3 ms·
>There are theoretically better layouts than dvorak, but I think dvorak strikes a great balance between ergonomics and being available and easy to switch to on
by magduf 8y ago
>There are theoretically better layouts than dvorak, but I think dvorak strikes a great balance between ergonomics and being available and easy to switch to on every operating system.
I disagree, and I'm a Dvorak typist. In any modern OS, Colemak at the least should be commonly available. Workman is a very good layout too, and should be pretty commonly available.
Dvorak's main advantage is that it's been around a long time, but it's not really the best layout IMO. One day I want to learn Workman as it seems to correct the flaws I see with Dvorak, and it should also (just like Colemak) be easier to learn for Qwerty typists than Dvorak.
- peatmoss 8y agoIt's a hard balance. Dvorak is vastly better than Qwerty and is ubiquitous. I have seen Colemak pretty commonly, and Workman once in a while. I don't doubt Workman might be marginally better than Dvorak, but I don't know if it's enough better for me to be the change that I want to see in the world.
- magduf 8y agoWorkman vs. Colemak probably isn't a huge gain. However, either of those have a huge advantage over Dvorak for someone who doesn't already know Dvorak and knows Qwerty, because they're just not that different from Qwerty the way Dvorak is. They also preserve the left-hand location of C, V, and X since those are so commonly used for cut-and-paste operations. Again, this is coming from someone who's proficient in Dvorak, but not Colemak or Workman, but right now I would not recommend Dvorak to someone interested in trying an alternate layout; I'd point them to these newer alternatives instead.