iPad reportedly overheating in the sun - Page 2

scottjl · 05-14-2010, 07:33 PM

well.. accuracy is one thing. multitouch is another. capacitive can be better and easier to implement with both features. resistive has several layers on top of the screen, reducing visibility, just look at all the complaints about the sony 600 and 900 ereaders with their resistive screens. the ipad's screen is crystal clear for all intents and purposes, great for watching movies on. multitouch allows pinch and stretch gestures for zooming in and out, can't do that on a resistive screen. resistive is more durable and cheaper to implement though, and you can press with anything, and of course damage the screen pressing with a sharp object too.

it really comes down to the device's purpose, audience and price.

apple could have made the ipad with a resistive screen, it would have required hard presses, had worse image quality, and no multi-touch. it would never have sold.

my GPSr on the other hand, the touch screen is only used occasionally, when i have to interact with the unit, most of the time i'm just looking at the screen for directions. it's cheap, keeping costs of the GPS down, durable enough to be tossed around on your dashboard and glovebox (don't try that with an ipad!) and you can press it in the winter with your gloves on.

garmin's new phone has a capacitive screen.

it really just depends on application..

dmaul1114 · 05-14-2010, 07:45 PM

Yeah, it's just a trade off.

Neither are ideal for my purposes as I really want something with a nice, crystal clear screen like the iPad. But I also want easy stylus writing which will always be more accurate on resistive touch screens, wacom touch screens etc. than capacitive touch screens as it's hard to write (for me anyway) on a slick capacitive screen.

Maggie Leung · 05-14-2010, 08:07 PM

Thanks for the explainer, Scott. That makes sense. I figured there were reasons, but I wanted to know what they were.

scottjl · 05-14-2010, 08:18 PM

no problem, these are just possibilities on why Apple went with what they did, apple has never explained exactly why.

Maggie Leung · 05-14-2010, 08:23 PM

Sure, I hear ya.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
iPad "iBooks is worth the price alone for iPad as ebook reader" Sun-Times	Donnageddon	Apple Devices	20	09-14-2011 02:52 AM
PRS-900 Fading in the sun	vxf	Sony Reader	15	08-21-2010 11:36 PM
I'm sick of hearing about iPad! iPad iPad iPad!!	Steven Lyle Jordan	Lounge	115	07-29-2010 11:38 PM
Apple sued for Overheating iPads: eBook Reader Outrage	Lilly	News	2	07-29-2010 11:32 AM
E-books reportedly doing well in Japan	igorsk	News	35	09-07-2007 01:45 AM

05-14-2010, 07:33 PM	#16
scottjl Reader of Books Posts: 1,632 Karma: 2697 Join Date: Oct 2009 Device: none	well.. accuracy is one thing. multitouch is another. capacitive can be better and easier to implement with both features. resistive has several layers on top of the screen, reducing visibility, just look at all the complaints about the sony 600 and 900 ereaders with their resistive screens. the ipad's screen is crystal clear for all intents and purposes, great for watching movies on. multitouch allows pinch and stretch gestures for zooming in and out, can't do that on a resistive screen. resistive is more durable and cheaper to implement though, and you can press with anything, and of course damage the screen pressing with a sharp object too. it really comes down to the device's purpose, audience and price. apple could have made the ipad with a resistive screen, it would have required hard presses, had worse image quality, and no multi-touch. it would never have sold. my GPSr on the other hand, the touch screen is only used occasionally, when i have to interact with the unit, most of the time i'm just looking at the screen for directions. it's cheap, keeping costs of the GPS down, durable enough to be tossed around on your dashboard and glovebox (don't try that with an ipad!) and you can press it in the winter with your gloves on. garmin's new phone has a capacitive screen. it really just depends on application..

05-14-2010, 07:45 PM	#17
dmaul1114 Wizard Posts: 2,300 Karma: 1121709 Join Date: Feb 2009 Device: Amazon Kindle 1	Yeah, it's just a trade off. Neither are ideal for my purposes as I really want something with a nice, crystal clear screen like the iPad. But I also want easy stylus writing which will always be more accurate on resistive touch screens, wacom touch screens etc. than capacitive touch screens as it's hard to write (for me anyway) on a slick capacitive screen.

05-14-2010, 08:07 PM	#18
Maggie Leung Wizard Posts: 1,449 Karma: 58383 Join Date: Jul 2009 Device: Kindle, iPad	Thanks for the explainer, Scott. That makes sense. I figured there were reasons, but I wanted to know what they were.

05-14-2010, 08:18 PM	#19
scottjl Reader of Books Posts: 1,632 Karma: 2697 Join Date: Oct 2009 Device: none	no problem, these are just possibilities on why Apple went with what they did, apple has never explained exactly why.

05-14-2010, 08:23 PM	#20
Maggie Leung Wizard Posts: 1,449 Karma: 58383 Join Date: Jul 2009 Device: Kindle, iPad	Sure, I hear ya.

Advert

Advert