First, never do with a mouse what you can accomplish with a keyboard.
The idea that keyboarding is always faster than mousing is somewhere between “not well-supported by available evidence” and “simply a myth”.
I am a big fan of keyboard shortcuts. (We built accesskeys and other keyboard navigation into GreaterWrong.com, for example, and I do the same for every other site I design.) I set up many custom keyboard shortcuts on my workstation machines at home, and use tools like Quicksilver extensively.
But your injunction is far, far too strong. I respectfully suggest that you consult the HCI literature on this topic. Whether mouse-based or keyboard-based interaction is more efficient for any given task is a much more complex, and more interesting, question than you give it credit for.
I think this is definitely on the right track, but I’d modify it slightly, for two reasons.
First, keyboard shortcuts belong (as do many other “efficiency-enhancing” UI modifications/customizations) to that class of tricks wherein the barrier to adoption consists largely of “activation energy”—which here has two components: first, being aware of the existence of keyboard shortcuts, of ways to set up keyboard shortcuts, of where to find keyboard shortcuts, etc.; and second, the initial effort required (in some, though not all, cases) to set things up so that you can use keyboard shortcuts in any given case.
Second, you say:
… never do with a mouse what you can accomplish more efficiently with a keyboard.
This phrasing is unimpeachable and I have no quibble with it per se, but I worry that some folks will look at this sentence and instead see this:
… never do with a mouse what may be accomplished more efficiently with a keyboard.
… which is, of course, a seriously misleading idea.
So let me emphasize that in addition to “activation energy”, there are also very real interpersonal variations—in everything from cognitive styles to manual dexterity to available hardware to eyesight to software to typical task distribution, etc., etc., etc.—that make it impossible to make even very strong general (let alone universal!) statements about this. Again, it’s a question of emphasis:
“Never do with a mouse what you can accomplish more efficiently with a keyboard.”
And then—going back to the “activation energy” issue—I would add this corollary:
Familiarize yourself with your tools.[1] Be aware of how to quickly find keyboard shortcuts, where they exist in your software; and also be aware of how to customize your software (and what add-on software exists that lets you customize further) to add or modify keyboard shortcuts. Then, you can decide on a case-by-case (program-by-program, task-by-task, etc.) basis, whether it makes sense to use keyboard shortcuts in any given case.
[1] “Know your tools” is, of course, a much more generally useful maxim than just in this context.
The idea that keyboarding is always faster than mousing is somewhere between “not well-supported by available evidence” and “simply a myth”.
I am a big fan of keyboard shortcuts. (We built accesskeys and other keyboard navigation into GreaterWrong.com, for example, and I do the same for every other site I design.) I set up many custom keyboard shortcuts on my workstation machines at home, and use tools like Quicksilver extensively.
But your injunction is far, far too strong. I respectfully suggest that you consult the HCI literature on this topic. Whether mouse-based or keyboard-based interaction is more efficient for any given task is a much more complex, and more interesting, question than you give it credit for.
You’re completely right. I made a slight edit. I think the actionable piece of that injuction should be:
Everything you do automatically with a mouse, you should at least look for a way to do with a keyboard and try that way.
I think this is definitely on the right track, but I’d modify it slightly, for two reasons.
First, keyboard shortcuts belong (as do many other “efficiency-enhancing” UI modifications/customizations) to that class of tricks wherein the barrier to adoption consists largely of “activation energy”—which here has two components: first, being aware of the existence of keyboard shortcuts, of ways to set up keyboard shortcuts, of where to find keyboard shortcuts, etc.; and second, the initial effort required (in some, though not all, cases) to set things up so that you can use keyboard shortcuts in any given case.
Second, you say:
This phrasing is unimpeachable and I have no quibble with it per se, but I worry that some folks will look at this sentence and instead see this:
… which is, of course, a seriously misleading idea.
So let me emphasize that in addition to “activation energy”, there are also very real interpersonal variations—in everything from cognitive styles to manual dexterity to available hardware to eyesight to software to typical task distribution, etc., etc., etc.—that make it impossible to make even very strong general (let alone universal!) statements about this. Again, it’s a question of emphasis:
“Never do with a mouse what you can accomplish more efficiently with a keyboard.”
And then—going back to the “activation energy” issue—I would add this corollary:
Familiarize yourself with your tools.[1] Be aware of how to quickly find keyboard shortcuts, where they exist in your software; and also be aware of how to customize your software (and what add-on software exists that lets you customize further) to add or modify keyboard shortcuts. Then, you can decide on a case-by-case (program-by-program, task-by-task, etc.) basis, whether it makes sense to use keyboard shortcuts in any given case.
[1] “Know your tools” is, of course, a much more generally useful maxim than just in this context.