Discussion about
Capacitive or Resistive?
Which one do you like and why? Or, why do you hate the opposing one?
The thing that I like with resistive screens that capacitive will never give me is that I can rest my finger on the screen and vary the resistance I'm giving to activate different things on the screen. I am also able to use my finger nail to pin point very thiny things on the screen. I have become very accturate at this over the years. Now with capacitive, I find myself pressing things I didn't mean to press all the time. It is very annoying and I wish that we didn't have to transition away from such a useful technology. Why can't we have dual technology resistive/capacitive screens? I know it's possible.
Capacitive screens can actually be programmed to be used with gloves, so long as the gloves aren't so thick that they block all of your finger's capacitance. If we look at touchscreen technology used in more "hazardous" environments, advanced capacitive screens (like those done by Occular LCD) can be switched to a "glove mode" wherein the touchscreen has a much higher threshold for changes in its membrane.
I think the real benefit of capacitive over resistive is that the former can use stronger materials like glass and lexan for its top most protective screen. Resistive, at this point will always need some sort of flexible surface. Of course, just because a material is hardened doesn't make it intrinsically more durable. Durability also takes the form of flexibility and thats where resistive maintains a market (its also cheaper). The Center for Flexible displays in Arizona has screens that bend and fold- certainly a cool aspect in its own right.
Accuracy wise, both technologies are greatly enhanced by software. If you ever have to click on a tiny button or link or whatever, then the touchscreen is being implemented wrong. I would advise people not to confuse accuracy of a technology with a bad interface.
I've seen some interesting touchscreen tech and suffice to say we are barely on the cusp of its usability. One example I saw was a capacitive touchscreen programed to detect as the finger neared the screen and gradually zoomed-in in an unobtrusive manner.
At this point, it's really hard to have a preference when each type is so strongly linked to different operating systems and user experiences.
Might some of our views have changed if the iPhone was resistive? I'm not saying, I'm just saying.
I think the real benefit of capacitive over resistive is that the former can use stronger materials like glass and lexan for its top most protective screen. Resistive, at this point will always need some sort of flexible surface. Of course, just because a material is hardened doesn't make it intrinsically more durable. Durability also takes the form of flexibility and thats where resistive maintains a market (its also cheaper). The Center for Flexible displays in Arizona has screens that bend and fold- certainly a cool aspect in its own right.
Accuracy wise, both technologies are greatly enhanced by software. If you ever have to click on a tiny button or link or whatever, then the touchscreen is being implemented wrong. I would advise people not to confuse accuracy of a technology with a bad interface.
I've seen some interesting touchscreen tech and suffice to say we are barely on the cusp of its usability. One example I saw was a capacitive touchscreen programed to detect as the finger neared the screen and gradually zoomed-in in an unobtrusive manner.
At this point, it's really hard to have a preference when each type is so strongly linked to different operating systems and user experiences.
Might some of our views have changed if the iPhone was resistive? I'm not saying, I'm just saying.
I hate resistive. It's such a pain to have to click on small icons. I tend to touch everything around except the button I am trying to press unless I pull up the stylus which I prefer not to do.
I have tried both types of screens. I noticed capacitive to be much more touch friendly because of two reasons:
1 - You don't have to push down so hard on the screen for it to register.
2 - It's way more precise and you always seem to touch exactly where you want.
I have tried both types of screens. I noticed capacitive to be much more touch friendly because of two reasons:
1 - You don't have to push down so hard on the screen for it to register.
2 - It's way more precise and you always seem to touch exactly where you want.
Capacitive is not precise at all. The actual screen on capacitive devices has zero affect on accuracy and precision. It is the software built into the OS that helps guesstimate what the user is trying to tap. The iPhone has a whole lot of software to compensate for the end users' horrible accuracy at hitting the correct letter, button, etc. If you miss the letter T on the virtual keyboard when you're trying to type the word ' fruit,' it will recognize this and autocorrect it for you.
Apple says to type away blindly without trying to hit the correct letter, and rather to trust the iPhone software to fix your mistakes. Worth repeating: to fix your mistakes. Capacitive users are usually inaccurate. Software is necessary to compensate.
Resistive touch screens have zero connection with small icons. That is the software's fault, or the OS, specifically. For example, if you use the stock Windows Mobile OS, yeah, it's horrible to use the small icons and scroll bars. However, there are many many software tweaks for this. Point in case: the resistive technology has zero connection to the smallness of the aspects of the OS.
On my Xperia X1a running TouchFLO 3D, I've upped the sensitivity to the maximum allowed for touch input on its resistive screen, and a lot of times it feels almost as if I'm using a capacitive screen. It's just that sensitive. And the buttons are very finger friendly in the custom ROM I flashed to the device. Resistive is 100% a nonissue in this case.
Apple says to type away blindly without trying to hit the correct letter, and rather to trust the iPhone software to fix your mistakes. Worth repeating: to fix your mistakes. Capacitive users are usually inaccurate. Software is necessary to compensate.
Resistive touch screens have zero connection with small icons. That is the software's fault, or the OS, specifically. For example, if you use the stock Windows Mobile OS, yeah, it's horrible to use the small icons and scroll bars. However, there are many many software tweaks for this. Point in case: the resistive technology has zero connection to the smallness of the aspects of the OS.
On my Xperia X1a running TouchFLO 3D, I've upped the sensitivity to the maximum allowed for touch input on its resistive screen, and a lot of times it feels almost as if I'm using a capacitive screen. It's just that sensitive. And the buttons are very finger friendly in the custom ROM I flashed to the device. Resistive is 100% a nonissue in this case.
Yes. I have tried both.
Capacitive screens have high sensitivity, but low resolution. Resistive screens have medium sensitivity with high resolution. But resistive screens are much better than they used to be.
When browsing on my N810 I couldn't imagine being able to click links only with a finger. It would be almost impossible to hit such a small target without using the stylus.
Capacitive screens have high sensitivity, but low resolution. Resistive screens have medium sensitivity with high resolution. But resistive screens are much better than they used to be.
When browsing on my N810 I couldn't imagine being able to click links only with a finger. It would be almost impossible to hit such a small target without using the stylus.
Uh, dude, whether the screen is resistive or capacitive has absolutely no connection to the resolution of the screen.
I owned an n800 (same screen), and when i purchased an iphone (first gen) it was a world of difference in sensetivity.
Always had a hard time using my finger on most things, and yes you would need your stylus to click links...
But on the iPhone and Android ... using your finger for such links works great. And for the itty bitty ones it's a quick pinch zoom and it's a nice big link.
Always had a hard time using my finger on most things, and yes you would need your stylus to click links...
But on the iPhone and Android ... using your finger for such links works great. And for the itty bitty ones it's a quick pinch zoom and it's a nice big link.
I agree with you. I don't hate resistive touch screens either and I think that they are just as responsive to their respective input method as capacitive. My only argument against resistive is that I think there is more room for error in creating that input. When you touch a capacitive screen I would say that almost one hundred percent of the time it responds almost immediately, giving room for lag and such not caused by the screen but by hardware. On the other hand with receptive you may try to produce the input that screen needs to respond to with no success. It is very easy to produce touch input. Pressure has a much larger chance for error I feel. How much pressure becomes a question. Correct me if I'm wrong, but with any touch you are creating pressure there . Granted a very small amount, but pressure non the less. So, the needed pressure for that receptive screen is somewhere between that touch and beating your screen half to death with your fist, which at times with some older capacitive screens it feels like I am doing.
They both have their own advantages. I loved the accuracy of my receptive screen when I had one. When ever I wanted I could easily sketch a design on it and send it to who ever I wanted. Hand writing recognition was especially handy and is the reason that I know the single stroke shorthand input that devices like palm used to this day. I would love to HTCs patent of a capacitive stylus come to fruition. Well I hate the stylus sometimes there ae other times when it is very useful.
They both have their own advantages. I loved the accuracy of my receptive screen when I had one. When ever I wanted I could easily sketch a design on it and send it to who ever I wanted. Hand writing recognition was especially handy and is the reason that I know the single stroke shorthand input that devices like palm used to this day. I would love to HTCs patent of a capacitive stylus come to fruition. Well I hate the stylus sometimes there ae other times when it is very useful.
