how this works, why it doesn't compete w/ qwerty (Score 1)

Fitt's law, the law this keyboard layout is based on, is from human factors. Like most of the stuff in human factors, it's common sense made difficult. Basically what it says is that the speed and accuracy of hitting a "target" (key) are related to how big and how close the target is. Shocking, huh?

They naturally presumed that you'd hit the spacebar more often than any other key, so that became the center. Frequently pressed keys are arranged close to the center to minimize the distance your stylus travels to hit them. What they're talking about when they call it "molecular" is that letters which are hit frequently one after another are placed closer together, and that they considered all the two-letter combinations in english to see which were the most important groupings.

You guys are getting the wrong idea when you talk about replacing qwerty with this. The major difference, obviously, is that we have many fingers but only one stylus. This is also why a chord system doesn't enter the picture here. The developers are trying to increase the speed of entry with just a stylus. (Fitt's law still applies to fingered systems, but it's greatly complicated.)

Personally, I'd like to see a PDA which is intended for two-handed use, something shaped more or less like an N64 controller, but with the buttons on the underside, and for fingers not thumbs. It'd be bigger, but more useful.

For data entry, voice is another option, but I'd actually rather type than speak. Besides all the technical difficulties in voice recognition, I think I'd prefer the privacy of typing in the many situations where I don't want my stored information to be public. (plus, I'd feel pretty stupid dictating to a PDA in an office cube.)

I hope I'm not just stating the blatantly obvious.