From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: 42 147 Subject: Re: org-meta-return Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:16:34 -0500 Message-ID: References: <5387.1361401155@alphaville> <5951.1361405498@alphaville> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf307ca0f4ead18c04d64296bc Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51725) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8dVN-0005Gy-IR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:16:39 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8dVL-00021A-Or for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:16:37 -0500 Received: from mail-vb0-f51.google.com ([209.85.212.51]:41149) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U8dVL-000215-GN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:16:35 -0500 Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fq11so5894831vbb.24 for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 13:16:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5951.1361405498@alphaville> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Cc: Org Mode --20cf307ca0f4ead18c04d64296bc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 [continues off-topic] > Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard? A friend of mine ridicules me for being a QWERTY typist, but I have found no empirical evidence that it is actually superior. At best, it has been proven, in /some/ studies, to be /slightly/ superior; and from a cost-benefit standpoint, /slight/ superiority according to /some/ studies (and I should add, only at extreme speeds), is not worth relearning how to type. I should add, he, too, changed the default Emacs keybindings to be positional. But he ended up changing /different/ defaults. 2013/2/20 Nick Dokos > [Warning: off-topic] > > 42 147 wrote: > > > My hands might be smaller than average, or, at least, smaller than yours. > > To reach I must shift my entire arm to the right and > > downward. To reach no such movement is necessary. Maybe a slight > > turn of the wrist to the right. > > > > I doubt my hands are bigger than yours: I have to do exactly what you > describe (at least on the bigger keyboards). It's just not as big a deal > for me as it is for you. > > > > Of course, these things are *highly* personal preferences, and you > might > > > have a lower tolerance for pain than I have, but I have to ask: where > > > exactly is your key relative to ? > > > > Warning, digression: > > > > I'm ultra cautious about finger / wrist strain. Even if I feel slight > > discomfort from a keybinding, I will change it to be more ergonomic and > > strain-free. Practically every basic Emacs movement command has been > > rebound for optimum comfort as a QWERTY typist. > > > > Many of the default Emacs keybindings are notational, not positional. For > > example, C-p and C-n. I've made them all positional. C-p / C-] are now > > paired together for previous-line / next-line. C-q / C-e for > > beginning-of-line / end-of-line. From a positional standpoint, C-p / C-n > > makes absolutely no sense. > > > > Agreed - they are only mnemonically significant. And I think you are > right in taking precautions. As I said, I'm a sufficiently bad typist > so that all these sins have not bitten me (at least not yet - and they > are rapidly running out of time). > > Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard? My son uses a QWERTY keyboard, mapped > in software to Dvorak - he learnt to touch type on one by switching > all the keycaps, although he didn't need the crutch > after a while, so his second keyboard has all the keycaps in the > standard places - they just produce different characters than what the > keycaps say. This had two advantages for him: the Dvorak placement > which reduces strain (supposedly at least), and the fact that I > couldn't say to him "Move over and let me drive for a while". I tried > a couple of times and I can still hear his laughter... I suspect > that unless one is an experienced Dvorak typist, it is a better security > device than many passwords :-) > > I'm not sure a Dvorak keyboard would help with emacs chords though. > Another possibility is one of the funky Kinesis keyboards: a colleague > would wax ecstatic about his, but he was not an emacs user. And they > are too expensive to buy one just to try it out. > > I'd be interested if somebody has tried either a Dvorak keyboard or > a Kinesis one with emacs - but this is way off-topic by now, so maybe > not. > > Nick > > > --20cf307ca0f4ead18c04d64296bc Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [continues off-topic]

> Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard?

= A friend of mine ridicules me for being a QWERTY typist, but I have foundno empirical evidence that it is actually superior. At best, it has been<= br> proven, in /some/ studies, to be /slightly/ superior; and from a
cost-be= nefit standpoint, /slight/ superiority according to /some/ studies
(and = I should add, only at extreme speeds), is not worth relearning how to
type.

I should add, he, too, changed the default Emacs keybindings t= o be
positional. But he ended up changing /different/ defaults.

<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">2013/2/20 Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com<= /a>>
[Warning: off-topic]

42 147 <aeuster@gmail.com> w= rote:

> My hands might be smaller than average, or, at least, smaller than you= rs.
> To reach <right> I must shift my entire arm to the right and
> downward. To reach <RET> no such movement is necessary. Maybe a = slight
> turn of the wrist to the right.
>

I doubt my hands are bigger than yours: I have to do exactly what you=
describe (at least on the bigger keyboards). It's just not as big a dea= l
for me as it is for you.

> > Of course, these things are *highly* personal preferences, and yo= u might
> > have a lower tolerance for pain than I have, but I have to ask: w= here
> > exactly is your <right> key relative to <RET>?
>
> Warning, digression:
>
> I'm ultra cautious about finger / wrist strain. Even if I feel sli= ght
> discomfort from a keybinding, I will change it to be more ergonomic an= d
> strain-free. Practically every basic Emacs movement command has been > rebound for optimum comfort as a QWERTY typist.
>
> Many of the default Emacs keybindings are notational, not positional. = For
> example, C-p and C-n. I've made them all positional. C-p / C-] are= now
> paired together for previous-line / next-line. C-q / C-e for
> beginning-of-line / end-of-line. From a positional standpoint, C-p / C= -n
> makes absolutely no sense.
>

Agreed - they are only mnemonically significant. And I think you are<= br> right in taking precautions. As I said, I'm a sufficiently bad typist so that all these sins have not bitten me (at least not yet - and they
are rapidly running out of time).

Have you tried a Dvorak keyboard? My son uses a QWERTY keyboard, mapped
in software to Dvorak - he learnt to touch type on one by switching
all the keycaps, although he didn't need the crutch
after a while, so his second keyboard has all the keycaps in the
standard places - they just produce different characters than what the
keycaps say. This had two advantages for him: the Dvorak placement
which reduces strain (supposedly at least), and the fact that I
couldn't say to him "Move over and let me drive for a while".= I tried
a couple of times and I can still hear his laughter... I suspect
that unless one is an experienced Dvorak typist, it is a better security device than many passwords :-)

I'm not sure a Dvorak keyboard would help with emacs chords though.
Another possibility is one of the funky Kinesis keyboards: a colleague
would wax ecstatic about his, but he was not an emacs user. And they
are too expensive to buy one just to try it out.

I'd be interested if somebody has tried either a Dvorak keyboard or
a Kinesis one with emacs - but this is way off-topic by now, so maybe
not.

Nick



--20cf307ca0f4ead18c04d64296bc--