Fink Different: Keyboards as counter-culture.
If you watched Star Wars for the first time, without seeing images of the Empire’s perfectly spaced thousands of goose-stepping minions in spotless white-lacquered armor. If you didn’t see the fleets of black and grey tie-fighters, the immaculately designed star cruisers, the evil moon-shaped flagship… you wouldn’t know that the rebels were rebels. After all, rebels don’t look like rebels if they don’t have something to contrast them against. They just look like normal people. That’s probably why when you see Luke Skywalker, Han Solo or Finn (all rebels) dressed in stormtrooper garb, they somehow seem even more rebellious then they were before. It’s not what they’re wearing, it’s how they wear it. Dirty, scuffed, broken. Helmet missing or askew. An out of place, beat up weapon slung diagonally across their body. It’s the simple act of defacing the uniform that identifies them in our mind as counter-cultural. Funnily enough, it works in reverse. To the dismay of...
Oct 6, 2024
Imagine you are an aspiring writer with a brilliant idea, just about to start typing out your magnum opus, staring at a yet empty document on your screen. Cursor blinking, annoying orphan relatives locked up in the cupboard under the stairs. Your story, about a young boy who ends up saving the world, is quite complete. You "just" have to type out heaps of your manuscripts and notes: about 6.5 million keystrokes.
How could we find better layouts? How to decide if one layout is better than the other? Many people do this intuitively, tweaking their keymaps perpetually, swapping some characters and checking the results. A more sophisticated approach is to use dedicated optimization tools (algorithms and models), which do the job in an automated way, handling a huge number of potential layouts to find the best one given the physical layout, corpus and ruleset. Regardless of the exact method used, the evaluation phase is similar to this:
Christopher Latham Sholes, inventor of QWERTY, did something similar when working on his typing machine back in the 1860-70s - counting letters and bigrams by hand, using pen and paper. August Dvorak and his team too. However, we are much luckier than our predecessors: thanks to our magical devices called computers we can compare thousands or millions of layouts in a realistic time-frame of mere minutes. That's how we can "type out" Harry Potter a few million times. (Sorry if you feel deceived.) Putting improvements into context (% to keypresses) So how to interpret the numbers above? What does a 1% or 0.1% (or 9 3/4) difference really mean? I found that it's easier to comprehend these values in the context of everyday metrics: keypress per page or line. E.g. the average line of text, with optimal readability in mind, is about 55-60 characters. We could agree on 50 characters for easy mental calculation, so roughly about 2% difference means one keypress less or more per line.
DNT Taking a look at the heatmap above, you may feel compelled to improve the layout by putting some frequent letters in the "right place". E.g. the layout I call DNT is the result of the most straightforward three letter swaps: D-E, N-J, T-F. (There are other obvious choices but they may introduce some unexpected effects.) All these letters stay on the same fingers so the layout is very easy to learn.
- Finger travel: 10.37 km → 5.46 km (-47.37%) Quite a start!
- Home row: 26.1% → 59.25% Nice!
- Min. samefinger: 3.89% → 0.25 Wow!
- Min. hurdle: 6.49% → 0.06% OMG!
- Max. rolls: 3.61% → 12.9% Yummy!
- (Max. inner rolls: 1.93% → 10.42%)
- Max. alternation: 52.87% → 70.07% If you fancy this.
(The numbers are based on a non-deterministic genetic model so they may be further improved. Slightly.) Too good to be true, right? 6-7 comfy rolls in a single line? Encountering a pesky hurdle only once per page? Not even leaving the home positions for 6 out of 10 keypresses? Sadly, since some indicators are antagonistic, achieving these numbers at once is impossible. Nevertheless, this may serve as a good reference when comparing our more realistic, aggregated layouts. Is it worth it? Based on the results above, I'd say changing to an alternative layout should be a no-brainer.Conclusion As this case study hopefully demonstrated: Alternative and custom layouts may dramatically improve your typing experience. Your typing habits are unique, average English doesn't really exist on the individual level, so there’s a chance that popular layouts are not the best option for you. All in all, feel free to experiment with alternative layouts or come up with your custom one. How exactly? Let's see some tips, exact steps (and warnings) next time.