Re: COLEMAK layout?

I was thinking the same things about how good hardware fixes many of those
problems. The good hardware really just minimizes them though; if there's a
better layout, it should work better on the better hardware too. Colemak
looks really cool, so I'll try it at some point. I've gotten used to those
problems, so I deal with them better, but they're still problems.

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 1:17 AM, earthmoon <[email protected]> wrote:

>   I've used Dvorak for almost 5 years and really like it, so take my bias
> with a grain of salt ;) What I will say is that I type on a Kinesis
> contoured keyboard and that completely eliminates all of the possible
> "reach" problems and the location of the delete, control, alt and arrow
> keys that might come up in a Dvorak layout. I can't say enough good
> things about the contoured keyboard - it literally saved me from chronic
> tendonitis when I was typing medical transcription for a living.
> Between the reduced repetitive stress from using Dvorak and the 80% less
> reach from using the Kinesis I was able to heal my wrists while still
> typing 5 hours a day, and that's just *not* going to happen with any
> other keyboard :)
>
> http://www.kinesis-ergo.com/advantage.htm
>
> So I guess what I'm saying is - don't just consider your layout,
> consider your hardware as well. No matter how good your layout is, it's
> not going to have you reaching 80% less on every key :)
>
> em
>
>
> ericsc4 wrote:
> > I was thinking of switching to DVORAK, but just recently I found out
> > about COLEMAK. Now I might switch to COLEMAK instead. What is
> > everyone's opinion on the COLEMAK layout? http://colemak.com/
> >
> > Also here is a link to a wiki with usage diagrams comparing QWERTY,
> > DVORAK, and COLEMAK.
> > http://tinyurl.com/64g9mz
> >
> > I'm especially interested in what experienced Dvorak users think of
> > the layout. And maybe a counter argument from the pro-DVORAK side on
> > what might be wrong with COLEMAK and why DVORAK is better.
> >
> > Below is some text taken from the Colemak website:
> >
> > What's wrong with the Dvorak layout?
> >
> > * Placing 'L' on the QWERTY 'P' position causes excessive strain
> > on the right pinky. Colemak doesn't place frequent letters where the
> > pinkies stretch.
> > * 'F' is on the QWERTY 'Y' position which is a difficult stretch
> > on normal keyboards.
> > * 'I' is very frequent but isn't on the home position.
> > * 'R' is very frequent but isn't on the home row.
> > * It is significantly lopsided so that the right hand does too
> > much work.
> > * It's not comfortable to use Ctrl-Z/X/C/V shortcuts with the left
> > hand while holding the mouse with the right hand. Colemak conserves
> > those shortcuts in their QWERTY positions.
> > * Even though the design principles are sound, the implementation
> > isn't optimal because it was designed without the aid of computers.
> > * 'L' and 'S' form a frequent same-finger digraph on the right
> > pinky. Same-finger for the pinky is very rare in Colemak. In
> > particular, Unix commands such as 'ls -l' are very uncomfortable to type.
> > * Some punctuation (in particular the curly/square brackets) is
> > less comfortable to type on Dvorak. This affects mainly programmers
> > and advanced Unix users.
> >
> >
> > Is it worth switching from Dvorak to Colemak?
> >
> > The Colemak keyboard layout fixes all the issues mentioned above, and
> > wins in virtually every criterion, but the difference will be less
> > noticeable than the difference between QWERTY and Dvorak. The switch
> > won't be as easy for veteran Dvorak users. If you're generally happy
> > with Dvorak, you should probably stick with it.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > To Post a message, send it to: [email protected]<altkeyboards%40eGroups.com>
> > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> [email protected]<altkeyboards-unsubscribe%40eGroups.comYahoo>!
> Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]