Re: Taking the Dvorak issue into our own hands. No Pun Intended.

Watching a programmer friend do his thing in QWERTY like a crazed spider
suggests to me there would be no benefit to switching layouts for someone
who is already skilled at QWERTY, whatever advantage Dvorak may have had
to offer. I have a Chinese friend who types QWERTY and I have a heck of
a time keeping up with her whilst chatting online and she's not even a
native English speaker. I haven't mentioned Dvorak to her, no need.

I remain a convinced Dvorak typist, and have no intention of ever going
back to Mr. Sholes awkward fantasy, and concur that at the moment the
decision to learn to type is made, a valid option for something better
should be there. Dvorak is one such option, perhaps the best option --
all things considered. 

I still have a CD of Mavis Beacon 5, from back when Mavis was hip, rather
than the stodgy QWERTY shill she later became. Mavis taught me Dvorak.
Now I notice, and I say this with some hesitation, but looking at the
Broderbund site today I see that Mavis is looking quite pale. Whatever
led to this odd, complected decision by her maker, this fly on the wall
would surely like to know. 



> I hope the word "mandatory" refers to allowing access to the keyboard  
> layout setting for anybody who uses a computer, and perhaps a mandate  
> for educators to introduce the Dvorak option to new typists.  
> Mandating access removes the most valid objection to teaching Dvorak  
> to students: that they might someday be forced to use QWERTY anyway.
> 
> Current QWERTY typists should not be forced to switch. The GSA study  
> that is commonly cited to denounce Dvorak advised against switching,  
> and many people will choose to believe it. Fortunately, even if you  
> ignore that study's flaws, it is a real stretch to apply it to new  
> typists. Mandating that both layouts are allowed in all work and  
> school environments should be enough to encourage voluntary adoption.
> 
> Any suggestion of forcing current typists to switch will doom the  
> effort. There is a cost to retraining. Although the Navy study in  
> 1941 showed the cost of retraining could be recouped in ten days  
> (after training ended), the Navy had the luxury of assigning subjects  
> to non-typing duties during the training period. Indeed, for best  
> results it is important to avoid or at least minimize typing work  
> outside of actual training sessions, and to not use QWERTY at all  
> until the Dvorak pattern is fully learned.
> 
> People who make their living at a keyboard might not be able to  
> afford even two or three weeks of lost work. If the change were a  
> mandate, more switchers would try to rush the process, risking  
> failures that in turn would be blamed on the layout, not poor training.
> 
> Good luck,
> Marcus
> 
> On Oct 12, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Gregory G wrote:
> 
> > I am sick and tired of seeing all of the money that is being wasted  
> > by people's ignorance and resistance to change.  So, I've finally  
> > decided to take matters into my own hands.  I've decided to lobby  
> > Congress directly to ask President Obama to lead the way on the  
> > Dvorak issue.  I've created an Internet page concerning how it's  
> > going to work and invite you all to take part.  If only seven of  
> > you decide to read the message and do what it says we can have the  
> > Dvorak Keyboard Layout made into a public law in no time.  Even if  
> > not, by simply alerting your friends of this page everyone on the  
> > Internet will be have enough information to make their own informed  
> > choice.
> >
> > Please click on the link below for more information.
> >
> > http://dynamicreflections.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1591481% 
> > 3ABlogPost%3A4330
> >