|
||||||||
How accurate is the iPhone's touchscreen |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: wigan
Posts: 172
|
How accurate is the iPhone's touchscreen
Samsung outdoes Apple as tests reveal it's inaccurate 75% of the time
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...e-75-time.html |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,389
|
Quote:
Samsung outdoes Apple as tests reveal it's inaccurate 75% of the time
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...e-75-time.html |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: West Yorks
Posts: 6,180
|
Bizarre test really - obviously the iPhone 5S is not inaccurate 75% of the time or it would hardly ever do anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
The test is a bit strange, as it assumes a robot touches the screen in the same way all over. Apple's iOS allows for the human being, who doesn't hold the phone in the same way all the time and doesn't have solid robot fingers.
A phone that also adjusts for inebriation level could be useful. And did the robot have the wrong size hand? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: West Yorks
Posts: 6,180
|
Quote:
How does it do that?
A phone that also adjusts for inebriation level could be useful. And did the robot have the wrong size hand? |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Wapping, London
Posts: 16,222
|
a fail is defined as + or - one mm. Unless you have really really thin fingers, that's not really a fair test.
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,966
|
Apple bash ammo.. it's like test has been designed to make it look bad. Who just got told off for paying for good reviews? Who's been caught for paying Pseudo research? Likely same people behind this. Only 25% accurate... Aye ok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
Apple bash ammo.. it's like test has been designed to make it look bad....
Even more useful would be dropped calls tests. The Guardian just recently ran a story telling us that the touchscreen was a few milliseconds faster on the iPhone/iPad. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 4,966
|
The Guardian is Apple's mouth piece... lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,153
|
Load of nonsense, obviously a phone provided by Samsung that was specifically calibrated for this nonsense test. More likely the test wasn't calibrated correctly for the iPhone screen. There would be no reason that the digitiser would be more accurate in one area of a screen than another.
That so called journalist has a history of Apple bashing articles and Samsung are known for this kind of thing for example faking their benchmarks. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
The Guardian is Apple's mouth piece... lol
I guess that is why Samsung market a pen and Apple don't. I read a good while back that the new thinner type of screen Apple uses is more inaccurate. Their older phones and tablets must be better for accuracy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Totnes, Devon
Posts: 6,693
|
Quote:
How does it do that?
A phone that also adjusts for inebriation level could be useful. And did the robot have the wrong size hand? |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: In a world of fools...
Posts: 864
|
The Iphone touchscreen is the reason I don't have one any more . Just couldn't get on with them at all .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,153
|
Quote:
The test was designed for accuracy. Its useful to know.
Even more useful would be dropped calls tests. The Guardian just recently ran a story telling us that the touchscreen was a few milliseconds faster on the iPhone/iPad. You can test this by opening a website on both devices that is likely to take a second or so to refresh. Hit the refresh button with one finger as you scroll the screen up and down with the other. You will find that the iPhone continues to scroll the screen up and down smoothly but the refresh stalls. On an android the scrolling up and down lags or even stops completely but the page carries on refreshing. This was why the iPhone seemed smoother on older devices but this isn't really an issue anymore with the newer powerful Android devices, except perhaps ones overloaded with crap ware |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,209
|
Quote:
I haven't seen that article but the way the os responds to touch works differently on iOS to Android. iOS gives touch priority, Android doesn't.
You can test this by opening a website on both devices that is likely to take a second or so to refresh. Hit the refresh button with one finger as you scroll the screen up and down with the other. You will find that the iPhone continues to scroll the screen up and down smoothly but the refresh stalls. On an android the scrolling up and down lags or even stops completely but the page carries on refreshing. This was why the iPhone seemed smoother on older devices but this isn't really an issue anymore with the newer powerful Android devices, except perhaps ones overloaded with crap ware |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,342
|
Nothing worse than scientific reasoning much better to change it to something that fits into opinions. I find that whole evolution thing really bothersome as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,474
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,292
|
Quote:
Agreed. I make a lot of use of both IOS and Android. The touch responsiveness is one of the reasons why my iPhone is my goto device rather than my HTC One.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,153
|
Quote:
I've tried the 5S and 5C and compared the speed of touch to my Nexus 4. There is no difference whatsoever. Not a thing. Yes, there was years ago. My 4S and my S3 were exactly the same as well. The one thing was, when typing with my 4S when i had it, i constantly made errors and it pissed me off no end. The keyboard on the iphone is terrible.
I actually own a nexus 4 and 5s. You can do the scroll and refresh test on the same connection and It's 100% reproducible and works very differently. In real world scenarios there isn't much difference in practice now but the old Android phones were laggy as hell compared with the old iPhone |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,474
|
Quote:
It doesn't sound like your doing a scientific test a bit like the gps non example you gave.
I actually own a nexus 4 and 5s. You can do the scroll and refresh test on the same connection and It's 100% reproducible and works very differently. In real world scenarios there isn't much difference in practice now but the old Android phones were laggy as hell compared with the old iPhone |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,052
|
This was on a website I was reading yesterday. They were on about a person going from a iPhone to a andrpid phone and how they found typing hard at first.
It had something to do with this "inaccuracy"and the way the brain got used to it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 9,292
|
Quote:
It doesn't sound like your doing a scientific test a bit like the gps non example you gave.
I actually own a nexus 4 and 5s. You can do the scroll and refresh test on the same connection and It's 100% reproducible and works very differently. In real world scenarios there isn't much difference in practice now but the old Android phones were laggy as hell compared with the old iPhone I haven't seen any difference which is what i was saying! |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,153
|
Quote:
Ah yes, of course it was a non example. I mean a pretty much unknown app that isn't even on the app store is being used and killing the battery vs using Google maps while on holiday for 6 hours straight and having almost half the battery left is a more scientific test isn't it?....
I haven't seen any difference which is what i was saying! I get the impression your not too technical so perhaps don't understand why different ways of using the gps system would cause different amounts of battery use. Some programs can use the gps quite heavily if you wanted to track something in more regular intervals for example and in the background. Also do you know if you had access to a-gps. This is a kind of semi gps that can use cellular data as well as gps and it much kinder to the battery ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,091
|
Quote:
I've tried the 5S and 5C and compared the speed of touch to my Nexus 4. There is no difference whatsoever. Not a thing. Yes, there was years ago. My 4S and my S3 were exactly the same as well. The one thing was, when typing with my 4S when i had it, i constantly made errors and it pissed me off no end. The keyboard on the iphone is terrible.
Quote:
Speaking of rendering, the old bugbear of Android has always been scrolling performance. Especially in Chrome, there's always been a sense of lag that seemed completely out of place on top-tier devices. On the Nexus 5, we're very sad to report that the situation doesn't seem any better. There is still not a one-to-one relationship between your finger and the screen, and it's still crazy-making.
My brother's old Galaxy S3 had this issue, and so does his brand new Xperia Z1. My friend's Nexus 4 is the same. When I was away on some training recently, I had a chance to use a Nexus 7, and the scrolling on that was just awful - really juddery.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:38.



