

Google Docs vs manual typewriter - sliceghost
http://tommorris.org/blog/2009/12/31

======
xiaoma
I have respect for the pen, due to its portability, convenience for quick
notes and use for making sketches, diagrams, and free-form documents. The type
writer, on the other hand is idiotic. It's rigid, even worse than computer
documents. It's also completely incapable of handling Chinese, which makes up
a large part of what I have to write. On top of that, a typewriter weighs more
than a backpack with a laptop inside.

What's next, _Mass production vs personal forge_?

------
coderdude
Admittedly I couldn't stand to read the whole article. His obsession with
typewriters seems to have influenced his taste in font size and family.

My question to others based on what I read is how many people here, without
looking, can type quickly and accurately but choose to not follow the homerow
practice? I type very quickly, and hardly ever need to press backspace. I
usually only look when I type in 16 character passwords with alternating caps.

~~~
nzmsv
On most keyboards it is very hard to touch-type while programming. Seriously,
I just can't enter a curly brace while keeping my hands on the home row. It
hurts :) And once you move that hand, repositioning it takes time.

The other reason I never learned to type properly is that I just get bored. I
tried several times, and always gave up. It just feels like a waste typing
fjfjfjfjfjfj when I could be entering code.

Finally, the productivity of a coder isn't how fast he/she can type. It's how
well they think, which is mostly inversely related to WPM.

~~~
endtime
>It's how well they think, which is mostly inversely related to WPM.

That's an...interesting claim. Why do you think typing ability is negatively
correlated with intelligence?

~~~
khafra
I, for one, can type almost 80wpm and am dumb as a rock. I can never solve
logic puzzles, and struggle with debugging when writing one-page scripts in
Python.

~~~
alanthonyc
Upvoted, for making me chuckle.

But I'm pretty sure that typing speed and programming ability are not-
correlated, most definitely not _inversely_ related.

~~~
nzmsv
"Correlation does not equal causation"

Also, I really should learn to type better. This though got me googling. I
found some discussion on the topic:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=952745>
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=510087>

Also, I seem to remember someone posting a webapp typing tutor. Does anyone
remember the name?

------
jcapote
Sorry, I had to close the page after reading: "I'm not sure that it's possible
to know how to code in as many programming languages as I do"

tldr: It's painfully apparent the author is getting too old to Keep Up and is
taking that frustration out on newer technology. Retire already. No one uses
gopher or typewriters anymore (for serious work), nor will they ever.

~~~
sp332
You should have at least finished the sentence before concluding that it makes
no sense. "I'm not sure that it's possible to know how to code in as many
programming languages as I do, own an iPod, three laptops, two mobiles and be
able to quote verbatim from some W3C/IETF specs and consider oneself a Luddite
unless one significantly bends the definition of Luddite."

~~~
jcapote
Perhaps you're right. I just felt it didn't make any sense. How is owning
gadgets and quoting specs some kind of "anti luddite" badge? Seems like he's
in some serious denial.

~~~
ghshephard
Agreed - One who is a "Luddite" is not, by the very definition of the word,
opposed to technology, per se, but instead are opposed to "technology change"
- the author does seem to be opposed to technological change - but does make
some good reasons as to why he is.

I think the article may have been written half tongue in cheek - I expect if I
was British, instead of just Canadian, I might have more fully appreciated the
humor. Hints were as follows:

" If a burglar enters your home, you can drop your typewriter on them from
above"

"To get the most out of Google Docs, you must use an arcane device known as a
mouse. "

But, if you read the article all the way to the end, there are actually some
parts that cause you to think about the (particularly for the ADHD among us)
issue of using Google Docs as our principal text entry / editting tool (as
opposed to something like "Pages" in Full Screen mode)

~~~
tommorris
I'm somewhat surprised - but gratified - to read my post on Hacker News. I
posted it mostly as a sort of very dry, tongue-firmly-in-cheek public memo to
various people I know who are always telling me why I really need to "get with
cloud computing". The idea was to prompt said people into seeing that those of
us who don't immediately respond with excitement when told about online
services like Google Docs and hurriedly jump on the bandwagon might actually
have some relatively sound reasons for it. Lots of people I know seem to get
very excited about stuff because it's new, and seem to be on automatic
optimism mode about all new technology. The attitude I think is much healthier
is a bit of guarded scepticism or realism. The Luddite would refuse new
technology flatly - they want the world to stop so they can get off. Instead,
I was hoping to push my readers (mostly my personal friends IRL) through a
rather absurd example to try and step back from the Digg/TechCrunch/Twitter-
driven hype and try to ask themselves "do you really need it?".

As for the earlier suggestion that I should retire, I most certainly would
like to, but I'm in my twenties (it is perfectly possible to have used a
typewriter frequently as a child and now be in one's twenties). Old school
doesn't equal old. I'm a programmer in my spare time and do independent
development projects to pay my way through philosophy grad school. I think
Google Docs has a perfect use - I use it a fair amount for planning (the
podcast I'm involved in uses it, and we used it quite a lot to plan a
vacation). I'm not advocating using a typewriter instead of Eclipse or instead
of whatever you use for word processing. What I'd like is if some of my geek
friends would learn the lessons of technological history and maybe try some of
the old tech they think desperately needs to be deprecated in order to bring
about some technological paradise. It's not all bad.

I'm not opposed to technological change. I'm opposed to people thinking
technology is automatically good because it is new and automatically needs to
be made obselete because it is old.

