6 ms·

The primary differences are 1. proper finger position and technique (mind your Ps and Qs); 2. better touch typing accuracy (see 1). Speed is probably roughly th

by pault 8y ago

The primary differences are 1. proper finger position and technique (mind your Ps and Qs); 2. better touch typing accuracy (see 1). Speed is probably roughly the same but with less backspacing. The staggered layout is weird; it's not natural at all and requires bizarre finger contortions designed to prevent mechanical typewriters from jamming. Ortholinear allows your fingers to move in perfectly straight lines, so it becomes incredibly easy to know exactly where a key should be without looking (honestly, can you type *$(@ without looking at your fingers?). Since we don't live in the 1890s, I think it's time to move on. The biggest benefit is not exclusive to ortho, but fully programmable layouts have totally transformed the way I interact with the computer; I map space and enter to where my thumbs naturally rest, have momentary layer toggles on row four that allow me to type any shifted symbol from the home row (also numpad centered on jkl and arrows mapped to hjkl), and esc/ctrl on R3 C1 (caps lock). Most of the time I never move my fingers more than 1u from their home positions. In my experience ortholinear is easier to map since things like number pads are awkward on a staggered layout, and ortho R4 gives you the ability to toggle between six layers without moving your thumbs. I've arrived at such an efficient layout that I don't even use R1 and most of R4 at all. Edit: you don't lose your ability to use a standard keyboard layout after learning ortho; it just feels like trading in your ferrari for a ford pinto.

appleiigs 8y ago
> can you type *{@ without looking at your fingers? No, but I would love to! Thanks for your comments. After thinking about it, I'd be willing to lose some speed (if at all) if I never had to look down to type ()=>{}; I'm a bit hesitant to use programmable layouts/layers. I already sometimes type 'jj' in MS Word because of Vim. I'm slow in context switching.
- jscholes 8y ago
  > After thinking about it, I'd be willing to lose some speed (if at all) if I never had to look down to type ()=>{}; Losing speed isn't a given. I recognise that my situation is completely different from someone who has learned to type by looking, but as a blind person I've only ever touch-typed and very rarely dip below 100 WPM while working with text. Writing code is different, naturally. But this is an area of life I've never felt at a disadvantage. Quite the opposite given how most people seem to type.
- enoch_r 8y ago
  I've had a few different ergonomic/ortholinear keyboards and I really, really highly recommend checking out the Atreus keyboard if you want to never look down. It's so ridiculously small (42 keys, no number row) that you know exactly where your fingers are the entire time you're typing. It has programmable layouts/layers but if you just stick with the defaults it's no more context-switching than modal editing. QWERTY is the base layer, next layer up does symbols, arrow keys, page up/down, and a numpad. Then on the third layer you have function keys and a few extras (e.g. insert, volume up/down). Took me a week or two to get comfortable with the first two layers, another few weeks before I felt confident with the third, and maybe 6 months in now I can't imagine ever going back to a regular keyboard. Typing `*{@` is as easy as typing `prw` with one (thumb operated) modifier held down. https://atreus.technomancy.us/ https://atreus.technomancy.us/
  - ludsan 8y ago
    Similar to the Atreus is the keyboardio, which I am now on my first month of learning. https://shop.keyboard.io/ https://shop.keyboard.io/ I have a Planck on order and will be the first keyboard I will be building, but wanted to buy something without having to think about which Cherry switches or keycap profile was perfect for me. The use of layers is great, and I encourage anyone to try it. I saw someone on a youtube somewhere explain the idea succinctly and I think it's worth paraphrasing here: "Bring the keys to your fingers and not your fingers to the keys"
CarVac 8y ago
I can type the punctuation on a staggered board without looking... I don't know what's so hard about it. RE: ortholinear In my opinion, there's no reason to do ortholinear instead of column-stagger, which is far more comfortable because it lets your fingers rest in a more natural curl. It's also further removed from row-stagger, easing the clean separation of muscle memory so that you can still use normal keyboards. The real key to upping your keyboard game, though, is thumb keys. My Mitosis Anaphase has tons and tons of thumb keys so I never have to reach for anything, ever. My number keys are on the home row, modifiers, and the enter key easily accessible by my thumbs. On layers I have mouse keys, funky punctuation, and more. The thumb clusters even leave room for a standard inverted-T arrow cluster useful for media control.
- pault 8y ago
  Yes, one of my daily drivers is an ergodox ez. Using thumb keys to change layers is a total game changer, but I also use this technique on my nyquist.
iad 8y ago
I still don't get it. In typing position, your arms are not parallel. Neither are the fingers of one hand parallel with the other. Doesn't that make the standard staggered layout more ergonomic than ortho? Isn't that the reason for the staggering?
- pault 8y ago
  Good points. I mostly use split keyboards to solve the arm problem, and there are staggered column layouts like the ergodox and friends that solve the finger problem (I'm typing on one now). And no, the staggering isn't for ergonomics, it was a limitation of mechanical typewriters[0] and it just stuck (hah) after that since it was what people were used to. [0]: https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/40403 https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/40403

by pault 8y ago

appleiigs 8y ago

> can you type *{@ without looking at your fingers? No, but I would love to! Thanks for your comments. After thinking about it, I'd be willing to lose some speed (if at all) if I never had to look down to type ()=>{}; I'm a bit hesitant to use programmable layouts/layers. I already sometimes type 'jj' in MS Word because of Vim. I'm slow in context switching.

jscholes 8y ago
> After thinking about it, I'd be willing to lose some speed (if at all) if I never had to look down to type ()=>{}; Losing speed isn't a given. I recognise that my situation is completely different from someone who has learned to type by looking, but as a blind person I've only ever touch-typed and very rarely dip below 100 WPM while working with text. Writing code is different, naturally. But this is an area of life I've never felt at a disadvantage. Quite the opposite given how most people seem to type.
enoch_r 8y ago
I've had a few different ergonomic/ortholinear keyboards and I really, really highly recommend checking out the Atreus keyboard if you want to never look down. It's so ridiculously small (42 keys, no number row) that you know exactly where your fingers are the entire time you're typing. It has programmable layouts/layers but if you just stick with the defaults it's no more context-switching than modal editing. QWERTY is the base layer, next layer up does symbols, arrow keys, page up/down, and a numpad. Then on the third layer you have function keys and a few extras (e.g. insert, volume up/down). Took me a week or two to get comfortable with the first two layers, another few weeks before I felt confident with the third, and maybe 6 months in now I can't imagine ever going back to a regular keyboard. Typing `*{@` is as easy as typing `prw` with one (thumb operated) modifier held down. https://atreus.technomancy.us/ https://atreus.technomancy.us/
- ludsan 8y ago
  Similar to the Atreus is the keyboardio, which I am now on my first month of learning. https://shop.keyboard.io/ https://shop.keyboard.io/ I have a Planck on order and will be the first keyboard I will be building, but wanted to buy something without having to think about which Cherry switches or keycap profile was perfect for me. The use of layers is great, and I encourage anyone to try it. I saw someone on a youtube somewhere explain the idea succinctly and I think it's worth paraphrasing here: "Bring the keys to your fingers and not your fingers to the keys"

CarVac 8y ago

I can type the punctuation on a staggered board without looking... I don't know what's so hard about it. RE: ortholinear In my opinion, there's no reason to do ortholinear instead of column-stagger, which is far more comfortable because it lets your fingers rest in a more natural curl. It's also further removed from row-stagger, easing the clean separation of muscle memory so that you can still use normal keyboards. The real key to upping your keyboard game, though, is thumb keys. My Mitosis Anaphase has tons and tons of thumb keys so I never have to reach for anything, ever. My number keys are on the home row, modifiers, and the enter key easily accessible by my thumbs. On layers I have mouse keys, funky punctuation, and more. The thumb clusters even leave room for a standard inverted-T arrow cluster useful for media control.

pault 8y ago
Yes, one of my daily drivers is an ergodox ez. Using thumb keys to change layers is a total game changer, but I also use this technique on my nyquist.

iad 8y ago

I still don't get it. In typing position, your arms are not parallel. Neither are the fingers of one hand parallel with the other. Doesn't that make the standard staggered layout more ergonomic than ortho? Isn't that the reason for the staggering?

pault 8y ago
Good points. I mostly use split keyboards to solve the arm problem, and there are staggered column layouts like the ergodox and friends that solve the finger problem (I'm typing on one now). And no, the staggering isn't for ergonomics, it was a limitation of mechanical typewriters[0] and it just stuck (hah) after that since it was what people were used to. [0]: https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/40403 https://ux.stackexchange.com/a/40403