To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I've already discussed the issue of noise in another reply, so I'll just explain what makes capacitive touchscreens so unreliable as compared to all other touchscreen techs : their sensitivity to water. If your screen becomes humid for any reason (rain, sweat, freshly washed hands...), the device will start become unresponsive or register false positives in a matter of minutes. Since when do we build mobile devices that can't stand a few drops of one of the most widespread chemicals of planet Earth ?
And there is a reason why the tech is so expensive and sensitive to external perturbations too : it requires ridiculously complex hardware by its very nature. As if resistive touchscreens and their need for fine-tuned mechanical properties weren't complicated enough, the best which hardware engineers could come up with as a successor was a fine mesh of transparent electrodes stuck in the tiny space between a LCD and a protective plate, following the tiny capacitance difference induced by the presence or absence of a human finger milimeters away while shielding itself from its direct electromagnetic environment somehow ? Honestly, if they just wanted to come up with something bizarre enough that it would create tons of jobs in R&D and stimulate the economy, they could have stated the goal right away...
Edited 2012-07-10 15:35 UTC




Member since:
2012-06-02
well, that might have worked in a lab, but think about real life: noise interferences and all the problems that a "cheap piezo" would have when exposed to daily heavy usage.
capacitive sensing is not at all unreliable, just take a look at how well it works on an ipad or similar devices. by now it's the best technology we came up with for touch surfaces. too bad it's still expensive and not usable on large surfaces.