New Keyboard Layout Project: The Optimal Layout?
Posted by Michael Dickens on August 28, 2009
MTGAP 3.5 is the best layout, even with several criteria changes:
' y l d b j p u m , o i t s c h n e r a x q w g z v f . k ;
So the question now is, is it really the best layout?
-Low same finger, most of which is on the strong middle or index finger.
-A lot of keys are in good positions. I very much like the position of l (ell).
-Very good inward rolls.
-A good balance of outward rolls to satisfy both those who find them easy and those who don’t like them.
-A good-looking home row.
-The word “are” is super easy to type.
-Same finger, while low, could be better.
-hand alternation is pretty bad, though better than Capewell or Arensito.
How does it compare to Colemak, MTGAP 2.0, and Carpalx GYLMW?
MTGAP 3.5 7869 MTGAP 2.0 7875 Carpalx 7972 Colemak 8001
MTGAP 3.5 7.66% MTGAP 2.0 7.04% Colemak 4.88% Carpalx 3.19%
MTGAP 2.0 7.11% MTGAP 3.5 4.98% Carpalx 4.07% Colemak 3.76%
Carpalx 16.51% Colemak 21.17% MTGAP 3.5 23.40% MTGAP 2.0 24.86%
Colemak 0.81% MTGAP 2.0 0.89% MTGAP 3.5 0.90% Carpalx 1.99%
Carpalx 7.49% MTGAP 3.5 8.97% Colemak 9.03% MTGAP 2.0 11.97%
Home Row Jump
MTGAP 3.5 0.23% Carpalx 0.27% MTGAP 2.0 0.39% Colemak 0.50%
MTGAP 2.0 3.16% Colemak 3.72% MTGAP 3.5 4.49% Carpalx 4.98%
The stats are actually pretty jumbled. Both Carpalx and MTGAP use computer programs, so they will likely be very good at a few selected stats. Which they are. MTGAP is best at distance and rolls and good at same finger, while Carpalx is much better at same hand. I don’t think it’s worth it, though.
The question is, are there any problems with MTGAP 3.5, not counting the fact that it does not preserve keyboard shortcuts? (I’m working on a layout that fixes that.)