How Fast Do you type

Dis · January 1, 2003, 16:42

Lately it seems like I do post fast, and hence why my name shows up in a lot of threads. Maybe I just post faster than all you guys

. But really I have never been that fast a typer. My fingers just aren't that coordinated. I make too many mistakes and have to use the backspace key. And if I think about it too much like now, I make even more mistakes.

I took typing class in the 7th and 8th grades for one quarter and one semester. We were a poor school and had old manual typewriters. Does anywone remember what those were?

And I've heard they want to change the keyboard layout. What sick sonuva***** would do something like that?

edit: I included some pretty high end numbers on that poll. I have heard stories of women typing way way over 100 wpm. Not sure if I believe it though

. Although I do like a woman with fast fingers.

Kropotkin · January 1, 2003, 16:54

Actually the so called qwerty-layout is from the days when you didn't want to type to fast as it lead to machine jams. So in theory a change would be a good idea but it's at the same time that sort of change that's not as easy to make as one might think.

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 16:55

This fast...

Solver · January 1, 2003, 16:57

I'd kill anyone for an idea to change the layout... why have I been getting so used for this one for so long?

No idea how fast can I type, but I don't look at the keyboard and do it fairly quick. Sometimes, after getting some energy from special sources, very quick.

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 17:01

Although a change of idea is a fairly good idea in some ways, it does mean that everyone would have to readapt to a new keyboard layout, something I am not overly keen on having to do...so I say stick, the current layout works perfectly well when you are used to it.

Solver · January 1, 2003, 17:04

Readapting would take time and I know for sure I'd explode with anger if I had to type slowly while already being used to quick typing

.

orange · January 1, 2003, 17:05

about 120 wpm on average. 200 wpm is insane, i'd love to see it. My aunt can do 160 wpm, and that's blazing enough to watch.

Sprayber · January 1, 2003, 17:10

Why would anyone want to relearn how to type? It might be ok for starting out new typers but to go back and relearn it wouldn't make sense unless the new arrangement improved average typing dramatically. You either type well or you don't.

http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/

http://home.earthlink.net/~dcrehr/whyqwert.html

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 17:17

I was imagining trying to type on that keyboard and most of the time was spent just looking on the keyboard for the right key. I wonder how long it would take to readapt...if too long I would just look after this keyboard well. Besides it is one of those things that could just be rejected by the public as a whole because the demand for qwerty keyboards would be so high that someone would provide them. Inertia in the present market would make qwerty keyboards stick...

Edan · January 1, 2003, 17:17

Quote:

So in theory a change would be a good idea but it's at the same time that sort of change that's not as easy to make as one might think.

There's always dvorak.

What about speech software like viovoice or naturalyspeaking? I'm suprised that's not listed as an option (though I guess it can't be used exclusively - yet)

Dis · January 1, 2003, 17:21

I'm not sure what software you mentioned.

But it seems to me we can have the best of both worlds. We can use either seperate keyboards or programs. Keyboards really wouldn't be necessary (except to display the 2 sets of characters). It would seem windows could have a routine that you can set 2 (or more) different types of keyboard layouts.

All the young kids could be instructed on the most effecient one. And eventually the old one will die out. But in the meantime we have the technology (with computers- not manual typewriters) to do both.

Dis · January 1, 2003, 17:24

As for speech software, I am not impressed by what I've seen so far. In fact I think the results are terrible. My brother had some program like that. I'm not sure if it results in faster typing because you have to correct so many words.

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 17:28

I have tried speech recognition stuff in the past but it made too many errors when it ended up that it would be considerably quicker to type than talk...

Edan · January 1, 2003, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
As for speech software, I am not impressed by what I've seen so far. In fact I think the results are terrible.

The results tend to vary on how much you train it (and hwo good one is at enunciating clearly). I used viavoice for a while (more for the gee-whizness of it, rather than as a serious replacement) and it did respectably (maybe 80-90%). I understand one can get it to as high as 97 or 98% correctness, which isn't too hard to go back and fix once you've finished - and for navigating the computer (say using a web browser or starting programs) there are only a few commands it would need to learn, so it performs without problems). Speed isn't that much of an issue, though, as you can't really talk really really quickly, or the program will likely start making mistakes, but it does allow you to do other things rather than type at the keyboard, (ie, away from the desktop, etc), which might be useful. Plus, it might prevent repetitve stress syndrome that one might get with a keyboard.

Edan · January 1, 2003, 17:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Dissident
I'm not sure what software you mentioned.

Dvorak - not a software, but a keyboard layout designed to allow for faster typing (ie, it groups all the most often used letters together, etc).

Viavoice is IBM's speech software, and Dragon Naturally Speaking is a speech software by some other company.

Nubclear · January 1, 2003, 18:04

On averege about 110, though that number rises and decreases with my mood and drive to type.

Capt Dizle · January 1, 2003, 18:10

Fast. Enough.

Jon Miller · January 1, 2003, 18:11

I talk much slower than I read, also much slower than a good typist (and I talk pretty fast)

I doubt speech recognition will ever replace typing (might for us poor typer s like me)

Jon Miller
who uses all his fingers but does not use the standard tpying arrangement (instead the wahtever finger is closer arrangement)

trickey · January 1, 2003, 19:27

The whatever-finger-is-closer arrangement is working great for me too.

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 19:30

I just splurge my fingers on the keyboard and see what comes out

Dauphin · January 1, 2003, 19:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
I have tried speech recognition stuff in the past but it made too many errors when it ended up that it would be considerably quicker to type than talk...

Its your funny northern accent. Someone like moi, with superlative enunciation, has no problems with such applications.

Provost Harrison · January 1, 2003, 19:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin

Its your funny northern accent. Someone like moi, with superlative enunciation, has no problems with such applications.

I am grateful I don't speak like a southern poof