
The QWERTY myth - numeromancer
http://reason.com/archives/1996/06/01/typing-errors
======
j_baker
For the record, here's the response to that article: <http://www.dvorak-
keyboard.com/dvorak2.html>

~~~
wglb
So are there any reliable studies that show 1) the superiority of one over the
other or 2) the superiority of one over the other for programming?

~~~
zefhous
I don't know of any recent studies, haven't really looked, but I've been
typing in Dvorak for about two years and this is my take on it.

1\. I don't think the superiority of one or the other is really the issue
here. The issue is making the switch. Those studies are addressing whether
it's worth it to switch.

The bottom line is that Dvorak is more efficient in terms of movement. It's
optimized for typing in English (other romance languages are quite similar)
and QWERTY just isn't.

2\. From personal experience, I think that the mappings of punctuation are
superior in Dvorak. I especially like having the dash and underscore easily
accessible (next to Return) for programming. I also find punctuation more
natural overall in Dvorak.

~~~
photomatt
I've been typing Dvorak over 10 years now and more than anything I appreciate
the comfort. Even though I type all day long I've never had a typing-related
hand problem.

------
pmichaud
tl;dr: it's a wordy but alright article about how the idea of an inferior
product winning because it got a head start is a myth that has no actual
evidence. QWERTY vs DVORAK is one example of this myth, but it's not central
to the piece, actually.

~~~
paulgb
Moreover, it seems to assume that being lucky is the same as being first.
Providing examples of second-comers who were successful (VHS, DOS) is not a
sufficient argument that luck doesn't matter in markets.

Interesting read, though.

~~~
Semiapies
Most claims of "luck" don't hold up when examined closely.

There are rather few cases of some technology being superior in every
conceivable way to its active competitor; usually, each has relative pros and
cons. Beta _wasn't_ superior in every way to VHS - at every point while they
were still earnestly competing, VHS tapes had longer run times. Early Beta
tapes only lasted _one hour_ , not even letting you record an entire movie.
(ETA: It was _very_ popular to record on LP and SLP modes in VHS, further
reducing quality to get extra recording time. Recording fidelity wasn't a
winning factor.)

Almost as bad, Sony waited a long time to license the format, _turning away_
interested manufacturers who then produced VHS machines.

End result? A (more) open format that was both more available and distinctly
superior in an key aspect won out. Not exactly a roll of the dice.

------
franticromantic
I'm surprised the article doesn't mention (or refute if need be) one of the
"tales" i have heard for why QWERTYUIOP is the top row: you can spell
TYPEWRITER using these letters, which was a neat demonstration for potential
buyers, back when the name for this new technology was up for grabs...

------
cookiecaper
The article seems to assume that social factors like product prevalence should
have no bearing on the actual ultimate economic benefits of the dominant
player, and that's silly, in my opinion.

We've only seen it more and more often; something may be technically better,
but there's more than technical consideration in choosing a product, and if
the newer product can't overcome the social inertia associated with the old
product, then it doesn't offer a net benefit.

People choose PHP because there is an abundance of PHP programmers and
businessmen want to stiff people on pay more than they want a good interpreter
running their software.

People choose Windows because the system is familiar and all of the software
they know, often niche, rare, or unmaintained, works correctly on it.

And so on.

And then there are instances where the consumers don't really have much say,
like Blu-ray v. HD-DVD. They were well about even until the one supergiant
corporation (Sony) swooped in with extra incentives for the other supergiant
corporations (movie sudios) to get them to choose Blu-ray over HD-DVD, even
though HD-DVD is ultimately superior.

So I sympathize with their intention to preserve faith in free markets, but
their postulation that markets _always_ make the right choice technically is
silly. There are many other factors, including retraining costs, meddling by
big players, etc., that can effect the ultimate dominance of a product.

~~~
j_baker
I don't necessarily agree with the idea, but there _is_ an economic theory
that essentially states that the market is always right given that it has
perfect information. You can agree or disagree with that theory, but I don't
think what they're saying is necessarily absurd.

~~~
zck
Even if you hold that theory, there's an implicit _limit as t- >infinity_.
Certainly if a new keyboard that's objectively better was introduced today, by
tomorrow it wouldn't have >50% marketshare.

------
parbo
QWERTY was not designed to slow typists down. It was designed to maximize the
typing speed without the types(?) getting stuck. This is not the fastest
layout now, but was the fastest for mechanical typewriters.

------
kaddar
I'm a bit irked by the conclusion here: "Apparently the typewriter example is
of such importance to many writers because it can so easily persuade people
that an interventionist technology policy is necessary. How else to explain
its continued use in this literature? Since an interventionist technology
policy is no more likely to benefit consumers than are the myriad other
government interventions in the market, we should not be surprised that good
examples are largely fictional."

I don't see how you can infer that because the basis for an argument of
government intervention by some writers is flawed, that government
intervention is flawed. Regardless of whether or not government intervention
is the right idea, it seems strange for a magazine based on reason to make the
claim : "A → ~B" is true, But A is false, therefore B is true.

~~~
Nwallins
I don't think _Reason_ is saying that this example proves that gov't
intervention is flawed. I think they take it as a premise that gov't
intervention is generally flawed, and the conclusion here is that we have an
example of champions of gov't intervention disingenuously promoting this
phenomenon as an example of why gov't intervention is needed.

~~~
jacobolus
The problem is that I don’t personally know of any “big-government” proponents
who use QWERTY as an example of how regulation is necessary (only that they
say it proves that markets can have path-dependency, and inefficiencies, &c.,
which is true whether this example holds or not).

------
huherto
Is this the case of the metric system vs English system? IMHO, the metric
system is superior, but it is too expensive to change in the US. Or driving on
the left or driving on the right. In this case both are similar but it is
desirable to have a worldwide standard.

~~~
martin_valiente
It wasn't too expensive to change in the rest of the world, though.

------
RyanMcGreal
[June 1996]

Edit: this comment score has ranged up to three or four points and back down
to zero. Is it not relevant to point out that an article was published _14
years ago_?

~~~
william-newman
It depends on what point you think you're making. (And perhaps you should make
that point explicitly, so that I don't need to guess it before criticizing it,
but if I'm guessing wrong, I apologize in advance.) If you are arguing out
that an article from 1996 not timely, your argument is "relevant" but not
necessarily correct. Note that the thread
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1062031> was on the front page when I
first noticed this article. It contained a comment linking to the 1996
article. I don't know why the the 1996 article became a standalone thread
instead of just a comment on the 1062031 thread, but it might be that someone
who read the 1062031 comment found the 1996 article surprisingly worthwhile.

IMO, the 1996 article (and even more the 1991ish "Fable of the Keys" academic
journal article which preceded it) remain timely because both QWERTY-is-
superior and QWERTY-demonstrates-market-failure stories are remarkably hardy
perennials, presented as established fact without acknowledging the
Liebowitz/Margolis counterargument. (E.g., _Knowledge and the Wealth of
Nations_ by David Walsh (2006), carries approving blurbs from _The Financial
Times_ and _The Economist_ on its cover, and should be easy to find in a
library, maybe even a chain bookstore. "Paul David" and QWERTY appear in the
index many times, but Liebowitz and Margolis do not.)

~~~
RyanMcGreal
My point is simply that the publication date provides some important context
for the contents of the essay.

------
metaguri
qwerty and dvorak are open standards. beta and vhs are licensable. windows and
mac os are retail products. although all three pairs are "competitors" in a
sense, i don't think it's reasonable at all to compare their adoption by the
market.

