Bernand & Cora
-
crackgmat007
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:690
B - coz technological advances had no impact in changing the key board style because of inheretence of old key board.
-
gmatmachoman
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2326
- Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
- Thanked: 173 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:710
-
2010gmat
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 371
- Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
- Thanked: 27 times
- GMAT Score:740
IMO A,
only A counters the point of tech advancements made by Bernand. If people who purchase keyboards have learnt typing on standard keyboard then it would not make sense to change the layout.
only A counters the point of tech advancements made by Bernand. If people who purchase keyboards have learnt typing on standard keyboard then it would not make sense to change the layout.
-
ananda271181
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:46 pm
Can't be C because Cora herself has refuted the logic that the original layout was for speed. That leaves us with A & B, and both give an explanation. However, A is stronger, and hence I will go with A.uptowngirl92 wrote:Bernand: For which language, and thus which frequency distribution of letters and letter sequences, was the standard typewriter keyboard designed?
Bernand To ask this question, you must be making a mistaken assumption: that typing speed was to be maximized. The real danger with early typewriters was that operators would hit successive keys too quickly, thereby crashing typebars into each other, bending connecting wires and so on. So the idea was to slow the operator down by making the most common letter sequences awkward to type.
Bernand: This is surely not right! These technological limitations have long since vanished, yet the keyboard is still as it was then.
Which one of the following, if true, could be used by Cora to counter Bernard�s rejection of her explanation?
(A) Typewriters and word-processing equipment are typically sold to people who have learned to use the standard keyboard and who, therefore, demand it in equipment they buy.
(B) Typewriters have been superseded in most offices by word-processing equipment, which has inherited the standard keyboard from typewriters.
(C) The standard keyboard allows skilled operators to achiever considerable typing speeds, thought it makes acquiring such skills relatively difficult.
(D) A person who has learned one keyboard layout can readily learn to use a second one in place of the first, but only with difficulty learn to use a second one alongside the first.
(E) It is now possible to construct typewriter and word-processing equipment in which a single keyboard can accommodate two or even more different keyboard layouts, each accessible to the operator at will.
Could somebody please post the OA?
Ananda Chakraborty
-
sunnyjohn
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 344
- Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:40 am
- Thanked: 28 times
- Followed by:3 members
- GMAT Score:700
B: Asked Q
C: replied : ur assumption is wrong.
in order to reduce wear and tear, It was made like that, although it will reduce the typing speed.
B: those disadvantage has been over come now, so still the design is still same ?
Or why cant be change the design to get a higher typing speed?
C: ??
A: people who know typing demand the keyboard in equipment they buy. :--> They demand the keyboard.
B: Computer has replaced type writer and its keyboard is like type writer :--> is this the reason why we can not change the keyboard design?
C: The existing keyboard allows skilled operators to get good speed, though it little difficult :-->
D: A person can learn the new design : going with Bernard, so means refuting his own argument.
E: What is possible now is out of scope.
A and C are clear winner here.
Now in A:
they said proficient ppl demand keyboard in the equipment they buy :--> it doesn't deal with argument directly.
one can argue that since demand is there so we don't need to change the design.
If we change the design, it can effect the demand since only proficient ppl are demanding the keyboard.
C: says typing speed can be good on traditional key board, but this is hard to achieve.
So actually we can say that, then its better to change it to simple.
I think answer is A.
C: replied : ur assumption is wrong.
in order to reduce wear and tear, It was made like that, although it will reduce the typing speed.
B: those disadvantage has been over come now, so still the design is still same ?
Or why cant be change the design to get a higher typing speed?
C: ??
A: people who know typing demand the keyboard in equipment they buy. :--> They demand the keyboard.
B: Computer has replaced type writer and its keyboard is like type writer :--> is this the reason why we can not change the keyboard design?
C: The existing keyboard allows skilled operators to get good speed, though it little difficult :-->
D: A person can learn the new design : going with Bernard, so means refuting his own argument.
E: What is possible now is out of scope.
A and C are clear winner here.
Now in A:
they said proficient ppl demand keyboard in the equipment they buy :--> it doesn't deal with argument directly.
one can argue that since demand is there so we don't need to change the design.
If we change the design, it can effect the demand since only proficient ppl are demanding the keyboard.
C: says typing speed can be good on traditional key board, but this is hard to achieve.
So actually we can say that, then its better to change it to simple.
I think answer is A.
