Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 01:09, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: thanks. didn't know about Ducky keyboard. Looks good. Also nice to hear your experience about Truly Ergonomic keyboard. I like it, see my first-hour review here: http://geekhack.org/showwiki.php?title=Island:18154 no actually i don't know how to make normal letter keys as (ctrl, alt) modifiers. You'll need a usb hid remapper. (there's a couple for mac os x i linked on my site but i couldn't verify cuz am now on a 6 years old powerpc with outdated mac os x) For Windows, Microsoft made a layout maker. I haven't used it so i don't know if it allows mapping letter keys as modifier. Have you tried it? I use Kubuntu Linux. i don't know much about the subject but from what i read am guessing it's possible, because each key just send up/down signals. (whether you are using usb or ps/2 makes a difference too.) (am assumbing above that you want to put modifiers in normal letter key positions. But if all you want to do is swap modifier among themselves, that's pretty easy. Lots of tools to do that for mac and windows.) Actually, most of the modifiers are just switched among themselves. Only Win is in a normal-keyboard location. But even if you succeded in putting modifiers to letter key positions, you may run into problems with key ghosting, because the circuits are desigend to prevent ghosting on qwerty layout only (with mod keys in their normal positions). Unless your keyboard is actually full n-key- roll-over. I doubt that this is n-key rollover, but it is I think 6-key rollover and in any case I personally use sticky keys as I have difficulty pressing more than one key at a time. But in the general sense that is good to know, if other people use the layout they will need to be aware of that. Thanks! maybe some of these are useful info, but maybe you are quite beyond that. Thanks for your info too. Good luck. just Xah Thanks Xah! I will not be online for the next three weeks, so a reply will be much delayed! -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 18, 4:06 am, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 01:09, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: thanks. didn't know about Ducky keyboard. Looks good. Also nice to hear your experience about Truly Ergonomic keyboard. I like it, see my first-hour review here:http://geekhack.org/showwiki.php?title=Island:18154 very nice review! and on geekhack.org too — the hardcore keyboard mod site! I enjoyed reading it. no actually i don't know how to make normal letter keys as (ctrl, alt) modifiers. You'll need a usb hid remapper. (there's a couple for mac os x i linked on my site but i couldn't verify cuz am now on a 6 years old powerpc with outdated mac os x) For Windows, Microsoft made a layout maker. I haven't used it so i don't know if it allows mapping letter keys as modifier. Have you tried it? I use Kubuntu Linux. i only started to use linux this month, from 10 years hiatus. First thing to do there is remap keys to the way i like of course. But am not familiar on how-to there. Seems xmodmap is becoming obsolete and XKB is in place. There's a couple nice sites about XKB but havn't had a chance to study them yet. May i ask you a few questions down the road? (maybe we can add each other on google talk or some social network) (off to email) Xah -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 14:40, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: very nice review! and on geekhack.org too — the hardcore keyboard mod site! I enjoyed reading it. Yes, that is some forum! Wait until I post my mods. You've never seen such abused input devices, I hope. i only started to use linux this month, from 10 years hiatus. First thing to do there is remap keys to the way i like of course. But am not familiar on how-to there. Seems xmodmap is becoming obsolete and XKB is in place. There's a couple nice sites about XKB but havn't had a chance to study them yet. XKB is pretty configurable but some stuff is not well documented. Here are some of my bookmarked resources, to get you started: // Making new layouts http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Altering_or_Creating_Keyboard_Maps http://www.x.org/wiki/XKB http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/XKeyboardConfig http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Configuring_keyboards http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Background:_How_keyboards_work http://www.xfree86.org/4.2.0/xmodmap.1.html // Enabling multimedia keys (also useful for the former) http://abesto.host22.com/2009/04/microsoft-ergonomic-4000-and-linux.html http://en.gentoo-wiki.com/wiki/Microsoft_Natural_Ergonomic_Keyboard_4000 https://wiki.kubuntu.org/KDEMultimediaKeys http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/keys.html http://cweiske.de/howto/xmodmap/allinone.html http://linux.die.net/man/8/setkeycodes http://rick.vanrein.org/linux/funkey/ http://juliano.info/en/Blog:Memory_Leak/Linux,_KDE:_Mapping_functions_to_extra_keys http://linux.playofmind.net/extra_keys/ http://dev-loki.blogspot.com/2006/04/mapping-unsupported-keys-with-xmodmap.html And as I know you to be an Emac man: https://github.com/r0adrunner/Space2Ctrl May i ask you a few questions down the road? (maybe we can add each other on google talk or some social network) Sure, I'll email you from my personal email account soon. But after a few more hours, I won't be available until late July. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 14, 7:50 am, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:21, Elena egarr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote:
Studies have shown that even a
strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is
acclimated.
Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40%
more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is.
And disproportionate usage of fingers. On QWERTY the weakest fingers
(pinkies) do almost 1/4 of the keypresses when modifier keys, enter,
tab, and backspace are taken into account.
I'm developing a QWERTY-based layout that moves the load off the
pinkies and onto the index
fingers:http://dotancohen.com/eng/noah_ergonomic_keyboard_layout.html
There is a Colemak version in the works as well.
u r aware that there are already tens of layouts, each created by
programer, thinking that they can create the best layout?
if not, check
〈Computer Keyboards, Layouts, Hotkeys, Macros, RSI ⌨〉
xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/keyboarding.html
on layout section. Lots people all creating layouts.
also, you want to put {Enter, Tab}, etc keys in the middle, but I
don't understand from ur website how u gonna do that since it requires
keyboard hardware modification. e.g. r u creating key layout on PC
keyboard or are you creating hardware keyboard Key layout? The former
is a dime a million, the latter is rare but also there are several
sites all trying to do it. Talk is cheap, the hardest part is actually
to get money to finance and manufacture it. The latest one, which i
deem good, is Truely Ergonomic keyboard. It sells for $200 and is in
pre-order only now.
Xah
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 15, 5:43 am, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: On Jun 15, 5:32 pm, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. From testing small movements with my fingers I see that the fourth finger is in fact a bit weaker than the last finger, but more importantly, it is much less dexterous. Good to know! Most of the piano technique-icians emphasis, especially those of the last century like Hanon, was to cultivate 'independence' of the fingers. The main target of these attacks being the 4th finger. The number of potential-pianists who ruined their hands and lives chasing this holy grail is unknown Hi rusi, am afaid going to contradict what u say here. i pretty much mastered Hanon 60. All of it, but it was now 8 years ago. The idea that pinky is stronger than 4th is silly. I can't fathom any logic or science to support that. Perhaps what u meant is that in many situations the use of pinky can be worked around because it in at the edge of your hand so you can apply chopping motion or similar. (which, is BAD if you want to develope piano finger skill) However, that's entirely different than saying pinky being stronger than 4th. there's many ways we can cookup tests right away to see. e.g. try to squeeze a rubber ball with 4th and thumb. Repeat with pink + thumb. Or, reverse exercise by stretching a rubber band wrapped on the 2 fingers of interest. You can easy see that pinky isn't stronger. Xah -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 20:43, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote:
u r aware that there are already tens of layouts, each created by
programer, thinking that they can create the best layout?
Yes. Mine is better :)
Had Stallman not heard of VI when he set out to write Emacs?
if not, check
〈Computer Keyboards, Layouts, Hotkeys, Macros, RSI ⌨〉
xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/keyboarding.html
on layout section. Lots people all creating layouts.
also, you want to put {Enter, Tab}, etc keys in the middle, but I
don't understand from ur website how u gonna do that since it requires
keyboard hardware modification. e.g. r u creating key layout on PC
keyboard or are you creating hardware keyboard Key layout? The former
is a dime a million, the latter is rare but also there are several
sites all trying to do it. Talk is cheap, the hardest part is actually
to get money to finance and manufacture it. The latest one, which i
deem good, is Truely Ergonomic keyboard. It sells for $200 and is in
pre-order only now.
I ordered the Truley Ergonomic keyboard, I waited for half a year
after delivery was supposed to happen to request my money back. Too
many delays, so in the end I bought a Ducky mechanical (Cherry Browns)
instead.
I am writing a software keyboard layout. I'm actually having a hard
time moving the modifier keys (Alt, Ctrl) to a new location. If you
know how to do that I would much appreciate some advice, I'll post the
problem here or in private mail.
Thanks, Lee. (or should that be Thanks, Xah?)
--
Dotan Cohen
http://gibberish.co.il
http://what-is-what.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 17, 2:26 pm, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 20:43, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote:
u r aware that there are already tens of layouts, each created by
programer, thinking that they can create the best layout?
Yes. Mine is better :)
Had Stallman not heard of VI when he set out to write Emacs?
if not, check
〈Computer Keyboards, Layouts, Hotkeys, Macros, RSI ⌨〉
xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/keyboarding.html
on layout section. Lots people all creating layouts.
also, you want to put {Enter, Tab}, etc keys in the middle, but I
don't understand from ur website how u gonna do that since it requires
keyboard hardware modification. e.g. r u creating key layout on PC
keyboard or are you creating hardware keyboard Key layout? The former
is a dime a million, the latter is rare but also there are several
sites all trying to do it. Talk is cheap, the hardest part is actually
to get money to finance and manufacture it. The latest one, which i
deem good, is Truely Ergonomic keyboard. It sells for $200 and is in
pre-order only now.
I ordered the Truley Ergonomic keyboard, I waited for half a year
after delivery was supposed to happen to request my money back. Too
many delays, so in the end I bought a Ducky mechanical (Cherry Browns)
instead.
I am writing a software keyboard layout. I'm actually having a hard
time moving the modifier keys (Alt, Ctrl) to a new location. If you
know how to do that I would much appreciate some advice, I'll post the
problem here or in private mail.
Thanks, Lee. (or should that be Thanks, Xah?)
thanks. didn't know about Ducky keyboard. Looks good. Also nice to
hear your experience about Truly Ergonomic keyboard.
no actually i don't know how to make normal letter keys as (ctrl, alt)
modifiers. You'll need a usb hid remapper. (there's a couple for mac
os x i linked on my site but i couldn't verify cuz am now on a 6 years
old powerpc with outdated mac os x) For Windows, Microsoft made a
layout maker. I haven't used it so i don't know if it allows mapping
letter keys as modifier. Have you tried it?
i don't know much about the subject but from what i read am guessing
it's possible, because each key just send up/down signals. (whether
you are using usb or ps/2 makes a difference too.)
(am assumbing above that you want to put modifiers in normal letter
key positions. But if all you want to do is swap modifier among
themselves, that's pretty easy. Lots of tools to do that for mac and
windows.)
But even if you succeded in putting modifiers to letter key positions,
you may run into problems with key ghosting, because the circuits are
desigend to prevent ghosting on qwerty layout only (with mod keys in
their normal positions). Unless your keyboard is actually full n-key-
roll-over.
maybe some of these are useful info, but maybe you are quite beyond
that. Thanks for your info too. Good luck.
just Xah
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Dennis Lee Bieber wlfr...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 21:30:43 -0700, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general: More than that, any layout more efficient than QWERTY is practically meaningless. The whole intentional inefficiency thing in the design of the QWERTY layout is an urban legend. Oh, there was an inefficiency in QWERTY -- but it only applies to fully manual typewriters, in which some of the more common letters were placed under the weakest fingers -- to slow down key strokes enough to reduce jamming multiple type blocks That's what I was referring to. That's a very common belief, but it's nonsense. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Dennis Lee Bieber wlfr...@ix.netcom.com wrote: Oh, there was an inefficiency in QWERTY -- but it only applies to fully manual typewriters, in which some of the more common letters were placed under the weakest fingers -- to slow down key strokes enough to reduce jamming multiple type blocks That's what I was referring to. That's a very common belief, but it's nonsense. Competing rumour: The layout was designed such that typewriter could be typed out using only the top row, to improve demo speed by a factor of three. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 11:30, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: Competing rumour: The layout was designed such that typewriter could be typed out using only the top row, to improve demo speed by a factor of three. Utter nonsense. The QWERTY keyboard was - and this is verified fact - designed the way is was because the inventor's mother in law's initials were AS and his father is law was DF. The letter combinations JK and L; were his childrens' initials. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: Utter nonsense. The QWERTY keyboard was - and this is verified fact - designed the way is was because the inventor's mother in law's initials were AS and his father is law was DF. The letter combinations JK and L; were his childrens' initials. He had a son called Harry ;emicolon? That's nearly as bad as Robert'); DROP TABLE Students; --. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 15, 9:35 am, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:00, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: For keyboarding (in the piano/organ sense) the weakest finger is not the fifth/pinky but the fourth. Because for the fifth you will notice that the natural movement is to stiffen the finger and then use a slight outward arm-swing; for thumb, index and middle, they of course have their own strength. The fourth has neither advantage. IOW qwerty is not so bad as it could have been if it were qewrty (or asd was sad) Thank you rusi! Tell me, where can I read more about the advantages of each finger? Googling turns up nothing. My intention is to improved the Noah ergonomic keyboard layout. Thanks! Dont know how to answer that! I only have my experience to go by :-) If you've spent a childhood and many of your adult hours breaking your hands on Czerny http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Czerny and Hanon eg exercise 4 http://www.hanon-online.com/the-virtuoso-pianist/part-i/exercise-n-4/ you will come to similar conclusions. I should warn however that even for a modern electronic piano the action is larger and heavier than a typical (computer) keyboard and for a real/acoustic piano with a foot long slice of wood moved for each keystroke its probably an order of magnitude heavier. So its not exactly clear how much the experience of one carries over to the other -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 15:19, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you rusi! Tell me, where can I read more about the advantages of each finger? Googling turns up nothing. My intention is to improved the Noah ergonomic keyboard layout. Thanks! Dont know how to answer that! I only have my experience to go by :-) If you've spent a childhood and many of your adult hours breaking your hands on Czerny http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Czerny and Hanon eg exercise 4 http://www.hanon-online.com/the-virtuoso-pianist/part-i/exercise-n-4/ you will come to similar conclusions. I should warn however that even for a modern electronic piano the action is larger and heavier than a typical (computer) keyboard and for a real/acoustic piano with a foot long slice of wood moved for each keystroke its probably an order of magnitude heavier. So its not exactly clear how much the experience of one carries over to the other Thanks. From testing small movements with my fingers I see that the fourth finger is in fact a bit weaker than the last finger, but more importantly, it is much less dexterous. Good to know! -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 15, 5:32 pm, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks. From testing small movements with my fingers I see that the fourth finger is in fact a bit weaker than the last finger, but more importantly, it is much less dexterous. Good to know! Most of the piano technique-icians emphasis, especially those of the last century like Hanon, was to cultivate 'independence' of the fingers. The main target of these attacks being the 4th finger. The number of potential-pianists who ruined their hands and lives chasing this holy grail is unknown -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:11 AM, Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: numerical keypad is useful to many. Most people can't touch type. Even for touch typist, many doesn't do the number keys. So, when they need to type credit, phone number, etc, they go for the number pad. It's not about being *able* to touch type with the number keys in the main section. When you're doing primarily numerical data entry, the number pad is typically much faster to touch type with than the main number keys. In the main section, the number keys are too far removed from the home row to be able to type with any speed, and if you reposition your hands directly above them then the Enter, decimal, and Shift keys are no longer easily accessible. Touch typing on the number pad gives you everything you're likely to need in easy reach of your right hand, and if you need something else as well then your left hand is free to hover over it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 13, 6:45 pm, Gregory Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: Chris Angelico wrote: And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? What I think's really stupid is designing keyboards with two big blocks of keys between the alphabetic keys and the mouse. Back when standard-grade keyboards didn't usually have a built-in numeric keypad, it was much easier to move one's right hand back and forth between the keyboard and mouse. Nowadays I find myself perpetually prone to off-by-one errors when moving back to the keyboard. :-( numerical keypad is useful to many. Most people can't touch type. Even for touch typist, many doesn't do the number keys. So, when they need to type credit, phone number, etc, they go for the number pad. Also, i think the number pad esentially have become a calculator for vast majority of computer users. These days, almost all keyboard from Microsoft or Logitech has a Calculator button near the number pad to launch it. i myself, am a qwerty typist since ~1987, also worked as data entry clerk for a couple of years. Am a dvorak touch typist since 1994. (and emacs since 1997) However, i never learned touch type the numbers on the main section till i think ~2005. Since about 2008, the numerical keypad is used as extra function keys. Xah -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 13, 6:19 am, Steven D'Aprano 〔steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info〕 wrote: │ I don't know if there are any studies that indicate how much of a │ programmer's work is actual mechanical typing but I'd be surprised if it │ were as much as 20% of the work day. The rest of the time being thinking, │ planning, debugging, communicating with customers or managers, reading │ documentation, testing, committing code, sketching data schemas on the │ whiteboard ... to say nothing of the dreaded strategy meetings. you can find the study on my site. URL in the first post of this thread. Xah -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Ba Wha 13, 7:23 nz, Ehfgbz Zbql 〔ehfgbzcz...@tznvy.pbz〕 jebgr: │ Qibenx -- yvxr djregl naq nal bgure xrlobneq ynlbhg -- nffhzrf gur │ pbzchgre vf n glcrjevgre. │ Guvf zrnaf va rssrpg ng yrnfg gjb pbafgenvagf, arprffnel sbe gur │ glcrjevgre ohg abg sbe gur pbzchgre: │ │ n. Gur glcvfg pna glcr bayl 1 xrl ng n gvzr │ o. Bar (xrl)fgebxr trarengrf rknpgyl 1 yrggre │ │ Rkprcgvbaf gb [n] ner Fuvsg (Pgey) rgp ohg pyrneyl va ehaavat hfr gurl │ ner gur rkprcgvba abg gur ehyr. │ │ │ Jurer fcrrq ernyyl vf ivgny, fhpu nf sbe pbheg fgrabtencuref, fcrpvny zrpunavpny │ │ fubegunaq znpuvarf fhpu nf fgrabglcrf ner hfrq, pbfgvat gubhfnaqf bs qbyynef ohg nyybjvat │ │ gur glcvfg gb ernpu fcrrqf bs bire 300 jcz. │ │ Lrf, vafgehzragf yvxr fgrabglcrf fcrrq hc glcvat ol hanffhzvat [n] │ Yvxrjvfr cvnavfgf pna or fnvq (naq frra) gb qb zber ng gur cvnab guna │ glcvfgf ng n pbzchgre orpnhfr pubeqf ner cneg bs gur 'nyybjrq │ ynathntr'. │ │ Nffhzcgvba [o] yvxrjvfr vf haarprffnevyl erfgevpgvir ba n pbzchgre. │ Guvax bs nyy gur 'nooeri/favccrg/fubegsbez/grzcyngr' flfgrzf yvxr │ lnfavccrg, grkgzngr-favccrgf, rznpf/iv nooerif rgp. │ │ Sbe beqvanel Ratyvfu gurer ner guvatf yvxr xrlfpevcguggc://jjj.serrjrof.pbz/pnfflwnarx │ │ Sbe rknzcyr gur zbfg pbzzba jbeqf (rfgvzngrq gb or nebhaq 40% bs │ Ratyvfu) ner fubegsbezrq nf: │ o = ohg │ p = jvgu │ q = unq │ r = guvf │ s = bs │ t = gung │ u = gur │ w = juvpu │ a = naq │ ...rgp rgp hcgb │ m = jnf │ │ gura pbzzba cuenfrf │ noyr gb = po │ unq orra = qa │ qb abg = qk │ qvq abg = rk │ qbrf abg = qfk │ │ rgp │ │ Pyrneyl, sbe cebtenzzref guvf vf hayvxryl gb or zhpu hfr -- │ cebtenzzvat ynathntrf ner abg Ratyvfu. │ │ Ohg ohg vg vf pregnvayl na bcra dhrfgvba jurgure vs gur ercrngvat │ cnggreaf va cebtenzzvat ynathntrf ner pncgherq vagb fbzr flfgrz, gur │ erfhygvat orarsvg jbhyq or n zrer zvpeb-bcgvzvmngvba be fbzrguvat zber │ fvtavsvpnag. V unir frra fbzr tbbq cebtenzzref fjrne ol │ rznpf-lnfavccrgf, grkgzngr-favccrgf rgp. gurer'f fcrpvny vachg qrivprf qrfvtarq sbe pubeqvat, pnyyrq pubeqvat xrlobneq. Gurer'f qngnunaq. Ybbx hc Jvxvcrqvn sbe n yvfg. gurer'f nyfb xvarfvf naq bguref gung jbexf jvgu sbbg crqnyf. Fb, vg'f yvxr pubeqvat jvgu lbhe srrg gbb. Rire frra gubfr penml betnavfg jvgu srrg ohfl ba 30 crqnyf? unir lbh gevrq ibvpr vachg? Jvaqbjf pbzrf jvgu vg. Cerggl tbbq. Gubhtu, qbrfa'g jbex fb jryy jvgu nccf vzcyrzragrq bhgfvqr bs ZF'f senzrjbex, fhpu nf rznpf. fbzr cebtenzre'f fbyhgvbaf: 〈Pryroevgl Cebtenzref jvgu EFV (Ercrgvgvir Fgenva Vawhel)〉 uggc://knuyrr.bet/rznpf/rznpf_unaq_cnva_pryroevgl.ugzy Knu -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs. Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
for some reason, was unable to post the previous message. (but can post others) So, the message is rot13'd and it works. Not sure what's up with Google groups. (this happened a few years back once. Apparantly, the message content might have something to do with it because rot13 clearly works. Yet, the problem doesnt seem to be my name or embedded url, since it only happens with the previous message) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 13 Giu, 11:22, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Yang Ha Nguyen cmp...@gmail.com wrote: Could you show which studies? Do they do research just about habit or other elements (e.g. movement rates, comfortablility, ...) as well? Have they ever heard of RSI because of repetitive movements? And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? The classic grasp mouse sitting to the right of the keyboard mandates either a one-handed typing style (left hand on keyboard, right hand on mouse) or constant re-aiming and re-grasping. Or you can use a touchpad; what are the consequences of that on typing speed? And my personal favorite, the IBM TrackPoint - a stick mouse between the G/H/B keys, a design which other manufacturers have since copied (although IMHO the IBM/Lenovo type still beats the others hands down) - keep your hands where you want them and just reach out to grab the mouse with your index finger, or slide your fingers one key over (works fine if you're used to it). Typing speed depends on a lot more than just your layout, and it's going to be nearly impossible to narrow it down viably. Chris Angelico Moreover, I've seen people move the mouse faster than I could achieve the same task by keyboard. To me, the advantage of ergonomic layout is not about speed - I'm sure there will always be people able to type blazingly fast on any random layout - but about comfort. Even when typing slowly, I don't want my fingers and my hands neither moving much more nor contorting much more than necessary. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:21, Elena egarr...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40% more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is. And disproportionate usage of fingers. On QWERTY the weakest fingers (pinkies) do almost 1/4 of the keypresses when modifier keys, enter, tab, and backspace are taken into account. I'm developing a QWERTY-based layout that moves the load off the pinkies and onto the index fingers: http://dotancohen.com/eng/noah_ergonomic_keyboard_layout.html There is a Colemak version in the works as well. -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 2011.06.13 08:58 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: That's one of the reasons I like my laptop keyboard so much. I find that the terribly tiny keys on a laptop keyboard make them very evil. I don't see how anyone could type fast on one of them without making tons of errors. I constantly have to fix typos (the 'o' key is the worst) when writing with this thing, and I'm not typing fast at all. I suppose if you have really small hands, the compact layout might be more comfortable, but I hate my keyboard. Then again, maybe I just have a tiny keyboard; you might have one that actually fills the space on the bottom. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: And disproportionate usage of fingers. On QWERTY the weakest fingers (pinkies) do almost 1/4 of the keypresses when modifier keys, enter, tab, and backspace are taken into account. That's true on a piano too, though. My pinkies are quite accustomed to doing the extra work now, so whether I'm playing the church organ or typing a post here, they're put to good use. It's the longer fingers in the middle that aren't pulling their weight... Chis Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Berg bahamutzero8...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011.06.13 08:58 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: That's one of the reasons I like my laptop keyboard so much. I find that the terribly tiny keys on a laptop keyboard make them very evil. I don't see how anyone could type fast on one of them without making tons of errors. Then again, maybe I just have a tiny keyboard; you might have one that actually fills the space on the bottom. There are many different designs of laptop keyboard. Tiny netbooks seem to have the very worst, leaving it nearly impossible to get any decent work done (there may be exceptions to that, but I've seen a lot of bad netbook keyboards). My current laptop is an IBM T60, one of the last of the IBMs (now they're all Lenovos); prior to him, I've had various other 14 or 15 laptops, all with the keyboards using most of the available room. Obviously there's no numeric keypad on a keyboard that small (having one overlaid on the main keyboard doesn't help when you're playing Angband), but other than that, it's a complete keyboard with enough room for the fingers to whack the right keys. There's also a lot of difference in travel. The smaller keyboards have keys that move about half a nanometer, but better keyboards feel right. The worst keyboard of all, in that sense, would have to be the virtual laser keyboard, no longer available on ThinkGeek but seems to be here http://www.virtual-laser-devices.com/ - it's an incredibly cool concept, but I can't imagine actually using one long-term. Typing on concrete is not my idea of productivity. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 2011.06.14 07:18 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: There are many different designs of laptop keyboard. Tiny netbooks seem to have the very worst, leaving it nearly impossible to get any decent work done (there may be exceptions to that, but I've seen a lot of bad netbook keyboards). My current laptop is an IBM T60, one of the last of the IBMs (now they're all Lenovos); prior to him, I've had various other 14 or 15 laptops, all with the keyboards using most of the available room. I thought that might be the case. I can take a picture of mine if you're keeping a collection of bad laptop keyboards. :D Seriously, I have a 17.1 display, and the keyboard is almost small enough for a large tablet. It takes up no more than 30% of the area available. Also, the left shift and left control keys don't want to work most of the time, but that's another issue. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 15, 5:11 am, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Dotan Cohen dotanco...@gmail.com wrote: And disproportionate usage of fingers. On QWERTY the weakest fingers (pinkies) do almost 1/4 of the keypresses when modifier keys, enter, tab, and backspace are taken into account. That's true on a piano too, though. My pinkies are quite accustomed to doing the extra work now, so whether I'm playing the church organ or typing a post here, they're put to good use. It's the longer fingers in the middle that aren't pulling their weight... For keyboarding (in the piano/organ sense) the weakest finger is not the fifth/pinky but the fourth. Because for the fifth you will notice that the natural movement is to stiffen the finger and then use a slight outward arm-swing; for thumb, index and middle, they of course have their own strength. The fourth has neither advantage. IOW qwerty is not so bad as it could have been if it were qewrty (or asd was sad) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 06:00, rusi rustompm...@gmail.com wrote: For keyboarding (in the piano/organ sense) the weakest finger is not the fifth/pinky but the fourth. Because for the fifth you will notice that the natural movement is to stiffen the finger and then use a slight outward arm-swing; for thumb, index and middle, they of course have their own strength. The fourth has neither advantage. IOW qwerty is not so bad as it could have been if it were qewrty (or asd was sad) Thank you rusi! Tell me, where can I read more about the advantages of each finger? Googling turns up nothing. My intention is to improved the Noah ergonomic keyboard layout. Thanks! -- Dotan Cohen http://gibberish.co.il http://what-is-what.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40% more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 13, 11:30 am, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: (a lil weekend distraction from comp lang!) in recent years, there came this Colemak layout. The guy who created it, Colemak, has a site, and aggressively market his layout. It's in linuxes distro by default, and has become somewhat popular. ... If your typing doesn't come anywhere close to a data-entry clerk, then any layout “more efficient” than Dvorak is practically meaningless. More than that, any layout more efficient than QWERTY is practically meaningless. The whole intentional inefficiency thing in the design of the QWERTY layout is an urban legend. Once your fingers have the mapping memorized, the actual order is irrelevent. Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. Could you show which studies? Do they do research just about habit or other elements (e.g. movement rates, comfortablility, ...) as well? Have they ever heard of RSI because of repetitive movements? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Yang Ha Nguyen cmp...@gmail.com wrote: Could you show which studies? Do they do research just about habit or other elements (e.g. movement rates, comfortablility, ...) as well? Have they ever heard of RSI because of repetitive movements? And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? The classic grasp mouse sitting to the right of the keyboard mandates either a one-handed typing style (left hand on keyboard, right hand on mouse) or constant re-aiming and re-grasping. Or you can use a touchpad; what are the consequences of that on typing speed? And my personal favorite, the IBM TrackPoint - a stick mouse between the G/H/B keys, a design which other manufacturers have since copied (although IMHO the IBM/Lenovo type still beats the others hands down) - keep your hands where you want them and just reach out to grab the mouse with your index finger, or slide your fingers one key over (works fine if you're used to it). Typing speed depends on a lot more than just your layout, and it's going to be nearly impossible to narrow it down viably. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:21:53 -0700, Elena wrote: On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40% more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is. The actual physical cost of typing is a small part of coding. Productivity-wise, optimizing the distance your hands move is worthwhile for typists who do nothing but type, e.g. if you spend their day mechanically copying text or doing data entry, then increasing your typing speed from 30 words per minute (the average for untrained computer users) to 90 wpm (the average for typists) means your productivity increases by 200% (three times more work done). I don't know if there are any studies that indicate how much of a programmer's work is actual mechanical typing but I'd be surprised if it were as much as 20% of the work day. The rest of the time being thinking, planning, debugging, communicating with customers or managers, reading documentation, testing, committing code, sketching data schemas on the whiteboard ... to say nothing of the dreaded strategy meetings. And even in that 20% of the time when you are actively typing code, you're not merely transcribing written text but writing new code, and active composition is well known to slow down typing speed compared to transcribing. You might hit 90 wpm in the typing test, but when writing code you're probably typing at 50 wpm with the occasional full speed burst. So going from a top speed (measured when transcribing text) of 30 wpm to 90 wpm sounds good on your CV, but in practice the difference in productivity is probably tiny. Oh, and if typing faster just means you make more typos in less time, then the productivity increase is *negative*. Keyboard optimizations, I believe, are almost certainly a conceit. If they really were that good an optimization, they would be used when typing speed is a premium. The difference between an average data entry operator at 90 wpm and a fast one at 150 wpm is worth real money. If Dvorak and other optimized keyboards were really that much better, they would be in far more common use. Where speed really is vital, such as for court stenographers, special mechanical shorthand machines such as stenotypes are used, costing thousands of dollars but allowing the typist to reach speeds of over 300 wpm. Even if we accept that Dvorak is an optimization, it's a micro- optimization. And like most optimizations, there is a very real risk that it is actually a pessimation: if it takes you three months to get back up to speed on a new keyboard layout, you potentially may never make back that lost time in your entire programming career. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info writes:
The actual physical cost of typing is a small part of coding.
Productivity-wise, optimizing the distance your hands move is worthwhile
for typists who do nothing but type, e.g. if you spend their day
mechanically copying text or doing data entry, then increasing your
typing speed from 30 words per minute (the average for untrained computer
users) to 90 wpm (the average for typists) means your productivity
increases by 200% (three times more work done).
I don't know if there are any studies that indicate how much of a
programmer's work is actual mechanical typing but I'd be surprised if it
were as much as 20% of the work day.
I'd agree that while programming, typing speed is not usually a problem
(but it has been reported that some star programmers could issue bug
free code faster than they could type, and they could type fast!).
Now, where the gain lies, is in typing flames on IRC or usenet.
If they can do it faster, then it's more time left for programming.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Jun 13, 6:19 pm, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Even if we accept that Dvorak is an optimization, it's a micro- optimization. +1 Dvorak -- like qwerty and any other keyboard layout -- assumes the computer is a typewriter. This means in effect at least two constraints, necessary for the typewriter but not for the computer: a. The typist can type only 1 key at a time b. One (key)stroke generates exactly 1 letter Exceptions to a are Shift (Ctrl) etc but clearly in running use they are the exception not the rule. Where speed really is vital, such as for court stenographers, special mechanical shorthand machines such as stenotypes are used, costing thousands of dollars but allowing the typist to reach speeds of over 300 wpm. Yes, instruments like stenotypes speed up typing by unassuming a Likewise pianists can be said (and seen) to do more at the piano than typists at a computer because chords are part of the 'allowed language'. Assumption b likewise is unnecessarily restrictive on a computer. Think of all the 'abbrev/snippet/shortform/template' systems like yasnippet, textmate-snippets, emacs/vi abbrevs etc. For ordinary English there are things like keyscript http://www.freewebs.com/cassyjanek For example the most common words (estimated to be around 40% of English) are shortformed as: b = but c = with d = had e = this f = of g = that h = the j = which n = and ...etc etc upto z = was then common phrases able to = cb had been = dn do not = dx did not = ex does not = dsx etc Clearly, for programmers this is unlikely to be much use -- programming languages are not English. But but it is certainly an open question whether if the repeating patterns in programming languages are captured into some system, the resulting benefit would be a mere micro-optimization or something more significant. I have seen some good programmers swear by emacs-yasnippets, textmate-snippets etc. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 13 Giu, 15:19, Steven D'Aprano steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:21:53 -0700, Elena wrote: On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40% more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is. The actual physical cost of typing is a small part of coding. Productivity-wise, optimizing the distance your hands move is worthwhile for typists who do nothing but type, e.g. if you spend their day mechanically copying text or doing data entry, then increasing your typing speed from 30 words per minute (the average for untrained computer users) to 90 wpm (the average for typists) means your productivity increases by 200% (three times more work done). I don't know if there are any studies that indicate how much of a programmer's work is actual mechanical typing but I'd be surprised if it were as much as 20% of the work day. The rest of the time being thinking, planning, debugging, communicating with customers or managers, reading documentation, testing, committing code, sketching data schemas on the whiteboard ... to say nothing of the dreaded strategy meetings. And even in that 20% of the time when you are actively typing code, you're not merely transcribing written text but writing new code, and active composition is well known to slow down typing speed compared to transcribing. You might hit 90 wpm in the typing test, but when writing code you're probably typing at 50 wpm with the occasional full speed burst. So going from a top speed (measured when transcribing text) of 30 wpm to 90 wpm sounds good on your CV, but in practice the difference in productivity is probably tiny. Oh, and if typing faster just means you make more typos in less time, then the productivity increase is *negative*. Keyboard optimizations, I believe, are almost certainly a conceit. If they really were that good an optimization, they would be used when typing speed is a premium. The difference between an average data entry operator at 90 wpm and a fast one at 150 wpm is worth real money. If Dvorak and other optimized keyboards were really that much better, they would be in far more common use. Where speed really is vital, such as for court stenographers, special mechanical shorthand machines such as stenotypes are used, costing thousands of dollars but allowing the typist to reach speeds of over 300 wpm. Even if we accept that Dvorak is an optimization, it's a micro- optimization. And like most optimizations, there is a very real risk that it is actually a pessimation: if it takes you three months to get back up to speed on a new keyboard layout, you potentially may never make back that lost time in your entire programming career. -- Steven I don't buy into this. For one, could you possibly lose so much time while learning a new layout, time you won't recover in an entire career, if entering text were such a little time consuming task of yours? In my experience, an inefficient layout would disrupt my flow of thought whenever I would sit at the keyboard and type something. That's the reason I use a Vim-like editor, as well. Sure, better is worse, once you push beyond a certain limit, and that's exactly what Xah was talking about. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 00:21:53 -0700, Elena wrote: On 13 Giu, 06:30, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. Once the user is acclimated to move her hands much more (about 40% more for Qwerty versus Dvorak), that is. The actual physical cost of typing is more than dollars and cents. The difference for me is not typing speed, but my wrists. The Dvorak layout is much easier on me than the QWERTY one was. ~Ethan~ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Chris Angelico wrote: And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? What I think's really stupid is designing keyboards with two big blocks of keys between the alphabetic keys and the mouse. Back when standard-grade keyboards didn't usually have a built-in numeric keypad, it was much easier to move one's right hand back and forth between the keyboard and mouse. Nowadays I find myself perpetually prone to off-by-one errors when moving back to the keyboard. :-( -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Gregory Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: Chris Angelico wrote: And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? What I think's really stupid is designing keyboards with two big blocks of keys between the alphabetic keys and the mouse. Nowadays I find myself perpetually prone to off-by-one errors when moving back to the keyboard. :-( That's one of the reasons I like my laptop keyboard so much. Hands don't have to leave to grab the mouse. Although if you lay out your desk right (assuming you have one - the other advantage of the laptop is the ability to type at the same speed on a bus) you can change that two big blocks of keys issue. For instance, I have a computer at work where the mouse is in front of the keyboard (between me and it). It looks odd, but it works in practice. The actual distance my hand moves to get from home keys to mouse is about the same as swinging to the right past the numpad, but since I'm aiming in the opposite direction, it's easier to not hit the off-by-one. But as an old jester Pointed out, you can come in time to like anything that you get used to. ChrisA PS. Pointed is not a mistake, but I doubt anyone on this list will know why I did it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
On 2011-06-14, Gregory Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote: Chris Angelico wrote: And did any of the studies take into account the fact that a lot of computer users - in all but the purest data entry tasks - will use a mouse as well as a keyboard? What I think's really stupid is designing keyboards with two big blocks of keys between the alphabetic keys and the mouse. Back when standard-grade keyboards didn't usually have a built-in numeric keypad, it was much easier to move one's right hand back and forth between the keyboard and mouse. That's why I always buy keyboards without numeric keypads. :) Another good solution is to put the mouse on the left-hand side. -- Grant -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Keyboard Layout: Dvorak vs Colemak: is it Worthwhile to Improve the Dvorak Layout?
Xah Lee xah...@gmail.com wrote: (a lil weekend distraction from comp lang!) in recent years, there came this Colemak layout. The guy who created it, Colemak, has a site, and aggressively market his layout. It's in linuxes distro by default, and has become somewhat popular. ... If your typing doesn't come anywhere close to a data-entry clerk, then any layout more efficient than Dvorak is practically meaningless. More than that, any layout more efficient than QWERTY is practically meaningless. The whole intentional inefficiency thing in the design of the QWERTY layout is an urban legend. Once your fingers have the mapping memorized, the actual order is irrelevent. Studies have shown that even a strictly alphabetical layout works perfectly well, once the typist is acclimated. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
