Anyone want to test your iPad?

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Tuesday, April 6th, 2010 12:31pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter Psychologic.

Keep in mind that they're comparing apples to oranges (at least with the iphone). The iphone uses a capacitive touch screen vs. many of those others are resistive. Two different technologies; the capacitive being the newer and better tech, IMO.

^ I think the Droid, Eris, and Nexus all use capacitive touch, though an older version than the iPhone being tested.

I have the Motorola Droid. I've been hoodwinked.

I've used both the iPhone and Droid side-by-side and it doesn't take a robot to determine that Apple is the king of touchscreens.

>> ^Psychologic:

^ I think the Droid, Eris, and Nexus all use capacitive touch, though an older version than the iPhone being tested.


If that Droid is a capacitive touch screen, then it's quite possibly the worst capacitive touch screen I've ever seen tested.


Ick.

>> ^brycewi19:

>> ^Psychologic:
^ I think the Droid, Eris, and Nexus all use capacitive touch, though an older version than the iPhone being tested.

If that Droid is a capacitive touch screen, then it's quite possibly the worst capacitive touch screen I've ever seen tested.
Ick.


Yea, the others are definitely better. The specs say the Droid is capacitive, so that's what I'm going by.

I have a Droid, but the screen really isn't terrible. I can't touch the screen lightly enough that it doesn't register, so sensitivity isn't ever an issue. The only problems I come across with accuracy are either with very small links (zoomed out on web pages) or when using the vertical keyboard (might miss the key 1 or 2 times out of 10).

Those accuracy issues are compensated by the physical keyboard and pinch-zooming in the browser (Dolphin). I also have 2.1 (cyanogen + 1Ghz kernal) on there so speech-to-text is available as well.

I certainly wouldn't complain if the screen were more accurate, but it isn't as much of a problem as the robotic test would seem to indicate. Besides, I figured my Droid would be obsolete in under a year anyway. =)

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Just to be clear- all of the phones tested are capacitive touch screens. A resistive touchscreen is the older kind that you would more likely use with a sylus on a Windows 6.5 handset.

>> ^brycewi19:

Keep in mind that they're comparing apples to oranges (at least with the iphone). The iphone uses a capacitive touch screen vs. many of those others are resistive. Two different technologies; the capacitive being the newer and better tech, IMO.


That's not strictly true - they're testing smart phones against smart phones.

The technology behind it is a bit irrelevant if you're looking to buy a smartphone with a good touch screen, really. I'm not going to go "well it's less recent tech so i'll buy x phone for trying harder"

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^brycewi19:
Keep in mind that they're comparing apples to oranges (at least with the iphone). The iphone uses a capacitive touch screen vs. many of those others are resistive. Two different technologies; the capacitive being the newer and better tech, IMO.

That's not strictly true - they're testing smart phones against smart phones.
The technology behind it is a bit irrelevant if you're looking to buy a smartphone with a good touch screen, really. I'm not going to go "well it's less recent tech so i'll buy x phone for trying harder"


Perhaps, but in a sense some of these smartphones have a significant difference in a major tech - the screen type. Sure they're both "smartphones", but they're not the same.

It's like comparing a stickshift to an automatic. Sure, they're both cars, but their transmissions are significantly different.

>> ^brycewi19:

>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^brycewi19:
Keep in mind that they're comparing apples to oranges (at least with the iphone). The iphone uses a capacitive touch screen vs. many of those others are resistive. Two different technologies; the capacitive being the newer and better tech, IMO.

That's not strictly true - they're testing smart phones against smart phones.
The technology behind it is a bit irrelevant if you're looking to buy a smartphone with a good touch screen, really. I'm not going to go "well it's less recent tech so i'll buy x phone for trying harder"

Perhaps, but in a sense some of these smartphones have a significant difference in a major tech - the screen type. Sure they're both "smartphones", but they're not the same.
It's like comparing a stickshift to an automatic. Sure, they're both cars, but their transmissions are significantly different.


Yeah i understand that, what i'm saying is this: If you're comparing a manual car to an automatic car and you say "which is the best to drive?" then the method of gear change is irrelevant to that comparison. These guys are asking "which is the most accurate touchscreen smart phone?" So the tech is moot. Mention it in passing, but you may as well mention the colour of the phone.

So yeah, just saying - it isn't apples and oranges at all.

If the title of the video said "Which smartphone uses the touchscreen technology the best?" Then you'd have a point.