[toopok4k3]

Are you still stuck in 2008? Perhaps worked at Nokia?

I heard this a lot back then. Even believed it myself because how could 1000s of engineers be wrong... Ohh how nice those screens felt!

Then again it required only a few seconds of iphone usage to realize what a lie it is. Even the first crappy android phones with capacitive touchscreens was enough to show this.

[pessimizer]

> Then again it required only a few seconds of iphone usage to realize what a lie it is.

I'm going to have to call this subjective, because, surprisingly, I've also used capacitive screens.

I could use the N900 wet and in gloves, and it was pressure sensitive. Also, I once dropped it so hard that it broke a tiny piece of the sidewalk off (I tried to catch it while it was falling, and instead batted it and added velocity to the fall.) The screen was fine. I've never seen a cracked N900 screen.

The only time it required a stylus is when I was using a desktop UI on it, making everything microscopic. If you did that with a capacitive screen it would require a special stylus, whereas with my N900, a toothpick would do.

[diffeomorphism]

While definitely not "superior" in every way, it was more precise also with a finger (at least on the n900; other devices had worse quality resistive screens). So you for example could draw or hit small buttons much more easily.

For capacitive screens you instead have to add another digitizer layer by wacom or n-trig to be able to draw, which took a while and still is not common enough. That said, bad quality resistive screens were much, much more frustrating to use than bad capacitive screen.