* Weaver <wea...@riseup.net> [120112 02:56]: > Hello all. > I've been interested in this subject for some time, because of the greater > typing speed potential and lowr incidence of RSI and have even delayed > moving from two finger typing with an idea of implementing a Dvorak > keyboard into the system. > > Who makes the best ones? > Where can they be bought from. > > Thanks for any time and trouble. > Regards, > > Weaver.
SHORT ANSWER: Do NOT purchase a Dvorak-layout keyboard. Instead, learn to touch-type Dvorak on a standard QWERTY keyboard. The computer does not care how the keycaps are labeled; and if you touch-type, neither should you! LONGER ANSWER: I learned to touch-type circa 1963 on a manual typewriter which used the QWERTY layout but had blank keycaps. I was one of the fastest and most accurate typists in the class, but numbers always were difficult for me. From 1963 until the present day, I type daily and heavily. About 1980, with my first IBM-PC (running M$DO$ and Window$) and a major contract in hand, I switched to the "classic" (that is, the original) Dvorak layout, in which the numeric row is: [ 7 5 3 1 9 0 2 4 6 8 ] Because the "classic" Dvorak layout is more-or-less intuitive to the native English speaker, the transition from QWERTY to Dvorak "classic" was not painful; it took me about a month to become comfortable and proficient with Dvorak. (The best way to ensure a successful transition is to commit yourself to the Dvorak layout at the beginning of a major project -- so that the matter becomes "swim or drown", and so that turning back is not an option.) Of course, learning the Dvorak layout should be easier for someone who does not have to "unlearn" QWERTY in the process. With the "classic" Dvorak layout (which now is available in Debian and Ubuntu, if not elsewhere), numbers suddenly were much easier to type accurately and rapidly. Back then, it was impractical for me to search for a "classic" Dvorak keyboard driver; the few readily-available drivers produced the "modified" layout. So I wore out several Northgate brand keyboards which had the "classic" Dvorak option. Once keyboard layout utilities (such as "TradeKeys Dvorak" became common, I switched to an off-the-shelf QWERTY keyboard and simply ignored the keycap labels. (After all, this is what touch-typing is all about.) An added advantage is that QWERTY typists do not use my computer, because they cannot decipher the key layout! When I first switched from Window$ to Debian, I paid a Debian guru to modify the QWERTY keyboard driver to Dvorak "classic" layout. (August Dvorak really knew what he was doing when he arranged the numeric key row.) On the original Selectric, IBM offered as an option a layout which today is termed the "modified" Dvorak layout. But the "modified" layout is a lamentable and foolish compromise in which the numeric row arrangement is: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 - = and there are other changes, as well. Regrettably, it is the compromised "modified" Dvorak layout which was standardized by the ISO (see Wikipedia). Apple likewise used the "modified" Dvorak layout on the IIC, allowing the user to switch between QWERTY and modified Dvorak with a slide switch. Please see the article at: http://www.matthewweathers.com/year2004/emacs_dvorak.htm . The section labeled "Update, August 2006:") presents my recommendations concerning intuitive Emacs-specific keybindings which have served me well for at least a decade. RLH -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120112043825.ga20...@gospelbroadcasting.org