QWERTY vs Dvorak vs Colemak — Does Keyboard Layout Actually Make You Type Faster?

Would switching layouts actually make you faster?

A claim keeps circulating online: "QWERTY is a bad layout, switch to Dvorak or Colemak and you'll type twice as fast." Half of that claim holds up on paper. In practice, it's a lot less clear-cut — especially if most of what you type isn't English.

Let's look at how each layout came to exist, what the actual research found, and whether switching is worth it at all.

Where QWERTY came from

Christopher Latham Sholes designed the QWERTY layout in the 1870s for the first commercial typewriters. The commonly repeated explanation is that letter placement was chosen to separate frequently-paired letters and reduce mechanical typebar jams — though historians still debate this account, and some consider it an oversimplified myth rather than settled fact.

Whatever the original reason, the outcome was that many of the most-used English letters ended up off the home row, meaning fingers travel more than they strictly need to.

Dvorak — the first serious alternative

In 1936, August Dvorak and his brother-in-law William Dealey patented a new layout (U.S. Patent No. 2,040,248) as an alternative to QWERTY. Dvorak, an education professor at the University of Washington, analyzed English letter frequency and placed the most common letters on the home row.

In 1982, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) officially recognized Dvorak as an alternate standard alongside QWERTY. It never achieved meaningful adoption regardless.

Colemak — a gentler 2006 alternative

Dvorak's biggest drawback is that it changes over 30 key positions from QWERTY, meaning you're essentially relearning from scratch. Shai Coleman created Colemak in 2006 to solve exactly that: it changes only 17 keys, keeps common shortcuts like Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V in place, while still pushing home-row usage even higher than Dvorak.

The three layouts, side by side

Those numbers alone look convincing — if home row usage roughly doubles or triples, speed should follow. Real-world results are messier.

What the actual research shows

Here's the important nuance. Early studies from the 1940s, run under U.S. Navy sponsorship, showed strong gains for Dvorak — but Dvorak himself oversaw that research, which has made its objectivity a subject of ongoing skepticism.

A later, independent study led by Earle Strong in 1956 painted a different picture: typists already fluent in QWERTY who were retrained on Dvorak eventually recovered their old speed, but didn't consistently surpass it. In other words, the weeks and months spent relearning weren't paid back with a clear speed premium.

Modern comparisons tend to land in the same place: some report a 5-10% difference (roughly 3-5 WPM at a 50 WPM baseline), but that gap tracks more with how much someone practices than with the layout itself.

Why this matters differently outside English

Both Dvorak and Colemak were optimized using English letter and bigram frequency — they're built to make combinations like "the," "and," and "ing" faster to type.

Any other language has a different letter distribution, and layouts optimized specifically for it are the exception, not the rule — there's no widely recognized, frequency-optimized Dvorak or Colemak variant for most non-English languages, including Uzbek. So if most of your typing happens in a language other than English, there's no verified benefit to switching, because the layout wasn't built with your language's letter frequencies in mind.

So what actually raises your speed

If real speed is the goal, three things do more than switching layouts ever will:

1. Learn touch typing — typing with all ten fingers without looking at the keyboard. This is the skill that gets you to 60-100+ WPM, on QWERTY or otherwise. See the full touch typing guide.
2. Practice consistently and with purpose — 15-20 minutes a day, targeting your actual weak spots rather than random typing. Plan in the keyboard drills guide.
3. Prioritize accuracy over speed — time spent correcting mistakes costs you more net WPM than any layout difference ever will.

Combined, these three produce real, measurable gains on any layout — unlike a Dvorak or Colemak switch.

If you still want to try it

Curiosity is fine, especially if you type mostly in English. On Windows, you can add Dvorak or Colemak from Language & keyboard settings; on macOS, from System Settings → Keyboard → Input Sources. No need to replace your physical keyboard — the key mapping changes in software.

Just know the relearning period runs several weeks, and your speed will drop noticeably during it.

Frequently asked questions

What is Dvorak?

Dvorak is a keyboard layout patented in 1936 by August Dvorak and William Dealey that places the most commonly used English letters on the home row to reduce finger movement.

What is Colemak?

Colemak is an alternative layout created by Shai Coleman in 2006 that changes only 17 key positions from QWERTY, making it easier to learn than Dvorak.

Does switching layouts actually make you faster?

Not reliably. Independent research (notably Strong, 1956) found that retrained typists recovered their prior speed but didn't consistently exceed it. Real gains track more with total practice time than with the layout itself.

Which layout is best if I don't type mostly in English?

QWERTY. Dvorak and Colemak are optimized for English letter frequency, and there's no widely recognized optimized variant for most other languages. Staying on QWERTY and investing in touch typing and consistent practice pays off more.

How do I switch layouts?

Add it through your OS's keyboard settings on Windows or macOS — no physical keyboard change required.

What to actually do

If your goal is typing faster in real life, layout choice isn't where the time should go. Stay on QWERTY, learn touch typing, and practice with purpose for 15-20 minutes a day.

Take the 10-second test to see where you stand, then read what WPM means and how to raise it. Technique and consistency make you faster — not the layout.