Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Mar 2013 16:49 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless "The Minuum keyboard, through its simplicity, improves your touchscreen typing. Existing keyboards leave you barely enough screen to interact with your apps, and you can't enjoy typing on them. Minuum eliminates the visual clutter of archaic mobile keyboards by adapting the keyboard to a single dimension." You have to watch the video. This is yet another example of a strength of more open platforms - like Android - that often gets overlooked: the ability to experiment with core aspects of the operating system. Whenever someone says there are no Android-exclusive applications, they conveniently overlook things like this. No other platform has stuff like this, and I certainly miss this experimentation on my 8X.
Thread beginning with comment 555927
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Oooh, yay...
by Lobotomik on Tue 19th Mar 2013 14:04 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Oooh, yay..."
Lobotomik
Member since:
2006-01-03

Are they good only for English, or are they as good in any language? Lots of people need to type regularly in two or more languages: is this OK on a Dvorak layout?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Oooh, yay...
by UltraZelda64 on Tue 19th Mar 2013 18:47 in reply to "RE[3]: Oooh, yay..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

It was designed and optimized for the English language based on things like letter frequencies and common bigraphs, etc., but if you speak French I've heard of a version adapted to that language called Bepo. It may work well in some other languages, who knows. I have heard of some completely unique layout designed and optimized for the German language as well, but I can't remember its name.

QWERTY wasn't optimized for any written language, it was the successor to a plain old alphabetical layout (just look at the home row: ASDFGHJKL, and the most common letters are pretty much everywhere but the home row). It was designed so primitive typewriters wouldn't jam, by placing keys that were commonly struck in quick succession (and as a result, their typebars) far away from each other. That just solves a long-obsolete problem; it does absolutely nothing for optimizing text entry in English or any other language.

So really, the argument that Dvorak better support multiple languages perfectly because QWERTY somehow does... doesn't really make any sense. That's assuming that QWERTY was even optimized for the English language in the first place. But it wasn't... creating a layout that didn't jam and created a usable typewriter to sell was top priority. It was only 'optimized' to reduce and get around an antique machine's mechanical problems.

Edited 2013-03-19 18:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Oooh, yay...
by darknexus on Wed 20th Mar 2013 00:05 in reply to "RE[3]: Oooh, yay..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Are they good only for English, or are they as good in any language? Lots of people need to type regularly in two or more languages: is this OK on a Dvorak layout?

In my experience, no. Dvorak was created and optimized specifically for the spelling patterns of English, to enable the least strain on the hands when typing English. One could, of course, optimize a keyboard layout for any alphabetic language in the same way, but it would be completely different on a per-language (or at minimum a per-language family) basis.

Reply Parent Score: 3