Soukie's Place
keeping track of random thoughtsCzech Heroes (Considered) Fictional
Josef Švejk, Jan Welzl, Jára Cimrman. These are three distinct heroes of the Czech past. Two of them are fictional, one has often been incorrectly regarded as such, and one of them was prominent in the poll for the greatest Czech person ever.
Not that Czechs would have a shortage of “regular” national heroes—there are Charles IV, Hus, Comenius, Dvořák, Kafka, Wichterle, Forman or Jágr (not to mention Pilsner Urquell, because beer almost does qualify here)—but the Czech mentality often prefers heroes of a not-so-international stardom and more-of-an-average abilities with non-standard achievements (a “Joe the hero” who is best in something I don’t care about). And if on top of that the hero manages to be fictional or to become famous against his will, he’s on the fast track to the hall of fame. Continues »
Of Keyboards and Men:
Dvorak vs. Colemak
The computer age made it easy to switch the keyboard layout to Dvorak Simplified Keyboard without any hardware modifications, and also made it possible for anyone to swap a few individual letters or all of them. One such recent creation of a complete keyboard is the Colemak layout, named after its author Shai Coleman who released it in 2006.
Colemak leaves 17 keysDisregarding the number row and various function keys. in identical positions to qwerty to ease the learning and preserve the location of frequent keyboard shortcuts. This might be good for many people. In my case, the reason I failed to learn touch typing until recently was the temptation to fall back to my very fast ‘hunt and peck.’ With only two keys in the same position on Dvorak, this was not an option. Too many similarities also interfere with the mental switchCzech keyboard and qwerty are mostly identical and switching between the two is very difficult precisely because they are so alike..
The comparisons between Dvorak Simplified Keyboard and Colemak often conclude that the latter is better and usually revolve around several statistical metrics. Two prominent measurements pointing in favor of Colemak are the ‘distance’ that your fingers need to travel and the percentage of letters typed on the ‘home row.’ I am going to go through the various numbers and other aspects, and explain why I consider Dvorak a superior layout.
Statistics for qwerty, Colemak and Dvorak
In most comparisons, the ‘distance’ favors Colemak, with a 7.5% reduction on my test textData were generated in http://colemak.com/Compare tool using the full text of Philip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and other texts where indicated. but this varies (the reduction for The Fellowship of the Ring is 3.5%). The calculated Dvorak distance can get actually lower than Colemak by swapping the neighboring keys U and I (both typed with the same finger on the ‘home row’). I have seen suggestions for this modification but I advise against it:
The method used to calculate the ‘distance’ is flawed or misleadingThe keys in home position are considered zero distance. This leads to calculating ‘hit’ (on Dvorak) as three times longer than ‘did’ although the distance your fingers travel is almost the same. (qwerty equivalent is ‘had’ and ‘lad’.) — a phrase on home keys such as ‘eat the toast at ten to noon’ on Dvorak would be calculated as zero distance. Such ‘distance’ is not influencing the typing speed as much as one would think (otherwise the qwerty typists would be hopelessly slow). Dvorak’s ‘key’ considerations for the layout went far beyond single-letter frequencies, and the placement of keys balances other, often more important, criteria.
The other thing you will likely notice is that Colemak prioritizes having all the top-frequency letters on the home row. Dvorak opted differentlyDvorak kept the left side of the home row for vowels. The letter ‘U’ is the 12th most frequent letter, so on merits of frequency it does not deserve to be in the top ten. and, as a result, Dvorak typists spend 67% of typing on the home row which Colemak bests with 71.5%; but they also spend one third less time on the bottom row and this is very good because it is the slowest row to reach.
On the test text, Colemak also achieves an 8% reduction in the “same-fingerMeasured when different consecutive letters are typed using the same finger — a particularly slow combination.” typing over Dvorak. Although it can do better30% ‘same-finger’ typing reduction on The Fellowship of the Ring. and combinations typed with the same finger are the slowest, this improves only 1% of all the typing. Dvorak over Colemak, on the other hand, improves by 32% the chance that the next letter will be typed by the ‘other hand’ than the current one; and this better hand alternation helps with the typing constantly. This also makes Dvorak ideal for using thumbs on hand-held devices.
Conclusion
Bear in mind that what is evaluated as the optimal keyboard layout inevitably depends on what criteria are used. Colemak is not different because it was designed in the computer age, it is different because it used different priorities and assumptions. If your criteria are in line with Colemak, it might work for you.
The criteria Dr. Dvorak and Dr. Dealey used for the Simplified Keyboard were based on research and investigation with scope that amazed me when I read their book Typewriting Behavior. Yet, despite all the advantages (especially over qwerty) it is amazing how little used and known the Simplified Keyboard is. It is not even supported by many devices at all: iPhone comes to mind — although, ironically, Apple’s co-founder Steve Wozniak is a Dvorak typist.
But this sad state is not surprising: One thing Dvorak does not have is an active, passionate community. It almost feels as if Dvorak users were content to have a little known and under-appreciated gem under their hands.
This is the final article in the series Of Keyboards and Men. The first, titled Childhood, described my encounter with the typewriters and was filed in the Life category. The second, The Inventors, explored the History before concluding with this one, Dvorak vs. Colemak, in the Technology category.
Comments (1) | 
Feed |
Of Keyboards and Men:
The Inventors
One thing that children do very well is asking questions. “What is this?” “What is that?” The most difficult and important questions start with ‘Why.’ “Why are the letters on the keyboard arranged like this?”
Glad you asked. There are many detailed accounts of the history of the typewriter and its keyboard layout, and at least as many myths. The typewriter that became wildly used was invented by Christopher Latham Sholes in 1867.
Initially, the mechanism relied on the gravity to return the heads of the keys after imprinting the letters on the paper. This lead to jamming of neighboring keys, so Sholes experimentally modified his alphabetical layout to distance common letters into what we now accept without much thinking as the keyboard. (It was not to slow down typists as is often said because there had not been any typists then.)
When the typewriters were upgraded with springs to return the keys faster, Sholes actually wanted to update the so-called qwerty layout to make it more efficient but the manufacturers were against changing the (barely) established standard.
By the time August Dvorak, professor at the Seattle’s University of Washington, scientifically approached the problem in 1932 and proposed a ‘simplified’ layout with his brother-in-law, the standard had really been established. Dvorak’s Simplified Keyboard was based on the analysis of English language, and took into account how typists learn and the ergonomics of the movements during touch typing.
Although Dvorak’s pupils were achieving faster typing speeds with less typos, the biggest argument against the new layout at that time was the cost of converting the physical typewriters and retraining of typists. The fact that ‘Simplified Keyboard’ is demonstrably easier to learn and faster was not sufficient.
Despite Dvorak’s efforts, his invention has never succeeded. Because of this, it became a favorite example of how a better standard can lose to a worse — but more established — one. If any ‘invisible hand of the market’ exists it must be responsible for the destruction of a fair number of superior alternatives, aided by corporate greed and the reluctance to change of the masses.
Twist of the Wrist
Another unfortunate legacy of the old mechanical days which is almost never mentioned is the staggered position of the rows. While this progressive offset to the left allowed the mechanical parts of the typewriter to fit in easily, it has no function today and forces the hands and fingers to twist asymmetricallyThe right hand movement is more natural. But the same-finger keys for left hand, e.g. W-S-K for the ring finger, are difficult..
A Better Keyboard
Without going overboard with the design, a mainstream, simple keyboard should have long looked something like this:
Physical layout
- The rows are not staggered, so the keys are easy to reach up and down for both hands
- Enter and Backspace are moved to prominent positions (they should not be an after-thought pasted at the edge of the 19th century)
- Caps Lock is outcast to the fringe, awaiting extinction.
Dvorak vs. qwerty
- Frequently occurring letters are on the ‘home row’ (70% vs. 32%)
- The “work” is distributed gradually
between the fingers; the right hand has a slightly more demanding job - The typing alternates better between hands (‘same-hand’ probability of 23% vs. 36%)
- The least frequently used keys are on the lower row which is hardest to hit (8% of typing vs. 16%)
Unfortunately, even most keyboards that label themselves as ‘ergonomic’ and ‘natural’ do nothing about this. While the vast majority of ‘split’ keyboards offer a more comfortable angle for the arms, they keep the offset on both halves in the same direction. The offset, if any, should be mirrored, otherwise the left hand is left strained. The industry assumes that everybody prefers to slavishly bend to a 150-year-old design, even though it takes no more than 15 hours to get completely used to a normal (straight column) layout.
Changing both the layout and positioning of the keys leads to a faster typing with significantly reduced movement, which also reduces the risk of repetitive stress injuries and carpal tunnel syndrome. It is a sad fact that until now, the rather arbitrary and inefficient qwerty keyboard continues to dominate our computers to the point where most users are not even aware of better alternatives.
Should You Switch?
Adults tend to ask markedly different questions than children. One of the less flattering ones is: “Why should I bother?” If you are considering moving away from qwerty, I have the following recommendations:
Dvorak is an obvious choice for anyone who would like to learn touch typing. Do not waste your time with a slower and uncomfortable layout that is more difficult to learn. You do not need a new physical keyboard — you should not be looking at the keys anyway, so only change the software keyboard settings and start practicing. Good online exercises are at abcd.
The more difficult question is whether to learn Dvorak if you can touch type qwerty. I would say that unless you type more than 60 words per minute, switching to Dvorak is worth it: You should get to your original speed within a month. Dvorak is also much more comfortable so it is a superior choice even if your goal is not to write faster.
Take Action
If you wish to help promote better standards, these are some of the things you can do:- Demand alternatives from manufacturers of keyboards, laptops and mobile devices.
- Purchase products that already provide them.
- Link to this article or donate to the campaign promoting Dvorak.
The switch to a non-staggered layout is easy and does not require re-learning, and it will bring benefits to people who touch type (the “hunt and peck” does not suffer from the staggered layout). So even if you decide you do not wish to learn the Dvorak layout, you could still benefit from a keyboard with a design that is not bound by no longer existing mechanical parts.
Christopher Sholes died in 1890; typewriters were on the rise and opening good employment opportunities for women. August Dvorak died in 1975, his contribution doomed and used by maybe two thousand people; it was two years before the home computers would allow switching keyboards at will. It is time for the next step. Even if you decide to stay with the good old keyboard, give your children the chance to break away from the bad standard. My Grandma’s typewriter was manufactured before Dr Dvorak’s wonderful invention, so I was out of luck.
This is the second article in the series Of Keyboards and Men. The first, titled Childhood, described my encounter with the typewriters and was filed in the Life category. This one, The Inventors, is filed under History, while the final one, Dvorak vs. Colemak, concentrates on the Technology.
Comments (1) | Feed |
Of Keyboards and Men:
Childhood
My Grandma worked in a sugar factory that stood at the end of my village. Part of the year was always filled with the constant noise of tractors hauling beet from the fields to be transformed into refined sugar cubes that would later be served with tea or coffee in nice porcelain cups.
Her office had an electrical typewriter and a phone with a switchboard. There was a lot of plastic and lights. However, at home, in a large wooden wardrobe, below hanging coats and dresses, she kept a real typewriter. It was a black, iron mechanical machine, quite heavy for me to lift and carry to a desk. (Actually, everything was sturdier and properly built in the old days.)
Its keys were beautiful circles with nice lettering and silver rims that you needed to push hard a long way to be rewarded with a ‘clack’ sound as the letter got printed through an ink ribbon which slowly moved as you typed. I liked replacing the ribbon and setting the typewriter’s bell to ring as I approached the edge of the paper. I typed away slowly enough to know beforehand that the next key would produce the bright ring, announcing that I could finish the word and push the cylinder back — with great satisfaction — using a lever which would also advanced the paper to the next line.
The typewriter had a label ‘Remington,’ which sounded rather extraordinarily in the Haná region of Moravia (the intriguing shape of letter “g” appears rarely in Czech), and little did I know that this corporation was partially responsible – besides gun production – for thrusting a very poor standard of the keyboard on the whole world. When I was a kid, “typing productivity” and “repetitive stress injuries” did not mean a thing; but that machine was the best toy I’ve ever had.
Remington 92, made circa 1929
This is the first article in the series Of Keyboards and Men, titled Childhood and filed in the Life category. The second, The Inventors deals with the History; and the final one, Dvorak vs. Colemak concentrates on the Technology.
entertainment
e-mail subscription 
follow Twitter