
Englebart's Violin (2012) - DanBC
http://www.loper-os.org/?p=861
======
ozten
I got really excited about chorded keyboards and did some research in the
past.

The chorded keyboard is not as efficient as two handed QWERTY. Englebart
reported getting 35 words per minute with his right hand and 25 WPM on the
left after extensive training[1].

Granted, this is a good speed for having one hand free to use another type of
input (pen, mouse, touch screen or whatever).

A chorded keyboard is also a promising idea for mobile computing where a
dedicated physical qwerty keyboard is unwieldy.

I wasn't able to see enough of a benefit to try building one or purchasing
some of the existing products. At the right price point, I definitely would
try it as a novelty.

It seems there is a chicken and egg problem of inputs and software that makes
you efficient using them.

[1]
[http://www.billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf](http://www.billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf)

~~~
jarmitage
You need to do some more research. Stenotypes can write faster than people can
talk. There are studies of expert Twiddler users who can write at closer to
100wpm.

~~~
TylerE
I really wish someone would come out with a nice, not-too-expensive-but-not-
too-shitty USB steno keyboard.

~~~
disago
Check [http://www.openstenoproject.org/](http://www.openstenoproject.org/) \-
they have some pretty great ideas and alternatives (and the software to run
them)

------
59nadir
One part of me thinks it's terribly romantic to envision a world where the
professional gets to use the big, grand tools to practice his craft, but I
think it's actually more comforting to know that anyone with access to the
most basic tools can create. It might seem like we're all forced down to the
lowest common denominator, but I think the playing field might be better for
it.

The article mentions Emacs (and I would add vim) and throughout I could only
think about these two. They are the tools that reward learning and multiply
your efficiency. It doesn't all have to exist in hardware.

You can always get one of these(0).

0 - [http://www.dx.com/p/fs3-p-tri-pedal-usb-foot-switch-
controll...](http://www.dx.com/p/fs3-p-tri-pedal-usb-foot-switch-controller-
black-142964#.V3Nvl_l96JA)

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _You can always get one of these(0)._

I did. Sadly, they suck :(. First of all, there's a problem getting firmware
that would run on Windows. Secondly, getting the pedals to simulate raw
control keys is tricky (but can be done). But thirdly, the construction isn't
too solid - I had them in the office for a while, and somehow someone (I
suspect the cleaning crew) managed to break off one of the pedals. :/.

~~~
59nadir
I smell a market ripe for the taking... Or maybe not.

With that said, I actually thought about buying one of these, but I ended up
just revamping some of my Emacs bindings. Then I ended up switching to vim, so
chording became less of an issue in general.

(When I still found myself wanting the Emacs operating system I went with
Spacemacs. It really is the best of both worlds.)

------
bloaf
I suppose this is an eloquent defense of APL.

------
TeMPOraL
Thanks for posting this 'DanBC, this is golden! It captures exactly the issues
I sometimes rant about in UI/UX threads on HN - that the IT industry is
focused on producing toys, not tools.

The article focuses on hardware, but its point is more general, it touches
software too - basically the solutions developed both "by developers for
developers" and those created for non-tech users. There are lots of things
that worry/sadden me about this.

Within the industry, I'm tired of hearing comments like "don't use advanced
feature X, it's hard for the junior programmers". Like, "don't use lambdas /
streams in Java 8; it may be more readable for you, but it isn't for the cow-
orkers who don't know lambdas". Well, one would think that it is expected of a
professional to occasionally _learn some stuff_. But what I see instead is
"best practices" aimed at the lowest common denominator creating a culture of
code monkeys.

As for end-user software, I'm tired of ranting about it, and - as I learned
from this post - Erik Naggum (like usual) does a much better way of explaining
the problem. So I'll just end with a graph.

    
    
      power                                                                    /--
        ^                                                                 /----   professional
        |                                                             /---          software
        |                                                          ---
        |                                                         /
        |                                                        /
        |                                                       /
        |                                                      /
        |                                                     /
        |                                                    /
        |                                                   /
        |                                                  /
        |                                                 /
        |                                               //
        |                                             /-
        |                                           /-
        |                                        /--
        |                                      /-                             "user-friendly"
        |                                    /-                                  software
        |                                  /-                         /---------------------
        |                       /-------------------------------------
        +-----------------------      /-
        |                        /----
        |                 /------
        |         /-------
        |  /------
        |--
        +--------------+-------------------------------------------------------------------->
                       |                                                                 time
                       |
                       |
             point where companies make their sale
        and beyond which they don't give a shit anymore
    

We could be doing _so much more_ with the power of computing if only we gave
up on the expectations that people have to master of their software tools in
15 seconds since first seeing them...

~~~
yvdriess
A similar issue is for the commodity hardware handed out to developers. The
desktop setup gets standardized to the lowest common denominator, managers/IT
do not get the argument that saving 1k on a developer's desk setup is not good
business practice.

I get the same kind of hardware as a developer/researcher than a secretary,
some low-end lenovo laptop with a single standard sized screen, running the
same IT-provided windows image with performance-crippling endpoint and scanner
software. All my development happens through a VM which connects to a remote
server, via ssh/emacs tramp. Of course this invites the argument 'you are
using your desktop as a terminal anyway, why do you need something more
powerful'.

------
jacquesm
Engelbart, not Englebart

------
leoc
I replied to this: [http://www.loper-
os.org/?p=861&cpage=1#comment-16138](http://www.loper-
os.org/?p=861&cpage=1#comment-16138)

