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

Colemak keyboard layout

colemak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 55 posts

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#21

Post by abraham_s »

deadfall wrote: post #2

I am cautious to change my keyboard layout because I use a lot of different machines. Has anyone tried this or the Programmer Dvorak layout? Ref: http://www.kaufmann.no/roland/dvorak/

I have been using regular Dvorak. I took 3 months to reach my Qwerty speed, probably because I kept using Qwerty on the side. After a year my speed is 60 wpm, double that of what I had with Qwerty. The main difference I feel is not the speed, but a marked reduction in fatigue is your fingers. But I am back to hunt-and-peck typing in qwerty.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#22

Post by nknighthb »

disc wrote: post #19
nknighthb wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use the standard Dvorak layout. It hasn't been that big a deal for me. Things have gone something like this: 1) Learn Dvorak at a time when I only used my own machines. Stay that way for ~3 years. During this time, after my typing speed and error rate had reached QWERTY levels, the occasional use of QWERTY on someone else's PC was highly annoying. 2) Spend 2-3 years in jobs involving near-daily use of machines I co…

I switched to Dvorak 11+ years when I was in college and had a lot of time to kill. I think your spoken language fluency analogy is pretty accurate; I imagine I'll always retain a bit of my 'native' qwerty muscle-memory, but the more I practice it, the easier it is to make the mental 'switch' between languages. That said, if I had to do it all over again, I wouldn't switch to Dvorak. The efficiency gained on my keybo…

I definitely wouldn't suggest anyone switch for performance reasons. I switched because of pain. It helped that a lot. Made virtually no long-term difference in typing speed.

(Then again, my typing speed has been 90+ wpm since I was about 9, so I'm an outlier in various ways.)

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#23

Post by quink »

chaetodon wrote: post #3

Lefthanders like me need an inverse Colemak to remain effective, given that many of the most used letters are on a QWERTY keyboard on my left hand (while with Colemak e.g. the E has moved to the right). Does an inverse Colemak exist?

Left-handed Dvorak?

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#24

Post by zobzu »

reeses wrote: post #18
dmnd wrote: post #15

I'm not sure how relevant this is to anyone, but this post is as good excuse as any to talk about my transition to Colemak. In January I moved from Qwerty to Colemak, and also from a staggered to a columnar keyboard layout (on a Kinesis keyboard[1]). My Qwerty speed was only 75 wpm and my accuracy was terrible. Also I couldn't touch type - I never learnt to type properly with Qwerty; I just started typing when I was…

Fascinating about the phone. iOS only supports colemak on an external keyboard (or in a custom app) so I've not tried it there. You make perfect sense. I made a move fairly similar to yours. I went for the Truly Ergonomic keyboard because laterally staggered keys seem stupid if you're giving up Sholes anyway. I typed about 5-10 wpm for the first month. No matter what I tried, it was far too slow. Part of this was los…

Its not "fascinating" about the phone. It's 100% normal. You could say it's a pretty interesting turn of events in the history of keyboards however.

Qwerty was designed for typing machines (typewriters) where you needed enough space between keys so that the machine wouldn't jam. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typewriter)

That's exactly why qwerty is better on the phone as well as fingers, like the metal tyepbar, can't type letters too close to each other. Except its flesh and bones instead of metal.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#25

Post by adsr »

dmnd wrote: post #15

I'm not sure how relevant this is to anyone, but this post is as good excuse as any to talk about my transition to Colemak. In January I moved from Qwerty to Colemak, and also from a staggered to a columnar keyboard layout (on a Kinesis keyboard[1]). My Qwerty speed was only 75 wpm and my accuracy was terrible. Also I couldn't touch type - I never learnt to type properly with Qwerty; I just started typing when I was…

Interestingly, the home row issue you experienced on the phone is rather similar to the reason qwerty was invented in the first place, to avoid key jamming on mechanical typewriters.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#26

Post by lstamour »

dmnd wrote: post #15

I'm not sure how relevant this is to anyone, but this post is as good excuse as any to talk about my transition to Colemak. In January I moved from Qwerty to Colemak, and also from a staggered to a columnar keyboard layout (on a Kinesis keyboard[1]). My Qwerty speed was only 75 wpm and my accuracy was terrible. Also I couldn't touch type - I never learnt to type properly with Qwerty; I just started typing when I was…

I've also tried Colemak on my Android and iOS devices ... it's only useful for attaching physical keyboards -- at least when on a phone. A tablet might prove different, and I'd confirm with my Surface Pro, except I like its QWERTY touch keyboard better than the Colemak layout which isn't as touch-optimized in on-screen styling. I wish Windows 8.1 had Colemak built in. Apple's had it built-in since Lion.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#27

Post by lstamour »

zobzu wrote: post #24
reeses wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fascinating about the phone. iOS only supports colemak on an external keyboard (or in a custom app) so I've not tried it there. You make perfect sense. I made a move fairly similar to yours. I went for the Truly Ergonomic keyboard because laterally staggered keys seem stupid if you're giving up Sholes anyway. I typed about 5-10 wpm for the first month. No matter what I tried, it was far too slow. Part of this was los…

Its not "fascinating" about the phone. It's 100% normal. You could say it's a pretty interesting turn of events in the history of keyboards however. Qwerty was designed for typing machines (typewriters) where you needed enough space between keys so that the machine wouldn't jam. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typewriter ) That's exactly why qwerty is better on the phone as well as fingers, like the metal tyepbar,…

Actually I find that the hardest part about Colemak on the phone is being unable to distinguish the home row from the rest of the keyboard -- and if you can't touch type with fingers, using what's familiar (QWERTY) is easier. Thumb travel time is shorter than finger travel on full-size keyboards, after all.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#28

Post by veidr »

dmnd wrote: post #15

I'm not sure how relevant this is to anyone, but this post is as good excuse as any to talk about my transition to Colemak. In January I moved from Qwerty to Colemak, and also from a staggered to a columnar keyboard layout (on a Kinesis keyboard[1]). My Qwerty speed was only 75 wpm and my accuracy was terrible. Also I couldn't touch type - I never learnt to type properly with Qwerty; I just started typing when I was…

I am very jealous of you -- my inability to maintain QWERTY after I switched to Colemak was what forced me to grudgingly switch back.

I just couldn't do it; after I became acclimated to Colemak, my QWERTY was just destroyed. I had to think about where the keys were in QWERTY, and I realized I don't even really know, because typing is a doing-without-thinking activity. So I ended up having to look, which is extremely inefficient and finally I abandoned Colemak. (I couldn't avoid QWERTY because part of my job these days entails showing people how to do things on their own computers, which aren't using Colemak.)

The same thing happened when I learned Japanese; I used to be conversant in Spanish, and after I got to roughly the same level in Japanese (from living in Japan) one day I noticed that the Spanish wasn't there anymore -- I would have to think about what I wanted to say in my native English and convert it to Spanish.

Seems like a way different thing, but it felt the same, because it was like an unconscious activity being supplanted by another, and thus becoming something I had to think about. Which broke it.

It made me sad though, because now typing QWERTY feels idiotic. Kludgey and stupid. Colemak didn't make me a significantly faster typist (maybe it would have had I done it for more than 9 months) but it was way more comfortable.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#29

Post by mbrock »

veidr wrote: post #28
dmnd wrote: post #15

I'm not sure how relevant this is to anyone, but this post is as good excuse as any to talk about my transition to Colemak. In January I moved from Qwerty to Colemak, and also from a staggered to a columnar keyboard layout (on a Kinesis keyboard[1]). My Qwerty speed was only 75 wpm and my accuracy was terrible. Also I couldn't touch type - I never learnt to type properly with Qwerty; I just started typing when I was…

I am very jealous of you -- my inability to maintain QWERTY after I switched to Colemak was what forced me to grudgingly switch back. I just couldn't do it; after I became acclimated to Colemak, my QWERTY was just destroyed. I had to think about where the keys were in QWERTY, and I realized I don't even really know, because typing is a doing-without-thinking activity. So I ended up having to look , which is extremely…

I use Dvorak, and I have almost no problems typing QWERTY. But this only came after I became completely fluent in Dvorak. When I still had to think to type Dvorak, I couldn't switch to thinking about QWERTY without getting all confused. Now I just peek a little at the keyboard with QWERTY, especially for non-alphanumeric symbols, but it's no problem.

Re: Colemak keyboard layout

#30

Post by paduc »

I wonder if switching to a new keyboard layout is easier for people who are already used to switching between layouts (I use both Azerty and Qwerty), like it's easier for someone bilingual to learn a new language.
Post reply on HN