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

I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 183 posts

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#41

Post by lstamour »

nwah1 wrote: post #7

I've been a colemak user for a number of years, which has similar pros and cons. I would say that it is not worth it for most people to change. You could get a lot of the benefit of colemak, with none of the pain, by converting your caps lock key into a second backspace. The benefits are that it is slightly more comfortable, and you'll have less people trying to use your computer. Also, prior to learning colemak, I h…

I’ve spent more years of my life now typing in Colemak than I ever did typing in QWERTY: I switched in about 2004 or so when I was touch-typing full sentences in the dark playing video games and my fingers started hurting even with a natural keyboard. After the switch, the hurt went away and hasn’t returned. I can still touch-type in QWERTY, but oddly enough it depends on the keyboard make and model and my familiarity with it. I often use Mac so on a Apple keyboard my brain expects Colemak, but on touch screens and Dell/OEM keyboards I expect QWERTY. It helps that if I’m having trouble remembering the QWERTY layout I can just look at the keys to remind myself, then I can pick it up again. As FYI, Colemak is now natively supported on Mac, Linux, mobile, but... strangely has never made it to Windows almost two decades later...

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#42

Post by xiii1408 »

coldtea wrote: post #15

It's not yes. It was non-scientifically created and self-promoted to hell from the inventor in the early 20th century, for commercial interests. And there are a lot of myths about Qwerty too: https://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.html Not to mention that for programmers it's even more complicated. Most of our symbols we use most of the time (e.g. { } ; -, _) have nothing to do with DVORAK vs QWERTY, and the distri…

> That said, there are better researched layouts that DVORAK, with actual modern research behind them.

Any references? I'm curious.

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#43

Post by lixtra »

xiii1408 wrote: post #40
whack wrote: post #35

On a similar note, let me say something which is sure to be controversial/unpopular on HN. I type with 2-3 fingers, and I can tell you that the "peckers" like me aren't missing out on much either. I can consistently type at 60-70 wpm, and that's after adjusting for typos. A big part of that comes down to me having memorized the keyboard layout, and not having to look at the keyboard at all while typing. I've also nev…

I can type at 120 WPM, and it's not all that useful. I'd gladly halve my typing speed if it meant avoiding the occasional bout of RSI.

This seems possible. Make more pauses and excercise. A good physiotherapist can do wonders.

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#44

Post by hopler »

alexandernst wrote: post #9

I never really understood the obsession about WPM that some programmers have. You're a programmer, not a court reporter. You don't need +200 WPM. You need to think before/during/after writing each one of the characters you type. And more often than not, you actually spend +5min of 20 lines of code, so your +200 WPM ability doesn't matter at all.

There is a big range between 40wpm and 200wpm.

Typing is a cost, a waste. After spending an hour thinking, I don't want to be stalled out by delays typing. I need to rewrite my code several times to get that clean bugfree 100 lines for the day. I want to write documentation, not just code. I need to write emails and chats too.

Just like I spend 22hours a day not commuting but still want my commute to be twice as fast

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#45

Post by jules »

whack wrote: post #35

On a similar note, let me say something which is sure to be controversial/unpopular on HN. I type with 2-3 fingers, and I can tell you that the "peckers" like me aren't missing out on much either. I can consistently type at 60-70 wpm, and that's after adjusting for typos. A big part of that comes down to me having memorized the keyboard layout, and not having to look at the keyboard at all while typing. I've also nev…

It's not just about typing speed, it's about comfort. Touch typing on Colemak (and presumably Dvorak) feels much better and is less tiring than pecking.

What you mention is indeed the biggest advantage of touch typing: your hands are in a known position relative to the keyboard, so you don't have to look or think to type. How do you keep your hands in a fixed position if you only use 2-3 fingers?

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#46

Post by Pimpus »

whack wrote: post #35

On a similar note, let me say something which is sure to be controversial/unpopular on HN. I type with 2-3 fingers, and I can tell you that the "peckers" like me aren't missing out on much either. I can consistently type at 60-70 wpm, and that's after adjusting for typos. A big part of that comes down to me having memorized the keyboard layout, and not having to look at the keyboard at all while typing. I've also nev…

> I honestly doubt that my 60+ wpm has held me back in any significant way.

I type 120 at max speed and I think that if I were to suddenly start typing more slowly tomorrow due to a freak thumb accident it would be a significant impediment to my ability to get stuff done. Most of what I do is typing on the computer (either coding, writing, or flying around in Emacs and organizing my life with org-mode). I'm a great note-taker in meetings because of my speed and because I can concentrate on the content of what people are saying instead of on the typing, which is fast and accurate without conscious effort. Moreover, slow typing would be extra friction between my brain and the computer, and there needs to be as little latency between these things as possible to get my thoughts and ideas out there unfettered.

Honestly, I think you should invest the time in learning to type properly. Yes, it does make a difference. Learn the finger placements and practice every day. Learn when each hand is appropriate for shift and space and practice it, alternating appropriately. Even minor stuff like that makes you a better typer.

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#47

Post by Pimpus »

xiii1408 wrote: post #40
whack wrote: post #35

On a similar note, let me say something which is sure to be controversial/unpopular on HN. I type with 2-3 fingers, and I can tell you that the "peckers" like me aren't missing out on much either. I can consistently type at 60-70 wpm, and that's after adjusting for typos. A big part of that comes down to me having memorized the keyboard layout, and not having to look at the keyboard at all while typing. I've also nev…

I can type at 120 WPM, and it's not all that useful. I'd gladly halve my typing speed if it meant avoiding the occasional bout of RSI.

> RSI

Read the Mind-Body Prescription, you might be surprised at what you learn. RSI is not something we should be afraid of in this day and age, with everything we know about the human organism.

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#48

Post by Pimpus »

Cool article, I like honest reviews like this. I think a lot of people who learned Dvorak won't admit to themselves that it hasn't been worth it, because of the sunk cost (?) fallacy hindering objective self-reporting.

The thing with Dvorak is that putting all the vowels on the homerow for one hand actually turns out to be a bad idea. It's a classic example of a technical person trying to optimize something and actually making the thing worse. In Dvorak, one hand is flying all around the keyboard and making a wide variety of motions while the other is stuck in place, stiff as a board, typing at the homerow like a machine. You really can feel the difference after a day of typing like this -- the consonant hand feeling healthy with the vowel hand feeling cramped. If RSI were a real phenomenon then learning Dvorak would surely make it worse, but fortunately RSI is psychological so Dvorak and the expectation effect actually make it better usually.

QWERTY turns out to be a pretty good layout because of the mostly random location of the keys. It's actually a good thing. You want your hands to be moving, not staying in one place or they'll stiff up. Learning alternate layouts has negative net benefits and the worst thing is that because of human psychology, people who undertake the difficult (but useless) endeavor of switching layouts can't look at the results objectively.

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#49

Post by coldtea »

xiii1408 wrote: post #42
coldtea wrote: post #15

It's not yes. It was non-scientifically created and self-promoted to hell from the inventor in the early 20th century, for commercial interests. And there are a lot of myths about Qwerty too: https://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/keys1.html Not to mention that for programmers it's even more complicated. Most of our symbols we use most of the time (e.g. { } ; -, _) have nothing to do with DVORAK vs QWERTY, and the distri…

> That said, there are better researched layouts that DVORAK, with actual modern research behind them. Any references? I'm curious.

Here's a good starting point:

https://deskthority.net/wiki/Alternative_keyboard_layouts

Also:

http://xahlee.info/kbd/most_efficient_keyboard_layout.html

Re: I’ve used Dvorak for 10 years, and it’s not all that

#50

Post by rhn_mk1 »

jamestomasino wrote: post #32
rhn_mk1 wrote: post #17

I'm disappointed that this article is no different from all the other articles on keyboard layouts that I've ever encountered and ignores non-English uses. Obviously, a post written in English has no good reason describing a Norwegian-specific alternative to QWERTY, but it still manages to ignore half of the population of English-speaking people by not taking into account using multiple languages on the same keyboard…

My experience isn't much, but as a Dvorak user I can say that I haven't had any issues with Icelandic. I'm on linux which has great compose-key combinations. I haven't used anything but default Dvorak on an American layout or ortholinear keyboard. Hope that helps a bit.

Why did you decide to switch? Are you typing much more of English than Icelandic? Are the two languages similar enough that what works for one is likely to work for another? Or was there an unrelated reason?

Do you think it made your life better? Would you recommend it to others, not necessarily using Icelandic? Are you using compose combinations to enter non-English letters (there's 8 [0], a significant number)?

Thank you for speaking up, your experience is so rare I consider it invaluable.

[0] https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Icelandic/Alphabet_and_Pronunc...

Post reply on HN