| # Reply Your Layout Test |
| Author |
Justin |
I've been using your test for a while now, to examine some layouts.
But there's three things I want to try, that your test won't let me do:
1. Make a key that performs more than one letter, such as a Th key.
2. Have more than one of the same letter, for instance, a left and a right handed version of a letter.
3. Setting the alt keys or space bar to a letter.
I would really like to see how these would work out. |
| Date |
07/04/2009 01:21:57 |
| # Reply couple more things |
| Author |
Tim |
| J R C are on the left pinky, the rest lining up under each other. Right pinky = X H K. Hope that clarifies the layout. Also, a thing I have learned from using the Kinesis keyboard is that the bottom row is no longer worse than the other two, and in fact for some fingers is just as easy or easier/more comfortable to hit than the upper row. The upper row key for each pinky is probably the hardest to hit. This is why I tossed out the theory that the lower row is worst, which is true for standard store bought keyboards. Also, Dvorak's claim that the lower row is worst is based upon typewriters in which not only are the keys offset, but the bottom row lower, so the fingers had to reach/extend downwards. |
| Date |
09/10/2008 02:57:02 |
| # Reply alt layout |
| Author |
Tim |
Here is the layout I designed and have been using for about 1 year:
JMWGB ?ZAYX
QRNSTD UEOIH
CLFPV ; ' , . K
Yes, the Q is off the main area on the position of caps lock, however, I am also using a Kinesis Keyboard, so caps lock, backspace and tab are
under my thumbs. I don't know how well the layout would work on a traditional keyboard, but in tests on this site, the layout scores better than dvorak, equal in one area, and .1% worse in only one area. I have not done extensive testing though.
Just thought I would share the layout for anyone interested in testing it further and considering it. I plan on switching to another layout I designed in a few months which I believe will test better than dvorak in all areas. |
| Date |
09/10/2008 02:46:08 |
| # Reply Two other layouts for testing |
| Author |
Mecki |
Okay, I made two layouts for testing. The first one is the German NEO layout, found here:
pebbles.schattenlauf.de/layout/index_us.html
The layout is not too bad for English either, even so it wastes several keys for umlauts.
^1234567890-
#qvlcwkhgfjß+*#
#uiaeosnrtdy*N
*Löüäpzbm,.x*R
*L
#######/()=_
######KHGFJ?**
######SNRTDY'
######BM;:X
*R
#!"§$%&
#QVLCW
#UIAEO
#ÖÜÄPZ
*A
#####|#{[]}
#@#########\\~
#<>
The second one is a layout of that carpalx claims to be better than Colemak and they claim it's perfectly balanced. They call it BULPKM, according to the top row. My tests showed: It's actually not better. It is surprisingly good for German texts, even tough it has been optimized for English text, however, the tests with English tests were rather disappointing.
They layout is described here together with Colemak:
mkweb.bcgsc.ca/carpalx/?colemak
And here's the layout description for testing:
1234567890-=
#'bulpkmyf;[]\\
#riaohstendj*N
*Lzxcvqgw,./*R
*L
#######^&**()_+
######KMYF:{}|
######STENDJ
######GW<>?
*R
~!@*#$%
#"BULP
#RIAOH
#ZXCVQ
|
| Date |
13/09/2008 03:18:46 |
