Until recently, whenever I got option to choose layout during any software installation, I always wondered what’s the reason of using anything other than the superior QWERTY layout. That is until I came upon Dvorak and Colemak.
QWERTY layout was initially designed for typewriters. One of the reason told for QWERTY design was to slow down typing and separate the keys so, that two keys pressed one after another are far away and doesn’t jam the early typewriters. It also helped salesmen to impress their clients by typing “Type writer” from single row .This resulted in very un-efficient design. QWERTY doesn’t make efficent use of home row, it places some of the most used letters on other rows, according to few researches, it’s home row is used only 32% of the time and not more than 100 English language words can be typed without leaving it’s home row, where as this amount is more than 400 for Dvorak and Colemak.
Even with all the problem, once it started getting widely used, it became difficult to change the layout cause of simple economics, as no one was able to justify expense of time and money to convert existing typists to new layout.
QWERTY Layout
Dvorak was designed in 1936 to overcome the problems of QWERTY keyboard layout. Dr. August Dvorak studied letter frequency and physiology of human hands to create a layout that requires least stress on fingers and increase typing speed significantly. He moved the most used keys to home row which is easiest to use and least used keys to bottom row which is hardest to reach. Also, it was made sure that pinky fingers should have least amount of work to do, and more frequently used keys should be under our strong fingers. According to carpalx, Dvorak reduces typing effort 35% - 40% over QWERTY.
Dvorak is optimized for English language; their are versions for different languages available, but they have few problems. Almost all these layouts leave roman characters (English alphabets) in their original position, even though letter frequency for their language is different and require different layout. Dvorak also puts curly brackets and semi-colon in hard to access place, which makes it worst than QWERTY for programmers.
Dvorak Layout
Colemak, as stated by their homepage, is modern alternative to QWERTY and Dvorak layouts. Colemak implemented same optimizations as Dvorak with few differences, like it too moved all the vowels and most used keys to home row, but it did’t attempt to maximize hand alteration. Also, Colemak keeps all the punctuation in it’s original place with the sole exception of semi-colon, which it keeps easily accessible, making it much better option than Dvorak for programmers. As colemak doesn’t change all the keys on the keyboard it is also much easier to learn.
Colemak Layout
Even though many people claim that changing layout doesn’t make any difference, but mostly these are the people who haven’t tried any other layout. There is enough anecdotal & researched evidence on Internet that these layouts do make significant difference.
I compared all three layouts by typing different texts. Dvorak and Colemak outperformed QWERTY in all the English language tests, Colemak showed even better performance than Dvorak, but the difference between the two wasn’t huge. When tested using programming code, QWERTY’s performance was better than Dvorak but much less than Colemak. You can read more about different layouts on carpalx.
I am going to try out Colemak for a month or so, and see how it goes. I will post my results here.
6 Comments
keyboard layout images are not showing
Quote: “I am going to try out Colemak for a month or so, and see how it goes. I will post my results here.”
If use Colemak for merely a month, you are going to be disappointed.
Switching from QWERTY to Colemak is the best, but still takes time, while switching from Dvorak to Colemak takes longer and some have said the effort wasn’t worth it even after using Colemak for a couple months.
It takes time to use a new keyboard layout and arrive at your past typing speed.
I recommend looking at some of the stories on the Colemak forums before making a decision.
Ted, Well, I didn’t expect to become expert Colemak typist in one month, but I think one month is enough to get the idea.
It has already been over a month and though I am still quite slow with Colemak (due to my schedule I don’t practice too much), but I am very impressed with it and plan to continue working with it. I am hopeful that I would be able to make a complete switch within a month or two at max.
i used DVORAK and QWERTY and COLEMAK and found that DVORAK was easiest to type on, i could only do like 80 WPM on a QWERTY keyboard, but i could do 159 WPM on a DVORAK keyboard, and i could do 114 on a COLEMAK keyboard.
Remarkably naive, I have been. Considering QWERTY is called that because of the letter arrangement, I have always thought that DVORAK has the same reasons for the name. Never thought someone would actually name someone Dvorak. (I actually thought John C Dvorak was a fan of this keyboard
). Of cos, I haven’t heard of schweinschteiger back then (I tried spelling this name, haahah … ‘hijjay kar kay’ … check this 
)
Interesting that you are trying them out. How has it gone so far for you? Now that you have me interested, does the mightly Hafeez Center stock em?
Momekh, lol. Now, how do you pronounce schweinschteiger?
As for my current progress, it’s not much different from above. I still use QWERTY while developing, cause it’s too difficult to think about programming and typing at same time. As, other than programming and studying I am either playing game or reading a book, it leaves me no time for practicing Colemak, I do that only while chatting or commenting on other’s blogs, which is not too often.
Though, now I have put aside some time for practice, I will post my progress soon. BTW after 3 days of practicing couple of hours, I reached ~20 WPM in Colemak, whereas in QWERTY my speed is around 70-80 WPM.
Post a Comment