7

The Wikipedia article on the Velotype keyboard claims:

A practiced "veyboarder" can produce more text than on a traditional keyboard, as much as 200 words per minute, double the rate of a fast traditional typist. Because of this, Veyboards are often used for live applications, such as subtitling for television and for the hearing impaired.

Is the claim that this keyboard layout allows for superior speed true?

Oddthinking
  • 140,378
  • 46
  • 548
  • 638
Christian
  • 33,271
  • 15
  • 112
  • 266
  • 1
    As most traditional keyboard layout were designed to *slow* typing (because of the first typing machines mechanical limitations), that's not a hard case to make. It would be better to compare it to other modern keyboard layout. – MakorDal Jul 04 '16 at 15:08
  • 6
    @MakorDal : That's an urban myth that's [false](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/2080/196). – Christian Jul 04 '16 at 18:18
  • 1
    @Christian Calling it *false* is a bit misleading. They spread out the commonly used keys to avoid jamming from hitting consecutive letters too quickly. Spreading out the common keys slows striking the keys. That's why the Dvorak keyboard does the reverse, putting the most common keys together. This had the effect of both slowing typing (in the sense that it would take longer to move one's fingers) and speed typing (in the sense of producing output without having to stop and unjam the typewriter in the middle). – Brythan Jul 04 '16 at 21:11
  • @MakorDal "It would be better to compare it to other modern keyboard layout" - Are you saying that we should have a different question *instead* of this question? –  Jul 08 '16 at 16:22
  • @Brythan How can something have both the effect of speeding typing and slowing typing? What is the aggregate effect compared to the alternative? That would be more useful context for this question. –  Jul 08 '16 at 16:23
  • @Christian The contests mentioned date back to before 1900. Modern layout that don't have to bother with the mechanical challenge of typewriter might be superior. You also have to take into account the training needed to perform correctly. – MakorDal Jul 08 '16 at 17:18
  • @Dawn You might be right. The older layout (QWERTY, AZERTY, QWERTZ...) where all designed according to physical limitations of the typewriters. Later design, both in shape and in layout were freed from those limitations. So a comparison between generally old and generally new is interesting, but limiting the scope at the newer design/layout might be enough. – MakorDal Jul 08 '16 at 17:23
  • @MakorDal I don't get what you mean that I might be right. I was asking whether you are suggesting that we should have a different question instead of this question when you say "It wpuld be better to compare it to other modern keyboard layout" –  Jul 08 '16 at 17:49
  • 1
    @Brythan Spreading out the common keys does not slow striking the keys, it actually speeds it up by spreading the load among your fingers keeping them from tiring. The QWERTY layout, entirely by accident in the process of trying to avoid a now non-existing problem, is nearly optimal for its current applications. – David Schwartz Jul 13 '16 at 09:28
  • The velotype and veyboard keyboards are like stenographic keyboards in that they accept chorded input, typing out one or two complete syllables for each chord. Even when one will not be able to reach the same number of chords per minute that one could reach when hitting distinct keys per minute, the multiplier makes each hit count harder. These keyboards have been used for several decades for e.g. live subtitling on dutch television, something not possible with a classical keyboard. The claim rings true. – Arthur van Leeuwen Jan 17 '23 at 10:23
  • @DavidSchwartz It's laid out so you're likely to hit keys with alternate hands, thus keeping the pieces striking the paper as far apart as possible. You can definitely make a faster keyboard by putting the most common letters under your fingers--you can hit ASDFJKL; faster than you can hit anything else. – Loren Pechtel Jan 18 '23 at 03:10
  • @LorenPechtel True, but that's a much finer detail. The double speed claim is nonsense -- qwerty already gets most of the benefit possible by optimizing the key arrangement. – David Schwartz Jan 19 '23 at 03:53

0 Answers0