lorenzo bolla’s blog

February 2, 2009

qwerty vs dvorak vs colemak to edit python code

Filed under: Blogroll — Tags: , , , — lbolla @ 9:30 am

yesterday, I was intrigued by the idea of choosing a more efficient keyboard layout to work with everyday.

as long as I type python code 90% of my time, I decided to evaluate the efficiency of the first 3 most widespread keyboard layouts: QWERTY, Dvorak and Colemak.

I used this excellent tool to compare the three layouts over the first 50000 characters of the webpy source code.

here are the results:

The Qwerty Keyboard Layout Vs The Dvorak Keyboard Layout

:: UP ::Overall effort

Layout Effort % improvement over worst layout
Qwerty 306,509.6 0.0 %
Dvorak 283,868.7 7.4 %
Colemak 275,347.6 10.2 %

:: UP ::Keys for each finger (stronger fingers should be used more often)

Layout Thumbs LPinky LRing LMiddle LIndex RIndex RMiddle RRing RPinky Total
Qwerty 25.9 % 12.4 % 5.3 % 9.5 % 11.6 % 7.6 % 5.6 % 8.9 % 13.2 % 54,237.0 keys
Dvorak 25.9 % 13.0 % 5.2 % 8.1 % 7.3 % 7.5 % 7.5 % 8.2 % 17.3 % 54,237.0 keys
Colemak 25.9 % 12.7 % 4.8 % 7.5 % 9.5 % 8.4 % 10.1 % 6.6 % 14.5 % 54,237.0 keys
Layout Thumbs Left hand Right hand Total
Qwerty 25.9 % 38.8 % 35.2 % 54,237.0 keys
Dvorak 25.9 % 33.6 % 40.5 % 54,237.0 keys
Colemak 25.9 % 34.5 % 39.6 % 54,237.0 keys

:: UP ::Finger Travel Distance (only the horizontal)

Layout Thumbs LPinky LRing LMiddle LIndex RIndex RMiddle RRing RPinky Total
Qwerty 0.0 % 18.1 % 2.0 % 10.5 % 15.5 % 12.1 % 8.6 % 9.9 % 23.4 % 1,441.5 m
Dvorak 0.0 % 21.1 % 4.1 % 3.5 % 10.0 % 12.5 % 7.6 % 10.8 % 30.4 % 1,210.3 m
Colemak 0.0 % 23.7 % 2.5 % 6.1 % 10.2 % 10.2 % 9.3 % 9.3 % 28.6 % 1,131.2 m
Layout Thumbs Left hand Right hand Total
Qwerty 0.0 % 46.0 % 54.0 % 1,441.5 m
Dvorak 0.0 % 38.8 % 61.2 % 1,210.3 m
Colemak 0.0 % 42.6 % 57.4 % 1,131.2 m

:: UP ::% home keys (out of all character keys plus SHIFT and ENTER, but excluding keys operated by thumbs)

Qwerty 20.4 %
Dvorak 33.7 %
Colemak 38.7 %

:: UP ::% keys typed with the same finger as the previous key (excluding repeating keys like ss)

Qwerty 4.5 %
Dvorak 3.8 %
Colemak 3.6 %

:: UP ::% keys typed with the same hand as the previous key (ex: in Qwerty sd or ss are included, but s s is not since you type the space with the other hand)

Qwerty 26.8 %
Dvorak 20.0 %
Colemak 24.6 %

:: UP ::% keys typed with the same hand as the previous key and jumping a row (ex: in Qwerty ev is a row jump – you jump over the middle row – and it’s awkward to type; ef is not a row jump)

Qwerty 10.3 %
Dvorak 5.7 %
Colemak 4.1 %

:: UP ::% keys typed with the same hand as the previous key and in reverse order (ex: in Qwerty df or kj are typed in the easier order pinky-ring-middle-index, whereas fd and jk are in reverse order index-middle-ring-pinky, and harder to type)

Qwerty 15.4 %
Dvorak 11.9 %
Colemak 15.2 %

:: UP ::% keys that need the SHIFT modifier

Qwerty 14.3 %
Dvorak 14.3 %
Colemak 14.3 %

:: UP ::Pairs of consecutive keys typed with the same finger in Qwerty

:_NewLine_ 253 times 0.47 %
de 200 times 0.37 %
tr 158 times 0.29 %
rt 102 times 0.19 %
ol 99 times 0.18 %
un 98 times 0.18 %
q_LeftShift_ 87 times 0.16 %
ce 86 times 0.16 %
“_NewLine_ 81 times 0.15 %
ed 80 times 0.15 %
}_NewLine_ 62 times 0.11 %

:: UP ::Pairs of consecutive keys typed with the same finger in Dvorak

ct 196 times 0.36 %
s_RightShift_ 169 times 0.31 %
db 152 times 0.28 %
l_RightShift_ 137 times 0.25 %
‘_LeftShift_ 133 times 0.25 %
rn 115 times 0.21 %
ls 100 times 0.18 %
}_NewLine_ 62 times 0.11 %
=_RightShift_ 59 times 0.11 %
“_LeftShift_ 58 times 0.11 %
e. 58 times 0.11 %

:: UP ::Pairs of consecutive keys typed with the same finger in Colemak

:_NewLine_ 253 times 0.47 %
ue 237 times 0.44 %
db 152 times 0.28 %
e, 89 times 0.16 %
q_LeftShift_ 87 times 0.16 %
“_NewLine_ 81 times 0.15 %
}_NewLine_ 62 times 0.11 %
]_NewLine_ 46 times 0.08 %
pt 44 times 0.08 %
‘_RightShift_ 41 times 0.08 %
“_RightShift_ 41 times 0.08 %

:: UP ::Key frequency in your text

_Space_ 14067 times 25.94 %
_LeftShift_ 4391 times 8.10 %
e 3239 times 5.97 %
t 2184 times 4.03 %
s 2170 times 4.00 %
r 1890 times 3.48 %
a 1619 times 2.99 %
o 1557 times 2.87 %
l 1530 times 2.82 %
n 1519 times 2.80 %
_NewLine_ 1511 times 2.79 %
i 1372 times 2.53 %
_RightShift_ 1357 times 2.50 %
d 1014 times 1.87 %
f 971 times 1.79 %
c 855 times 1.58 %
u 851 times 1.57 %
m 716 times 1.32 %
p 715 times 1.32 %
( 674 times 1.24 %
) 673 times 1.24 %
. 658 times 1.21 %
623 times 1.15 %
, 573 times 1.06 %
b 571 times 1.05 %
563 times 1.04 %
_ 554 times 1.02 %
= 518 times 0.96 %
: 490 times 0.90 %
q 463 times 0.85 %
y 423 times 0.78 %
h 416 times 0.77 %
w 352 times 0.65 %
> 348 times 0.64 %
g 304 times 0.56 %
v 257 times 0.47 %
x 253 times 0.47 %
k 231 times 0.43 %
< 154 times 0.28 %
/ 125 times 0.23 %
[ 120 times 0.22 %
] 119 times 0.22 %
; 113 times 0.21 %
0 86 times 0.16 %
` 85 times 0.16 %
+ 84 times 0.15 %
1 81 times 0.15 %
{ 80 times 0.15 %
} 79 times 0.15 %
78 times 0.14 %
j 76 times 0.14 %
* 72 times 0.13 %
# 69 times 0.13 %
2 67 times 0.12 %
% 55 times 0.10 %
$ 52 times 0.10 %
3 31 times 0.06 %
6 29 times 0.05 %
8 18 times 0.03 %
@ 17 times 0.03 %
\ 14 times 0.03 %
z 13 times 0.02 %
5 13 times 0.02 %
4 8 times 0.01 %
? 8 times 0.01 %
9 7 times 0.01 %

:: UP ::Frequent pairs of keys in your text

_Space__Space_ 9243 times 17.04 %
_NewLine__Space_ 1233 times 2.27 %
_Space__LeftShift_ 805 times 1.48 %
_LeftShift_( 674 times 1.24 %
_LeftShift_) 673 times 1.24 %
_LeftShift_” 563 times 1.04 %
_LeftShift__ 554 times 1.02 %
se 549 times 1.01 %
,_Space_ 543 times 1.00 %
_LeftShift_: 490 times 0.90 %
el 405 times 0.75 %
er 377 times 0.70 %
in 364 times 0.67 %
_Space__RightShift_ 362 times 0.67 %
or 352 times 0.65 %
_LeftShift_> 348 times 0.64 %
_Space_i 344 times 0.63 %
_Space_s 341 times 0.63 %
te 340 times 0.63 %
e_LeftShift_ 338 times 0.62 %
=_Space_ 332 times 0.61 %
_Space_= 321 times 0.59 %
re 306 times 0.56 %
lf 294 times 0.54 %
)_NewLine_ 281 times 0.52 %
e_Space_ 281 times 0.52 %

actually, I was disappointed: there seem to be no clear advantage of Dvorak or Colemak, wrt QWERTY and, given the popularity of the latter, switching does not seem to be a good idea…

February 1, 2009

this is another weblog client test

Filed under: personal — Tags: , — lbolla @ 1:44 am

…and this is using BloGTK, which seems a little bit better.
it support tags, too!

better…

test with gnome-blog

Filed under: Uncategorized — lbolla @ 12:54 am

this is a post using gnome-blog, a weblog client for gnome.

here I read about this possibility, but there were no instructions about how to configure the client…

if this is published, it can’t be so difficult…

Blog at WordPress.com.