Das Keyboard Model S Ultimate

[thomas.s.martinson-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org (Tom Martinson)]

Well,

     When the fastest runner in the world wears nike, there might be 
something.  When the fastest race car driver drives an ford, there might 
be something there.  When the fastest super computer in the US is made 
by Cray and uses AMD Opteron's there might be something.

And when the fast person in the world used dvorak there might be 
something. Personally I believe that the keyboard you choose should fit 
your personal typing style.  No money should be spent on trying to 
figure out which one is better.

+++
As of 2005[update], writer Barbara Blackburn was the fastest English 
language typist in the world, according to The Guinness Book of World 
Records. Using the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard, she has maintained 150 
words per minute (wpm) for 50 minutes, and 170 wpm for shorter periods. 
She has been clocked at a peak speed of 212 wpm. Blackburn, who failed 
her QWERTY typing class in high school, first encountered the Dvorak 
keyboard in 1938, quickly learned to achieve very high speeds, and 
occasionally toured giving speed-typing demonstrations during her 
secretarial career. She appeared on The David Letterman Show and felt 
she was made a spectacle of.[3] Blackburn died in April 2008.[3]
+++

Tom

On 01/20/2011 07:32 PM, jc-8FIgwK2HfyJMuWfdjsoA/w at public.gmane.org wrote:
> Bill Horne wrote:
> | On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 22:14 -0500, Ben Eisenbraun wrote:
> |>  On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 09:21:52PM -0500, Bill Horne wrote:
> |>  >  On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 15:30 -0500, Ben Eisenbraun wrote:
> |>  >  >  For home I think I'll buy the one with key inscriptions,
> |>  >  >  since it'll be tough for the 3 year old to use otherwise.
> |>  >
> |>  >  I recommend Dvorak for all children learning to type.
> |>
> |>  Oh no.  He's definitely going to be a vi user.  :-)
> |>
> |>  I thought they decided the Dvorak advantage was a myth?
> |
> | I hadn't heard that: please cite the study that proved it.
> |
> | ISTM that the advantage of Dvorak is so fundamental that it can't be
> | overcome; the most-often used keys are closer to the home row. It's not
> | something that seems debatable to me: shorter distance means less finger
> | travel, ergo more speed.
> |
> | Then again, I've been wrong before, so I'd like to look at the data.
>
> What I've got from reading the criticisms  is  that  basically  there
> isn't  much  data.   What there is has some obvious problems, such as
> coming from people with a financial interest in  convincing  us  that
> the Dvorak keyboard is faster than QWERTY.
>
> That is, the claim isn't that QWERTY is actually faster than  Dvorak.
> The  claim  is that there's no credible scientific study showing that
> there's any difference.  There might well be, but marketing campaigns
> aren't a good place to look for the evidence.  If you want scientific
> evidence, you'll have to make it yourself.  A few organizations  with
> no financial interests in the outcome have tried to do this, and came
> up empty handed. But this hasn't been done too often, because funding
> and  research  organizations  have  much  more important questions to
> spend their money on.
>
> I was a bit curious, when I first read about this, how there could be
> a financial interest in a keyboard layout.  But it does turn out that
> the Dvorak layout was patented back in the 1920s and  1930s,  and  at
> that time you couldn't switch layouts by just changing a setting. The
> layout was "hard wired" into the typewriter mechanism, so  to  use  a
> different  layout,  you  had  to  buy  a  typewriter that had the new
> layout.  Nowadays, when keyboards just send a digital  keycode,  it's
> easy  to  invent  new  keyboard layouts and experiment with them, but
> this wasn't possible back then, so there was money to be made if  you
> could market a new layout.
>
> It seems reasonable that putting the common (in English) keys in  the
> home row would lead to faster typing. But saying this doesn't make it
> true.  If it's true, why  has  it  turned  out  to  be  difficult  to
> demonstrate scientifically?
>
> (Actually, that's an easy question to answer: When people  are  dying
> of cancer, heart disease, malaria and AIDS by the millions, why would
> we spend our limited human and financial resources studying something
> so  inconsequential  as  a  keyboard  layout?  So only people with an
> interest in the Dvorak layout have a motive to study the topic.  ;-)
>
>
> --
>     _'
>     O
>   <:#/>   John Chambers
>     +<jc-8FIgwK2HfyJMuWfdjsoA/w at public.gmane.org>
>    /#\<jc1742-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>
>    | |
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss