The article pointed out one glaring problem, one that was present with the Apple II (along with other microcomputers of the era): it could only display uppercase text. It got around that by displaying capital letters in inverse. A related problem was the limited display width. While a typed page is roughly 80 characters wide, the Apple II could only display 40 characters per line. Thankfully the Apple II was expandable. 80 column cards and cards that displayed lowercase text were created, but Apple didn't introduce such capabilities themselves until the Apple IIe. Even then you needed to buy their 80 column card (but at least that standardized things).
Another hitch was actually typing lowercase letters. You needed to do a shift-key modification for applications to register the shift-key being pressed when a letter was typed. Again, Apple didn't standardize this until the Apple IIe.
Of course, those weren't the only issues. Computerization may have been taking over the world, but so were reams of paper. While most of those additional reams of paper were being generated by computers, much of that paperwork existed before. Forms, in particular, almost necessitated the use of a typewriter. While I would hate to line up forms in a typewriter, such feats were nearly impossible with printers.
So I guess you're right in some circumstances: computers were not a good experience. That doesn't negate the times when they offered a far better experience. Whether you're writing memos or novels, the ability to go back and edit text outweighs the drawbacks (never mind all of the advancements that were just around the corner). But a blanket ban on typewriters was myopic.
[0] https://archive.org/details/apple-writer-a2-v1.1-ph/componen...
Put another way, I grew up with those 8-bit machines. I preferred using those 8-bit machines for writing since it was easier to edit documents, which was important because I was young and learning to type (along with learning spelling, grammar, etc.). Using a typewriter wouldn't so much be an exercise in frustration as it would be one of mental anguish. On top of that, I wouldn't have the expectation of screen text mapping reasonably well to the printed page.
On the other hand, people who had experience with typewriters (or even 80-column terminals) would have that expectation. And they would be bumping into that mismatch whenever they were dealing with indenting or centering or lists or any number of other layout options. They would also be more accustomed to the writing/editing process with a typewriter, so they would be less inclined to view it as problematic. The flip side is that they would be unaccustomed to the writing/editing process on a computer, so they would be more inclined to view those quirks as problematic. On top of that, the process of using a word processor would be completely different from using a typewriter. Think of over-typing: (fake) bold, underlining, and so on. It is less labor intensive to do on a computer, but the average secretary would have trouble seeing that when they have to navigate the then cryptic user interfaces of software.
Proving that something is possible probably wasn't the issue here. Proving that something is better, which isn't hard to do even considering the primitive word processing software for the Apple II of that era, isn't the issue here. Dealing with the expectations of people is.
Apple was an upstart company in its day, the anti-IBM, creative, expressive, rebellious. The memo may have been driving a point, but it was mostly just going for a laugh.
Look at how "effective immediately" is underlined, and how inconsistent the letterforms are.
Also, 1980 is 5 years before the Apple LaserWriter, 11 years before TrueType, and 15+ years before "grunge" fonts were a thing.
Some daisy wheel drivers would vary the spacing to "kern" the letters, but some wouldn't. If they didn't, what you got looked basically exactly like what you'd get on a typewriter.
On the other hand, it looks like the output of a typewriter (including individual variation amongst typed letters as the typewriter has small variations in the amount of ink that's used for each strike), and if the date on the letter is to be believed (1981) then using a typewriter would have been typical for the time.
Circa '81 or so they had a PDP-8/A with a printing terminal and two VT-61s which were unusual in that they had a block mode, though we ran a multiuser BASIC system that didn't take advantage of it until I looked up in the manual how to put it into block mode.
My understanding was that this system was designed for word processing at small newspapers where it would be used to do all the typesetting as well as incorporating classified ads and that a newspaper had ordered it and never taken delivery which was why we got a deal on it. It looked a lot like the "DEC Word Processor" in the article, particularly the dual disk drive.
The PDP-8/A had 32k words of 12 bits each, but regular pointers where 12 bits so it had a rather ugly scheme to access multiple pages of 4k words. We had the Crowther & Woods Adventure and a BASIC interpreter that could be used in single-user mode with the printing terminal and we could also boot it up with a three-user BASIC.
Years later my school got a VAX-11/730 and the PDP-8 was donated to the computer club that was advised by our new physics teacher and I tried plugging in one of the VT-61s into the same current loop plug that the printing terminal was plugged into and it caught on fire because of the dust inside, we cleaned the other one out good and managed to get it running again.
Given that the Apple ][+ had 64k of RAM addressable with 16 bit pointers it was probably a better machine than the 8/A overall, but the terminals for the 8/A were 80 columns whereas the ][ came with only a 40 column screen although 80 column cards for it were not unusual and when Apple made the late step of ASICizing the ][ they eventually built in an 80 column VDC.
ginko•7mo ago
I guess I'm living in a particular professional niche but I haven't seen a typewriter in ages. Let alone seen anyone using one.
loloquwowndueo•7mo ago
Yet they are still around and not obsolete.
ChrisMarshallNY•7mo ago
They live there.
jrajav•7mo ago
loeg•7mo ago
ghaff•7mo ago
As a patient much better. No more faxing lab work to the lab and it's back in hours.
kevin_thibedeau•7mo ago
Legend2440•7mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Signatures_in_Globa...
zabzonk•7mo ago
drob518•7mo ago
zabzonk•7mo ago
jdougan•7mo ago
paxys•7mo ago
zaphirplane•7mo ago
ben_w•7mo ago
tempodox•7mo ago
tptacek•7mo ago
throwanem•7mo ago
opless•7mo ago
throwanem•7mo ago
Of course we are deep into the realm of movie plots already, where we've fantasized a superstate-or superhuman-level adversary still somehow capable of being defeated by "going crude." But if that's where we're going to hang out, why half-ass it?
II2II•7mo ago
... you would be shocked by how much could be surveilled back then. Pretty much any voice communicated were sent in the clear. It didn't much matter whether it was sent over wire or over the air. Snail mail was virtually always sent as clear text. Even digital communications were rarely encrypted. Even ignoring the legality of it, few people had the creativity to envision a world of secure communications or wanted to expend their (limited) computing power on it. There were, of course, exceptions like the military.
throwanem•7mo ago
I really do grow frightened of people's reading comprehension on the internet, having observed a qualitative decline especially in the last twelve months. Granted, this seems more due to indolence than actual impairment, thus far at least, but atrophy must eventually tell.
3eb7988a1663•7mo ago
zb•7mo ago
beala•7mo ago
PopAlongKid•7mo ago
teeray•7mo ago
jethro_tell•7mo ago
alexjplant•7mo ago
Excepting niche cases (like filling out carbons in triplicate at car dealerships and such) typewriters are pretty anachronistic. It is, however, amusing that over the past decade as things have digitized fewer people seem to own printers. Without a printer a computer fails at the simple task that a typewriter is inherently designed for - putting words to paper. Anecdotally <50% of my friends have a printer in their home... I wonder how that compares to typewriter ownership 50 years ago?
Regardless it's pretty clear that the author of the site is a big typewriter fan hence their statement. I find it contrived, but hey, it takes all kinds to make the world go 'round.
KerrAvon•7mo ago
anyfoo•7mo ago
For example I sometimes (not always) like printing out papers to read them “offline”, or diagrams when I want to take notes on them.
I don’t miss dealing with paper because I had to.
int_19h•7mo ago