efficiency and use.

I have found it better to use dynamic (software) analysers for analysing different layouts and the best I've found so far is the AdNW one as it allows you to adjust the weighting of various criteria to suit your physical layout and personal use and use your own corpus of text. For "quick and dirty" comparison you can use this online analyser (http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/#/main), but it may not have the same weighting of criteria that you're looking at for comparing layouts for yourself (upper vs lower row weighting, etc). I have found it to be a good way to quickly analyse a layout in comparison to others, though. It allows you to put your own "corpus" into the text field for analysis, although you can't put a large volume of text in unless you want to wait a LONG time with an unresponsive browser   It was very useful when designing my custom layout for my ergo board. Once I had a good rough draft I did the final analyses (with much larger texts) and fine tuning with AdNW.

One thing the online analyser does not take into account is the fact that it's easier for the index fingers to press lower row keys and it's easier for middle and ring fingers to press upper row keys. In fact in my case it's easier to press upper row keys with middle and ring than home row keys due to the way I hold my hands when typing.

[Oobly]

Alright, so far I've been talking generalities and "most efficient", etc. But for some practical advice, if you're going to use a standard physical layout board and you simply want a little more typing comfort / efficiency and you're willing to put the time in (and you want it to be a "standard" alternative layout), I'd suggest rather learning Dvorak than Colemak for a number of reasons:

1. It's different enough from QWERTY that you're not going to interfere as much with your existing QWERTY muscle memory and skills.
2. Alternation is more conducive to more comfortable typing than rolls (this an opinion, but a well-grounded one). It's also faster, but there are some caveats here (see my comments below).
3. Colemak overloads the index fingers.
4. It's available on every OS with very little effort needed to "install" it. Colemak is getting better, but still not as widely available.

In terms of keycaps, most GB's that include support for an alternative layout will include both Dvorak and Colemak caps, so it's not really a factor, IMHO.

I suspect some will challenge number 2, so here is a little supporting information: Fingers on the same hand have shared tendons and muscles, which makes pressing successive keys with the same hand require more effort and concentration (flex, release, flex) and thus less speed than if you were to be alternating all the presses. You could argue that the "roll" can be produced by a rotation of the wrist (pronation / supination motion) without much finger movement required, however you still need to position the individual fingers to "set up" the roll which requires more concentration and as much finger movement as pressing alternating keys.

The only advantage to "rolls" that I can think of are that it matches the way your mind works in breaking words into key groups to be pressed which then translate into finger movement "sets", but these sets tend to start off as single keys when learning and progress to larger and larger groups as you become more proficient and used to typing specific words, so the Colemak rolls will only match certain stages of typing proficiency. It's still more fatiguing overall.

[davkol]

Rolls are essentially only a consequence of Colemak's reduced same-finger ratio with focus on home-row typing though.

[steve.v]

Alright, so far I've been talking generalities and "most efficient", etc. But for some practical advice, if you're going to use a standard physical layout board and you simply want a little more typing comfort / efficiency and you're willing to put the time in (and you want it to be a "standard" alternative layout), I'd suggest rather learning Dvorak than Colemak for a number of reasons:

1. It's different enough from QWERTY that you're not going to interfere as much with your existing QWERTY muscle memory and skills.
2. Alternation is more conducive to more comfortable typing than rolls (this an opinion, but a well-grounded one). It's also faster, but there are some caveats here (see my comments below).
3. Colemak overloads the index fingers.
4. It's available on every OS with very little effort needed to "install" it. Colemak is getting better, but still not as widely available.

In terms of keycaps, most GB's that include support for an alternative layout will include both Dvorak and Colemak caps, so it's not really a factor, IMHO.

I suspect some will challenge number 2, so here is a little supporting information: Fingers on the same hand have shared tendons and muscles, which makes pressing successive keys with the same hand require more effort and concentration (flex, release, flex) and thus less speed than if you were to be alternating all the presses. You could argue that the "roll" can be produced by a rotation of the wrist (pronation / supination motion) without much finger movement required, however you still need to position the individual fingers to "set up" the roll which requires more concentration and as much finger movement as pressing alternating keys.

The only advantage to "rolls" that I can think of are that it matches the way your mind works in breaking words into key groups to be pressed which then translate into finger movement "sets", but these sets tend to start off as single keys when learning and progress to larger and larger groups as you become more proficient and used to typing specific words, so the Colemak rolls will only match certain stages of typing proficiency. It's still more fatiguing overall.

I type Colemak.

Your post left too many things out in favor of Dvorak. The left index finger, right ring & pinkies are overloaded for Dvorak. I, R, L, very common letters, requires the fingers to stretch often.

Your number three is misleading and false. If anything, it's qwerty that works the index fingers due to top middle row usage. Between Dv/Col, its Dv that suffers due to the letter i.

Strictly for English. One of Colemak's greatest strength is the distance accumulated through typing; it's far less than many layouts. 

However it comes down to personal preference; as each hand/fingers can be different. Finger rolls & a very balanced finger load versus finger alternation and a unique layout.

Dvorak was my first layout beyond qwerty; the positions of the three letters were annoying and pushed me to switch.

I can type for hours without fatigue. Nothing's perfect of course and the only thing I find annoying about Colemak is typing the word 'you'.

Want to be faster and efficient? Learn Plover. 

 

[PieterGen]

P.S. - if you use a Linux / Unix terminal often, Dvorak can be a pain.. "L" and "S" are both on the right hand pinkie...

If you use Linux/Unix you know what an alias is. Let's use some inward rolls.
alias nth='ls'
alias snth='ls-a'

[Oobly]

More

Alright, so far I've been talking generalities and "most efficient", etc. But for some practical advice, if you're going to use a standard physical layout board and you simply want a little more typing comfort / efficiency and you're willing to put the time in (and you want it to be a "standard" alternative layout), I'd suggest rather learning Dvorak than Colemak for a number of reasons:

1. It's different enough from QWERTY that you're not going to interfere as much with your existing QWERTY muscle memory and skills.
2. Alternation is more conducive to more comfortable typing than rolls (this an opinion, but a well-grounded one). It's also faster, but there are some caveats here (see my comments below).
3. Colemak overloads the index fingers.
4. It's available on every OS with very little effort needed to "install" it. Colemak is getting better, but still not as widely available.

In terms of keycaps, most GB's that include support for an alternative layout will include both Dvorak and Colemak caps, so it's not really a factor, IMHO.

I suspect some will challenge number 2, so here is a little supporting information: Fingers on the same hand have shared tendons and muscles, which makes pressing successive keys with the same hand require more effort and concentration (flex, release, flex) and thus less speed than if you were to be alternating all the presses. You could argue that the "roll" can be produced by a rotation of the wrist (pronation / supination motion) without much finger movement required, however you still need to position the individual fingers to "set up" the roll which requires more concentration and as much finger movement as pressing alternating keys.

The only advantage to "rolls" that I can think of are that it matches the way your mind works in breaking words into key groups to be pressed which then translate into finger movement "sets", but these sets tend to start off as single keys when learning and progress to larger and larger groups as you become more proficient and used to typing specific words, so the Colemak rolls will only match certain stages of typing proficiency. It's still more fatiguing overall.

I type Colemak.

Your post left too many things out in favor of Dvorak. The left index finger, right ring & pinkies are overloaded for Dvorak. I, R, L, very common letters, requires the fingers to stretch often.

Your number three is misleading and false. If anything, it's qwerty that works the index fingers due to top middle row usage. Between Dv/Col, its Dv that suffers due to the letter i.

Strictly for English. One of Colemak's greatest strength is the distance accumulated through typing; it's far less than many layouts. 

However it comes down to personal preference; as each hand/fingers can be different. Finger rolls & a very balanced finger load versus finger alternation and a unique layout.

Dvorak was my first layout beyond qwerty; the positions of the three letters were annoying and pushed me to switch.

I can type for hours without fatigue. Nothing's perfect of course and the only thing I find annoying about Colemak is typing the word 'you'.

Want to be faster and efficient? Learn Plover.

http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/#/main

Post your favourite text into that and then take a look at the finger usage graphs. Dvorak has MUCH more balanced finger usage than Colemak and doesn't overload the index fingers, despite the inclusion of "i".

I agree that the letter placement of Dvorak leaves something to be desired, which is why I went for a completely custom layout for my own board. Dvorak can be "improved" by switching the positions of U and I, but L and R are difficult to reposition without damaging the layout more than you fix it. Still, it's better than Colemak for the use case I specified and for the reasons I listed.

Regarding Plover, it's great for dictation, but like all dictation techniques (which are designed for rapidly jotting down speech concepts), it requires parsing afterwards to turn it into readable text and it's not very useful for tasks like programming.

If you want the best general purpose typing efficiency, a well designed ergo board (with thumb keys) and properly analysed and tested character layout is about the best you can do. Maltron did a good job of this, but with newer, more configurable software you can design a better layout simply because you can do analysis using larger texts and more variables / constraints much faster.

@PieterGen: Nice! That's a good way to make things better for yourself when using Dvorak layout

[PieterGen]

Quite a few linux distros don't have colemak by default.

Layouts are in the xkeyboard config. The people at Freedesktop.org decide which keyboard layouts are in the standard X11 files. Of course users are free to change this, to add layouts, modify them and so on. So you will find qwerty, azery, qwertz, dvorak, colemak and *lots* of other layouts, on your standard Linux, Unix or BSD system. The less known ADNW layout has been in it since May 2014. Colemak has been in xkeyboard for a long time.

So why don't you see all these layouts in the menus of your latest Ubuntu or Fedora? This is because individual desktop environments (Gnome, Mate, KDE, Cinnamon, OpenBox and so on) and/or distributions (Ubuntu, Mint, openSuse, Fedora etc.) decide which layout-options they put in their menus. So a specific layout may not be in the menu, but it will be in your xkeyboard files. If the layout you want is called exoticlayout5 you just open a terminal and type set xkbmap exoticlayout5

[PieterGen]

Strictly for English. One of Colemak's greatest strength is the distance accumulated through typing; it's far less than many layouts. 

True. At the same time, it scores worse on other variables. Keyboard optimization is a matter of compromises.....

Dvorak can be "improved" by switching the positions of U and I, but L and R are difficult to reposition without damaging the layout more than you fix it.

Optimizing by hand is extremely hard. You should use a computer to calculate that !

Oobly uses an ADNW layout. I do too. ADNW is made based on Dvorak's approach, so if you "buy" Dvorak's theory, ADNW is interesting. Stock ADNW is optimized for an 50% English/50% German mix. Oobly made a version for his specific use (care to post it, and tell something about the backgrounds?). I made a version for my specific use, which is mixed Dutch and English prose.  For fun I also calculated a version for 100% English. Like Dvorak, which was also optimized for English. I called this new version Dvormax. If you like the Dvorak idea, but are not completely happy with it, for instance with the I, U, L, S   you may give Dvormax a try !


If you do, please post your findings.

Here are four layouts:

Code: [Select]

[b]Dvorak[/b] (optimized for English) 
  ,.py fgcrl'
  aoeiu dhtns;
  ?qjkx bmwvz

DvorMax (optimized for English)
  kyu." zlmdpv
  rieao hnstcw
  x*?,/ jqfgb

Stock ADNW ("hieao")  (optimized for German/English)
  ku"./ vgcljf
  hieao dtrnsx
  y?,qb pwmzß

Dutch ADNW ("rieao") (optimized for Dutch/English). This is the layout I use
  y.u," wclhqz
  rieao gdtnsk
  /x?;j vpmbf


[rebus]

I tried Colemak for a few months then I tried Dvorak and immediately felt much more comfortable. I think most of the studies claiming the superiority of a layout over others are based on stats, and a very few of them (maybe none) can measure a real improvement in comfort for the fingers. I mean, they all say there is less motion this way or that other way, but how the motion has been? So they all mean nothing to me. Anyway I read that some prefer Colemak over Dvorak after trying both (like me, but I have opposite feelings) so in the end it's all up to you.
Just a few more considerations: why would you have to wait to suffer for RSI to change layout? I did, and I regret that.
And lastly, qwerty and Colemak seem cool because they give you the chance to type frequent shortcuts like ctrl-v with just the left hand. But that's not a good habit at all. Since I began suffering for wrist pain, I learned to always type the modifier with the opposite hand. And I feel very nice with shortcuts in Dvorak now. Just my 2 cents

[Vibex]

Quite a few linux distros don't have colemak by default.

Layouts are in the xkeyboard config. The people at Freedesktop.org decide which keyboard layouts are in the standard X11 files. Of course users are free to change this, to add layouts, modify them and so on. So you will find qwerty, azery, qwertz, dvorak, colemak and *lots* of other layouts, on your standard Linux, Unix or BSD system. The less known ADNW layout has been in it since May 2014. Colemak has been in xkeyboard for a long time.

So why don't you see all these layouts in the menus of your latest Ubuntu or Fedora? This is because individual desktop environments (Gnome, Mate, KDE, Cinnamon, OpenBox and so on) and/or distributions (Ubuntu, Mint, openSuse, Fedora etc.) decide which layout-options they put in their menus. So a specific layout may not be in the menu, but it will be in your xkeyboard files. If the layout you want is called exoticlayout5 you just open a terminal and type set xkbmap exoticlayout5

That might be true for Ubuntu and such, it has been a long time since I used it. However the most recent distro I tried that didn't have Colemak was Funtoo.

[PieterGen]

@vibex - I've been eying funtoo & gentoo for a while now....I've hopped lots (30 + ? ) of distros, some long term loves were crunchbang, mint and the last couple of years arch (+ openbox/goomwwm//herbstluft). Do you like funtoo, is compiling everything worth the hassle? Can you find everything in the repos? is the masked stuff usable? I like my system to be reasonable up to date.

(Not that arch is without faults. The AUR build files vary in quality, sometimes you haveto repair them, packages get abandonned, etc etc ).

Thanks.

Sorry for the linux off topic talk, back to Dvorak !!   

[mashby]

Well, I’m not going to read carefully through, but here are 60 threads that came up in my searching, I think at least 10–20 of them should be pretty relevant:

I saw some of those, but nothing definitive enough not to warrant starting a new thread. However, your search was much more exhaustive than what I found. 


Lots of great discussion here. Thank you! You guys have brought up a lot of things that I either hadn't considered or didn't even know existed, not to mention helping address all of my questions. Again, thank you so much for contributing to the conversation.

Since I don't have RSI issues and it's not pain that's motivating me to consider different layouts, it's pretty clear that different layouts are more about personal preferences. I'm also not looking to increase my typing speed necessarily, but faster is always good if something like that were to happen, it's just not a motivating factor for considering a different layout.

It sounds like I just need to dive in and give it a shot for a week or so and go from there. Since I tend to rotate keyboards anyway, there's no reason that I could set one to be DSK and the other QWERTY and switch as I need to. In fact, after getting acquainted with DSK, I think venturing into Colemak for a test drive is warranted as well. Looking at Mac OS Yosemite, it would appear I have plenty of options.



So I'll have to set aside some time to give it a crack and I'll let you know how it goes. That being said, please feel free to keep the conversation going. There's a lot of good stuff being discussed!

[jacobolus]

I saw some of those, but nothing definitive enough not to warrant starting a new thread. However, your search was much more exhaustive than what I found. 

I didn’t mean you shouldn’t start a new thread. Only that you might learn something useful by reading old threads. :-)

[Vibex]

@vibex - I've been eying funtoo & gentoo for a while now....I've hopped lots (30 + ? ) of distros, some long term loves were crunchbang, mint and the last couple of years arch (+ openbox/goomwwm//herbstluft). Do you like funtoo, is compiling everything worth the hassle? Can you find everything in the repos? is the masked stuff usable? I like my system to be reasonable up to date.

(Not that arch is without faults. The AUR build files vary in quality, sometimes you haveto repair them, packages get abandonned, etc etc ).

Thanks.

Sorry for the linux off topic talk, back to Dvorak !! 

Everything important is in the repo, plus a ton of other stuff. I wouldn't say everything though. I remember not being able to find things like bar.
I didn't mind the compiling, except for things like firefox. That took for ever. Masked packages were really on a case by case basis.
I'm on antergos now (basically arch, but I can't install arch at my college). I'm still not sure which I prefer. I'm also planning on looking at Crux, I just like playing around with things.

[SonOfSonOfSpock]

@Oobly: Your point about Dvorak being different from QWERTY and not interfering with those muscle memory skills is a good one. I always thought alternatives being similar to QWERTY was a good one to ease switching, but I didn't consider they could interfere with QWERTY skills if they were still needed. I guess they could also interfere with QWERTY skills while you are in the middle of switching which would be kinda bad if you need to type for you job.

[william]

I think people who defend QWERTY are like climate change deniers; they don't want anyone telling them anything that makes them question their beliefs.

QWERTY Pros: It is everywhere. You know how to use it.
QWERTY Cons: Everything else. It is balls and a bunch of nonsense. It is the religion of keyboard layouts.

Dvorak Pros: Hand alteration. Less finger travel than QWERTY. Different enough to limit confusion of muscle memory when alternating between layouts, if you need to. Supported virtually everywhere.
Dvorak Cons: Look at 'F'. Like what the **** is it doing there? Dvorak is a good step in the right direction, but the design is old as ****. While it did get a lot right, there is a lot of room for optimization.

Colemak Pros: It is easy to learn. It is more thought out in some ways than Dvorak. The shortcut keys are the same as QWERTY. It is supported most places where it would matter for anyone.
Colemak Cons: Too many concessions made to QWERTY, like leaving 'A' on the pinky. The things that make it easy to learn might also make it difficult for you to switch between it and QWERTY without hurting your typing speeds.

Custom layout on a custom keyboard Pros: Your keyboard can eventually be whatever you want to be. Even a sex bot. But that is gross, and I mostly advise against it. But what do I know? Change my mind. Maybe a sexbot keyboard is a brilliant idea. But is it sanitary? Do I care if it is?
Custom layout on a custom keyboard Cons: They can be A LOT OF WORK, and the job may never be done. But maybe that is what you want, because messing with **** is fun.

Other things to keep in mind:You won't be peck-typing on any layout that isn't QWERTY, so keycaps are mostly for fun and keeping your hands oriented.

 There is such a thing as programmable keyboards. A lot of the things that bother you about some of these layouts, such as where shortcuts are located, could be relocated to another layer somewhere that is maybe even more convenient than where they were before. Or you could move your punctuation around. Want the shift state of '.' to be '?'? Mine is. Want your passwords or user names saved to a key? ****ing do it, ****. J/K, I don't think you are a ****. But you can make your keyboard do, or not do, whatever feels right to you, ****. Oh, and you can also have different layouts on locking layers (a locking layer being like capslock instead of a shift layer being like shift), if that is your thing.

[Korth]

Show Image

Just sayin' - as a Canadian - that Canadian-English and US-English keyboard layouts are not equal.  Various Frenchy characters/accents annoyingly appear from time to time when you inadvertently press certain key sequences.  And the software will still tend to emphasize American counterparts in spelling and grammar. 

I do wonder when the Irish got their own keyboard.  Hmm.