Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| 07-11-2009 07:05 AM |
| Unregistered |
The ongoing unwinnable war
I have a G1 (with a capacitive touchscreen) and my brother has a LG KP500 (with a resistive touchscreen). I have used his phone a few times and it has a few scratches on the screen, broken pressure points, is way less accurate than my phone (except when using a stylus, which I actually quite like) and is harder to use. I think that unless you live somewhere where you need to wear gloves all the time, a capactive touch screen is better
|
| 04-10-2009 12:01 PM |
| Unregistered |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Low prices. Have you been following the news?
Wrong. Gloves are bad on capacitive and resistive. Forget touch, buttons are the way. One handed simple operation that doesn't require you to hold the thing in front of your face.
|
You are wrong!!! Gloves are friendly only with RESISTIVE touch screens, not with capacitive. Because capacitive touch screens work by sensing the electrical properties of the human body, alt/ly resistive are using electrical layers so when you press the screen those layers are coming into contact which creates an electrical connection.
|
| 27-09-2009 10:36 PM |
| Unregistered |
What about my astronomy star chart software? Where I need to click on one star, of ten that lay inside of a square centimeter? How exactly do you propose to implement that UI on a capacitive screen? Will you come up with some kind of mind reading interface where the phone will read my mind to know which of the ten stars I meant?
|
| 08-09-2009 07:23 PM |
| dupersuper |
besides being more sensitive to touch, the other advantage is that it allow more light to pass through.
but the iphone is such a good touchscreen not solely due to its capacitive screen.
the scratch proof glass coating and the touch optimized os also contribute to the great user experience.
and capacitive screen allows multitouch which allows faster and more intuitive text entry (you don't have to lift your finger before typing the next letter)
like some have commented, i feel nokia didn't use capacitive simply because they are cheapskates trying to save a buck.
and even though they started using it on the x6, its still a long way to go to optimize s60 for touch. it only took them how long to realise people want kinetic scrolling?
|
| 08-09-2009 03:23 AM |
| Mods |
Its about 'Mindset' what you think; and what you require
Hi,
I don't remember reading a entire post about something before, but I just went thru all 4 pages of this Resistive vs Capacitive Touchscreen post.
The reason for that is that I was thinking if I should give up my N95 and buy the 5800 instead?
Touch screen has always fascinated me, but I think I would lookout more for the features a device offers... I understand today's devices offer very fancy ways of scrolling, zooming in/out, flipping etc. with ur hands/stylus and everyone gets impressed cus its a new tech not seen in the past.
So while I was comparing my N95's features with that of the 5800, I didn't find the 5800 lacking too much, except the camera being 3MP as compared to 5MP on the N95. But I think I read that both devices record video @ 30fps, so maybe its not much different in that sense. I'm not sure about the image quality though. But you cannot expect a mobile phone's integrated camera to be as good as the cameras available today.. right? It's just that they are handy; u don't have to carry a separate device in everyday life.
I need a little advice on this:
Well we know that touch-screen phones sound like delicate devices; very fragile as compared to the ones with physical keypads. So maybe they are more prone to damage and may render a device useless.
If a phone with a physical keypad falls, it's body might get damaged, screen might get scratched etc, but atleast u can still use/access it's features (unless the camera lens gets damaged) thru the physical keypad.
But what if a touch-screen phone slips out of ur hand or pocket.. ?? won't it be more likely to suffer greater as compared to the one with a physical keypad?
As there are no physical keys, a damage to the screen means that not only would the display suffer (as would be the case with phones with physical keypad) but your only interface with the phone might be disfunctional to.
So that's why I think I'd prefer I device not has a touchscreen but also offers a keypad for interacting with the phone so atleast its not completely 'interface-less'. I might not have think too much if the 5800 had some physical keypad too (maybe sliding, etc.)
And also I think it might be easier to write with a single-hand on a phone with a physical keypad as compared to a touchscreen one.
But in the price range of 5800, I think it's a very feature rich phone? Others just cost too much.
A couple of other devices inline with 5800 and within the same price range, I think are the 5530 XpressMusic which is also a touch-screen only and 5730 XpressMusic; but it's not touch-screen and has 2 Keyboards instead - but I just quoted it here inline with 5800 cus of its features, I think they are very similar.
Last but not the least, not everyone I think would be willing to spend too much on a gadget just because its so fancy and trendy. It's expected to be replaced with something better are fancier in the future anyways. So thats what makes 5800 even more attractive as its not that expensive as compared to other touchscreen phones out there in the market today.
Any thoughts/comments on what I just wrote?
Thanks.
|
| 19-08-2009 06:26 PM |
| Unregistered |
I like the N97
Yeah its resistive and it works fine with me, the main problem I have with is the constant need to wipe with touch screens so that's why I have made the most of the hard buttoned keypad... Means I can pause the movie I'm watching send a text and then continue watching withought having to get my microfibre cloth out and remove fingermarks from the screen!
Also when I'm taking notes (in short hand) with the handwriting (stylus)
I guess it just feels more comfortable (like a pen and pad) rather than thumb wrestling myself.
|
| 11-08-2009 11:17 PM |
| Unregistered |
Miss
you have all forgotten that women use mobile phones and the resistive screen is better as we have nails, I boughtgt a samsung toco and never used it i now have a nokia 5800 and its great I also like the HTC pro 2 but it cost too much, Nicola
|
| 22-07-2009 10:03 PM |
| Unregistered |
There is NO panacea...
The bottom line is "CHOICE", if it (whatever device you chose) works for you (Cost, features, function or some combination thereof, etc), then that's all that matters...
|
| 11-07-2009 08:04 AM |
| Unregistered |
touchscreens
I have long nails as a female, and would find the capacitive touchscreen practically impossible to use. I will buy an iphone, when and if, they offer a resistive touchscreen. Until then, I will stick with Nokia and will probably get the N97 with its resistive touchscreen!
|
| 24-06-2009 12:50 AM |
| Unregistered |
i heard that the nokia 5800 is going to put a capacitive screen on it instead of the resistive one it already has to compete with the iphone
|
| 14-05-2009 12:41 PM |
| Unregistered |
Facts
Facts about the two touch technologies:
Resistive is less durable, it is a mechanical interface, i.e. pressing the top surface to make contact with bottom surface. It works with gloves. less light transmission than capacitive. I am on my second RT on SE960i - first one died completely, second is already fogging - less than one year.
The capacitive you are discussing here is actually "projected capacitive", this is a different technology than standard capacitive. It is very durable as the conductive coatings are all on the rear of the glass and are therefore not suject to wear and tear. I'm not sure what the substrate used is on this phone but I think it is glass and therefore as durable as normal glass - very hard to scratch. Some PC touchscreens work with gloves, but need to be calibrated with the glove on - this leads to touches being activated prior to an ungloved finger touching the screen.
I work with touch screens - my opinion for what it's worth - go for capacitive - resistive is the poor boy!
|
| 11-05-2009 01:25 PM |
| Unregistered |
Phone features more important than marginal difference in touch tech
Hi, I don't usually post on these things but it is starting to get a bit annoying all this capacitive/resistive stuff.
I will be honest I am looking at getting the N97 but this was not before I have looked and looked for something better.
My criteria is, Wi fi, GPS, compass, GOOD video recording and photos, physical QWERTY keyboard, Facebook, Picasa and good email access for several accounts, plenty of room for music and vids, Sat Nav, touch screen a bonus for moving around web and pictures etc.
I have been eagerly awaiting the the N97 but it is not a foregone conclusion. I have been waiting and hoping for something that would sway me away from it, but no, nothing has come along.
I have tried out the Iphone and while the glam appeal of a nice soft touch screen is nice it soon wears off when you realise how limited the iphone actually is. I was hoping I would be impressed by the Iphone but sadly found it lacking. I liked the touch screen for scrolling around lovely, but when you try and get more accurate I was not impressed. Using a screen keyboard is just not for me either. I found it was fairly difficult typing fast without the wrong keys being selected. (maybe this would improve with use?) However the fact remains it is a flat surface so you do not get that feel of a keypad which is so useful when typing on any style keyboard.
I currently use a N95 8gb and have found the camera and Video great. I know it is only 5mp but the pictures show on a full screen well and the video does not stutter or pixelate and holds up well on a full size screen. I am not a Nokia fanboy or any fanboy for that matter, I have used all sorts of phones in the past, SE, Samsung, Nokia, Iphone, Blackberry etc. All I am a fan of is a device which will do all (or as much as possible) of the things I need and would use it for.
After all this talk about the resistive screens being no good I went in search of the 5800 to try out. I was surprisingly pleased with the way it worked. Again it baffles me a bit as to why people are so worried about having to press slightly harder on a screen to make it register when we all use computer keyboards, phone pads, lift buttons etc etc. we all seem to be able to push these buttons a lot harder than needed for any touchscreen!
Anyway my whole point here is I am more interested in the phones features and what it can do. At present the N97 has the best feature list for me (this wont be the case for all I am sure) and I would be considering it if it was either capacitive or resistive. The other features are not matched elsewhere.
If a phone comes out or is announced before that can handle all the functions of the N97 then that will be in the running. not because I have to press slightly softer or harder on the screen!
|
| 11-05-2009 01:06 PM |
| Unregistered |
[The example is often given of Nokia choosing to use resistive touch screens on the 7710, the 5800 XpressMusic and the N97 because they're Finnish, where it's very cold and people wear gloves, therefore they have to use a screen tech which works with gloved hands. This is all very cute but doesn't really beat scrutiny. Using even a resistive screen with outdoor-gloved hands is just about impossible.]
People wearing gloves may not be able to use their fingers, but they are perfectly capable of using a stylus, thus making a resistive touhscreen preferable.
|
| 18-04-2009 10:07 AM |
| roger347 |
There is rumor that Nokia 5800 May Soon Get New Capacitive Touchscreen... i know one website that says so...
so wait and watch....
|
| 25-03-2009 04:16 PM |
| skelldude |
""But you are clearly a current device fanboy - whatever you have is the best out."
Doesn't that apply to most people ? After all, if it wasn't the best choice, why would I buy it  "
Finally someone with common sense, thanks Zubar (Y)"
just because its the best phone out in someones opinion (some people might disagree so dont say it as if its fact) doesnt mean it has everything someone needs. no phone that i know has everything i want so i go for what has most and what is at a reasonable price. i have the money for an iphone (i have tried it and did like it ) but even though i have the money i still wont buy one because i wouldnt pay £400 or above for a phone unless it had every single thing i wanted (even take place of my laptop). so even if somethings the best out in someones opinion (maybe most people i dont know and dont care) doesnt mean its the best choice for example i have a nokia 5800 because it has good speakers. if the iphone had speakers as good as the nokia 5800 i might consider but still wouldnt definately buy it because i dont like that apple like to control everything. ps i am not a nokia fanboy before anyone says so because i have also had samsungs, sony ericssons, motorola (only one and that was the rzr v3i and kept crashing so im never going back to them) and htc.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:56 AM.
|
|
