Brendon Walsh
The Dvorak Experiment
Every now and then, I do something so incredibly geeky that I amaze even myself. Whether it be memorizing an extensively long password in all non-standard characters, or learning binary and hexadecimal conversions. Well, it’s time to chalk up another to the list of ridiculous feats and experimentations and wave goodbye to the Qwerty layout. Hello Dvorak.
Now, Allow me to spare you the entirety of the history lesson involved in understanding why our keyboards are the way they are and get right down to what you actually need to know…
Though the explanations as to why the Qwerty layout was actually defined as a standard have never been officially confirmed, the most credible and widely accepted reason is it was designed specifically so that the typewriter’s typebars would not wedge against one another causing jams. This was done at the expense of speed for many typists. And now here we are well over a hundred years later since the first introduction of the Qwerty layout with modern technology and still using – debatably – an inefficient layout that many have tried to improve upon over the years.
So why hasn’t the Dvorak layout been adopted as a superior layout then? Well, despite the numerous arguments that still claim Qwerty is just as efficient as anything else, it is the opinion of this user that the Dvorak layout remains largely unused for the simple reason that people do not like change.
This realization for me was one that I found to be particularly ironic and interesting. The word of technology is defined by change. Devices get continually smaller and faster. And yet it seems that the only things that have remained unchanged are our forms of input and interface with the computer such as the keyboard and the mouse. Well, I don’t want to be one to cling to such old concepts of data input. I want to remain open to new ideas (or 72 year old ideas as it were).
So with that, I’m announcing my venture into what I’m calling “The Dvorak Experiment.” I’ve taken apart every keyboard I own and rearranged the keys to satisfy the Dvorak layout. They will remain this way until the end of the school year at the very least. My hope is that this change will not only increase my typing skills over time by being ambiguous to both the Qwerty and Dvorak layout, but perhaps inspire me as well to conjure up new concepts of data input and be open to those proposed by others.
My commendations to Microsoft and Apple for taking the first steps on the matter with Microsoft Surface and the iPhone/iPod Touch respectively. But we still need to evolve past this notion of a keyboard and really invent something new to match our modern technologies of today.
Now if only I could figure out a way to reprogram my iPhone’s keyboard…
Breakin’ my heart man. Can’t forget to credit Nintendo for a bit of a change in inputs.
Oh man! How could I have forgotten? Thank you for that.
I’d be pretty interested to hear about the results from this experiment!
It is indeed geeky, but I’m really curious as to how hard you’ll find it to switch, and what gains (if any) you perceive.
I would just have real trouble going back to hunt-and-peck for a month… I figure if we ever were to change to DVORAK en-masse it’d take a few large companies to make a push (Google, Microsoft, etc.) and then they’d have to change it in the schools, starting with Grade 1, and then follow the change on up with those students.
Your comments about the contrast between how everything in tech changes, and how resistant people are to keyboard changes is interesting – at the same time; look at Word’s interface. Until the ribbon came out in the latest version, it was the same basic mockup since version 1.0
That same basic software design has stayed constant – everyone uses icons in a top toolbar. Some work with mouse gestures provides some functionality, but mouse gestures haven’t been standardized, so not all software will use the same ones, and it’s not open to someone just poking about – since they have to know the particular gestures in use in the program.
I do agree though, it seems like there’s really been very little interface changes in software for many, many years. Only now is there some start to different interfaces.
I’m not sure what comes first though – a new software design and usability paradigm, or innovative hardware changes? I’m not sure the user is prepared to accept a new UI AND a new interface device.
I think the future is probably a REDUCTION in UI – the dream, of course, is to have a computer know you, and know what you want just when you want it. So, if my computer is listening in to a conversation, and I ask, “Huh… when was the war of 1812?” when I next turn to my PC, it’ll already have the wikipedia page open.
Any UI still requires you to interact with the program/computer – I don’t want to interact with my computer; I want it to do what I want it to do :P
Well in response to your first comment Binks, I suppose I am not really looking for the masses to switch to another keyboard layout at this stage in the game. It’s really more of an experiment for myself to gauge how open I can be to change. And since the most basic form of user interaction with a computer is through the keyboard, what better way to disrupt my everyday habits?
You may also be surprised to see how quickly one can evolve away from the “hunt-and-peck” method. It has not yet been a week for me and already I am beginning to form a sense of ambiguity between Dvorak and Qwerty. I expect that by the end of the holiday break I may no longer have to look at the keyboard while I type.
Now in response to your second comment with regards to the evolution of software or hardware first, I believe that both have to come at the same time. But this obviously requires key players like Apple, Nintendo (Thanks Brian!) and Microsoft to take these first steps just as they have been in the last little while.
Lastly, it is my hope that our ultimate end goal never reaches a state where our only means of computer interaction is vocal input. It is the tactile interaction with a machine through use of my hands that I enjoy the most. That is not to say that voice recognition doesn’t have it’s place though. I just prefer to maintain a distinct separation between power users and average users by way of speed and voice recognition (and precognition in a sense?) would definitely not allow that.
For one: Yikes. Brendon, I knew your nerd had no limits, but I could never be bothered to do that just for the sake of an experiment of that sort.
Anyways, my question is what’s wrong with the QWERTY method? I very, very rarely ever finding myself thinking something and feeling like it’s taking a long time to get it down on the screen. If something was very minimally faster, would I even notice? I’m guessing the true “fastest” keyboard setup is going to have to take a look at both which letters are used most in the alphabet, which reflexes in your hand are fastest for what things, which combinations of reflexes don’t go well together, and the entire keyboard system would have be re-made using that. Maybe that’s how DVORAK did it? (Okay, I looked it up. It kinda does.) But that said, if we wanted to get real nerdy on this whole subject, you could say that everyone’s nerve systems and even the words they use most is going to be different for everyone, and therefore everyone will need a separate keyboard for true efficiency (which will never happen, short of some really sweet tech advances). I’m not arguing DVORAK isn’t better per se, but I’m just saying some typing system developed in the freakin’ 1930′s perhaps needs a better look before people start adapting it en mass.
And just to get into everyone else’s posts a little, part of me doesn’t really want insane UI (or lack there of, as some of you have commented). That’s when computer’s start to get creepy. You’d never know who’s listening to you. You’d never know who’s watching. I’d be unplugging my mic and webcam whenever I wasn’t using it just so I wasn’t worried. If this was a true reality, we wouldn’t even be able to unplug them, I’m guessing. Creepy. Very cool, but creepy. Government conspiracies! Internet pervs! Zorkan Lasers from Porvak III, the home of the Porvoids! Okay, just kidding. But you get what I mean.
Well Jeremy, you’re right that there really isn’t anything wrong with QWERTY, but the fact that it hasn’t been changed in over a century. I guess what I am trying to prove with all of this is that QWERTY is not the only keyboard layout out there. And with some practice, may not even be the best layout.
I just want to see more done on new fronts of interaction with computers and as a way of preparing myself for the drastic changes that lay ahead, I thought I’d try and turn my world upside down and try to learn how to type all over again.
That, and I may have just been bored.
@Jeremy I donno; I think that, in the absence of truly specialized writing (I’m thinking if you’re writing using terms translated or stolen from other languages a lot – stuff based on latin, for example) the “average composition” of a paragraph of text is probably pretty much the same for everyone.
I guess what I’m trying to get at is that I see it being possible for a new layout to be better, on average, then another text layout. It’s like getting a new bus route – it still doesn’t take you to your house, but if it gets you closer then the old route, you’re doing OK.
You are right about the privacy concerns – I know that even today, though, my doctor’s got apple PCs in every exam room – first time I went in and saw that they had webcams built-in I was pretty creeped out.
Brendon: Yeah, fair enough. I’m not saying don’t try. I’m just saying I wouldn’t have you’re patience ;)
Binks: Yeah, I was being extreme with the idea, haha. You could be right. I suppose I just don’t look forward to re-learning a whole way of typing just to get in 2 words a minute more then I used to. And part of me spends enough time re-reading why I type anyways before I put it down to verify it’s what I wanted to say anyways, that in the end I don’t think it’d make a big difference.
Wow. I’m glad I don’t go to your doctor. I thought it was weird when I had to “sign in” on a laptop at my dentists when I got there, so I didn’t even have to talk to the receptionist. I’m pretty sure there was a little webcam lens sitting at the top of that things screen too. Freaky.
I’m not a big fan of Binks’ GLaDOS scenario. I don’t know that I want a computer that does everything for me. Automation of certain tasks tends to lessen our skills in that specific task. Now that nobody drives standard, people have less to focus on while driving and it is easier to be detached from the cars around you (whereas in a standard, you’d have to be switching gears if you are slowing down behind a car, or speeding up to pass a car, which requires more focus).
And the biggest culprit of more automation, lower standards is spell checking. No one uses proper grammar anymore, and I’ve seen more than my fair share of improperly spelt words within the Red Card Group alone. I’ve also talked to the people from the English Language Proficiency Program here at the University of Waterloo, and they are saying that something like 60 – 70% of people across all Faculties fail the English Language Proficiency Exam and have to take a course as a substitute. And don’t assume that this number is just international students. The advent of the spell-checker has caused literacy to crumble.
What happens when everything on a computer is automated? Soon people will be lacking even the basic skills to locate information on their own and to make intuitive connections between topics. If everything is just fed to you on demand, we will end up suffering so much.
Also, I’m not a fan of DVORAK. They say that it is more convenient, but all the vowels are in one place, which has led to a lot of finger stumbling when typing a word like oatmeal or Oregon or duality. I find that QWERTY letters are laid out in such a way that I usually alternate between hands.
Alternate. Nearly every other letter there requires me to switch hands or use the opposite side of a hand. That is nice and comfy. I will remain prejudiced against DVORAK until its merits are undeniable.
I don’t buy that, because there is more work to operate a car, you’re distracted less.
I see it as a natural extension of what we have to do today – removing arbitrary obstacles. Farmers don’t go out with a scythe and thresh their own wheat; they have big machines to do it. Thanks to those big machines, more people are able to eat and live happy, well fed lives.
Any time you can make existing tasks easier, faster, and cheaper, you allow human labor to do other, likely more productive things. We don’t have thousands of monks spending their lives hand copying works, instead we have printing presses and digital distribution.
Already, Google is my external brain. If I don’t know something, Google is my first port of call. With more pervasive technology, we could integrate computers even more closely into being our “external brains”. An example – every day on campus, I pass people who I recognize but whose names I don’t know, and I don’t know where they’re from. If I could wear some sunglasses that would run facial recognition on those people, and pop up their vitals when I see them, I’d be a much happier man.
Oh, I can usually track someone down, through Google and Facebook, and questioning people – but in this vision of mine technolgy makes something really hard and time consuming to do almost effortless. That’s a win in my opinion
(Oh, I just realized, you write “opinion” all with one hand on QWERTY – so QWERTY is hardly immune to using one hand to type things)
I’m really going to have to find time to do some updates here. I haven’t had time as there is so much big news happening right now that I don’t have time to sit down and write a decent post.
Rest assured, this topic will be re-visited at some point with updates on how things are progressing and my experiences with the Dvorak layout and how it’s affected my usual computing habits. (Positively or negatively)
This has turned out to be quite a stirring post with some very decent arguments made for both the status quo and radically ridiculous change in terms of advancing technologies. Thank you everyone for your comments.
No, Binkle. It isn’t that you are distracted less. It is that you are more focused on the act of driving, and less focused on the act of talking on the phone, or applying makeup. Standard requires four limbs working in tandem, rather than the one and a half most seem to use on an automatic.
And what amazes me is that you would rather be able to look people up then actually know who they are. It isn’t impossible to remember people. I can still remember most of the people I went to elementary school with, and would certainly be able to recognize them if I ran into them. I think using Google has your external brain might result in you not bothering to commit anything to memory. And see, that is the flaw right there. So, in the future, will we simply look items up on Facebook accounts to learn more about people, rather than socializing. And learning about people should not be considered time consuming. It is a natural extension of socialization and human interaction. You want to absent yourself from that activity and – instead – catalogue all of your acquaintances through Facebook?
I mean, don’t get me wrong. I would be all for some sort of interface that expedites research (as long as people remain aware of how to properly document said research).
And yes. There are some words that you write with one hand with QWERTY, but DVORAK has all the vowels in a line, specifically e and a, which are two of the first and third most common letters in the english language (I believe the second most common is ‘t’).
So, DVORAK would still be the masturbatory keyboard scheme of choice.
Also, sorry it took me so long to drop a response. I honestly didn?t think anyone would come back to the topic because I posted a comment so late.