Most Anroid customers don't value these little touches. Being able to install various ROMs and have widgets on the homescreen plus other customizations are more important to them.
The fact that one platform is ahead or behind in one area isn't telling of what a mass of half a billion or a billion plus customers value or don't value.
Most apple fans don't realize that negligible differences in touch responsiveness against a small cherry picked selection of android devices doesn't make up for flexibility, cost, choice...
Except that your finger is bigger than that so you can't see what you're doing anyway. On ANY touch device. STYLUS (as you said) ftw. Or a mouse pointer. Infinitely small.
You are comparing size with time, which is an invalid comparison without further constraints (e.g. a visual response constrained to emanating out from the touch of a finger). Thus, you are making the assumption that all visual responses to the input of a finger will only occur directly under the real estate occupied by a finger - an assumption that I would argue is entirely unfounded in the realm of modern phones.
Agreed. To me it's either when you are at the minimum size of a numbering system with discreet quantum. Also yo ucan do a cross hair with the middle pixels empty so I guess that would be infinitely small, and a closed crosshair would be 1.
Then complain about how they have no idea how to use it and call the nearest family member when their clock widget "disappears" (on the next homescreen page).