3 ms·
Why are everyone focusing on just putting the common keys in the most accessible places? I still haven't found a layout that was quite as efficient for me as t
by bjoli 5y ago
Why are everyone focusing on just putting the common keys in the most accessible places?
I still haven't found a layout that was quite as efficient for me as the Capewell layout: http://www.michaelcapewell.com/projects/keyboard/index.htm#The_Coming_Capewell_Layout_ http://www.michaelcapewell.com/projects/keyboard/index.htm#T...
No other layout focuses of comfortable combos in the same way. I had to make some adaptions for Swedish, but the umlaut vowels are not common anyway. I comfortable got up to about 100wpm with it, which is my about what I do on Dvorak (svdvorak, the true Swedish Dvorak layout). It just feels more fluent and relaxed than any other layout I tried.
I ended up going back to svdvorak due to regular us Dvorak being available everywhere.
- lawn 5y agoWhat makes you think this is just putting common keys on the most accessible places? Troublesome bigrams are for instance very minimal with this layout and the rolls that exist are also comfortable, and this also extends to the symbol layer.
- bjoli 5y agoBecause it was not mentioned in the post, and it is very hard to reason about just by looking at a layout. My main complaint is actually not specific to this layout (which seems fine, TBH) but a more general one. Trying to optimize for good bigrams is just as important as avoiding bad ones. Now, probably not unlike you, I currently write in a couple of languages daily (all Germanic, so maybe not a huge problem) so this seems easier said than done.