Dvorak Layout Claimed Not Superior To QWERTY

Michael Pyne sends in an article published at Reason Online 13 years ago, dismantling the entrenched myth that the Dvorak keyboard layout is a superior technology to QWERTY. The odd thing is that this 13-year-old article recaps research (refereed and published in a respected economics journal) 19 years ago. While we have discussed Dvorak many times over the years, I don't believe we have dug into this convincing-sounding refutation of the Dvorak mythology. The article is in the context of arguing against the conventional wisdom of "first mover advantage" — that the first product to market gains a large entrenchment benefit, such as VHS vs. Beta, MS-DOS vs. anything, etc. It's very much a pro-markets piece.

Comments

Very much a pro-market piece

[bigsexyjoe]

Indeed. This piece actually contains no argument that the QWERTY is better than the Dvorak. It simply states that believing the Dvorak is better implies that markets aren't always perfect all the time. Therefore we must not believe the Dvorak is superior because that belief if not consistent with the free market religion.

It goes on to say that the researchers who demonstrated Dvorak's superiority didn't explain their methodology well enough. After that everyone accepted the general observation that Dvorak is faster and less stressful do to a secret communist conspiracy.

If this guy is so obsessed with the fucking Dvorak vs. QWERTY debate why doesn't he conduct the experiment again with more stringent methodology? It would be a stunning victory for free market theory if he proved that the QWERTY survived only because it was superior even though it was designed to be slow. Of course, if the experiment doesn't go the way he wants, he'll have to change his religion and I suppose he's not ready to do that.