Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 21:50:58 -0600
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <mailman.133.1460951485.6324.python-list@python.org>
References: <afdd8a6f-06d7-47a7-95fe-b69a48b746f7@googlegroups.com> <2796705.edb3E9ArW3@PointedEars.de> <d7013402-5d60-4e28-9ed7-92634f43fd1d@googlegroups.com> <1584744.4h7ToaqLat@PointedEars.de> <5705b9ef$0$1611$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <dmnhhaFq3t3U1@mid.individual.net> <570748ec$0$1620$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <dmq7lmFgf33U1@mid.individual.net> <874mbcgfmd.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <753cdb8b-9f94-48d6-bc0d-589efba86afc@googlegroups.com> <tshggb17gitfpufkg8inb8n8aapirfsvmk@4ax.com> <8560vr627l.fsf_-_@benfinney.id.au> <mailman.101.1460162658.2253.python-list@python.org> <570876f1$0$1619$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <1460217233.3804713.573755729.61D3FCF2@webmail.messagingengine.com> <mailman.126.1460217236.2253.python-list@python.org> <57143ac0$0$1609$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <571459A2.6050700@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
In-Reply-To: <57143ac0$0$1609$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:107228

On 04/17/2016 07:39 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Even though QWERTY wasn't designed with touch-typing in mind, it's
> interesting to look at some of the weaknesses of the system. It is almost
> as if it had been designed to make touch-typing as inefficient as
> possible :-) Just consider the home keys. The home keys require the least
> amount of finger or hand movement, and are therefore the fastest to reach.
> With QWERTY, the eight home keys only cover a fraction over a quarter of
> all key presses: ASDF JKL; have frequencies of
> 
> 8.12% 6.28% 4.32% 2.30% 0.10% 0.69% 3.98% and effectively 0%
> 
> making a total of 25.79%. If you also include G and H as "virtual
> home-keys", that rises to 33.74%.
> 
> But that's far less than the obvious tactic of using the most common
> letters ETAOIN as the home keys, which would cover 51.18% just from those
> eight keys alone. The 19th century Blickensderfer typewriter used a similar
> layout, with the ten home keys DHIATENSOR as the home keys. This would
> allow the typist to make just under 74% of all alphabetical key presses
> without moving the hands.

While they Dvorak layout also puts more coverage in the home row, and
also lets the touch typist alternate more equally between the fingers, I
had to quit using it because it just wasn't as comfortable to use with
vi, especially for things like cursor navigation, and I didn't really
want to remap all the keys.  vi is very flexible and I bet there are key
mappings for vi that work better with Dvorak.  Maybe if I try it again
I'll have another look.