I don't know what the correct word is, but Microsoft Word adjusts the spacing differently between letters than IBM Executive typewriters, according to this guy. As I understand what he is saying, each letter has its own width, while on the IBM Executive there were only 4 or so widths for letters.
http://www.hughhewitt.com/#postid876
BTW, I tried "To" and "Yo," the upper arm of the T and Y do NOT hang over the o. It looks like it because the T is just a tad narrower than the Y.
> ... the IBM Executive there were only 4 or so widths for letters.
That's not surprising. In real typography, including
computer typefaces, every glyph in the set can have
different metrics. That gets complicated to compute.
IBM would want to have kept it manageable.
People collect and restore these old machines. It's
interesting that so far, no one has apparently even
tried to recreate a Killian memo on a typewriter.
> BTW, I tried "To" and "Yo," ...
Roger that. Note that I am not saying the kerning
issue is meritless, just that it may be weak.
---BTW, I tried "To" and "Yo," the upper arm of the T and Y do NOT hang over the o. It looks like it because the T is just a tad narrower than the Y. ---
I assume you're talking about MS Word. Try typing the Yo To in 24pt type so you can see it clearly then go to print preview. I think you'll see the o has visably jumped over much closer to the T. The Yo remain a little further apart.