[martin_a]

> What's the better measure of typing speed

Full words correct with no typos.

If you want to measure this, you're interested in the combination of reading speed and muscle memory while typing. If you're making typos, your muscle memory is not good. Using a spell checker to automatically fix those words... Well, the number is not comparable, then.

[Jeff_Brown]

That feels pedantic to me. A more important, but also more difficult, measure would be of information conveyed, regardless of how it's accomplished.

A very effective friend of mine once said if your messages are perfect you're spending the oo much time on them.

[D13Fd]

It depends on the context. If you write for a living, then one relevant metric is how quickly you type with no errors (although perhaps a better metric would be how quickly you get error-free work product out, including revisions).

If you're talking about who can send text messages to another person faster, then the "typos included" metric makes more sense.

[Izkata]

> the oo much time

Was that intentional? Looks like the other two replies may have read right past that without noticing it...

[martin_a]

"Measuring typing speed" is just silly, if you ask me. For the reasons you already pointed out.

Typing speed is not about understanding information to its fullest, it's just a somewhat quirky metric for the speed of replication of words.

[jameshart]

How does ‘muscle memory’ apply to a brain computer interface?

[martin_a]

OP was talking about comparing typing speeds with his buddy, not the neural interface.