
OverType – The Over-the-Top Typewriter Simulator - henriquemaia
http://uniqcode.com/typewriter/
======
raldi
It's missing support for the way you used to get boldface on a typewriter:
Type a word, then go back and type it again.

This is why the source of manpages does boldface (and underlining) like that
-- it's from the days of lineprinter terminals!

For example, to write "hi" in bold, a manpage's source does this: h^Hhi^Hi ..
and to underline it: h^H_i^H_

Also, if you keep typing off the end of the page, it doesn't simulate what
would usually happen on a real typewriter: you'd get ink on the roller.

~~~
peterfirefly
No, that works fine.

I can't make the colour change work, though. I was looking forward to see if I
could make it type in part red, part black :)

~~~
raldi
I seem to be having the opposite experience as you; I can make text part red,
part black just fine.

~~~
peterfirefly
I misunderstood the instructions. I have to _hold_ the Esc key _down_ to type
red text (with a bit of black here and there at the top).

I'm pretty sure the old typewriter I played with as a child didn't have a
"shift" key for that but a toggle switch of some sort. I am also pretty sure
that I could type a lot faster on that than I can on this simulation. (I took
typewriting lessons at school as an elective.)

(I think it might have been an old Remington and I think my parents bought it
used.)

~~~
gchpaco
A real manual has better tactile feedback so you can know when it's safe to
hit keys without getting a jam, I think that's a lot of what was going on
here.

------
OliverJones
Wow. This old guy, who learned to type on a machine like that, sure has become
dependent on stuff like rollover and backspace. Humbling.

~~~
jerf
Don't be in such a hurry to second-guess your brain... it's very good at
optimization problems you don't even realize it's solving. If you're using the
correction buttons heavily, I'd suggest it's more likely because you're more
efficient using them than because of the intellectual slovenliness you seem to
so casually assume.

------
arocks
Another equally good simulator (built in Om, React):
[http://cmdrdats.github.io/undertype/](http://cmdrdats.github.io/undertype/)

~~~
forgotmypassw
That doesn't seem to work for me, the paper page is always blank.

------
chengiz
I started to learn typing as a kid on an old manual typewriter (didnt have the
patience to fully learn but that's not relevant). I do not remember the brand
but it was fricking heavy and solid and mechanical, not one of those
electrical lightweight types. The point is, this simulation is just not good.
You never missed that many keys. If you typed out an entire paragraph you
might lose a letter or two. It _NEVER_ happened this often. And yes, I was
banging on the keys. This is a simulation of a POS typewriter - just because
things are mechanical doesnt mean they suck.

------
DonHopkins

        *I 050 THE INFINITE NO. OF MONKEYS
    

Written by Bruce Tognazzini, this program was released by Apple Computer, Inc,
on the DOS 3.2 disk for the Apple II in June 1979. It ran under Integer BASIC,
and made use of some special tricks, which Tognazzini made available for
interested programmers to view, from within the program (notice the menu
choices at the start).

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfMDWhc_ohU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfMDWhc_ohU)

~~~
kyberias
Why do you mention this? It's related to typewriters but still...

------
sampl
If you like this, I made a something similar:
[http://typwrtr.com/](http://typwrtr.com/)

------
chrisan
Tom Hanks has an obsession with type writers and had an app made:
[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/hanx-
writer/id868326899?mt=8](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/hanx-
writer/id868326899?mt=8)

------
napsterbr
It stopped working after I pressed enter, didn't know if it was part of the
simulation.

Awesome work.

------
ricardobeat
I learned to type on a mechanical typewriter in the 90s, and if my memory
doesn't fail me could type at up to 80wpm, much faster than this simulation
allows.

------
massysett
Simulation of a crappy typewriter, sure. In the 1990s even a $100 typewriter
had a correction button, and in the years before that any office would buy a
decent model that had correction. This simulation also does not register keys
if you type too fast; no decent typewriter required you to type this slowly.

~~~
snogglethorpe
I had a mechanical typewriter I bought in the '80s, and it was pretty basic,
no real features at all, and the same classic type-bar mechanism that would
jam if you pushed it too hard... but I rather liked it. Lots of typewriters of
that class were very nice well-built reliable machines.

I think it's unfair to label them as "crappy typewriters," because they
weren't.

I will note that my actual typewriter was _much_ less annoying than this
simulator, because there was a lot more feedback from the physical mechanism,
both by touch—the keys were directly connected to the type bars, and one could
feel their momentum and how hard they hit the paper—and sound. One could
relatively easily judge if you were pushing the mechanism too hard (and adjust
accordingly), how evenly you were typing, etc. Using this feedback, one could
easily get into a nice typing rhythm and type pretty quickly with a decently
low error rate (much faster and more accurately than this simulator allows).

[Certainly as typewriter manufacturers at the very end of the typewriter era
began to be aware of the threat of computers, and started employ some of the
same technology, there were a lot of features added to try and compete.]

~~~
Sharlin
At least I'm fairly sure that no non-crap typewriter would skip characters if
you try to type at any speed that's not glacially slow (basically normal
touch-typing is impossible with this simulator.)

~~~
kpil
I think it more or less matches my old mechanical typewriter from early 80s.
Adjacent hammers can block each other without jamming when typing too fast.

