Is this really the most efficient keyboard layout for normal typing? It bothers me that one reason to switch is that it is relatively similar to QWERTY. Did you sacrifice anything to make it more "learnable?" Or was it just a nice coincidence? I'd rather learn slower if it meant a better keyboard in the end (I'm actually on Dvorak anyways so I don't really care about that). The "coincidence" of "zxvc" being all the same also bothers me. Was there a sacrifce to make that happen? I don't really care about those shortcuts, and I hope keeping them didn't have a cost.
Also, where is the Caps Lock key?
Colemak forum
Forum for the Colemak keyboard layout.
- You are not logged in.
- Topics:
- Active
- Unanswered
Troubling Reasons to Switch
- Started by Ryan
- 3 Replies:
Offline
- 0
It's no coincidence that Colemak looks like QWERTY, it's been designed to allow easy transition from QWERTY. The sacrifice that Colemak makes by being similar to QWERTY is quite negligable, and Colemak is very near the theoretical maximum of keyboard efficiency.
If you're happy with Dvorak, I recommend you to stick with it. See also FAQ (Is it worth switching from Dvorak to Colemak?).
There's no Caps Lock key. It's gone.
Offline
- 0
So there was a sacrifice, but it is pretty negligible... alright.
I'm actually NOT satisfied with Dvorak (the L on the right pinky is VERY annoying), and I was looking for layout to switch to. Excluding those QWERTY learning benefits and the "zxcv" thing, would you still say that Colemak is the most efficient one out there?
Offline
- 0
The Maltron, Arensito and the Capewell keyboard layout are also very good, but they're not practical alternatives.
See the forum thread What makes Colemak better than the alternatives?
Offline
- 0