Yes, I think I had looked at it a few weeks ago and then forgot about it because I started
focusing on learning Colemak.
I gather https://colemak.com/Compare
is based on John Maxwell's source code that Capewell also uses
http://www.geocities.com/smozoma/projec … applet.htm
besides looking the same, they all three give the same numbers for the Qwerty and Dvorak on the same
text. So you can easily make the direct comparisons to all those .
randomly selected two page NY Times technology article gives
Klausler 71.8% Colemak 71.4% Dvorak 68.7% Capewell-Dvorak 68.7%
Arensito 66.6% Capewell(Close) 65.9% Capewell(Adjacent) 65.4%
Capewell-Qwerty 61.0% Qwerty 33.3%
Capewell(Close) 0.98% Colemak 1.2% Arensito 1.5% Klausler 2.8%
Capewell(Adjacent) 1.8% Dvorak 3.2% Capewell-Dvorak 3.7%
Qwerty 5.2% Capewell-Qwerty 5.6%
Arensito 66.95m Klausler Capewell-Dvorak 67.29m 67.64m
Capewell(Adjacent) 67.39m Capewell(Close) 67.72m Colemak 68.75m
Dvorak 76.47m Capewell-Qwerty 82.4m Qwerty 131.5m
the rest of the stats also show that Colemak holds its own very well.
However http://www.siteuri.ro/dvorak/ comes up with different numbers for the same text so its a good thing that he includes Colemak.
Colemak 60.3 % DDvorak 59.3 % Dvorak 54.4 % QWERTY 25.0 %
Colemak 1.3 % Dvorak 2.8 % DDvorak 2.8 % QWERTY 4.5 %
Same hand as the previous key and jumping a row
Dvorak 0.6 % Colemak 0.7 % DDvorak 1.3 % QWERTY 8.6 %
DDvorak 166.0 m Colemak 170.9 m Dvorak 174.3 m QWERTY 236.3 m
Okay, I am done! That's my one day of layout comparison. No more!
Back to being productive.
---- (all typed using Colemak layout on my Macbook. Love my Mac :) )