5 ms·
One thing I always miss when I see statistics such as "Your fingers on QWERTY move 2.2x more than on Colemak," is an explanation of what activity you're presuma
by scbrg 7y ago
One thing I always miss when I see statistics such as "Your fingers on QWERTY move 2.2x more than on Colemak," is an explanation of what activity you're presumably doing then. I'm guessing the assumption is that you're writing pages and pages of English text. As a programmer in a non English speaking country I have no idea how that translates to my use case. 50% of the stuff I write is code. Sure, there's a bunch of English words in there, but I seldom get further than three letters before I mash my Emacs binding for autocomplete. When I write text, it's often internal emails that may not be in English.
So, perhaps my fingers don't move 2.2x more when using QWERTY. Perhaps they move less?! Maybe unlikely, but I really have no idea.
- RealWittenstein 7y agoI think that the main advantage of using Colemak over QWERTY is to reduce pain and effort.
- Foober223 7y agoCould Colemak increase pain and effort in non-english languages?
- RealWittenstein 7y agoProbably not, Colemak was designed to optimize English typing
- melling 7y agoYou could run what you type through an analyzer. http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/#/main http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/#/main
- knubie 7y agoI was really amused to find out that writing ruby code on a Japanese keyboard layout is a bit more efficient, because some of the frequently used special characters like _, @, and : don't require a modifier key. https://www.daveperrett.com/articles/2012/05/16/underscores-are-stupid-get-a-japanese-keyboard/ https://www.daveperrett.com/articles/2012/05/16/underscores-...