Better? No. But as far as popularity goes, I would not be totally surprised if a significant fraction of people type more text messages on their mobile phones - using just a numeric keypad - than use a real querty keyboard to send email.
The problem with that plan is that it destroys electronic keyboards and electric typewriters, but not trusty old mechanical Olivettis and Hispanos. Sounds kind of self-defeating.
I’m sorry, I have to call ‘cite’ on that. Who disputed which study, and what do they have to back up that assertion?
Marcus Brooks has gone through most of them, and none of them that I have seen involved trained vs. untrained.
My typing is similar to this. Occasionally I type a full post or email, but most of it is moving between fields on forms, and typing part numbers that consist of collections of numbers and letter.
So there isn’t an efficency based layout that is going to do anything for me, and because I am constantly moving between keyboard, number pad, hot keys and a mouse, any of the split keyboards would be more of a bother then a blessing. I need to be able to reach down with either hand and type any key. (I’m also left handed, so left hand is likely to have a pen in it)
These things already exist. See Chorded keyboard - Wikipedia. A friend of mine once went to hear a talk given by Charles Moore, the inventor of the programming language Forth (which I used to program in and liked a lot) and Moore demonstrated the use of such a chording keyboard. But it has not taken over the world. I am happy enough with QUERTY and see no reason to change. I have read that Dvorak will speed you up by maybe 3%.
I just don’t see the point. I already type nearly as fast as I think of the words to put on the screen… even if it gave me a 25% increase, it’d be too much work to change things like Ctrl-C/V etc.
Ah, an area I can speak to with authority. I was the co-designer of an ergonomic chorded keyboard for court reporters in the 1990s, and I’ve written many articles and several books on these and related technologies.
The “superiority” isn’t the question at all. The question is training time. The chorded keyboards are faster. Period. But it typically takes years to learn to use it well, plus some rather expensive software.
The whole point of chorded keyboards is that you’re not typing one letter at a time. One “keystroke” (using several fingers on several keys) can generate an entire syllable, word, or phrase. And while it isn’t common, people certainly can type in excess of 100 words per minute on a QWERTY keyboard. Using the Mavis Beacon software, I’ve broken 100wpm and my wife has broken 120wpm on standard computer keyboards with QWERTY layouts.
My wife is certified at 250 words per minute on a chorded keyboard, and national speed contests go significantly faster than that.
InvisibleWombat Have you ever posted on the yahoo groups AltKeyboard mailing list? There’s a wack of people there who’d be very interested in your work…
Or more reliable voice recognition.
As for different keyboards, there’s this device. http://www.virtual-laser-keyboard.com/
For $169, you’d think they could at least provide a Dvorak layout. And couldn’t they provide more ergonomic layouts? At the very least a split keyboard would be better. And why not allow the user to customize the layout?
I’m typing this right now on a Colemakkeyboard. I can switch to qwerty with maybe 10 seconds of adjustment time, and I have no problems with hotkeys. It was worth it for me to switch, because 99% of my typing time is at the home computer and it’s noticeably easier on my fingers.
I agree that it is societal inertia.
Society as a whole has many practices that have become deeply entrenched into people’s lives to the extent that changing it constitutes a great challenge for the person, who perhaps can see advantages in the change, considers the cost of the change to be too expensive given the benefit. When you factor in the fact that some people will resist at all cost, you can see that society is a lumbering dinosaur.
Imagine if someone did a study that French speakers are more intelligent and can reason better because of their language, that French is easier to teach and learn, and English hinders logical reasoning, then you tried to use that to convince the Anglophone world to switch to French - it wouldn’t work!
No, I haven’t. I hesitate to get involved in another group right now because I already have too many irons in the fire.
Many people have mentioned that a better keyboard layout would have to be significantly better in order to overcome the inertia of the QWERTY layout. But there is another resistance to consider; whatever better keyboard layout that is chosen will only be better for one set of applications. For instance the Colemak layout might optimize for typing English text, but it does not optimize for other applications; such as computer programming. Now certainly typing English text is a huge application, but there are many other applications that people use a keyboard for.
I am a software developer and code uses a very different distribution of keystrokes than prose. Code uses more capitalization, a lot more numbers, and a ton more punctuation. Furthermore, most software editing programs have sophisticated prediction and completion logic so that the user does not have to type an entire word. For example in my editor if I want to type the word ‘class’, I type ‘cl’ and then press space. This completes the word as well as the required boilerplate punctuation.
Likewise, people that work in other fields have their own set of keyboard needs. There are a ton of other applications that are much more ‘bursty’ than a word-processor: the user enters text in a few fields, does something with the mouse, hits a shortcut key, enters more text, etc. These users would not benefit much from a new keyboard layout either.
It seems much more likely that we will see an increase in prediction and completion of text. Not only does this provide the same benefit as a chorded keyboard that enters in chunks of a word, but it can also be rolled out in software only and without new keyboard hardware. Additionally, this logic would be tailored to the application as well to the language. We see this in browsers already; if they see an edit box labeled ‘phone’, they can suggest phone numbers that you have entered in previous edit boxes.
Except that there’s no real evidence that Dvorak is superior in any way- except for some users.
Do I understand correctly that this includes lots of ‘macro’ type entry, because many of the combinations are mapped not to single letters, but to whole words or phrases? Do you know how many key-combinations (single letters on a standard keyboard) per minute that 250 wpm requires?
I’m just curious: never having used a chorded keypad, it seems that coordinating the timing among multiple fingers would be slower, kind of like how serial ports turn out to be faster these days than parallel ports. But you, know I’d love to learn from an expert.
Not macros per se (that has a different meaning in court reporting software), but you’ve got the right idea.
Each person has a customized shorthand->English dictionary. There are a dozen or so major writing theories that give a starting point, but each person customizes from there. The keys under the left fingers correspond to initial consonants, the right fingers get final consonants, and the thumbs get vowels. Theoretically, each “stroke” produces a full syllable (or punctuation mark). In actual practice, even multisyllabic words are frequently reduced to one or two strokes, as are common phrases.
For someone working in a courtroom, for example, the phrase “Objection: vague and ambiguous” would probably be two strokes. For someone doing television closed-captioning, common names in the news would be shortened to one or two strokes–even long ones like Schwartzenegger. This is why each person has a custom dictionary filled with words and word parts appropriate to what they do. This is also why they go to school for 2-4 years to learn how to do it.
If I understand the question correctly, when she’s writing at 250 words per minute, she’s typically pressing about 5 strokes per second (= 300 strokes per minute), although that’s rarely sustained for long. The good ones can handle bursts up to 7 or 8 strokes per second.
First, to kill a fallacy, parallel processing (and communication) is indeed faster than serial when you’re comparing apples to apples. If you take the old parallel ports, they were always faster than RS-232 (and even RS-422) serial ports. Comparing them to USB is putting up 1970’s parallel against 1990’s serial.
But to answer the question, it takes a lot of getting used to, and the actual number of strokes per second is typically going to be slower than typing on a non-chorded keyboard. I was using my wife in the example above. On a regular computer keyboard, she types just shy of 120 wpm, which is 2 words per second. At a typical five letters plus space per word, that’s 12 keystrokes per second, which is double the normal sustained rate on the chorded keyboard.
Now that I’ve revealed my true identity, I can give out details on the book: It’s called The Closed Captioning Handbook (ISBN 9780240805610), and chapter 11 describes in detail how the stenotype chorded keyboards work.
How does this work legally? Do they transcribe their entries using their custom dictionary after the fact? Or do they have the transcript and dictionary recorded together?
Some run the translation process after the fact, but many (perhaps most by this time) do it in realtime so that it’s clear when something’s awry. The cleaned-up text file is printed or transmitted electronically to the attorney(s). If the accuracy of the transcript is challenged, they can be checked against the steno notes by another impartial court reporter.
Even though the dictionaries are custom, most court reporters can read each other’s notes.
Haven’t read all the posts, but, no, because there are and always will be a lot of people, such as myself, who touch type with Qwerty. Ever heard the expression, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”? I can do 60 wpm (used to be 75); why would I want a new keyboard layout? For that matter, a new keyboard layout probably isn’t going to make it easier for a beginner to learn touch typing. You’d still have to memorize where the keys are and practice, practice, practice. Maybe it would help those who use the hunt-and-peck method, but I don’t see why I should give up Qwerty to make it easier for those of you who’d rather hunt and peck.