It is ridiculous for Apple to spend so much time trying to conform the user interface to 18th century hardware mechanical models. Typing? Give me a break people, every device designed by human-kind does not need a QWERTY keyboard. Move on. This is blind stupidity that tells use we need QWERTY keyboards for everything from pocket telephones, to eReaders, MP3 players, to your freakin refrigerator. Industrial designers need to devise user interfaces and input types much more appropriate to our age than a system designed in 1867 to prevent mechanical typebars from clashing and jamming if neighboring arms were depressed at the same time or in rapid succession. Some people just cannot accept change even if it is the most logical and efficient way forward. QWERTY keyboard should have long been dead if not for stubborn refusal to change.
It is ridiculous for Apple to spend so much time trying to conform the user interface to 18th century hardware mechanical models. Typing? Give me a break people, every device designed by human-kind does not need a QWERTY keyboard. Move on. This is blind stupidity that tells use we need QWERTY keyboards for everything from pocket telephones, to eReaders, MP3 players, to your freakin refrigerator. Industrial designers need to devise user interfaces and input types much more appropriate to our age than a system designed in 1867 to prevent mechanical typebars from clashing and jamming if neighboring arms were depressed at the same time or in rapid succession. Some people just cannot accept change even if it is the most logical and efficient way forward. QWERTY keyboard should have long been dead if not for stubborn refusal to change.
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can?t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I?d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn?t expect it to change most people?s patterns.
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can’t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I’d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn’t expect it to change most people’s patterns.
I think RicPrince is right in that there is no good reason why Dvorak shouldn't be an option on a software keyboard. Less than 1% of customers will use it but it shouldn't be that hard to offer such a feature.
It isn't that hard to pop off the keys on an Apple hardware keyboard and DIY.
I think RicPrince is right in that there is no good reason why Dvorak shouldn't be an option on a software keyboard. Less than 1% of customers will use it but it shouldn't be that hard to offer such a feature.
It isn't that hard to pop off the keys on an Apple hardware keyboard and DIY.
Note that he doesn?t specify any alternative to his perceived problem and doesn?t address the physical non-QWERTY layout that Apple uses outside the US. To a lesser extent Apple does offer Emoji on the iPhone which is an alternative to the default keyboard layout. Plus, I?m the one that brought up Dvorak as an option.
Besides that his post seems to have a problem with both QWERTY and keyboards in general for input, which I find somewhat baffling since I don?t think there is anything better at this time, hence my query.
PS: If Apple sold a Mac with Dvorak I?d buy it, and as perviously stated would like to see an official Dvorak iPhone OS option (you can get it if your phone is jailbroken). I?m Guessing that Jobs hates even having to make a different physical keyboard layout at all and will move to an OLED (or similar) keyboard once the technology becomes viable.
There's already a software Dvorak option on the Mac, I don't see why that couldn't happen on the iPhone OS.
Or why isn?t included from the start. They have just under 50 keyboard layouts, including a UK version which looks like it only replaces the $ with a £.
Note that he doesn’t specify any alternative to his perceived problem and doesn’t address the physical non-QWERTY layout that Apple uses outside the US. To a lesser extent Apple does offer Emoji on the iPhone which is an alternative to the default keyboard layout. Plus, I’m the one that brought up Dvorak as an option.
Besides that his post seems to have a problem with both QWERTY and keyboards in general for input, which I find somewhat baffling since I don’t think there is anything better at this time, hence my query.
PS: If Apple sold a Mac with Dvorak I’d buy it, and as perviously stated would like to see an official Dvorak iPhone OS option (you can get it if your phone is jailbroken). I’m Guessing that Jobs hates even having to make a different physical keyboard layout at all and will move to an OLED (or similar) keyboard once the technology becomes viable.
Keyboards are far and away the most reliable form of fast data input. If there was a clear successor, it would have appeared by now and replaced keyboards everywhere.
I have typed on a Selectric keyboard and there is none better. They are big, clunky, and LOUD (like my 1969 Camaro) but like the Camaro they are super fast. They have no place in the modern sleek small and highly designed world of personal computers, iPhones, and iTablets but make no mistake about it the Selectric keyboard is a very good input device.
I agree. The Selectric was a fantastic typewriter. Wonder if anyone has tried to retrofit a modern computer with a modded USB Selectric keyboard?
I?m expecting an ULV Core-i7, a dual-core Atom and a Cortex-A9 ARM. Anything less than all three and I?m going to come onto AI to spout nonsense about Apple being doomed.
One thing is certain: It will get everyone's attention. If I were any other company with a new product to show, I'd stay away from the timeframe surrounding the Apple tablet. It's a battleship coming down a river. You'd best get out of the way.
Anyway, [my son] ended up with a new MacBook Pro, one of the few laptops being sold that actually impresses me. It's got that hard aluminum unibody that makes the thing feel like a rock. There is none of the flexing and bending of a typical laptop.
Apple had added multi-touch, developed for the iPhone, to the track pad. Two fingers on the pad and you can do all sorts of fancy moves that are slick and interesting. The display is gorgeous and crisp.
All these whiz-bang features make me realize that I have fallen behind.
Quote:
He pulled the trigger and got it for $1,050 with a free iPod thrown in. If I was going to buy a machine this minute, it would probably be what I'd get, too.
He still complains plenty about Apple, even saying that "Apple Storesare barriers to sales,? which goes against everything we know to be true with ever increasing unit sales, highest sales per sqft, and even the addition of many new upscale stores, even while in a recession. I personally think that Apple Stores have done more for Apple?s Mac sales increase than the supposed ?halo effect? of people liking a $200 pocketable PMP and then deciding to fork over $1200 for a computer? but I can?t prove it.
I don't see apple going that route. It seems to clunky and with all the hinges and whatnot just more to break. I want a unibody 7-10 inch tablet with an OS between the iphones and OS X.. and the Ilife/iwork groups. Under $1000, no 3G plan for me.
I actually like the "book" format of the Courier (pretend MS design). For me a slate is okay, but I would rather have two smaller screens to do research and take notes while reading, than one big screen that has to be windowed or is all or nothing. Now the slate is better for just books and movie watching, but I'm more interested in using it to do work or be creative without the need for a keyboard .. and only occasionally watch a movie.
I actually like the "book" format of the Courier (pretend MS design). For me a slate is okay, but I would rather have two smaller screens to do research and take notes while reading, than one big screen that has to be windowed or is all or nothing. Now the slate is better for just books and movie watching, but I'm more interested in using it to do work or be creative without the need for a keyboard .. and only occasionally watch a movie.
I think the split screen/hinge thing is kinda like the hardware keyboard thing, though: it commits you in hardware to a format that can be emulated in software. Whatever advantages may be had through a physical form factor are probably cancelled out by loss of adaptability.
For instance, while the "book" configuration allows me to fold the device into a smaller shape for carrying around, I now can never use all the screen real estate at once for things like movie watching.
Whereas I can take a fixed screen slate and make two windows that act exactly like the Courier concept, without the mechanical complexity and cost of hinges, without the unsightly seam when I want to go full screen, and without the additional thickness when folded.
Since we're already talking about a device that won't just fit in a pocket, I think that's more than a good tradeoff over carrying around, say, a 4"x6"x2" object as opposed to a 8"x6"x1/2" object.
It's why I'm sure that Courier video is just an internal MS concept piece that will never see the light of day-- there're just too many reasons mitigating against actually using hardware design to enforce the split screen concept, when you can do it just as well in software.
I think the split screen/hinge thing is kinda like the hardware keyboard thing, though: it commits you in hardware to a format that can be emulated in software. Whatever advantages may be had through a physical form factor are probably cancelled out by loss of adaptability.
Since we're already talking about a device that won't just fit in a pocket, I think that's more than a good tradeoff over carrying around, say, a 4"x6"x2" object as opposed to a 8"x6"x1/2" object.
It's why I'm sure that Courier video is just an internal MS concept piece that will never see the light of day-- there're just too many reasons mitigating against actually using hardware design to enforce the split screen concept, when you can do it just as well in software.
It is ridiculous for Apple to spend so much time trying to conform the user interface to 18th century hardware mechanical models. Typing? Give me a break people, every device designed by human-kind does not need a QWERTY keyboard. Move on. This is blind stupidity that tells use we need QWERTY keyboards for everything from pocket telephones, to eReaders, MP3 players, to your freakin refrigerator. Industrial designers need to devise user interfaces and input types much more appropriate to our age than a system designed in 1867 to prevent mechanical typebars from clashing and jamming if neighboring arms were depressed at the same time or in rapid succession. Some people just cannot accept change even if it is the most logical and efficient way forward. QWERTY keyboard should have long been dead if not for stubborn refusal to change.
QWERTY was certainly designed to prevent jamming, but there is a lot of urban legend involved here as well.
Competing typewriter makers had different layouts. The best strategy to prevent jamming was to space commonly used keys out in order to minimize the frequency of adjacent keys being used one after another. Each manufacturer wanted to claim that they had the better hardware. That their products were more efficient. They even commissioned studies to prove the superiority. Obviously those studies were biased.
This is where the legend came from. More recent studies have revealed additional qwerty training is as valuable if not more valuable than re-training on allegedly more efficient layouts. Turns out, the layout doesn't matter terribly much... but proper training does.
There's nothing stopping you from using a different keyboard layout. Just pop the keys off and put them elsewhere and then configure a custom key layout in the OS.
I think you'll find that designers and computer users are not as stupid as you're suggesting. Lots of research has been done on alternate layouts, chorded key combinations, gestures, one-handed input, etc. Turns out... even schemes that are more efficient, aren't efficient enough to merit the switchover cost. (Cost both in terms of time and money)
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can?t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I?d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn?t expect it to change most people?s patterns.
There is really incredibly innovative solutions to QWERTY keyboard being developed and that have been prototyped going back to the MIT Media Labs of the 1980s. Recently, there was a great TED lecture on the changing interface between humans and their computing devices. Some for the work involves virtual keyboards that adjust to human physiology rather than human conforming to mechanical standards resulting in things like carpal tunnel syndrome. Other solutions involve the reinvention of the UI, whereby commands are given to the computer operating system based on either motion, gesture, voice/sound or a combination of these input types. Many of these alternatives give the user more direct, immediate, and tactile control over their devices than banging away at some 19th century random combination of keys and symbols.
There is really incredibly innovative solutions to QWERTY keyboard being developed and that have been prototyped going back to the MIT Media Labs of the 1980s. Recently, there was a great TED lecture on the changing interface between humans and their computing devices. Some for the work involves virtual keyboards that adjust to human physiology rather than human conforming to mechanical standards resulting in things like carpal tunnel syndrome. Other solutions involve the reinvention of the UI, whereby commands are given to the computer operating system based on either motion, gesture, voice/sound or a combination of these input types. Many of these alternatives give the user more direct, immediate, and tactile control over their devices than banging away at some 19th century random combination of keys and symbols.
Yeah, but that's a little like saying that English is a cobbled together mess and we need to shift to Esperanto, pronto.
The legacy layout of the keyboard is inefficient, true, but it's deeply, deeply entrenched. We can do a lot with better ergonomics, voice recognition, gestures, etc., but at some point people need to be able to use their computing devices to input large amounts of text without saying it out loud. Expecting those people to learn some new keyboard layout when there is an existing system that works fine and the vast majority are fluent with is a pretty high barrier to entry, especially if you're trying to sell a device that utilizes such a scheme.
Think about it: "Our new machine uses a much more efficient, much more ergonomic system of text entry that you should become as good at as the old system at after only a year or two of constant practice" is not a strong selling point.
The legacy layout of the keyboard is inefficient, true, but it's deeply, deeply entrenched.
Also, the inefficiency of qwerty is trivial enough that most characterizations of it fall into the category of urban legend. If looking to increase employee efficiency, keyboard layout shouldn't even be considered.
Here's a few examples of higher ROI projects:
Better file naming
Better folder organizations
Proper balance of utilization between popup menus, shortcuts, and toolbars
Training for specific software packages
Mice with more buttons and corresponding training
Mouse training and optimization of velocity/acceleration preferences
Reading (computer) glasses
Disable spell checking while authoring and instead use it only upon task completion
The list is endless. What it boils down to is, the difference in time required for a finger to move to a non-home-row key as compared to a home-row-key, is mind bogglingly trivial.
One more item for the list... Not authoring this post would have saved more time than would switching to dvorak.
Comments
Is David Cronenberg listed as a co-inventor?
PS an articulating touchscreen superstrate to simulate keyboard / provide tactile feedback would be INSANELY GREAT (really)
It is ridiculous for Apple to spend so much time trying to conform the user interface to 18th century hardware mechanical models. Typing? Give me a break people, every device designed by human-kind does not need a QWERTY keyboard. Move on. This is blind stupidity that tells use we need QWERTY keyboards for everything from pocket telephones, to eReaders, MP3 players, to your freakin refrigerator. Industrial designers need to devise user interfaces and input types much more appropriate to our age than a system designed in 1867 to prevent mechanical typebars from clashing and jamming if neighboring arms were depressed at the same time or in rapid succession. Some people just cannot accept change even if it is the most logical and efficient way forward. QWERTY keyboard should have long been dead if not for stubborn refusal to change.
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can?t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I?d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn?t expect it to change most people?s patterns.
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can’t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I’d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn’t expect it to change most people’s patterns.
I think RicPrince is right in that there is no good reason why Dvorak shouldn't be an option on a software keyboard. Less than 1% of customers will use it but it shouldn't be that hard to offer such a feature.
It isn't that hard to pop off the keys on an Apple hardware keyboard and DIY.
I think RicPrince is right in that there is no good reason why Dvorak shouldn't be an option on a software keyboard. Less than 1% of customers will use it but it shouldn't be that hard to offer such a feature.
It isn't that hard to pop off the keys on an Apple hardware keyboard and DIY.
Note that he doesn?t specify any alternative to his perceived problem and doesn?t address the physical non-QWERTY layout that Apple uses outside the US. To a lesser extent Apple does offer Emoji on the iPhone which is an alternative to the default keyboard layout. Plus, I?m the one that brought up Dvorak as an option.
Besides that his post seems to have a problem with both QWERTY and keyboards in general for input, which I find somewhat baffling since I don?t think there is anything better at this time, hence my query.
PS: If Apple sold a Mac with Dvorak I?d buy it, and as perviously stated would like to see an official Dvorak iPhone OS option (you can get it if your phone is jailbroken). I?m Guessing that Jobs hates even having to make a different physical keyboard layout at all and will move to an OLED (or similar) keyboard once the technology becomes viable.
There's already a software Dvorak option on the Mac, I don't see why that couldn't happen on the iPhone OS.
Or why isn?t included from the start. They have just under 50 keyboard layouts, including a UK version which looks like it only replaces the $ with a £.
Note that he doesn’t specify any alternative to his perceived problem and doesn’t address the physical non-QWERTY layout that Apple uses outside the US. To a lesser extent Apple does offer Emoji on the iPhone which is an alternative to the default keyboard layout. Plus, I’m the one that brought up Dvorak as an option.
Besides that his post seems to have a problem with both QWERTY and keyboards in general for input, which I find somewhat baffling since I don’t think there is anything better at this time, hence my query.
PS: If Apple sold a Mac with Dvorak I’d buy it, and as perviously stated would like to see an official Dvorak iPhone OS option (you can get it if your phone is jailbroken). I’m Guessing that Jobs hates even having to make a different physical keyboard layout at all and will move to an OLED (or similar) keyboard once the technology becomes viable.
Keyboards are far and away the most reliable form of fast data input. If there was a clear successor, it would have appeared by now and replaced keyboards everywhere.
I have typed on a Selectric keyboard and there is none better. They are big, clunky, and LOUD (like my 1969 Camaro) but like the Camaro they are super fast. They have no place in the modern sleek small and highly designed world of personal computers, iPhones, and iTablets but make no mistake about it the Selectric keyboard is a very good input device.
I agree. The Selectric was a fantastic typewriter. Wonder if anyone has tried to retrofit a modern computer with a modded USB Selectric keyboard?
I?m expecting an ULV Core-i7, a dual-core Atom and a Cortex-A9 ARM. Anything less than all three and I?m going to come onto AI to spout nonsense about Apple being doomed.
If you do, then what on earth...
...will there be for John Dvorak to do?
Even Dvorak can change...
One thing is certain: It will get everyone's attention. If I were any other company with a new product to show, I'd stay away from the timeframe surrounding the Apple tablet. It's a battleship coming down a river. You'd best get out of the way.
Anyway, [my son] ended up with a new MacBook Pro, one of the few laptops being sold that actually impresses me. It's got that hard aluminum unibody that makes the thing feel like a rock. There is none of the flexing and bending of a typical laptop.
Apple had added multi-touch, developed for the iPhone, to the track pad. Two fingers on the pad and you can do all sorts of fancy moves that are slick and interesting. The display is gorgeous and crisp.
All these whiz-bang features make me realize that I have fallen behind.
He pulled the trigger and got it for $1,050 with a free iPod thrown in. If I was going to buy a machine this minute, it would probably be what I'd get, too.
I agree. The Selectric was a fantastic typewriter. Wonder if anyone has tried to retrofit a modern computer with a modded USB Selectric keyboard?
There are keyboards here that are derived from the IBM Model M which was designed to mimic the Selectric:
http://pckeyboards.stores.yahoo.net/keyboards.html
There are keyboards here that are derived from the IBM Model M which was designed to mimic the Selectric:
http://pckeyboards.stores.yahoo.net/keyboards.html
Cool quote in your sig line.
I don't see apple going that route. It seems to clunky and with all the hinges and whatnot just more to break. I want a unibody 7-10 inch tablet with an OS between the iphones and OS X.. and the Ilife/iwork groups. Under $1000, no 3G plan for me.
I actually like the "book" format of the Courier (pretend MS design). For me a slate is okay, but I would rather have two smaller screens to do research and take notes while reading, than one big screen that has to be windowed or is all or nothing. Now the slate is better for just books and movie watching, but I'm more interested in using it to do work or be creative without the need for a keyboard .. and only occasionally watch a movie.
I actually like the "book" format of the Courier (pretend MS design). For me a slate is okay, but I would rather have two smaller screens to do research and take notes while reading, than one big screen that has to be windowed or is all or nothing. Now the slate is better for just books and movie watching, but I'm more interested in using it to do work or be creative without the need for a keyboard .. and only occasionally watch a movie.
I think the split screen/hinge thing is kinda like the hardware keyboard thing, though: it commits you in hardware to a format that can be emulated in software. Whatever advantages may be had through a physical form factor are probably cancelled out by loss of adaptability.
For instance, while the "book" configuration allows me to fold the device into a smaller shape for carrying around, I now can never use all the screen real estate at once for things like movie watching.
Whereas I can take a fixed screen slate and make two windows that act exactly like the Courier concept, without the mechanical complexity and cost of hinges, without the unsightly seam when I want to go full screen, and without the additional thickness when folded.
Since we're already talking about a device that won't just fit in a pocket, I think that's more than a good tradeoff over carrying around, say, a 4"x6"x2" object as opposed to a 8"x6"x1/2" object.
It's why I'm sure that Courier video is just an internal MS concept piece that will never see the light of day-- there're just too many reasons mitigating against actually using hardware design to enforce the split screen concept, when you can do it just as well in software.
I think the split screen/hinge thing is kinda like the hardware keyboard thing, though: it commits you in hardware to a format that can be emulated in software. Whatever advantages may be had through a physical form factor are probably cancelled out by loss of adaptability.
Since we're already talking about a device that won't just fit in a pocket, I think that's more than a good tradeoff over carrying around, say, a 4"x6"x2" object as opposed to a 8"x6"x1/2" object.
It's why I'm sure that Courier video is just an internal MS concept piece that will never see the light of day-- there're just too many reasons mitigating against actually using hardware design to enforce the split screen concept, when you can do it just as well in software.
good points!
It is ridiculous for Apple to spend so much time trying to conform the user interface to 18th century hardware mechanical models. Typing? Give me a break people, every device designed by human-kind does not need a QWERTY keyboard. Move on. This is blind stupidity that tells use we need QWERTY keyboards for everything from pocket telephones, to eReaders, MP3 players, to your freakin refrigerator. Industrial designers need to devise user interfaces and input types much more appropriate to our age than a system designed in 1867 to prevent mechanical typebars from clashing and jamming if neighboring arms were depressed at the same time or in rapid succession. Some people just cannot accept change even if it is the most logical and efficient way forward. QWERTY keyboard should have long been dead if not for stubborn refusal to change.
QWERTY was certainly designed to prevent jamming, but there is a lot of urban legend involved here as well.
Competing typewriter makers had different layouts. The best strategy to prevent jamming was to space commonly used keys out in order to minimize the frequency of adjacent keys being used one after another. Each manufacturer wanted to claim that they had the better hardware. That their products were more efficient. They even commissioned studies to prove the superiority. Obviously those studies were biased.
This is where the legend came from. More recent studies have revealed additional qwerty training is as valuable if not more valuable than re-training on allegedly more efficient layouts. Turns out, the layout doesn't matter terribly much... but proper training does.
There's nothing stopping you from using a different keyboard layout. Just pop the keys off and put them elsewhere and then configure a custom key layout in the OS.
I think you'll find that designers and computer users are not as stupid as you're suggesting. Lots of research has been done on alternate layouts, chorded key combinations, gestures, one-handed input, etc. Turns out... even schemes that are more efficient, aren't efficient enough to merit the switchover cost. (Cost both in terms of time and money)
Welcome to the forums and what do you propose as a solution? Are you stating that a lettered keyboard should go away altogether for some other input solution or that the QWERTY keyboard should be replaced with, say, the Dvorak Simplified Keyboard?
QWERTY is so well known and entrenched that making a universal change would not assist users for sometime. You can?t just force everyone to change and expect it to go smoothly. Personally, I?d like to see an option for DSK in the iPhone OS and other virtual keyboards, but I wouldn?t expect it to change most people?s patterns.
There is really incredibly innovative solutions to QWERTY keyboard being developed and that have been prototyped going back to the MIT Media Labs of the 1980s. Recently, there was a great TED lecture on the changing interface between humans and their computing devices. Some for the work involves virtual keyboards that adjust to human physiology rather than human conforming to mechanical standards resulting in things like carpal tunnel syndrome. Other solutions involve the reinvention of the UI, whereby commands are given to the computer operating system based on either motion, gesture, voice/sound or a combination of these input types. Many of these alternatives give the user more direct, immediate, and tactile control over their devices than banging away at some 19th century random combination of keys and symbols.
There is really incredibly innovative solutions to QWERTY keyboard being developed and that have been prototyped going back to the MIT Media Labs of the 1980s. Recently, there was a great TED lecture on the changing interface between humans and their computing devices. Some for the work involves virtual keyboards that adjust to human physiology rather than human conforming to mechanical standards resulting in things like carpal tunnel syndrome. Other solutions involve the reinvention of the UI, whereby commands are given to the computer operating system based on either motion, gesture, voice/sound or a combination of these input types. Many of these alternatives give the user more direct, immediate, and tactile control over their devices than banging away at some 19th century random combination of keys and symbols.
Yeah, but that's a little like saying that English is a cobbled together mess and we need to shift to Esperanto, pronto.
The legacy layout of the keyboard is inefficient, true, but it's deeply, deeply entrenched. We can do a lot with better ergonomics, voice recognition, gestures, etc., but at some point people need to be able to use their computing devices to input large amounts of text without saying it out loud. Expecting those people to learn some new keyboard layout when there is an existing system that works fine and the vast majority are fluent with is a pretty high barrier to entry, especially if you're trying to sell a device that utilizes such a scheme.
Think about it: "Our new machine uses a much more efficient, much more ergonomic system of text entry that you should become as good at as the old system at after only a year or two of constant practice" is not a strong selling point.
The legacy layout of the keyboard is inefficient, true, but it's deeply, deeply entrenched.
Also, the inefficiency of qwerty is trivial enough that most characterizations of it fall into the category of urban legend. If looking to increase employee efficiency, keyboard layout shouldn't even be considered.
Here's a few examples of higher ROI projects:
Better file naming
Better folder organizations
Proper balance of utilization between popup menus, shortcuts, and toolbars
Training for specific software packages
Mice with more buttons and corresponding training
Mouse training and optimization of velocity/acceleration preferences
Reading (computer) glasses
Disable spell checking while authoring and instead use it only upon task completion
The list is endless. What it boils down to is, the difference in time required for a finger to move to a non-home-row key as compared to a home-row-key, is mind bogglingly trivial.
One more item for the list... Not authoring this post would have saved more time than would switching to dvorak.