3 ms·
I've typed Dvorak for a couple years, and have been quite happy with it. I'm curious about Colemak, though. Dvorak is pretty established as the alternative Engl
by silentbicycle 16y ago
I've typed Dvorak for a couple years, and have been quite happy with it. I'm curious about Colemak, though. Dvorak is pretty established as the alternative English-language keyboard layout - It's not hard to set up on Windows, Unix, or (I'm guessing) OS X. Is Colemak? While I'm convinced that Dvorak is significantly better than Qwerty, if you're the stubborn sort that would use a different keyboard layout for English (spoiler alert: I am), I suspect there's diminishing returns after that. Still, I'm really curious about Colemak (what was the rationale?) - I just don't know anybody who uses it.
My strategy of "heavily customized Emacs / Dvorak on my computers, standard Qwerty / vi otherwise" has been a good compromise over the years, incidentally.
Also, I work with Swedish hackers who remind me that Qwerty is only "standard" so far across the ocean. These things only make sense in a local context.
- w1ntermute 16y agoFunny that they're Swedish - Swedish is one of the few non-English languages for which there is a version of Dvorak - it's called Svorak.
- silentbicycle 16y agoYeah, I think there's a Danish Dvorak as well. Pretty useless for Japanese, Russian, or Arabic though. :)
- jules 16y agoI use Colemak. It's supposed to be easier to learn than Dvorak, and it leaves some keyboard shortcuts intact (e.g. ctrl+zxcv). There is a colemak.vim file that completely customizes vim for colemak. Warning: it changes nearly every single key binding. The only downside to colemak is that d is next to t. This sometimes makes it difficult to type Dutch, because some words end with "dt". A typo "td" is easy to make.