Quote:
Originally Posted by FrustratedReader
No, they use capacitive because that costs less! They can now, because the eInk screen is less grey. The IR based touch gives a clearer brighter screen, but needs a taller bezel and it costs more.
1) IR needs more parts.
2) IR taller bezel (more recess to screen).
3) IR less RF interference than Capacitive.
4) IR wastes less ambient light, screen brighter than Capacitive
5) Wider viewing angle.
6) Both are equally safe.
|
I'm stuck with capacitive phones and tablets because there is no other choice, and they work relatively well enough for me since I don't read on either nor use them outdoors (phone only when necessary).
But for an ereader, I insist on IR screens only, I'll never own a capacitive reader. One reason is that my skin doesn't always play nice with capacitive so I can have a really hard time turning the pages. And the main reason is that I read outdoors and on trains, buses, etc, in temps anywhere from 0°-100°F, which means during 3 seasons I'm wearing some type of gloves. I'm not about to also have to buy special gloves in different weights that aren't as warm just to be able to read. They also usually have just a forefinger with the conductive material, and I hardly use that to turn a page. So again, it would really be a pain for me to use those gloves even if I was willing to spend the money on them. I also prefer the slightly recessed screen that IR gives you, I don't like the completely flat screen usually on ereaders with capacitive touch.
As HarryT already said, it's a personal preference. Infrared is not inferior to capacitive. It's just a different technology that some people have their own reasons for preferring.