hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU (Wes Hardaker) (09/07/90)
Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem getting
confused? I doubt anyone just know the Dvorak style since there are so
few keyboards that support Dvorak. I think this would be a problem
switching from one to the other, however, or is the brain intelligent
enough to seperate the two during their respective use.
_____
/ ___ \
Wes Hardaker / / \/
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science \--/ /\
University of California at Davis __________________ \/ /--\
(hardaker@iris.ucdavis.edu) / Recycle \ /\___/ /
/ It's not too late! \ \_____/funkstr@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Larry Hastings) (09/07/90)
+-In article <7657@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU | (Wes Hardaker) wrote: +---------- | | Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem getting | confused? I doubt anyone just know the Dvorak style since there are so | few keyboards that support Dvorak. I think this would be a problem | switching from one to the other, however, or is the brain intelligent | enough to seperate the two during their respective use. | +---------- I have a Northgate OmniKey/PLUS, which supports two Dvorak layouts (one with the standard QWERTY number keys, and one with the weird Dvorak number key layout). This is a nice keyboard in many other ways, and is very easy to get (just order from Northgate). The keyboard is about $100, and you can optionally get Dvorak keycaps for another $15 (you can't just move the keys that are already there -- they have differently shaped keys for each row). I don't _know_ the Dvorak keyboard layout, but I am working on it -- and it seems to me that your brain could keep them mostly separated (there might be a little crossover, but not much). It occurs to me that this is similar to (although more complex than) switching between an 84-key and a 101-key -- and my brain is able to remember that the Esc and the function keys are above the alphanum keys. -- larry hastings, the galactic funkster, funkstr@ucscb.ucsc.edu I don't speak for Knowledge Dynamics or UC Santa Cruz, nor do they speak for me "I said to my girlfriend 'What do you want?' and she said 'Oh, just get me something crazy and expensive that I don't even need'... so I signed her up for radiation treatments." --Emo Phillips
john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (09/07/90)
Wes Hardaker (hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU) writes: +-- | Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem | getting confused? I doubt anyone just know the Dvorak style | since there are so few keyboards that support Dvorak. I | think this would be a problem switching from one to the other, | however, or is the brain intelligent enough to seperate the | two during their respective use. +-- I converted my personal equipment to the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard, but of course I often have to use QWERTY. It doesn't bother me for long, as the feel of the keyboard tends to serve as a cue to tell me which layout to use. If I start using the wrong mental set, after noticing a few typos I tend to snap into the correct set. My usual pattern is to use full touch typing on Dvorak (not looking at the keyboard at all), but during casual use of QWERTY I tend to look at the keys. If I have to use QWERTY for more than a few minutes, my touch training on QWERTY kicks in. Disclaimer: I don't know if my experience is typical. I had 18 years experience touch-typing on QWERTY when I retrained myself on the DSK, and that was ten years ago. I seldom do more than an hour or two of typing a day. My QWERTY speed never got much beyond 40 wpm, but I can generally do over 70 wpm on the DSK. -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) (09/07/90)
In article <1990Sep7.055025.16732@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) writes: Since the Dvorak vs. Qwerty discussion has come again, let me ask a dumb question that I've been curious about. Note I've never used a Dvorak keyboard, but can touch type at a reasonable rate (I think I did 40-60wpm when I took typing class 15 years ago). Many of the Dvorak proponents seem to be computer jocks, rather than your classic secretary types. Do people who claim to like Dvorak because qwerty slows you down, really type enough to get the advantages out of the higher speed? I would imagine that if you were sitting, typing away all day transcribing material (ie, a 60-100wpm secretary) that you would get a gain. I don't find myself powertyping that much at a time, I find I need to either compose what I'm writing, or rearrange things. -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 Do apple growers tell their kids money doesn't grow on bushes?
prc@erbe.se (Robert Claeson) (09/08/90)
In a recent article hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU (Wes Hardaker) writes: >Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem getting >confused? I doubt anyone just know the Dvorak style since there are so >few keyboards that support Dvorak. I think this would be a problem >switching from one to the other, however, or is the brain intelligent >enough to seperate the two during their respective use. I've had some, but not much, problems switching from the one to the other. But then, I avoid Dvorak if I have a choice. I find that I type about as fast on a QWERTY keyboard. It should be noted, though, that most of my typing is in Swedish. The Dvorak layout is optimized solely for the English language. If someone came up with an equally optimizied keyboard for Swedish, I might well switch to using it. -- Robert Claeson |Reasonable mailers: rclaeson@erbe.se ERBE DATA AB | Dumb mailers: rclaeson%erbe.se@sunet.se | Perverse mailers: rclaeson%erbe.se@encore.com These opinions reflect my personal views and not those of my employer (ask him).
melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) (09/08/90)
In article <1990Sep7.180323.8467@intek01.uucp> mark@intek01.uucp (Mark McWiggins) writes:
I haven't tried Dvorak, but Donald Norman ("The Psychology of Everyday
Things") claims that it's quite well documented that a conversion from
QWERTY to Dvorak will increase speed by no more than 10% for the average
user. So it's probably not worth doing for the average QWERTY-comfortable
touch-typist.
A claim was also made that fewer typso are made on Dvorak keyboards.
Can anyone corroborate this? Also, the original study was performed
on people using typewriters, not people using Emacs (GNU flavor). Is
the keyboard still optimal when you are a frequent user of C-t?
-Mikejohn@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (09/09/90)
Mark McWiggins (mark@intek01.uucp) writes: +-- | I haven't tried Dvorak, but Donald Norman ("The Psychology | of Everyday Things") claims that it's quite well documented | that a conversion from QWERTY to Dvorak will increase speed | by no more than 10% for the average user. So it's probably | not worth doing for the average QWERTY-comfortable touch-typist. +-- I disagree with this assertion; I don't do that much typing, and Dvorak gives me almost a twofold speed advantage. I got a message from someone identified only as bpdsun1!rmf, asking whether the Dvorak keyboard made any difference in fatigue. I tried to reply via e-mail, but my reply bounced. My experience indicates that the Dvorak keyboard has two other significant advantages besides raw speed. First, it is less fatiguing. People watching me type have often remarked that my fingers barely seem to move; this is probably because 70% of Dvorak typing is done on the home row, vs. 32% with QWERTY, according to Dvorak's measurements. Another important advantage is a reduced error rate. Stroking is often awkward on the QWERTY keyboard, and awkwardness leads to errors. To me, using the QWERTY keyboard is like driving a clapped-out '64 Rambler, and using the DSK is like driving a modern, highly responsive sports car. The feel is quite different. -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
david@star2.cm.utexas.edu (David Sigeti) (09/09/90)
In article <1990Sep8.174830.12039@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) writes: > My experience indicates that the Dvorak keyboard has two other > significant advantages besides raw speed. First, it is less > fatiguing. People watching me type have often remarked that > my fingers barely seem to move; this is probably because 70% > of Dvorak typing is done on the home row, vs. 32% with QWERTY, > according to Dvorak's measurements. .................................... > -- > John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu > ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber It sounds from this that the Dvorak keyboard might be better for typists with Karpal tunnel syndrome and possibly other typing related repetitive motion injuries. I have heard that Karpal tunnel syndrome is particularly aggravated by reaching for the upper row with the outer two fingers. If so, then Dvovak could be a real God-send to a lot of people (including me). Has anyone out there heard or read anything about Dvorak and repetitive motion injuries? -- David Sigeti david@star2.cm.utexas.edu cmhl265@hermes.chpc.utexas.edu
bote@csense.uucp (John Boteler) (09/11/90)
From article <1990Sep7.055025.16732@nmt.edu>, by john@nmt.edu (John Shipman): > Wes Hardaker (hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU) writes: > +-- > | Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem > | getting confused? > > I converted my personal equipment to the Dvorak Simplified > Keyboard, but of course I often have to use QWERTY. It > doesn't bother me for long, as the feel of the keyboard > tends to serve as a cue to tell me which layout to use. I am curious as to why the discussion refers to keyboards as physical entities, rather than the layout as interpreted by the computer systems. I have never purchased a Dvorak keyboard, yet I have been using the layout for over 5 years. Works great, less typing! Under DOS, I use SuperKey to remap the keyboard. Under Xenix, I use the 'mapkey' utility for remapping the console keyboard layout. A bit easier and quicker to implement, not to mention much cheaper! I switch readily, albeit grudgingly, to QWERTY when forced to by backward computers :? Think of the analogy to standard vs automatic transmissions in cars. -- John Boteler bote@csense.uucp {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703-241-BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling
hardaker@iris.ucdavis.edu (Wes Hardaker) (09/11/90)
Ok... It sounds like the Dvorak keyboard is worth looking into at
least, but now comes the question of where a decent typing tutor
exists that recognizs Dvorak style? Anyone? Anyone? (I have access
to most types of computers, but something public domain is a must...
I'd rather teach myself than spend money.)
I too am curious about using emacs with Dvorak and how that feels. No one
has responded to this question yet...
_____
/ ___ \
Wes Hardaker / / \/
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science \--/ /\
University of California at Davis __________________ \/ /--\
(hardaker@iris.ucdavis.edu) / Recycle \ /\___/ /
/ It's not too late! \ \_____/
_____
/ ___ \
Wes Hardaker / / \/
Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science \--/ /\john@nmt.edu (John Shipman) (09/11/90)
Wes Hardaker (hardaker@iris.ucdavis.edu) writes: +-- | Ok... It sounds like the Dvorak keyboard is worth looking | into at least, but now comes the question of where a decent | typing tutor exists that recognizs Dvorak style? Anyone? | Anyone? +-- I have a small booklet of typing exercises for the Dvorak keyboard, but it is copyrighted by Smith-Corona. +-- | I too am curious about using emacs with Dvorak and how | that feels. No one has responded to this question yet... +-- I use emacs with a DSK all the time. I remapped the control characters to match the regular controls, so C-x is under the new position of the X key. I like it just fine. It's a little hard to do C-x C-s C-x C-c one-handed, but it's no extra trouble if your hands are in the touch typing position---and the whole point of DSK is to improve touch typing. -- John Shipman/Zoological Data Processing/Socorro, NM/john@jupiter.nmt.edu ``Let's go outside and commiserate with nature.'' --Dave Farber
penneyj@servio.UUCP (D. Jason Penney) (09/11/90)
In article <7657@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> hardaker@iris.UCDavis.EDU (Wes Hardaker) writes: >Does anyone know both keyboards, and do you have a problem getting >confused? I doubt anyone just know the Dvorak style since there are so >few keyboards that support Dvorak. I think this would be a problem >switching from one to the other, however, or is the brain intelligent >enough to seperate the two during their respective use. > OK, I've been gone a week on vacation, and look what's going around comp.misc when I return! I think you can call me an authority on the Dvorak keyboard. I've been using it for about 5 years. I have software that will convert an IBM or a Sun to Dvorak. Of course, these drivers allow one to switch back and forth, so that others can use your machine! I have also found material relating to the one-handed versions of the American Simplified Keyboard (as it is referred to in the patent). I have software to allow one to learn to touch type, either Dvorak or Qwerty (Sholes). It comes in two flavors: the quasi-original MS-BASIC format (derived from a VMS-BASIC program from Harris Corp. on a DECUS tape some years back), and a rewritten version in C using curses. I switch between the two types of keyboards regularly, but I *definitely* prefer the Dvorak layout. BTW, there *was* a period of disorientation while I was learning, but with additional practice with the software this problem quickly disappeared. The Navy commissioned a study to see if Dvorak layouts could improve the productivity of their clerical staff. The results were inconclusive. However, the 95% reduction in cumulative finger motion is easily verifiable, and has its own rewards. ALL of this software is available from my MBAS (mail-based archive server). The pertinent filenames are: [extracted from "index"] [snip] --------------------------------------------------------- dvorak/ -- Dvorak support for IBM PC's and the Sun console, plus a tutorial program and test data for learning to touch-type either dvorak or qwerty. -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 56241 Mar 21 09:46 dvorak/Data01 -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 51507 Mar 21 09:46 dvorak/Data02 -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 44805 Mar 21 09:46 dvorak/Data03 -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 43184 Mar 21 09:46 dvorak/Data04 These are the data files for the learning program -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 50964 Mar 21 09:48 dvorak/Ibm01 -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 33413 Mar 21 09:48 dvorak/Ibm02 These are the drivers and a BASICA version of the learning program for the IBM and compatibles. The driver is "smart" -- you can toggle between qwerty and dvorak, and even one-handed layouts are available. It could use more work, but I've used it in its current form for years. -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 19278 Mar 21 11:34 dvorak/Unix01 This is the learning program in C and under curses, as well as a driver for the Sun console keyboard. -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 55945 Mar 22 16:28 dvorak/Xenix01 -rw-r--r-- 1 penneyj 9281 Mar 22 16:28 dvorak/Xenix02 This is "keybind", a console remapper for Xenix 386 (and presumably some SysV variants as well). No dvorak mapping is included, because I can't test it here. I include it because it looks pretty clear that it could be used to implement a Dvorak keyboard. Note you'll have to pick up Unix01 if you want the learning program. [snip] The remainder of this message is the help file from my MBAS. Enjoy! ----- HELP FOR jason-archive, as of 27 Apr 1990 This is a variant of the "kiss" archive server. Requests to this server should be addressed to penneyj@slc.com, and include the phrase, "jason-archive-request" in the subject. To contact a human, make sure that "jason-archive-request" is NOT in your Subject: line. The Subject: line is otherwise ignored. The remainder of the mail message should consist of "kiss" commands, one per line. Lines that do not form a valid command are ignored. You may request multiple files in a single mail message. There is no advantage in splitting the requests into multiple mail messages. The server recognizes six commands. They are: path <path> This lets the requestor override the address that is normally be extracted from the header. If you do not hear from the archiver server within oh, about 2 days, you should consider adding a "path" command to your request. The path describes how to mail a message from slc.com to your address. Overriding the path can also reduce uunet charges (see below). slc.com is directly connected to ogicse and uunet. I strongly prefer that your replies be routed through ogicse. Domain-based addresses are preferred, such as: path luser@baz.foo.bar.edu (These will be automatically routed through ogicse.) An example without domain routing: path ogicse!foo!oof!bar!rab!luser help This message. It equivalent to the command "send help". index This is equivalent to the command "send index". send <whatever> The whatever is mailed to you. Examine the index to see what is currently available. Wildcards are NOT supported -- if you want multiple files, you should ask for them separately, one per line. Filenames are relative to a kiss "data" directory. All files except "index" and "help" are in subdirectories, so you will need to prepend a directory path, Unix style. Filenames are case-sensitive. compress ALL of the files requested in the current mail message will be "compressed" and "xxencoded". "xxencode" is NOT compatible with uuencode, so you will need to acquire misc/Xxencode01 BEFORE using this. xxencode is preferred over uuencode because the latter is useless on some BITNET sites using non-ASCII character sets. This is related to translation problems in some Internet/Bitnet gateways. If your system does not have compress, a public domain version is available in misc/. This is the most economical way to move files, but again, you will need to upload misc/Xxencode01 in a separate message, and possibly misc/Ncompress01 and misc/Ncompress02 as well. quit Nothing past this point is interpreted. This is provided so that the occasional lost soul whose signature contains a line that looks like a command can still use the server without getting a bogus response. -- D. Jason Penney Ph: (503) 629-8383 Beaverton, OR 97006 uucp: ...uunet!servio!penneyj (penneyj@slc.com) "Talking about music is like dancing about architecture." -- Steve Martin
duncan@dduck.ctt.bellcore.com (Scott Duncan) (09/13/90)
It's been noted that >Many of the Dvorak proponents seem to be computer jocks, rather than >your classic secretary types. Do people who claim to like Dvorak >because qwerty slows you down, really type enough to get the >advantages out of the higher speed? I would imagine that if you were >sitting, typing away all day transcribing material (ie, a 60-100wpm >secretary) that you would get a gain. I don't find myself powertyping >that much at a time, I find I need to either compose what I'm writing, >or rearrange things. Which I think is a fair representation of things. At SHARE (a large user group of customers for IBM mainframes) meetings, I have heard human factors folks from IBM state that they had, at least in the past, done most of their studies of keyboards with data entry personnel. This was because they were the ones with the heaviest usage of keyboards. Customers at SHARE (mostly from programming shops rather than data entry departments) thought that profiles of other keyboard use needed to be more heavily examined. (Not picking on IBM on this point as it's just an example that probably all manufacturers of keyboards probably follow.) In any event, my inclination would be to avoid the whole issue of speed and advocate investing more resource into better scanning mechanisms to avoid heavy transcription tasks in the first place. At one time the keyboard layout debate may have been very important, but technology is probably going to (if it has not really already) make this irrelevant. Speaking only for myself, of course, I am... Scott P. Duncan (duncan@ctt.bellcore.com OR ...!bellcore!ctt!duncan) (Bellcore, 444 Hoes Lane RRC 1H-210, Piscataway, NJ 08854) (908-699-3910 (w) 609-737-2945 (h))