OT: keyboard layouts

[Teddy Mills]

Imagine if your a Maltron sysadmin having to carry and connect that keyboard
to every system you worked on.
People think you were batty or something.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Henry Spencer" <henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org>
To: <tlug-lxSQFCZeNF4 at public.gmane.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [TLUG]: OT: keyboard layouts


> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Taavi Burns wrote:
> > > Similar tests, on a smaller scale, have been done by modern ergonomics
> > > researchers.  Same uninspiring results -- at most, a small advantage.
> >
> > But if it's a distinct, statistically valid advantage, is there any good
> > reason to avoid learning, using, and/or promoting the use of a
marginally
> > superior layout?
>
> Mainly, the very high costs of conversion, including a lengthy period of
> operating both.  As with a number of other things, having everybody do
> things the same reasonably-good way is much more important than finding
> the absolutely optimal way.
>
> > what does a Maltron layout look like?  Is it even physically similar to
> > the keyboards we use today?
>
> Only very loosely.  It's closer to the "natural" keyboards.  On each end,
> there is a sort of shallow bowl of finger keys.  Below and inward from
> that, tilted backward, on each side is a small array of thumb keys (which
> includes assorted shifts and movement keys, the space key, and the E key).
> In the center above the thumb arrays is a numeric keypad -- accessible to
> either hand -- and some other odds and ends.  It's a very sculptured
> layout with a very different key pattern, a full redesign rather than a
> trivial remapping of an ordinary keyboard.  There's a picture at
> <http://www.keytools-ergonomics.co.uk/keyboards/maltron.asp>, although
> it's not quite large enough to make out all the key markings.  (Google
> on "Maltron keyboard" for more references.)
>
> You might perhaps be able to come up with a vaguely Maltron-ish remapping
> of the standard layout.  The thumb areas would be tricky.
>
> > Perhaps Dvorak is a step in the right direction,
> > if only as a stepping stone, showing peole that There Is More Than One
> > Way To Do It.
>
> The cost of conversion, however, suggests that at most one switchover is
> acceptable.
>
> > Don't forget that there are also left- and right-handed Dvorak layouts
> > which I think would be unarguably superior for one-handed typists.  They
> > use four levels of letters, with the numbers all off to one side.
>
> <http://www.keytools-ergonomics.co.uk/advice/onehanded.asp> concludes that
> unless a one-handed typist was previously a fast two-handed typist, the
> overwhelmingly best choice is one-handed typing on a standard Qwerty
> keyboard, simply because it avoids needing special accommodations for that
> one person.  (And if he or she was a fast two-handed typist, there are
> one-handed variants of Qwerty which may be preferred.)
>
> In any case, if you're buying a custom keyboard, there are one-handed
> Maltron keyboards which are probably preferable over anything Dvorak.
>
>                                                           Henry Spencer
>                                                        henry-lqW1N6Cllo0sV2N9l4h3zg at public.gmane.org
>
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml
>
>

--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml