Colemak as a stand-alone good layout - General

SpeedMorph
Member

Reputation: 0
Registered: 08-Mar-2008
Posts: 303

Website

04-Dec-2008 18:05:11#1 Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

Several people at my school have suddenly become interested in alternative layouts, apparently without me doing anything. One person said that he was not going to learn Colemak, because it was only designed to be easy to learn, while Dvorak was designed to be good. I tried to explain that Colemak is better overall.

I think that it should be made clear on the website that Colemak is better than Dvorak. It compared Colemak to QWERTY ("Your fingers on QWERTY move 2.2x more than on Colemak"), but it should also compare Colemak to Dvorak.

My typing speed record: http://hi-games.net/typing-test/watch?u=493

Offline

0

DreymaR
Member

Reputation: 214
From: Viken, Norway
Registered: 13-Dec-2006
Posts: 5,371

Website

04-Dec-2008 23:43:27#2 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

I don't think it should be made clear that Colemak is better than Dvorak. I believe that to be the case, but it's not by a large margin and it's going to be damn difficult to prove. And if you can't prove it, don't say it. As for QWERTY, the difference is much more obvious and you can make claims that won't be much contested even without a rock solid body of empirical evidence.

I do think that it could be made clearer that Colemak is at least as good as Dvorak from what we can tell. That's not taking your mouth too full I think, and it should be pointed out quite clearly for the likes of your schoolmate there.

*** Learn Colemak in 2–5 steps with Tarmak! ***
*** Check out my Big Bag of Keyboard Tricks for Win/Linux/TMK... ***

Offline

0

ghen
Member

Reputation: 23
From: Belgium
Registered: 26-Feb-2008
Posts: 482

Website

05-Dec-2008 08:24:52#3 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

Colemak just combines several advantages which Dvorak didn't. It's a) much better than Qwerty (like Dvorak, obviously), b) easy to learn for existing Qwerty typists (due to many keys staying in the same place) and therefore also easier to switch back and forth and c) is somewhat better than Dvorak on some of its weak points.

I wouldn't explain it like Colemak being "superior" to Dvorak, but being "more modern", and having "some advantages" over Dvorak.

Last edited by ghen (05-Dec-2008 08:25:57)

Offline

0

ChessWhiz
Member

Reputation: 0
Registered: 08-Feb-2008
Posts: 20

05-Dec-2008 08:52:54#4 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

Colemak is better than Dvorak, and it would be even if QWERTY didn't exist. Maybe hard to prove, but I think it's true.

Offline

0

DreymaR
Member

Reputation: 214
From: Viken, Norway
Registered: 13-Dec-2006
Posts: 5,371

Website

05-Dec-2008 10:56:57#5 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

Ghen is absolutely right: The point would be to not claim that Colemak beats Dvorak on speed or comfort (which would be VERY hard to prove to the Dvorak users' satisfaction, or really to anyone with a critical eye and/or a knowledge of science!), but to claim that it certainly feels no worse(!) in these areas while also being easier to learn, easier to use together with QWERTY (for those pesky work comps etc), more in compliance with commonly used hotkey positions for most systems etc.

Although I switched to Colemak from Dvorak and I see many others doing so as well, that shouldn't be a selling point at all. In fact, unless someone feels inspired and dedicated about it both Shai and I recommend AGAINST switching from Dvorak to Colemak! (So I was inspired; I frequently am!) At the same time, I realize that it becomes important to keep QWERTY users from choosing Dvorak over Colemak for invalid reasons. (Valid reasons might be the accessibility of Dvorak which comes pre-installed with all systems, on ready-made physical keyboards etc.)

*** Learn Colemak in 2–5 steps with Tarmak! ***
*** Check out my Big Bag of Keyboard Tricks for Win/Linux/TMK... ***

Offline

0

SpeedMorph
Member

Reputation: 0
Registered: 08-Mar-2008
Posts: 303

Website

06-Dec-2008 20:31:45#6 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

DreymaR said:

Although I switched to Colemak from Dvorak and I see many others doing so as well, that shouldn't be a selling point at all. In fact, unless someone feels inspired and dedicated about it both Shai and I recommend AGAINST switching from Dvorak to Colemak! (So I was inspired; I frequently am!) At the same time, I realize that it becomes important to keep QWERTY users from choosing Dvorak over Colemak for invalid reasons. (Valid reasons might be the accessibility of Dvorak which comes pre-installed with all systems, on ready-made physical keyboards etc.)

But at the same time, some Dvorakists would be more likely to switch than QWERTYists. Dvorakists have proved that they are willing to try a new layout, even if it's hard. And many of them may remember QWERTY, and that will help them learn Colemak.

My typing speed record: http://hi-games.net/typing-test/watch?u=493

Offline

0

DreymaR
Member

Reputation: 214
From: Viken, Norway
Registered: 13-Dec-2006
Posts: 5,371

Website

07-Dec-2008 00:34:05#7 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

Yes, but we cannot prove that Colemak is better than Dvorak so we shouldn't make that claim with any force even if we believe it ourselves. All that would accomplish is to label us as fanboys. You have seen how hard it's been to prove that Dvorak really is better than QWERTY, and the differences between Colemak and Dvorak are a LOT smaller.

You can of course market your opinion, but not as a fact unless you have something solid to back it up with. What I'd tell a Dvorak user is all the other advantages, and many Dvorakists (including myself) have indeed switched because of them.

Last edited by DreymaR (07-Dec-2008 00:35:50)

*** Learn Colemak in 2–5 steps with Tarmak! ***
*** Check out my Big Bag of Keyboard Tricks for Win/Linux/TMK... ***

Offline

0

vVv
Member

Reputation: 1
Registered: 22-Aug-2008
Posts: 36

08-Dec-2008 00:47:31#8 Re: Colemak as a stand-alone good layout

I agree with DreymaR that it's hard to prove Colemak is better. As somebody with little typing experience, I am suspicious of such claims because while I see that Dvorak has some defects, I'm not entirely convinced that Colemak's same hand tricks allow for faster typing than with Dvorak.

But it is true that many people would not choose a layout simply because it's closer to QWERTY, including many people who do not already type with QWERTY, and they may in fact see it as meaning that the layout is not as good. These people should be told what other advantages Colemak has over Dvorak, (as well as what (possible) advantages Dvorak has, just to be fair).

Offline

0