Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc:1479 comp.misc:10045
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!paperboy!meissner
From: meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.misc
Subject: Re: Dvorak keys vs. QWERT
Message-ID: 
Date: 7 Sep 90 16:29:58 GMT
References: <1990Sep6.154721.12322@iwarp.intel.com> <7657@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>
	<1990Sep7.055025.16732@nmt.edu>
Sender: news@OSF.ORG
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Lines: 22
In-reply-to: john@nmt.edu's message of 7 Sep 90 05:50:25 GMT

In article <1990Sep7.055025.16732@nmt.edu> john@nmt.edu (John Shipman)
writes:

Since the Dvorak vs. Qwerty discussion has come again, let me ask a
dumb question that I've been curious about.  Note I've never used a
Dvorak keyboard, but can touch type at a reasonable rate (I think I
did 40-60wpm when I took typing class 15 years ago).

Many of the Dvorak proponents seem to be computer jocks, rather than
your classic secretary types.  Do people who claim to like Dvorak
because qwerty slows you down, really type enough to get the
advantages out of the higher speed?  I would imagine that if you were
sitting, typing away all day transcribing material (ie, a 60-100wpm
secretary) that you would get a gain.  I don't find myself powertyping
that much at a time, I find I need to either compose what I'm writing,
or rearrange things.

--
Michael Meissner	email: meissner@osf.org		phone: 617-621-8861
Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142

Do apple growers tell their kids money doesn't grow on bushes?