QWERTY vs Dvorak vs Colemak — Should You Switch?

Short answer for almost everyone: no, do not switch. But the reasoning matters, because the pro-switching arguments are not wrong — they are just smaller than they sound.

Where QWERTY came from

QWERTY was designed in the 1870s for mechanical typewriters. The widespread story is that it deliberately slowed typists down to stop typebars jamming; the more careful version is that common letter pairs were separated so their typebars would not collide.

Either way, it was not designed for finger efficiency, and nobody claims otherwise. The interesting question is whether that matters now.

The alternatives

Dvorak (1936) puts all vowels on the left home row and the most common consonants on the right. Around 70% of typing happens on the home row, against roughly 32% for QWERTY.

Colemak (2006) is the pragmatic option: it changes only 17 keys from QWERTY, keeps Z X C V where they are so copy-and-paste shortcuts still work, and reaches about 74% home row usage.

Workman, Norman and others exist and optimise for slightly different things. The differences between them are much smaller than the difference from QWERTY.

What the efficiency actually buys

Alternative layouts genuinely reduce finger travel — often by half or more. That is a real measurement.

What it does not reliably produce is a higher top speed. The world's fastest typists are split across layouts, and plenty of 150+ WPM typists use QWERTY. Finger travel is not the binding constraint at speed; recognition and rhythm are.

The real cost

• 1–3 months to return to your previous speed. Not to exceed it — to match it.
• A period of being bad at your job if typing is part of it.
• Every other computer is QWERTY. Shared machines, client laptops, interviews, exam halls.
• Shortcuts move. Under Dvorak, Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V end up in awkward places. Colemak specifically avoids this.
• Maintaining both is hard. Some people manage it; many find each layout degrades the other.

Who should actually consider it

Switch only if most of these are true:

• You type several hours a day, most days
• You have wrist or hand discomfort that a better setup has not resolved
• You almost always use your own machine
• You can afford to be slow for a couple of months
• You already touch type well on QWERTY at 70+ WPM

That last one matters. If you are still learning to touch type, learn QWERTY. Switching mid-learning means fighting two incomplete habits, and QWERTY is what you will meet everywhere.

If you do switch

• Choose Colemak unless you have a specific reason for Dvorak — fewer changed keys, shortcuts preserved, similar efficiency
• Go cold turkey. Alternating layouts daily is the slowest possible route
• Do not relabel your keycaps. You are learning to type without looking; labels invite the habit back
• Expect week one to be genuinely miserable

The better answer for most people

Almost everyone considering a layout switch would gain more, faster, from:

1. 1Not looking at the keyboard — worth 15–25 WPM
2. 2Accuracy above 97% — worth 5–15 WPM
3. 3Fixing posture — where the comfort argument is really settled

Those cost weeks, not months, and they transfer to every keyboard you will ever touch.

QWERTY is not good. It is just not the thing holding you back. Find out what is.