QUERTY vs Dvorak

The QUERTY keyboard layout, the one you are likely using (see the first, top 6 letters of your keyboard), was designed so that the most common letters are scattered about the keyboard in order to prevent typewriters from jamming. In other words, it was designed to be somewhat slower than an arbitrarily arranged keyboard.

The Dvorak layout was designed for speed and has become a popular alternative to QUERTY (I'm using Dvorak to write this).

So we seem to have a situation where the prefered standard is the intentionally non-optimal one. We also have an optimal one (Dvorak) which we could adopt if we wanted to.

So why are schools not teaching Dvorak? Why havn't we, as a society, made the switch. All modern OS's support Dvorak. No one uses typewritters anymore. Why does society persist in being irrational on this point?

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm

Keyboards used in the business world are primarily qwerty, so qwerty should be taught in schools. Businesses adopting dvorak are free to do so, and if enough do, maybe we'll see qwerty fade out of the education system.

At 4/22/2011 1:50:26 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Keyboards used in the business world are primarily qwerty, so qwerty should be taught in schools. Businesses adopting dvorak are free to do so, and if enough do, maybe we'll see qwerty fade out of the education system.

The actual keyboard doesn't need to matter to much. I have a querty keyboard but use the dvorak layout. I just taught myself to touch type in Dvorak so I don't need to look at the keyboard.

I know that not everybody can take touch typing in highschool so I see the problem you are pointing out. That's to say, to some extent, the hardware (keyboards) have us locked in to querty since querty keyboards are ubiquitous.

Still, touch typing classes could use Dvorak. When those trained in Dvorak enter the business world they can toggle the OS to a Dvorak layout and wouldn't care that they are using a querty keyboard (since they are touch typists). This might be the path to converting everyone to the superior layout.

At 4/22/2011 2:07:08 PM, vbaculum wrote:

At 4/22/2011 1:50:26 PM, wjmelements wrote:
Keyboards used in the business world are primarily qwerty, so qwerty should be taught in schools. Businesses adopting dvorak are free to do so, and if enough do, maybe we'll see qwerty fade out of the education system.

The actual keyboard doesn't need to matter to much. I have a querty keyboard but use the dvorak layout. I just taught myself to touch type in Dvorak so I don't need to look at the keyboard.

I know that not everybody can take touch typing in highschool so I see the problem you are pointing out. That's to say, to some extent, the hardware (keyboards) have us locked in to querty since querty keyboards are ubiquitous.

Still, touch typing classes could use Dvorak. When those trained in Dvorak enter the business world they can toggle the OS to a Dvorak layout and wouldn't care that they are using a querty keyboard (since they are touch typists). This might be the path to converting everyone to the superior layout.

This would work well for companies that don't have security programs preventing employees from modifying their computers.

Bigger fan of Colemak.

I'd imagine that this would be about as effective in America as the switch to the metric system.

At 4/22/2011 6:27:12 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'd imagine that this would be about as effective in America as the switch to the metric system.

SI isn't even that great. The base ten system is appreciated, but the meter and second units have no basis in an objective world and are therefore no better than the foot.

A better system would start with the mole, making it 1 x 10^24, and making a mole of neutrons equal to a gram by changing the definition of gram. Defining time should also follow the neutron, making a second equal to one thousandth the mean life of a free neutron before beta decay. For length, the speed of light in a vacuum, a universal constant, should govern the unit; in one second, a photon should travel 1 x 10^9 meters. A Coulomb could be the charge of a mole of electrons. The litre should remain equal to the cubic decimeter, and all other dependent units should follow their old derivations.

This system would certainly be more objective and probably would be more convenient in science, but it would require everyday units to change. In America, the common people did not adopt the scientific units and to this day keep the units to which they are accustomed. The cost of change is probably greater than the inconvenience you save the people for perhaps the remainder of mankind.

Haha, you read the same cracked article I just did, apparently.

Personally, I'd prefer an alphabetical one.

Awhile back I was using somebody's Dvorak keyboard and it made typing so much slower, I suppose because I just wasn't used to it though.

At 4/22/2011 6:27:12 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'd imagine that this would be about as effective in America as the switch to the metric system.

Case closed. Really (at vbaculum), if you can't get people to switch to a way smarter system (in metric) , then how do you suppose you'll be able to get people to switch based upon minor improvements in typing efficiency?

At 4/22/2011 11:32:14 PM, Logic_on_rails wrote:

At 4/22/2011 6:27:12 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
I'd imagine that this would be about as effective in America as the switch to the metric system.

Case closed. Really (at vbaculum), if you can't get people to switch to a way smarter system (in metric) , then how do you suppose you'll be able to get people to switch based upon minor improvements in typing efficiency?

Yeah, I thought Cosmic's point was pretty good. I should point out that we do use the metric system when it matters (scientific research, medicine, education). Maybe it's just too late for some things though like speed limit signs. I would think if more people knew their keyboards were designed to be slow they would be shocked and eager switch to a better layout. But I agree, it seem unlikely that Dvorak will ever gain wide adoption.