"QWERTY" is the term applied to a specific keyboard layout,(preceded by the teletype or telegrapgh keyboard). It is also a concept in education refering to an outdated technology or method of thinking adhered to for no other reason than convention, convenience, or habit, not a literal example limited to those specific keys. Actually thec purpose of the QWERTY keyboard was to intentionally slow down typists, not make it easier for them. I only picked alphabetical as one alternative. other more ergonomic setups have been tried and largely rejected as well. I would beg to differ on the euro keyboard, most folks can't just adapt easily as you intimate. I have German friends who tried to use our keyboard system, it was difficult for them, and they were skilled users, but I asume you would argue it is easier to go the other way. Lighten up it was a for fun analogy, and a good one. My point stands. We still use QWERTY keyboards over other similar if improved examples for the reasons I stated.
Canards, well, that's another story, here comes the debate... Happy new year, JD -----Original Message----- From: Monkey King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 1:00 PM To: John Derstine Cc: glidergeek; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [RCSE] Canards-- what a canard!!! On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, John Derstine wrote: > There are not more canards for the same reason we keep QWERTY next to each > other on a computer keyboard. > Typwriter keyboards were designed so that a fast typist could not jamb the > arms when typing quickly. It was discovered early that putting the above > letters in that order would solve that problem. Actually, the design is to put frequently-used combinations in slightly awkward positions so they don't get hit at the same time. That applies to the entire keyboard, not just the qwerty combo. > Today there is no need to do > that, but we still hang on to the convention of QWERTY, there is no reason > to do so today, it is a habit, a convention mindlessly branded into our > culture. It would probably be easier to teach children to type in > alphabetical order, but we cannot divorce ourself of our mindset. <sigh...> That mistake is made *all the time*. Alphabetical keyboards are, for all intents and purposes, random. As a random layout, they are difficuly to use. The Dvorak keyboard, for instance, supposedly solves the qwerty problem. It makes a bit more theoretical sense than qwerty, but it beats the pants off of any random (including alphabetical) layout. > Maybe it > is too much trouble to retool our minds and preconceptions. Perhaps it would > be too expensive to shift production and impossible to retrain everyone. It's actually not that hard. It's like typing on a European keyboard if you're American. You pick it up pretty easily. > Conventional tailed aircraft are not better, but it is culturally ingrained > as the way to do it. Which is weird since the Wrights used canards. Rutan likes them because they offer maneuverability without sacrificing stability. I like them because they're sexy. > RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
