> then I think you are going to see very few people who are not touch typists because it'd be very difficult or maybe even impossible to reach those WPM without touch typing.
Anecdata, but: I got ~160 WPM without learning touch typing. I was a regular computer user from the age of 12.
> "my fingers into less efficient movements" - don't lie to yourself.
I used to type at 120+ wpm using my self taught typing experience.
I purchased a new keyboard recently with ortholinear layout and figured it would be a good time to learn proper touch typing. I'm at 70-80 wpm and cannot see how to improve unless I _free_ myself from pure touch typing.
There are just limitations to how a single hand can move when multiple keys have to be hit on the same side or even the same finger.
> It's not 'proper' touch typing - I almost never use my little fingers (I use three on my left hand, but bias towards just using index/index and middle on my right)
I used to do something like this. Developed some real bad RSI that was only partially alleviated when I got a split keyboard (which forced me to learn to touch-type). Now that I’m used to that I’m finally starting to touch-type on a normal keyboard, which also helps quite a bit.
YMMV of course, but in retrospect I really wish I learned to touch-type to begin with; I think I ignored it during typing lessons as a kid as my typing speed was honestly pretty good, but now I regret that.
> I never understood this way of thinking about touch typing as a distinct skill from typing.
Touch typing is a special technique. Typing and touch typing being distinct things isn't a "way of thinking", it's a clear fact. It's not open to interpretation.
The keyboard is an instrument. Anyone can use it without learning the proper technique, but the technique helps a great deal. That's the whole point.
It is greatly comparable to musical instruments. For instance you can learn how to play the guitar yourself, but if you know the proper technique, you'll have better mastery in a shorter time. This is why it needs to be teached, especially to knowledge workers, who type, type and type all day long.
Maybe the skill you currently have is enough for you, but you shouldn't dismiss the proper technique, especially if you haven't tried it (you sound like you didn't really).
Though if you can answer yes to all the questions below, then you probably don't need the technique:
- Can you easily do 80+ wpm whether it is prose or code?
- Do you have more than 95% accuracy at all times?
- Do you never (no exceptions) look at the keyboard?
These things all make a difference. Having less friction with the input instrument results in a higher stamina in a knowledge worker, which means more productivity per unit of time. Few realize this.
...what? What kind of error-rate? How long could you sustain that? How'd you manage that speed having to glance between source and keyboard?
I'm pretty sure I was the fastest in my high school typing class (because I already knew how to type very well by then) and at my best I could stay a little over 100wpm for a minute or two without any errors, but it was hard. I could maybe get up around 120-130 transcribing speech and letting minor errors slip though. I doubt I get much over 90wpm at my best these days but it's still fast enough to draw the occasional "whoa!" from people watching me. 160 seems... crazy if you're not touch typing, and way above normal even if you are.
[EDIT] sorry about the tone, I'm not saying you're lying, that's just... wow. Crazy fast. Must have really surprised some people, haha.
> Do I seriously have to type slower to make it between things? This is awful.
I found out the complete opposite. I'm a pretty fast typist but I learned touch typing at a rather late age, at around 26 or so. I still don't have a perfect technique but I have not really practiced it either.
Typing slowly pinpointed several flaws in my technique, some which I wasn't aware of. I already knew that using the "y" key with the wrong hand, but playing this game for some minutes also pointed out that I use the wrong hand or finger. For example I noticed that I use my index finger to type out x and c (rather than my ring and middle fingers).
Sure, but I don't agree that touch typing is "the" technique and that it's impossible that someone else has come up with a better one independently. Touch typing is a good way to type well, but I don't think it's distinct from "typing", it's one way to type. Just like you can play the guitar even if you don't know the technique.
> - Why do you think you did slow down after the switch to touch typing?
I have no idea, the way to hit the keys just feels less convenient to me. For example, the x and c are harder to hit because my fingers don't like going there, I can't really explain it better.
> - Why did you feel the need to switch to touch typing if the skill you already had was so good?
Half because I got an ortho split keyboard and couldn't use my old technique with it, and half because everyone said touch typing is so much better.
> - Do you regret switching to touch typing? Why?
Yes, my old technique is much more comfortable and faster. I still type the "old" way on regular keyboards, but it's not such a big deal either way, since I'm usually limited by the speed of my brain rather than my hands, and I don't much mind the reduced accuracy either. I'm touch typing this on the split keyboard right now.
> - How many years did it take you to get to 120 wpm at 98%?
I've been typing that way for 20 years, so I can't really say. I definitely remember being pretty good around 4 years in, possibly long before that.
> - Is there anything you miss from your old technique (beside the higher stats)?
It just feels more comfortable, when I touch-type I feel a bit like I'm fighting the keyboard, or as if I'm wearing shoes half a size too small. With my old technique (e.g. on my laptop) I feel at home.
> I get that you could cheat if you had a regular keyboard, but if you're learning to type, why would you do that?
I sometimes look to align myself when I've had my hands off the keyboard, and now that I've got the wrong keycaps on some letters[1], it throws me off sometimes (I'll start on K or ; instead of L). However, when I'm actually typing, I almost never look at the keys (usually only when I'm pausing anyway, and more to take my eyes off the screen for a second). My only training has been using a keyboard for 20+ years.
It's not 'proper' touch typing - I almost never use my little fingers (I use three on my left hand, but bias towards just using index/index and middle on my right), I've got a tendency to reach across with either index finger depending on what I've just typed, and my hands at rest are around AWD/JIO rather than the home row - but I've never felt limited by my typing speed (80-100 WPM if I'm copying something).
I suspect my typing style is largely habits developed from gaming more then typing when growing up (rest on AWD and being more fluent with my left hand).
[1] Laptop keyboard - S where I should be (I got an S sent by mistake for a broken C key, and the I broke later), moved Fn keys to replace L and E
> I noticed that lots of skilled and professional engineers never learned to touch type. That discovery itself was odd to me: why would a professional programmer not want to invest the time to learn to type properly: typing fast boosts your productivity significantly. But they do.
This is a false dilemma. Plenty of us type quickly without hunting and pecking, or looking at the keyboard, without home-row touch typing. This comment was typed as such.
There isn't anything "proper" about home row style touch typing, it is merely one of multiple ways to type fast.
> I never understood the fascination with typing optimization
Touch typing is about the combination of speed and accuracy. You're right that in these discussions people always talk about speed, but that hidden accuracy bonus is useful for everyone.
> Typing ‘HE’ forced the hand to make a very unnatural sideways twisting motion from the wrist and then back again.
Really? On my keyboard, I can simultaneously place my index finger on the Colemak position of H and my pinky on Shift without any movement of my wrist. I'm on a full-size keyboard with a tenkey and I have smallish hands.
Personally, I've found that even on a qwerty keyboard the speed at which I type is usually not the bottleneck, especially when programming.
> There is another fundamental that is ignored by a lot of computer users. I think everyone who spends a lot of time
behind a computer should learn how to touch type, since typing is still the main way of interacting with your computer.
I sort of agree, but anyone typing out code at 120WPM isn't programming, they're writing. Programming is an intellectual activity, not a physical one so learning to touch type is worthwhile but might only gain you a few minutes a day of productivity over someone doing 40WPM in a home-grown hunt-and-peck style of typing?
I've been touch typing for years, and none of my fingers have experienced any strain, or ever been overworked. In fact, the reason I learned how to touch type was to _reduce_ the strain on all my fingers.
That's kind of sad. The most productive 2 week class I ever took was a touch typing class in 8th grade. We learned on mechanical typewriters where you really had to hammer the keys. This has paid off for me enormously.
> quite slow by coder standards
I spend very little time typing code in, that's not where my typing time is spent. For example, I am typing this while looking at the screen, not the keyboard. I catch and fix mistaeks much faster. When I'm transcribing text, touch typing doubles the speed because I read the original while typing.
I also try and optimize my code for readability, not minimal keystrokes.
> Your assumption, which I think is wrong, is that WPM (or maybe APM) is the bottleneck for most work.
I don't care if it's a bottle neck. I want an efficient means of typing, so that I can keep my focus on other stuff. Maybe I could do a lot of my typing using a terrible interface like my phone, but it would be very aggravating.
> In you're nice example, you're using your pointer finger to press the "c" key. Standard recommendations say both "c" and "e" keys should be handled by your middle finger on qwerty.
Do you mean in the wrists down example? I used natural fingers and it was still horribly unpleasant.
> You're also typing incredibly slow where you can physically move your hand to avoid contorting your finger. At faster speeds, which I personally hit frequently when slacking or typing up emails, I can't be moving my hands all over the keyboard.
How do you figure that? I can easily hit 100 wpm and that’s way above my thinking speed already.
I take typing seriously. We can race and I’m going to win. Guarantee it. In addition, I can sustain that speed for an hour. Can you?
What do you think moving my hand entails anyway. It’s not going to the other room to pet the cat, it’s literally 0.5–1.0 cm that I don’t even think about… It’s what the brain figures out makes more sense than “contorting” fingers when you have the ability to do so, i.e. if your wrists are not artificially glued down to your desk.
> I also don't look at the keyboard
> I just know where the keys are from muscle memory
You are touch typing though. You may have an unconventional style, but that is irrelevant.
reply