
Ditch QWERTY – Your Hands Need Colemak - chetan51
http://chetansurpur.com/blog/2012/11/colemak.html
======
wonnage
As someone who types 100+WPM on plain-old QWERTY, I don't see the point - the
limiting factor is obviously not the distance between keys or switching
between hands. In any case, it's been beaten to death that in real work,
you're never going to be typing at a volume where WPM matters anyway.

As for the ergonomic argument, it doesn't seem like the claims made (assuming
they're true) have a huge effect on your health (again, you're almost never
typing for a continued period of time). You might achieve 50% more key-hand
alternation (is that metric even useful?), but when you're typing twenty words
at a time, that doesn't come out to very many.

And in the end you have to deal with QWERTY anyway, every time you use a
foreign computer.

That said, there's no real reason why QWERTY is intrinsically _good_ either,
other than that it's "good enough", and happens to be the standard.

~~~
Androsynth
You could also sit in a steel fold-up chair while you program and probably get
about the same amount done over the course of a day. Dvorak layout is like the
Herman Miller office chair of layouts. (or maybe colemak is, but its not
qwerty)

As a Dvorak user, I came to this thread happy to discuss the pros and cons (I
usually chime in on these threads). But it bothers me that the top the thread
is someone who is so close-minded. Plus its obvious that _you have never
learned dvorak_ , so it also bothers me that you got any upvotes at all.

~~~
skriticos2
Agreed. I also use Dvorak since a about five years and quite like it. I wanted
to discuss interesting similarities to Dvorak, like the 'a' and 'm' keys are
on the same place on all three layouts. (In an earlier assignment I created
shell scripts with these names to switch the layouts). I think choice is great
and I like mine, and it's not like anyone is forced to use an alternative
layout. Op is just unnecessary negative without even knowing what he talks
about. Way to go.

------
jcoder
A while ago I wrote a small program[0], that measures effort to type a passage
with different keyboard layouts.

It accounts for reach and alternation. I just added Colemak in response to
this discussion, and from the texts I include in the distribution (some public
domain from archive.org), it looks like Colemak is better on reach, Dvorak is
better on alternation, and they both spank QWERTY for substantive texts[1].

It's just a quick experiment, I'd love to hear input on methodology.

[0] <https://github.com/bak/keyboard_battle>

[1]

    
    
      texts/alice_underground.txt:
        colemak:
          alternation_effort: 29962
          reach_effort: 29403
          raw_score: 59365
        dvorak:
          alternation_effort: 24476
          reach_effort: 30312
          raw_score: 54788
        qwerty:
          alternation_effort: 32118
          reach_effort: 51842
          raw_score: 83960
      texts/declaration_of_independence.txt:
        colemak:
          alternation_effort: 2725
          reach_effort: 2469
          raw_score: 5194
        dvorak:
          alternation_effort: 2237
          reach_effort: 2693
          raw_score: 4930
        qwerty:
          alternation_effort: 3049
          reach_effort: 5129
          raw_score: 8178
      texts/gullivers.txt:
        colemak:
          alternation_effort: 100074
          reach_effort: 97327
          raw_score: 197401
        dvorak:
          alternation_effort: 81836
          reach_effort: 103371
          raw_score: 185207
        qwerty:
          alternation_effort: 110812
          reach_effort: 181778
          raw_score: 292590
      texts/qbf.txt ("the quick brown fox..."):
        colemak:
          alternation_effort: 9
          reach_effort: 22
          raw_score: 31
        dvorak:
          alternation_effort: 13
          reach_effort: 21
          raw_score: 34
        qwerty:
          alternation_effort: 11
          reach_effort: 30
          raw_score: 41

~~~
andreasvc
So is it "lower is better" for all scores? In the raw_score a combination of
the two previous scores? By that measure, dvorak is better on all nontrivial
texts (so excluding the quick brown fox).

~~~
jcoder
The scores are a measure of effort. For reach, it accumulates the effort of
reaching away from the home row. For alternation, it accumulates subsequent
keystrokes with the same hand. Raw is the sum of both.

So yes, lower numbers are better, _however_ I do not have the research to be
able to say that a lower _raw_ number is always better. It's entirely possible
that alternation matters much, much more than reach---or vice versa---such
that a truly meaningful "aggregate score" would involve a multiplier instead
of just summing the two.

The best we can say is that, assuming less reach and more alternation are
good, Colemak is better on reach, and Dvorak is better on alternation.

------
andreasvc
> Colemak is easier to learn, since it’s designed to be as similar to QWERTY
> as possible without compromising on efficiency.

I actually suspect that's a fallacy. When you learn & use something new, it's
actually confusing when it's similar to something else. I have no issue with
typing either Qwerty or Dvorak, but Azerty, where only a few keys are
different from Qwerty, drives me nuts.

~~~
jbri
I haven't used colemak, but I suspect this isn't really a problem if you're
going to do a full-transition and not use qwerty at all.

But if you have to switch between two layouts regularly then you definitely
want something completely-distinct rather than something close-but-not-quite.

It seems like colemak is in the awkward position where you wouldn't even
consider it unless you're already comfortable with qwerty, but you're also in
a position to stop using qwerty entirely and switch all your keyboard layouts.

------
shokwave
What if I told you that you could get these same benefits with only a 10-20%
drop in WPM? And that you could be faster on the newer layout in two weeks?

Believe it. Go to carpalx's key swaps page (
<http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?partial_optimization> ). Make the first change
on their list - swap K and E - and use the new layout until your brain gets
used to the swap. Once you're comfortable, make the next swap.

Once you've made about 7 swaps you're on a layout that's on par with both
Dvorak and Colemak, and you never had to waste a single hour in typing
trainers.

Each swap takes me about five hours of typing over about 3 days to get used
to. I imagine if your job has you typing all the time, your day-count will be
lower. I have currently swapped E/K and O/J, and this post has reminded me to
swap F/T as well.

There are plenty of keyboard remappers available for windows and osx, and it's
not difficult to do yourself in linux either.

------
codemac
I switched to Dvorak back in the summer of 2005 and I've never looked back.
Colemak may have been a better choice for certain metrics on certain
keyboards, but one that cannot be stated enough for Dvorak is the way your
hands alternate keys so much more than they do on QWERTY. I'm not sure if that
has been studied for Colemak.

Thoughts on changing keyboard layouts:

1) If you're gonna do it, I agree with this article, touch typing = #1
priority. You're not going to see a colemak keyboard, most likely.

2) QWERTY actually seems to work pretty well for big thumbs on a small screen.
I don't use tablets, so I don't know the state of affairs on Android or iOS
keyboard layouts. This has notably not been a problem for me, even though I
was initially concerned about using BlackBerrys (oh 2005 me..)

3) IRC/Instant Messaging are a massive way to learn how to type because you'll
prioritize learning words that you type often, and natural patterns for you.

4) Buy a better keyboard if you're gonna go to this effort for your hands. I
swear by my Kinesis Advantage Pro.

This process is frustratingly slow, but after ~3 weeks of going cold turkey, I
have not once switched back. I was even a sysadmin for 1000's of desktops in
labs, and it took 2 seconds to switch them to dvorak and back.

Finally, while we're at it, if your company offers ergonomic consulting, _DO
IT_! You'll be amazed how much more comfortable your typing is when you've
fixed how you sit, your monitor height, and your keyboard tray.

~~~
bosie
> and your keyboard tray

i have an kinesis advantage pro too, hence i am wondering why you are using a
keyboard tray and which one?

maybe you could answer two problems i can see with dvorak: a) home row
changes. isn't this a big problem in vim, as in, you have to re-map basically
every shortcut (otherwise you are basically de-dvoraking) b) wouldn't you need
different dvorak layouts for different tasks? ruby needs different keys on the
homerow than java, which is different to plain english which is then different
to plain german etc

thank you

~~~
codemac
> i have an kinesis advantage pro too, hence i am wondering why you are using
> a keyboard tray and which one?

I don't remember which one, it's a huge flat thing that just looks like a big
surfboard. I can try to find out later.

Why I use it is simple: when sitting with correct posture, the distance
between my eyes and my resting hands is further than just using my desk
allowed. The keyboard tray lowers the keyboard further without having to lower
the entire desk and raising the monitor to a comical height.

> a) home row changes. isn't this a big problem in vim, as in, you have to re-
> map basically every shortcut (otherwise you are basically de-dvoraking)

I found an easy solution for this, see the bottom of my vimrc:
<https://github.com/codemac/config/blob/master/vimrc>

    
    
        noremap d h
        noremap h j
        noremap t k
        noremap n l
        noremap k d
        noremap l n
        noremap j t
        noremap ^Wd ^Wh
        noremap ^Wh ^Wj
        noremap ^Wt ^Wk
        noremap ^Wn ^Wl
        inoremap ^] ^[A
        inoremap ð ^N
    

Keep in mind I mostly use emacs these days, which is an entirely different set
of ergonomic challenges :) However, those changes seemed to have worked well
for me.

> b) wouldn't you need different dvorak layouts for different tasks? ruby
> needs different keys on the homerow than java, which is different to plain
> english which is then different to plain german etc

You must answer the question for yourself: How much english vs. ruby vs. java
do I type?

For me? most of my variables are English based, and all my symbols ()[]@$&
etc.. are all in different places on a Kinesis keyboard anyways.

There may be a case for specialized layouts, but I think the amount of English
that is keyed far outweighs any specialization.

------
AaronBBrown
I appreciate the fact that there may be technically _better_ layouts than
QWERTY (Dvorak, Colemak, whatever), I'm still unable to understand how this is
going to help me as someone who can has been able to touch-type in the
100-120wpm range since middle school (that was over 20 years ago). How much
faster do I need to type? By all personal measures, QWERTY is _good enough_
and the fact that it is the _standard_ means that I can sit down at any
English keyboard and be able to type at my peak efficiency without having to
switch my brain back and forth between two layouts. My fingers can already
keep up with my ability to form coherent sentences and in programming/sysadmin
work, typing speed is not very important once you get past a certain point. I
literally never had the thought, "If only I could type faster, I could get
this done more quickly..."

On top of this, as a heavy vi user, the main navigation keys are no longer on
the home row for either Colemak or Dvorak, which means I either need to make
my editing far less efficient, or remap nearly every key.

I have had many very intelligent people attempt to explain the switch to
Dvorak to me, and never heard a good reason to invest the time. I am curious
if folks invested the same amount of concentrated time improving their QWERTY
skills (relative to the amount of time folks spend learning a new layout) if
there would be a similar speed improvement.

~~~
eertami
>I'm still unable to understand how this is going to help me

I sometimes consider changing layouts but it all comes back to that one simple
statement. I don't touch type and I still hit the 120 WPM sweetspot on QWERTY
- but I feel that any benefit of Dvorak/Colemak would be wasted if I didn't
also learn to touch type.

I fear it would be a lot of work for no discernible benefit other than geek
cred.

~~~
reeses
One side benefit is that no one can shoulder surf your password.

~~~
andreasvc
Security through obscurity is not the best of strategies. If someone notices
your shoulder surfed password doesn't work with qwerty, it's a trivial step to
try it on dvorak/colemak.

~~~
reeses
If they know to try that, they deserve access to my gmail account. :-)

------
neuspadrin
I just made the switch from QWERTY to Colemak this summer. Basically I started
with only using it at home doing typing tutors and using it as my system
default. Once I was up to ~30-40wpm after a week or two I switched my work
computer's default over too. I'm now ~10wpm faster then I was on qwerty.

I mainly program and email at work, and Colemak was my recommended keyboard by
the analyzer listed in here. Loving the layout, feels easier on the hands, and
a big plus for me is my most used keyboard shortcuts remain the same seeing as
the bottom row is almost identical.

Negatives is I find it hard to switch back to qwerty on demand on foreign
computers where colemak isn't set. Have to resort to hunt/peck, but hey at
least any keyboard you come across will be labeled correctly.

I'm planning on going back to qwerty for a week sometime and then keep using
it occasionally to keep in fresh to try to get around the issue of using other
computers.

My recommendation? Start with it at home with the basics where productivity
won't matter much, once you have the basics down where you know where each key
is you just are slow/inconsistent to it switch work over. I then saw a rapid
increase by using it so much. The layout is great! :) And if you might run
into other computers try to keep QWERTY up with using it occasionally.

Oh, and it will piss off others who use your computer, so make sure you have
separate profiles set up at home so it's not a language bar war. Wife and I
used to just both use the one account.

------
urlwolf
I've used colemak for ~3 years and love it. I have it set on a programmable
keyboard, with matrix layout, that I built myself. So I can take it with me if
I have to switch computers. When I'm on a laptop, my body knows it's qwerty
time, and I see no slow-down.

I had a burst of ergonomic problems that made me switch. I have had zero
problems since, and I work just as many hours.

I can recommend colemak.

I learned it by typing a novel from an author I wanted to learn writing style
from (Murakami, pinball 1973). Took me maybe a month.

------
milesf
I've been cutting-and-pasting the type of code I write into the Keyboard
Layout Analyzer <http://patorjk.com/keyboard-layout-analyzer/>

Now I want to switch to Colemak :/

~~~
chetan51
Do it!

------
spudlyo
To those of you trying to learn a new layout, I've found a good way to
practice and increase speed is to compete with others online in a typing race
game like:

<http://www.typeracer.com>

------
darklajid
I'm interested. But the article and the main site (colmak.com) fail to provide
a full layout - or at least I gave up after being unable to check where my
keys would go.

This is from a German that runs everything with a qwerty US english layout,
because Germany uses a crappy qwertz layout where really every interesting
character for programmers leads to pain and suffering to compose. What I get
~reasonably~ fine from US qwerty:

@{}[]~`/\|;':"

That's my measurement for any keyboard layout I'd be willing to try: If these
letters are hard to type I cannot be bothered to switch, even if I certainly
do type more prose than the chars above.

~~~
andrewcooke
from the image at the bottom of
<http://colemak.com/wiki/index.php?title=Images> it seems all those stay the
same as us qwerty.

------
citricsquid
I really want to move to a better typing style but I'm nervous that I'll end
up losing my current ability to type very fast and spend months typing very
slow for no real long term gain. Has anyone tried re-learning typing after
they've been typing 16 hours a day for half a decade? I can type at 120 WPM
with 2 fingers (QWERTY) and don't want to end up typing at 60 WPM for 6 months
while I learn to type with all my fingers in COLEMAK (or DVORAK) to find that
I'm back at 120 WPM... I have no pain from typing 16 hours consecutively at
the moment, so the only advantage would be speed.

~~~
vacri
Regardless of what you use, touchtyping is better than hunt'n'peck because it
allows you to multitask. You can write what you want while looking at other
things and evaluating them - there's an increased continuity between what
you're writing and what you're thinking.

------
smsm42
I have hard time seeing how it may be worth my effort. Switching layouts will
probably be very painful and result in productivity drop - and then if I do
it, it would be only working on the computers I specifically configure for
that purpose. I wouldn't be able to use it on anybody else's computer or on
any mobile device. If I were professional typist, the speed increase might be
worth it, but otherwise I'd stick with the devil I know and everybody else
does too.

~~~
mistercow
I switched to colemak years ago, and it's really not that bad. It's a little
bit mind bending to learn a new layout, but after about a week or two of
practice, your mind sort of "clicks" into it, and it's like you've been typing
that way your whole life.

During that transition period you do not have to use Colemak exclusively.
You're practicing a new motor skill, and the returns on such practice diminish
rapidly after an hour or so per day.

Once you've learned Colemak, you will have to use QWERTY for just a short time
each day to make sure you keep those neural pathways from decaying. I did not
do this, and I regret it. I do alright on a QWERTY keyboard though; it just
slows me down a bit. On a mobile device, it really doesn't make any
difference, since the letters are in front of my eyes.

------
kghose
So, I've read in several places that QWERTY was designed to slow typists down.
Therefore, there must have been an older layout that was actually faster.
According to wikipedia this is not correct
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qwerty>).

The first layout was a simple minded alphabetical layout which jammed, so
QWERTY was designed to let typists go fast AND not have the mechanical stuff
jam up.

~~~
reeses
It's designed to allow a person to type as fast as possible within a set of
constraints that are no longer relevant to the vast majority of typists.

------
msluyter
I used dvorak but stopped because a) I developed wrist problems for a while
(despite using dvorak) and reverted to hunt & peck to minimize finger movement
and b) ctrl-c/ctrl-v were almost impossible to remap on windows (at the time).

This is promising, mostly because unchanged x, c, v keys.

------
diziet
I don't think developers are often held back by typing speed. I certainly
don't produce code at 75 WPM -- unless I am writing something trivial. Other
times, I stop to think and consider what I am typing, so what is holding me
back is my thought speed.

------
stringham
I spent a month with Colemak and got to about 40 wpm. The transition to a new
keyboard layout is HARD and takes a lot of determination. I know some people
find it to be worth the learning curve, but I migrated back to qwerty.

------
oskarth
For people who are worried about being unable to use QWERTY after learning
Colemak, have a look at the graph in this post:
<http://www.ryanheise.com/colemak/>

------
ricardobeat
Is it common to type 110-130 WPM on Colemak, and is it optimized for English
or design for global usage?

~~~
vacri
Every keyboard layout is going to be optimised for a particular language.

------
cardine
I touch type at 125+ wpm using QWERTY. Don't see any reason to switch at this
point.

------
d0m
Someone knows about other languages? For instance, what about french?

