From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: 42 147 Subject: Re: org-meta-return Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 18:59:02 -0500 Message-ID: References: <5387.1361401155@alphaville> <5951.1361405498@alphaville> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54a383e86395004d6f9e869 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60607) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UBwKX-0002GV-BP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Mar 2013 18:59:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UBwKW-0003MK-69 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Mar 2013 18:59:05 -0500 Received: from mail-ve0-f177.google.com ([209.85.128.177]:52647) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UBwKW-0003ME-1C for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Mar 2013 18:59:04 -0500 Received: by mail-ve0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m1so3829082ves.22 for ; Sat, 02 Mar 2013 15:59:03 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Michael Brand Cc: Org Mode --bcaec54a383e86395004d6f9e869 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Michael, Did a little research on Colemak: appears to be (1) as or even slightly more ergonomic than Dvorak, in terms of measurable results; and (2) designed for QWERTY users. That said, were you a QWERTY user before you transitioned into Colemak? . . . Does anyone here type Russian characters? I've started learning how to type the alphabet using Cyrillic stickers on my keyboard, and it /seems/ to be more ergonomically organized -- but perhaps that is just because I'm systematically learning it, rather than intuitively, and over many years, as I did with English QWERTY. 2013/3/2 Michael Brand > Hi John > > On Feb 21, 2013 10:16 PM, "42 147" wrote: > > [continues off-topic] > > > > > Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard? > > > > A friend of mine ridicules me for being a QWERTY typist, but I have found > > no empirical evidence that it is actually superior. At best, it has been > > proven, in /some/ studies, to be /slightly/ superior; and from a > > cost-benefit standpoint, /slight/ superiority according to /some/ studies > > (and I should add, only at extreme speeds), is not worth relearning how > to > > type. > > Colemak is a much better keyboard layout than Dvorak. I have been using > Colemak for many years now with great pleasure. > > Michael > --bcaec54a383e86395004d6f9e869 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Michael,

Did a little research on Colemak: appears to be (1) as or e= ven slightly
more ergonomic than Dvorak, in terms of measurable results;= and (2)
designed for QWERTY users.

That said, were you a QWERTY = user before you transitioned into Colemak?

. . .

Does anyone here type Russian characters? I've started= learning how to type
the alphabet using Cyrillic stickers on my keyboar= d, and it /seems/ to be
more ergonomically organized -- but perhaps that= is just because I'm
systematically learning it, rather than intuitively, and over many years,as I did with English QWERTY.


2013/= 3/2 Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com>

Hi John

On Feb 21, 2013 10:16 PM, "42 147" <aeuster@gmail.com> wrote:
> [continues off-topic]
>
> > Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard?
>
> A friend of mine ridicules me for being a QWERTY typist, but I have fo= und
> no empirical evidence that it is actually superior. At best, it has be= en
> proven, in /some/ studies, to be /slightly/ superior; and from a
> cost-benefit standpoint, /slight/ superiority according to /some/ stud= ies
> (and I should add, only at extreme speeds), is not worth relearning ho= w to
> type.

Colemak is a much better keyboard layout than Dvorak. I have been = using Colemak for many years now with great pleasure.

Michael


--bcaec54a383e86395004d6f9e869--