Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

erichgrunewald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 148 posts

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#71

Post by nomel »

vemv wrote: post #35
nomel wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This position is how I've always typed, but I still had RSI problems. I switched to Dvorak with great, personal, success. If you watch a video of someone typing on Dvorak vs Qwerty [1], it's clear that the experience is very very different with any of these reduced motion layouts. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udc9CH8ICVQ

That video shows poor technique, it's the arms/hands that should hover over the keyboard, in one motion. Stretching the fingers for reaching a given key is bad, Dvorak masks this by minimizing travel, which is simply a workaround / optimization for the wrong thing that long-term will result in the same problems (simply delayed a few years). I could use an intentionally bad keyboard layout and it wouldn't matter. Arms…

I don't think "masking" is the right way to look at it. Regardless of exact position, all hand motion is drastically reduced, for that hand position. There are many others on YouTube that show better technique, but this was the first video in the list that showed a simultaneous top down view.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#72

Post by ziml77 »

xjrp wrote: post #66

The bigger problem is not the layout it’s the keyboard itself, if you have rsi switching to an ergodox can improve the situation, if this is not enough something like a dactyl manuform or a kinesis advantage 360 should do the trick. This combined with light switches like tactile (MX brown) or linear (red) will reduce your pain immensely.

I wonder if anyone has studied the effects of different weights of switches. Personally I've always liked the lighter ones. The heavier ones felt uncomfortable and tiring. But I see people in the mechanical keyboard community praise the heavier switches, so I've always assumed that my hands are just weak.

The worst ones I used were ones that I got because the MK community doesn't consider browns to be able to be in the same class as other tactile switches because the bump is so weak. I ended up getting Zealio V2s, but I had to take them off my board after only a few days of use. The tactile bump is stupidly strong, but once you pass it there's almost no force pushing back. You're basically guaranteed on each press to bottom out with a ton of force. It was jarring and I was very afraid of what kind of damage that would do to my hands long term.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#73

Post by cosmiccatnap »

wyattpeak wrote: post #51
erwald wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i am the author and i didn't mean to be wishy-washy about it. i read several of the papers involved and think it's more likely than not that qwerty was designed for fast typing, or at least not designed to type slowly. but i wouldn't say it's a done deal -- the paper i cited gives the most convincing argument, imo, but it didn't move me up to 100% confidence or anything. i didn't want to give the appearance of being…

Ah, my mistake I'm sorry. Thank you for clarifying your thoughts.

No post body was provided.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#74

Post by halikular »

ericbarrett wrote: post #25
chillacy wrote: post #12

> One week or so ago I switched from Colemak to typing on QWYRFM due to the reduced load it places on the pinkies. I typed Dvorak for 10 years before I started getting RSI again in my right ulna. It turns out that the 'S' key being hit by the pinky in Dvorak caused me a lot of pain. I ended up switching to BEAKL, a pretty obscure layout which is specifically made to alleviate stress on the pinky. It moves the relativ…

A friend of mine used his pinky and ring finger to open the door of his pickup truck. But it was frozen shut and he snapped the tendons (ligaments?) and that was that, he couldn't curl them shut on his hand anymore.

Surely that heals after a few months? I tried opening our shower door which magnetically attracts and seals the glass doors together with my pinky, I wasn't prepared for the amount of force required to open so I got sharp pain and had problems doing anything with my finger. Luckily it only lasted a day. Reading this I didn't think it could've gone this bad.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#75

Post by 1MachineElf »

chillacy wrote: post #12

> One week or so ago I switched from Colemak to typing on QWYRFM due to the reduced load it places on the pinkies. I typed Dvorak for 10 years before I started getting RSI again in my right ulna. It turns out that the 'S' key being hit by the pinky in Dvorak caused me a lot of pain. I ended up switching to BEAKL, a pretty obscure layout which is specifically made to alleviate stress on the pinky. It moves the relativ…

Thanks for sharing this. As a Dvorak typist of 6 years, I have often wondered what my next frontier will be. Stenography seems to have a fast growing community around it, but I'm open to alternative layouts as well. BEAKL has always been on the edge of my radar holding the position of interesting, but probably no. This however is the first time I've seen someone compare it favorably to Dvorak. Seems it could be worth trying out based on what you said! While I feel like Dvorak has strengthened my right pinky finger, it's L, /, and = keys are notably tedious. I wouldn't want to have RSI as a result of that.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#76

Post by drewzero1 »

scoofy wrote: post #9

I switched to Dvorak in my 20's. I don't think i got faster, but my right-hand wrist which would irritate me and was one reason for the switch, definitely was more comfortable after, and hasn't given me any problems since. That said, switching was a huge pain in the ass.... like horrible for the first two months, and i promised myself i'd keep typing in both. However, i eventually lost the ability to type in qwerty,…

I've switched to Dvorak twice, first in my teens and again in my 20s. I'd never been great at typing with Qwerty (a lot of hunt and peck) so it was a low bar. I can absolutely relate to the terrible two months (at least) but I at least retained what little ability I had in Qwerty.

Both times I've switched back after a few years because of needing to share computers with other people and not wanting to deal with switching the layout (either physically or in the OS). I also had trouble with vintage computers and phone keyboard layouts which couldn't be switched. For some time I was faster at Dvorak and I really enjoyed that, but I think learning Dvorak and switching back has at least made me better at Qwerty. I love Dvorak and will almost certainly start using it again someday. Right now I've accepted I just need to go with the flow and do what everyone else is doing.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#77

Post by 1MachineElf »

I've been typing english and only english on Dvorak for 6 years. For my needs, I am very happy with it. There is one point I would like to make that the author misses (and it's not unique to Dvorak).

Learning an alternative layout can make you a better typist for the sole reason of requiring effort to learn it. When most of us type with QWERTY, it is effortless, however we also carry with us all of the bad typing habits we've accumulated over time - all of the stuff we did wrong on a QWERTY board out of habit that our typing classes tried to condition out of us but it still remains. When you try to learn a new layout, you're putting in more effort than ever before into typing with correct form. That alone is a big factor for why non-QWERTY typists perform better.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#78

Post by ordu »

userbinator wrote: post #32

Personal anecdote, but I know a few people who got RSI/CTS and had a chance to watch them type --- and what they all had in common was how "stiff" their typing posture was, and the strength at which they hit the keys. They weren't fast either, probably in the 50-70wpm range. One of them, before he got RSI, even commented on how bad my posture was and how it'd "make it easier to injure myself". I find that relaxing, a…

> they all had in common was how "stiff" their typing posture was, and the strength at which they hit the keys.

Yeah! Its what I want to be researched. I play piano and guitar, and to do it successfully I had spent a lot of time learning to not apply more force than needed. Somtimes it needs to change a posture. I learned piano being a kid under a supervision of a teacher, so probably I don't remember the most of my learning troubles. But I learned guitar at my late teens and I remember clearly how I was corrected by a teacher, then corrected again and again. I oftentimes needed a break because of pain in muscles.

And I wonder might it be that in the most cases RSI is the consequences of the wrong posture or too much force applied. If it so, I suppose, switching layouts would help because of breaking a muscle memory and learning it anew, not because the new layout is better. The very RSI could influence learning: pain is a good teacher, it forces student to seek for painless ways to do things.

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#79

Post by GoOnThenDoTell »

not2b wrote: post #64

What the author may be missing is that keyboards are much, much better now than they were in the 1990s, when RMS was having problems. The touch is much lighter, the amount of force needed to depress the keys is much less. Hitting control-alt-meta-cokebottle-Q for everything to make Emacs work on an early 90s keyboard was a recipe for pain. I've been typing on computers for almost as long as RMS has, don't have those…

Hands and posture are simply personal. What works well for most people might be painful for others

Re: How bad is QWERTY, really? A review of the literature, such as it is

#80

Post by csdvrx »

ziml77 wrote: post #72
xjrp wrote: post #66

The bigger problem is not the layout it’s the keyboard itself, if you have rsi switching to an ergodox can improve the situation, if this is not enough something like a dactyl manuform or a kinesis advantage 360 should do the trick. This combined with light switches like tactile (MX brown) or linear (red) will reduce your pain immensely.

I wonder if anyone has studied the effects of different weights of switches. Personally I've always liked the lighter ones. The heavier ones felt uncomfortable and tiring. But I see people in the mechanical keyboard community praise the heavier switches, so I've always assumed that my hands are just weak. The worst ones I used were ones that I got because the MK community doesn't consider browns to be able to be in t…

> I wonder if anyone has studied the effects of different weights of switches. Personally I've always liked the lighter ones. The heavier ones felt uncomfortable and tiring. But I see people in the mechanical keyboard community praise the heavier switches, so I've always assumed that my hands are just weak

I don't know about studies, but I prefer membrane keyboards for this reason: far less strength is required.

Post reply on HN