3 ms·
Disagree with a lot here. I could touch type before switching to Dvorak, but it’s still been very much worthwhile. Just trying out a single sentence in QWERTY
by saltcod 8y ago
Disagree with a lot here. I could touch type before switching to Dvorak, but it’s still been very much worthwhile.
Just trying out a single sentence in QWERTY now the difference is stark to me. My fingers move so much. With Dvorak I find there is much much less finger movement.
It’s not painless, but I’d recommend it to anyone who types for 8+ hrs a day. It’s not a small optimizations imo.
- saltcod 8y agoAlso should say that the benefit is 100% ergonomic for me. I can’t type any faster now than before. I’m at exactly the same speed I’d say.
- esrauch 8y agoI switched about 10 years ago and can still touch type qwerty as well (and need to do so fairly often). I haven't seriously considered going back, but I don't know that there is even any ergonomic advantages much less speed ones. I think the most relevant thing is that it might actually be worse for programming, both from the symbols and from qwerty-optimized hotkeys. I use vim with most of the regular bindings which is designed as a combination of mnemonics (which are still fine) and qwerty layout (which obviously just end up in a random spot, though j and k happen to still be together but not in the home row).
- dnautics 8y agoIt's certainly worse for programming if you use a semicolon rich language.
- claudiawerner 8y agoIn terms of finger movement (i.e distance your fingers have to travel) I'd have a look at CarpalX that specifically optimizes based on this metric. Its best layout (QGMLWB) compares favorably to both QWERTY, Dvorak and Colemak as far as that goes. http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/ http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/