turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu (Carl Turner) (08/25/90)
In article <24152@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU> I wrote: >Question: what would be the problems involved in offering both an optimal >computer keyboard (for the people who haven't yet learned to type) and >the old QWERTY? Thanks for all the responses. I had not planned to summarize the replies, but there seems to be enough interest in the subject that a short summary is appropriate. I can summarize briefly by PROs and CONs. PROs: * An optimal keyboard exists--the Dvorak keyboard, named after its designer, August Dvorak. * It's currently implemented in hardware on Apple //c and available as a keymap on other machines: amiga, maybe IBM's. CONs: * No one would use it. * Switching from QWERTY to an optimal keyboard would be difficult especially for people who use many kinds of equipment: they would have to wait until ALL the machines and keyboards are reconfigured. I take no responsibility for the information contained herein. Carl Turner turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu
john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (08/25/90)
Carl Turner (turner@webb.psych.ufl.edu) writes: +-- | PROs: * An optimal keyboard exists--the Dvorak keyboard, named after | its designer, August Dvorak. | * It's currently implemented in hardware on Apple //c and | available as a keymap on other machines: amiga, maybe IBM's. +-- I will take some credit for the availability of the Dvorak keyboard on the //c. I've been using this keyboard for some time, and I tend to rant about it with little provocation. One day I was ranting about it to my friend Tom Root, who just happened to be working on the operating system for the //c. +-- | CONs: * No one would use it. | * Switching from QWERTY to an optimal keyboard would be | difficult especially for people who use many kinds of | equipment: they would have to wait until ALL the machines and | keyboards are reconfigured. +-- I don't know how many people use the Dvorak arrangement, but *I* use it, and I'll continue to use it because it makes typing much faster and less error-prone. I also disagree with the second point, as I constantly use QWERTY keyboards as well, and I still retain a reasonable amount of touch-typing speed on them as well. I have three Heath H19's with remapped keyboard encoder ROMs, and also an aftermarket Dvorak keyboard for my PC-XT. If I ever get a workstation, a little tinkering with the /dev/kbd driver will take care of remapping that too. I am a contractor and have to use customer equipment a lot. I do about 35-40 wpm on the QWERTY keyboard and 70-80 wpm on Dvorak, touch typing in both systems. I don't believe that learning an improved system will decrease one's speed in the inferior system. The QWERTY keyboard layout is WORSE THAN RANDOM. Scholes, the inventor of that keyboard, was a lousy mechanical engineer, so he ANTI-ENGINEERED his keyboard to compensate for problems in his typewriter. I would be happy to correspond with anyone who wants to find out more about the incredible story of these two keyboards. Here is the Dvorak keyboard layout I have been using. This layout replaces a 10 x 3 rectangular area of the normal keyboard bounded by the Q, P, Z, and / (slash) keys of the QWERTY layout: left hand | right hand ? < > P Y | F G C R L / , . p y | f g c r l A O E U I | D H T N S a o e u i | d h t n s <--home row : Q J K X | B M W V Z ; q j k x | b m w v z -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
paul@tucson.sie.arizona.edu (Paul Sanchez) (08/25/90)
If you want to get a Dvorak layout for IBM PC's and compatibles, I believe Fansi-Console (a commercial ansi.sys replacement) has a Dvorak option. This also means that you can use Dvorak when you're away from your own machine by taking along a bootable floppy, since the mapping is done in software. Std Disclaimer -- I have no connection with the makers of Fansi-Console.
lance@motcsd.csd.mot.com (lance.norskog) (08/29/90)
Where can I get a chord keyboard? This is the one-handed keyboard; you hold down 2 or more keys at once for different character combinations. Historical note: Douglas Englebart invented the mouse for use with the chord keyboard to make the perfect workstation: mouse with one hand, type with the other. This obviously superior system was ignored by certain micro-computer architects who have a habit of horribly mangling good ideas :-( Lance "We have plain muffins, whole wheat muffins, oat bran muffins, corn muffins, and blue corn muffins." "Let a hundred flours bloom."
john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (08/30/90)
Lance Norskog (lance@motcsd.csd.mot.com) writes: +-- | Where can I get a chord keyboard? This is the one-handed | keyboard; you hold down 2 or more keys at once for different | character combinations.... This obviously superior system | was ignored by certain micro-computer architects who have | a habit of horribly mangling good ideas :-( +-- Obviously superior? For people who have only one hand, perhaps (or for people who are doing something else with the other hand). But I really don't think it would be possible to type very fast on a chord keyboard. For applications where the typist is mostly thinking and not typing, it may be a win, but for volume entry, I doubt that it is superior. A two-handed keyboard allows one to ``play for position,'' that is, when one finger is stroking, other fingers can be moving into position. Some Dvorak keyboard typists can do consistently over 120 words per minute; I usually do over 70, but I seldom type more than an hour or so a day. Does anyone have any performance figures for chord keyboards? -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) (08/30/90)
In article <1990Aug29.204351.27673@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) writes:
moving into position. Some Dvorak keyboard typists can do
consistently over 120 words per minute; I usually do over
70, but I seldom type more than an hour or so a day. Does
anyone have any performance figures for chord keyboards?
Try asking your local court reporter. They use chord keyboards. They
also keep up with the spoken word. I think that's a bit faster than
120 wpm.
<mike
--
When all our dreams lay deformed and dead Mike Meyer
We'll be two radioactive dancers mwm@relay.pa.dec.com
Spinning in different directions decwrl!mwm
And my love for you will be reduced to powderjik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) (08/30/90)
In article <MWM.90Aug29170650@raven.pa.dec.com>, mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) writes: |> Try asking your local court reporter. They use chord keyboards. They |> also keep up with the spoken word. I think that's a bit faster than |> 120 wpm. This comparison is relatively meaningless, because what court reporters type isn't English, it's a particular form of typed shorthand. Each reporter develops a slightly different form as he gains experience; in fact, part of the court reporter's job is transcribing what he has recorded, since often, only the reporter is able to read it (Some reporters, however, hire permanent secretaries and teach them to read their notation.). Furthermore, the method of using a court stenography machine is very different from the method of typing on a chord keyboard. On a stenography machine, several letters are hit at the same time; usually, the stenographer types an entire word with one downward motion of the hands. Chord keyboards, on the other hand, generate one character for every motion of the hand. In other words, I am fairly certain that court reporters do NOT use chord keyboards of the type we are discussing. Jonathan Kamens USnail: MIT Project Athena 11 Ashford Terrace jik@Athena.MIT.EDU Allston, MA 02134 Office: 617-253-8495 Home: 617-782-0710
Richard.Milward@samba.acs.unc.edu (BBS Account) (08/30/90)
Does anyone have any information on court-stenographers and their keyboards? I believe they use some sort of "chord" method for typing words, and I know it's a small number of keys... --Richard Milward / network tech U. of North Carolina / Chappa Heel "Service without slogans."
john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (08/30/90)
An earlier posting of mine expressed skepticism that a one-handed chord keyboard could make good speed. Mike Meyer (mwm@raven.pa.dec.com) responded: +-- | Try asking your local court reporter. They use chord | keyboards. They also keep up with the spoken word. I | think that's a bit faster than 120 wpm. +-- True, but that's a TWO-handed chord keyboard, and it also does not produce English. It produces a rather cryptic code that must be re-transcribed later into English. I have read that some Dvorak typists can take dictation at full speed. -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
lance@motcsd.csd.mot.com (lance.norskog) (08/31/90)
john@nmt.edu writes: > lance@motcsd.csd.mot.com writes: > | Where can I get a chord keyboard? > | This obviously superior system > > Obviously superior? For people who have only one hand, > perhaps (or for people who are doing something else with the > other hand). Yes. That's the point! I'm talking about mice. > Some Dvorak keyboard typists can do > consistently over 120 words per minute; I usually do over > 70, "Obviously superior" if you're using a mouse. Douglas Englebart's prototype workstation had a chord keyboard in one hand and the mouse in the other. If you can type 70 words a minute while working your word processor with a mouse, like MacWrite, you have a future in magic. The mouse was this wooden monster with X & Y wheels. You could tip the mouse up on either wheel and draw straight lines!
ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin) (08/31/90)
In article <1990Aug30.163436.17881@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) writes: > >True, but that's a TWO-handed chord keyboard, and it also >does not produce English. It produces a rather cryptic >code that must be re-transcribed later into English. There is also a keyboard called Velotype, invented by a Belgian whose name I have forgotten (Berkelmans?) I believe it is uses special keys for certain syllables. Of course, different languages require different key sets. This type of keyboard is often used by typists 'sublining' dialogues on television. -- Anders Thulin ath@prosys.se {uunet,mcsun}!sunic!prosys!ath Telesoft Europe AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) (09/02/90)
It doesn't matter how slow a chord keyboard is, because it's not
supposed to _replace_ the full keyboard; it's supposed to _supplement_ the
mouse. You still enter text the usual way; you use the chord-keyboard
(which its inventors at SRI called a "keyset") to make corrections and give
commands while your other hand is "mousing around" (or otherwise occupied).
It's interesting to see how often this request pops up these days; it's
about time something appeared on the market. The people at SRI reported
that it only takes about a week to become proficient (the microwriter
people claim 15 hours), and I've heard that IBM has studied the idea as
well.
Actually, it could be done entirely in software-- with your right hand
on the mouse, lay your left hand on the 'home row' (ASDF), with your thumb
on the spacebar. That's not too bad a position for typing "chords"; you
just need a device driver to decode it properly (I'm assuming your keyboard
sends separate make/break signals). Maybe someone like Northgate could
build it into their keyboards.
==================
zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean)
{harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphodjik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) (09/05/90)
In article <1523@madnix.UUCP>, zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) writes: |> It doesn't matter how slow a chord keyboard is, because it's not |> supposed to _replace_ the full keyboard; it's supposed to _supplement_ the |> mouse. You still enter text the usual way; you use the chord-keyboard |> (which its inventors at SRI called a "keyset") to make corrections and give |> commands while your other hand is "mousing around" (or otherwise occupied). This may be true of some chord keyboards, but certainly not all of them. The only chord keyboards I've heard of were meant to produce the whole range of characters available on the system, and were meant to replace the traditional qwerty (or dvorak) keyboard, since the claim is that with a good chord keyboard, it is possible for a user to type as fast as, or faster than, he/she can on a qwerty. -- Jonathan Kamens USnail: MIT Project Athena 11 Ashford Terrace jik@Athena.MIT.EDU Allston, MA 02134 Office: 617-253-8495 Home: 617-782-0710
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (09/06/90)
In article <1990Aug25.015334.16702@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) writes: > / , . p y | f g c r l > a o e u i | d h t n s <--home row > ; q j k x | b m w v z Given that UNIX wasn't around when this was designed, it's understandable, but I'd prefer to be hitting the "/" key with a bit stronger finger than my left pinkie! -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' +1 713 274 5180. 'U` peter@ferranti.com
sanders@amber.rtp.dg.com (Lee Sanders) (09/06/90)
Has anyone seen or used a Maltron keyboard? It was mentioned in the February 1990 issue of "Computer". This is an excerpt from the article "Design of a Bitmapped Multilingual Workstation" by Richard Walters UCD: "[..] The most promising recent design is the Maltron keyboard developed by Stephen Hobday and Lillian Malt (see [omitted] Figure 1)(3). This design overcomes most of the Qwerty keyboard's design flaws. It takes advantage of the dexterity of both thumbs by giving them control of a number of important keys, including the letter "e," space, period, and enter. The keys are separated into two pods, one for each hand, and placed in a concave configuration that eliminates the need for users to move their hands to access all keys. These last two features reduce two known causes of severe strain resulting from Qwerty keyboard use. The keys are also repositioned to increase alternate hand typing and to make greater use of the most dextrous fingers (giving a slight bias to the right hand). This keyboard can increase the speed of any user, even professional typists.(3)" (3) S.W.Hobday, "Keyboards Designed to Fit Hands and Reduce Postural Stress," in _Trends in Ergonomics/Human Factors_, F. Aghazadeh, ed., Vol. V, 1988, pp.321-330. The missing picture looks really neat but the left half is mostly illegible so I can't include the layout here (and I don't believe that I could do it justice anyway :-). Lee Sanders Usenet: ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!sanders Data General at RTP CSnet: sanders@dg-rtp.dg.com
adamsf@turing.cs.rpi.edu (Frank Adams) (09/12/90)
Is alternate hand typing (having consecutive characters entered by alternate hands) really something to be encouraged? I have no doubt that it is faster, but I believe that it is also more error prone. I know that a large fraction of my typing errors are interchanged characters typed on alternate hands. I wonder whether this is an appropriate tradeoff, especially for computer input where accuracy is at a premium.
lerman@stpstn.UUCP (Ken Lerman) (09/13/90)
In article <N5B%SS$@rpi.edu> adamsf@turing.cs.rpi.edu (Frank Adams) writes: >Is alternate hand typing (having consecutive characters entered by alternate >hands) really something to be encouraged? I have no doubt that it is faster, >but I believe that it is also more error prone. I know that a large fraction >of my typing errors are interchanged characters typed on alternate hands. >I wonder whether this is an appropriate tradeoff, especially for computer >input where accuracy is at a premium. I was recently asked the same question about alternate finger typing. :-) For most computer typing, accuracy is not at such a premium. Consider: Numbers (not really relevant to this discussion because keyboard layouts don't affect which alternate hand use for random numbers): credit card numbers have a checksum which detects interchanged characters Text -- use a spelling checker If you are willing to pay the premium, type everything twice (by different typists) and have the results automatically compared. Ken