M
Mxsmanic
David said:No, but they may be more practiced at things previously not even available
to practice with.
The poor ergonomics of cell-phone keypads are related to human anatomy,
not practice.
This reminds me of the arguments 'proving' that people would never be able
to remember 7 digit telephone numbers, and now there are 10.
And there are a lot more people looking numbers up.
"Touch typing" doesn't 'imply' any particular number of fingers. That just
happens to be the methodology used with a 'full sized' keyboard because it
was made for 10 fingers.
Touch-typing means typing without looking at the keyboard, using all
available fingers. If that were not the case, it wouldn't be called
TOUCH-typing. You put your fingers on home keys, and thereafter you
type without looking at the keyboard, and with all fingers.
And there's nothing about a standard QWERTY that makes it the 'last word'
(pun) in alphanumeric entry methods.
I didn't say otherwise, but the size and ergonomics of a standard
keyboard make it much more conducive to fast typing than a cell-phone
keypad.
There are faster keyboards, but unfortunately they are not compatible
with the standard QWERTY keyboards. If one need only type on one's own
keyboard, this incompatibility is not a problem; but if one must retain
the ability to type quickly on a standard keyboard, then a high degree
of compatibility must be maintained. That's why I use a Microsoft
Natural Keyboard, which is much more ergonomic than a straight keyboard,
but retains most of the key layout.
These people have tons of studies to show this one is 'better' than a QWERTY
They are probably right.
Frankly, I think a lot of the resistance to one handed keyboards is because
the QWERTY is easier to hunt and peck.
I suspect the main reason for resistance is as above, i.e., the need for
compatibility. That's why the Dvorak keyboard has never caught on.
The originaly QWERTY was designed to make typing _difficult_, in order
to help avoid jamming type bars on the typewriters.
The the 'argument' part is over. "Reasonably fast" is, well, reasonable.
It's nothing compared to touch-typing on a real keyboard.
The topic wasn't a speed contest. The topic was whether the small devices
were ergonomic enough to be useful. And 'reasonable' fills the bill.
Speed is the primary measure of ergonomy in this case.
The Dvorak folks disagree and say theirs is even faster.
I agree with them. Unfortunately, until everyone has a Dvorak keyboard,
I need to stay familiar with the traditional keyboard layout. I don't
even think I could get a Natural-style keyboard in Dvorak layout.
But then fastest
possible may not be the criteria of interest for you, just as it isn't
necessarily with the portables.
It has to be fast and it must not induce RSI.
Sure it will. Compare the speed of a small keypad that, because of it's
size and portability, one has to that of a full-size keyboard that isn't
there. The small keypad will win every time.
Not a valid comparison.
I prefer to wait until I'm in front of my PC to type text messages, even
though I have a cell phone. It allows me to writer longer messages in
less time, thereby wasting less time overall. High-school students may
have lots of time on their hands, but I do not.