4 ms·

I come out of the woodworks every now and again whenever I see Dvorak mentioned in any context. I really despise its popularity as an alternative keyboard layou

by Nadya 3y ago

I come out of the woodworks every now and again whenever I see Dvorak mentioned in any context. I really despise its popularity as an alternative keyboard layout because I feel it wasted a good year of my life. 1) Few people will have benefit of learning Dvorak. What benefits they see comes from learning how to properly touch type by forcefully breaking bad habits with their original (usually QWERTY) keyboard layout. 2) Switch to Colemak or any more modern layout that takes advantage of bigrams/trigrams better. Colemak is genuinely superior to QWERTY beyond just learning to touch type. I used to type 170~ WPM on QWERTY. Sustained. By all means an accomplished typist. I learned Dvorak well enough to get back up to 120~ WPM but saw no real benefits of using it: I already knew how to touch type. But QWERTY was causing my hands to cramp up over time and so I was on the search for improving that. I gave Colemak a try and it was a great relief. I only type 150~ WPM on Colemak after some years of using it but the lack of pain from typing for long periods of time is worth the small hit to my typing speed. Almost every single person I see who touts benefits of learning Dvorak was typing <60WPM in QWERTY and did not know how to properly touch type. The benefits they see weren't from using Dvorak: it was from finally learning how to touch type properly. Apologies as I know Dvorak wasn't really the focus of your post here. But in an attempt to perhaps make it still relevant: change every now and then is good. It can break you out of bad habits you didn't know you had learned and sometimes open you up to new ways of accomplishing something. As other replies have mentioned - I'm a big fan of Helix and gave up Neovim for it.

tmtvl 3y ago
Eh, I'd say it kinda depends, Colemak focuses more on rolls while Dvorak focuses more on alternating between hands. Though I think that Workman is a superior alternative to Colemak when it comes to ergonomic rolls. Xah Lee wrote an analysis on why he believes Dvorak is better than Colemak: <http://xahlee.info/kbd/dvorak_vs_colemak.html http://xahlee.info/kbd/dvorak_vs_colemak.html> and he brings up the frequency of the "th" digram, which on Colemak is a bit of an issue due to the finger travel.
imiric 3y ago
> I used to type 170~ WPM on QWERTY. That's an absurd speed. I can touch type on QWERTY, and last I measured I hovered at around 100 WPM on my best efforts. But TBH typing speed is really not something I'm concerned about. When I'm programming, accuracy is more important than speed, and I spend much more time thinking than actually typing. And when I'm writing prose, I also make pauses to rethink what I'm writing, and go back and forth, refining the text to match my thoughts. So even if I typed much faster, my overall speed of communication or programming wouldn't improve. I also haven't had any discomfort after decades of typing on QWERTY keyboards. I find it hard to believe that a different layout would reduce discomfort more than using an ergonomic keyboard, with proper wrist support and posture.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  Typing on a traditional keyboard using the Workman layout is - in my experience - significantly more comfortable. Typing on an actually ergonomic keyboard (currently a Keyboardio Model01) is a much more significant comfort difference. Both together scratches an itch that I recognize not everyone has, but if you do have that itch, scratching it feels damn good.
F3nd0 3y ago
I understand that Dvorak hasn’t been great for you, but I don’t think it’s fair to attribute all of its success and merits to touch typing. The distribution of keys is obviously more optimal than than of QWERTY, and even if your analysis holds true for some Dvorak typists, I doubt it does for a majority (or even a significant portion) of them. Speaking from my own personal experience, I learned to touch type (properly) on QWERTY first, but after a while I switched to Colemak. After yet another while, I switched to Dvorak, and have been using it for several years now. For me, Dvorak has been slightly more comfortable than Colemak (which, in turn, was much more comfortable than QWERTY); though I have to admit I’ve never experienced significant pain or cramps just from typing. In any case, I find both layouts to be a great improvement over QWERTY, and certainly not only because of touch typing.
- Nadya 3y ago
  The primary difference is rolling vs alternating (as someone else mentioned) and slight left vs right hand biases (I don't think anyone brought this up yet) and there is some definitely enough room for preference of one over the other there. I prefer rolling over alternating and I'm left-hand dominant. For finger alternation I'd recommend any of the CarpalX layouts (Qgmlwb specifically). If I knew about CarpalX before learning Colemak I probably would have learned it instead but I also don't want to relearn typing for a 4th time. There's always a handful of exceptions to every rule but by and large from my experiences in the altkey layout communities the people who touted Dvorak the loudest largely didn't know how to type properly before learning Dvorak and it was their first alternative layout learned. So it's colored my view a bit. I have regularly typed for >8 hours/day - nearly every day - since age 8. The hand pains didn't really start until I was in my 20's.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
tjoff 3y ago
> What benefits they see comes from learning how to properly touch type by forcefully breaking bad habits with their original (usually QWERTY) keyboard layout. With that I fully agree, but then again - in my mind that exactly is the value proposition of any non-QWERTY-layout. I also agree that ergonomics is more important than peek throughput. But you neglect the cost. The cost of ruining shortcuts in many applications and/or complex OS settings just to be able to type. There are workarounds and solutions for most but I haven't been convinced it is a net gain. So in my opinion, stay and invest in QWERTY instead. Regarding ergonomics use a split ortholinear keyboard. I am in doubt any layout will be as liberating as that and orders of magnitude less investment in time. Everytime I use or think of a staggered keyboard I'm amazed at the design. Put your right hand over the right hand of the keyboard as if to type, the columns kind of naturally go with your fingers - not bad at all really. Then do the same with your left hand and it is just a clusterfuck. Though I do have to acknowledge two things, you can of course use and benefit from an alternative layout on an ortholinear keyboard as well. And the cost of only feeling at home on a bespoke keyboard (not that it is different enough for you to not be able to use a normal keyboard) isn't negligible depending on your situation either.
self_awareness 3y ago
One even bigger problem with Dvorak isn't the speed, which is actually very hard (next to improssible) to objectively measure; it's that you lose the ability to write on somebody else's computer, or phone, depending on where you're using Dvorak.
euiq 3y ago
I am intensively envious of people who type this fast; I get up to 100 words per minute on a good day. Time to get a new pair of hands?
zimbatm 3y ago
Especially when programming. A lot of key shortcuts are specifically designed for QWERTY. And if you believe that the keyboard should be re-arranged to better fit the language then shouldn't a programming layout have more easily reachable symbol characters? (and varying depending on the language).

by Nadya 3y ago

tmtvl 3y ago

Eh, I'd say it kinda depends, Colemak focuses more on rolls while Dvorak focuses more on alternating between hands. Though I think that Workman is a superior alternative to Colemak when it comes to ergonomic rolls. Xah Lee wrote an analysis on why he believes Dvorak is better than Colemak: <http://xahlee.info/kbd/dvorak_vs_colemak.html http://xahlee.info/kbd/dvorak_vs_colemak.html> and he brings up the frequency of the "th" digram, which on Colemak is a bit of an issue due to the finger travel.

imiric 3y ago

> I used to type 170~ WPM on QWERTY. That's an absurd speed. I can touch type on QWERTY, and last I measured I hovered at around 100 WPM on my best efforts. But TBH typing speed is really not something I'm concerned about. When I'm programming, accuracy is more important than speed, and I spend much more time thinking than actually typing. And when I'm writing prose, I also make pauses to rethink what I'm writing, and go back and forth, refining the text to match my thoughts. So even if I typed much faster, my overall speed of communication or programming wouldn't improve. I also haven't had any discomfort after decades of typing on QWERTY keyboards. I find it hard to believe that a different layout would reduce discomfort more than using an ergonomic keyboard, with proper wrist support and posture.

thomastjeffery 3y ago
Typing on a traditional keyboard using the Workman layout is - in my experience - significantly more comfortable. Typing on an actually ergonomic keyboard (currently a Keyboardio Model01) is a much more significant comfort difference. Both together scratches an itch that I recognize not everyone has, but if you do have that itch, scratching it feels damn good.

F3nd0 3y ago

I understand that Dvorak hasn’t been great for you, but I don’t think it’s fair to attribute all of its success and merits to touch typing. The distribution of keys is obviously more optimal than than of QWERTY, and even if your analysis holds true for some Dvorak typists, I doubt it does for a majority (or even a significant portion) of them. Speaking from my own personal experience, I learned to touch type (properly) on QWERTY first, but after a while I switched to Colemak. After yet another while, I switched to Dvorak, and have been using it for several years now. For me, Dvorak has been slightly more comfortable than Colemak (which, in turn, was much more comfortable than QWERTY); though I have to admit I’ve never experienced significant pain or cramps just from typing. In any case, I find both layouts to be a great improvement over QWERTY, and certainly not only because of touch typing.

Nadya 3y ago
The primary difference is rolling vs alternating (as someone else mentioned) and slight left vs right hand biases (I don't think anyone brought this up yet) and there is some definitely enough room for preference of one over the other there. I prefer rolling over alternating and I'm left-hand dominant. For finger alternation I'd recommend any of the CarpalX layouts (Qgmlwb specifically). If I knew about CarpalX before learning Colemak I probably would have learned it instead but I also don't want to relearn typing for a 4th time. There's always a handful of exceptions to every rule but by and large from my experiences in the altkey layout communities the people who touted Dvorak the loudest largely didn't know how to type properly before learning Dvorak and it was their first alternative layout learned. So it's colored my view a bit. I have regularly typed for >8 hours/day - nearly every day - since age 8. The hand pains didn't really start until I was in my 20's.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

tjoff 3y ago

> What benefits they see comes from learning how to properly touch type by forcefully breaking bad habits with their original (usually QWERTY) keyboard layout. With that I fully agree, but then again - in my mind that exactly is the value proposition of any non-QWERTY-layout. I also agree that ergonomics is more important than peek throughput. But you neglect the cost. The cost of ruining shortcuts in many applications and/or complex OS settings just to be able to type. There are workarounds and solutions for most but I haven't been convinced it is a net gain. So in my opinion, stay and invest in QWERTY instead. Regarding ergonomics use a split ortholinear keyboard. I am in doubt any layout will be as liberating as that and orders of magnitude less investment in time. Everytime I use or think of a staggered keyboard I'm amazed at the design. Put your right hand over the right hand of the keyboard as if to type, the columns kind of naturally go with your fingers - not bad at all really. Then do the same with your left hand and it is just a clusterfuck. Though I do have to acknowledge two things, you can of course use and benefit from an alternative layout on an ortholinear keyboard as well. And the cost of only feeling at home on a bespoke keyboard (not that it is different enough for you to not be able to use a normal keyboard) isn't negligible depending on your situation either.

self_awareness 3y ago

One even bigger problem with Dvorak isn't the speed, which is actually very hard (next to improssible) to objectively measure; it's that you lose the ability to write on somebody else's computer, or phone, depending on where you're using Dvorak.

euiq 3y ago

I am intensively envious of people who type this fast; I get up to 100 words per minute on a good day. Time to get a new pair of hands?

zimbatm 3y ago

Especially when programming. A lot of key shortcuts are specifically designed for QWERTY. And if you believe that the keyboard should be re-arranged to better fit the language then shouldn't a programming layout have more easily reachable symbol characters? (and varying depending on the language).