I thought that stopped to be news after the first 20 or so TV mysteries where the police requested the phone details of the murder suspect, so it MUST have been around the first half of the 80s.
Yes, many people wrote about rockets. But the only books that were really relevant were those by that Russian guy, Tsiolkovsky. Everything else was just so much junk.
I think I've made my point about the deficiencies of capacitive touch screens
Sure, and I showed you that the "deficiencies" you talk about are mostly imaginary.
as we've seen on your video, it does get in the way
No, we haven't seen it, because you have failed to show an example of a resistive sensor touchscreen device that allows doing something similar with less work.
I'm not going to get anywhere here
Of course. You keep arguing the same thing over and over-- that sensor resolution is the only thing that matters, when it is clearly not so. What are you expecting, the facts to change because you expect them to? Lemme tell you, it isn't going to happen soon.
No, the better usability of a capacitive touchscreen is not subjective.
Your preference for a stylus is subjective and clouds your judgement of the superior usability that a multitouch interface provides. A capacitive screen that supports a pen is even better, but a single-touch resistive device is clearly inferior to a capacitive one for the purposes of drawing and note-taking assuming that suitable software is available. And suitable software is available.
The difference is precision, however, is objective
The small difference in the sensor datasheets is objective, but it doesn't matter in use, because it is compensated for easily. However, you cannot compensate easily the other deficiencies of the resistive sensor.
such simple concepts seem to be completely beyond your reach
Your righteous butt-hurt is preventing you from seeing what is important. You try to support your point by focusing on one simple concept of sensor precision, instead of the more relevant issue of the usability of the whole package.
I sketch and write a lot, so to me what's on the specs sheets is irrelevant as long as it doesn't get in my way.
The objective fact is that the tasks you claim are hard to accomplish with a capacitive sensor are easily and comfortably accomplished. Everything else is just snobbery and trolling on your part.
The capacitive sensor accuracy is more than adequate and the multitouch gestures are invaluable for the tasks under discussion -- drawing sketches and taking notes. I've shown examples already. To beat those, you need a good Wacom-like sensor, and that is a very far cry from a simple resistive sensor.
I don't know what kind of magical device have YOU been using, but on the ones I have experience with (listed above) taking notes and especially drawing diagrams is much more cumbersome than on modern multi-touch tablets with capacitive screens.
You had to go much farther out of your way to write notes or draw comprehensible diagrams on a resistive sensor device similar in size to a modern phone if only because you had to interrupt your workflow to zoom in/out all the time. The volume button on windows mobile was a really poor substitute for the pinch-zoom.
Besides, I don't understand why are you complaining at all. The capacitive sensor is good enough for 95% of the use cases out there, including all use cases with a resistive sensor. But if you can't live without one, there are a number of resistive sensor tablets you can buy today and the prices are not all that high. There are also some tablets that come with sensor AND a digitizer. They are more expensive, but, again, if you need one, just go get one.
Why yes, I am. In my experience, nice things don't come about magically just because I dream them up, I have to actually do something to have them appear.
Maybe it is different in your universe, in which case please let me know how can I move there. Thanks.
Not to mention that the Thomson is already taken, and the Millikan would be an unfortunate choice, as people will uncontrollably multiply it by a thousand.
Thus it seems to me that the starship Enterprise is a necessary step towards achieving the space shuttle Enterprise
Too bad you're wrong about this, as the two are not related in any way, shape or form. The Shuttle program was yet another idea of Herr Wernher, based firmly on his knowledge of the subject of rocketry and quite unrelated to the Star Trek franchise.
If you have any doubts, I recommend you read the sci-fi book about flying to the moon by the dear Herr, and note the differences between that and the less hard sci-fi that garbage like Star Trek and Star Wars are based on.
The videos show that you can easily make very precise and detailed drawings and easily take notes on a device with a capacitive sensor. I am surprised the conclusion has escaped you.
There is a small, but important difference between daydreaming and actually setting out to make something real with the technologies you have at your disposal. In the first case, you get the starship Enterprise movie. In the second case, you get the space shuttle Enterprise.
People were daydreaming about flying around for ages. Around the end of the 19th century, a whole body of junk science about how airplanes were supposed to fly had developed, resulting in a lot of money and effort wasted in unsuccessful airplane projects.
Alas, flight did not happen until the Wright brothers built a testing rig, threw out all the junk theories and designed something that could use technologies available at the time to actually take off.
Eureka doesn't simply happen from staring at your navel for many days.
You can disagree all you want but that doesn't make it so. Any one of the Samsung galaxy phones is a much better choice to take notes or sketch on than any of my resistive PDAs (tested first-hand against my Newton, my two Clies and my Dell Axim). Even a relatively modern resistive touchscreen device like the Sharp Netwalker isn't any better than a capacitive sensor on a phone.
Capacitive works okay for short notes, which is all the writing you'd do on a tablet. As far as drawing is concerned, God created the Wacom tablets/screens for that. A resistive touchscreen doesn't even come close to one of those and is about as useless (or useful) as a capacitive one.
Slashdot Mirror
I go through life with at most half a brain, and I am in the same shoes, bro. No words to describe the hardness.
I thought that stopped to be news after the first 20 or so TV mysteries where the police requested the phone details of the murder suspect, so it MUST have been around the first half of the 80s.
FB isn't a "new technology", it is just another match-making site. Don't kill yourself just yet.
No, they only say it is possible.
Better than the unlimited number of SSH clients available? I wish I could see this amazing cloud interface.
What's in the cloud that is better?
Maybe you're still using AOL?
Yes, many people wrote about rockets. But the only books that were really relevant were those by that Russian guy, Tsiolkovsky. Everything else was just so much junk.
I think I've made my point about the deficiencies of capacitive touch screens
Sure, and I showed you that the "deficiencies" you talk about are mostly imaginary.
as we've seen on your video, it does get in the way
No, we haven't seen it, because you have failed to show an example of a resistive sensor touchscreen device that allows doing something similar with less work.
I'm not going to get anywhere here
Of course. You keep arguing the same thing over and over-- that sensor resolution is the only thing that matters, when it is clearly not so. What are you expecting, the facts to change because you expect them to? Lemme tell you, it isn't going to happen soon.
If you happen to measure either charge or time in volts, it is.
That's subjective, not objective.
No, the better usability of a capacitive touchscreen is not subjective.
Your preference for a stylus is subjective and clouds your judgement of the superior usability that a multitouch interface provides. A capacitive screen that supports a pen is even better, but a single-touch resistive device is clearly inferior to a capacitive one for the purposes of drawing and note-taking assuming that suitable software is available. And suitable software is available.
The difference is precision, however, is objective
The small difference in the sensor datasheets is objective, but it doesn't matter in use, because it is compensated for easily. However, you cannot compensate easily the other deficiencies of the resistive sensor.
such simple concepts seem to be completely beyond your reach
Your righteous butt-hurt is preventing you from seeing what is important. You try to support your point by focusing on one simple concept of sensor precision, instead of the more relevant issue of the usability of the whole package.
I sketch and write a lot, so to me what's on the specs sheets is irrelevant as long as it doesn't get in my way.
The objective fact is that the tasks you claim are hard to accomplish with a capacitive sensor are easily and comfortably accomplished. Everything else is just snobbery and trolling on your part.
Do you own one that you want to sell yourself? If you do, we can talk.
Well, I'm sorrier than you are.
The capacitive sensor accuracy is more than adequate and the multitouch gestures are invaluable for the tasks under discussion -- drawing sketches and taking notes. I've shown examples already. To beat those, you need a good Wacom-like sensor, and that is a very far cry from a simple resistive sensor.
I don't know what kind of magical device have YOU been using, but on the ones I have experience with (listed above) taking notes and especially drawing diagrams is much more cumbersome than on modern multi-touch tablets with capacitive screens.
You had to go much farther out of your way to write notes or draw comprehensible diagrams on a resistive sensor device similar in size to a modern phone if only because you had to interrupt your workflow to zoom in/out all the time. The volume button on windows mobile was a really poor substitute for the pinch-zoom.
Besides, I don't understand why are you complaining at all. The capacitive sensor is good enough for 95% of the use cases out there, including all use cases with a resistive sensor. But if you can't live without one, there are a number of resistive sensor tablets you can buy today and the prices are not all that high. There are also some tablets that come with sensor AND a digitizer. They are more expensive, but, again, if you need one, just go get one.
Why yes, I am. In my experience, nice things don't come about magically just because I dream them up, I have to actually do something to have them appear.
Maybe it is different in your universe, in which case please let me know how can I move there. Thanks.
Not to mention that the Thomson is already taken, and the Millikan would be an unfortunate choice, as people will uncontrollably multiply it by a thousand.
Thus it seems to me that the starship Enterprise is a necessary step towards achieving the space shuttle Enterprise
Too bad you're wrong about this, as the two are not related in any way, shape or form. The Shuttle program was yet another idea of Herr Wernher, based firmly on his knowledge of the subject of rocketry and quite unrelated to the Star Trek franchise.
If you have any doubts, I recommend you read the sci-fi book about flying to the moon by the dear Herr, and note the differences between that and the less hard sci-fi that garbage like Star Trek and Star Wars are based on.
The parasite does not refuse blood infusions.
The videos show that you can easily make very precise and detailed drawings and easily take notes on a device with a capacitive sensor. I am surprised the conclusion has escaped you.
You are obviously using the capacitive sensor the wrong way or with the wrong software. Here are some hints for you:
http://download.autodesk.com/us/sketchbookpro/mobile/sketchbook_mobile_features_620x388.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f43Exu02w5A
There is a small, but important difference between daydreaming and actually setting out to make something real with the technologies you have at your disposal. In the first case, you get the starship Enterprise movie. In the second case, you get the space shuttle Enterprise.
People were daydreaming about flying around for ages. Around the end of the 19th century, a whole body of junk science about how airplanes were supposed to fly had developed, resulting in a lot of money and effort wasted in unsuccessful airplane projects.
Alas, flight did not happen until the Wright brothers built a testing rig, threw out all the junk theories and designed something that could use technologies available at the time to actually take off.
Eureka doesn't simply happen from staring at your navel for many days.
You can disagree all you want but that doesn't make it so. Any one of the Samsung galaxy phones is a much better choice to take notes or sketch on than any of my resistive PDAs (tested first-hand against my Newton, my two Clies and my Dell Axim). Even a relatively modern resistive touchscreen device like the Sharp Netwalker isn't any better than a capacitive sensor on a phone.
Since Christians were fed to a Li-Ion only occasionally and not as a matter of policy, no, probably not.
Capacitive works okay for short notes, which is all the writing you'd do on a tablet. As far as drawing is concerned, God created the Wacom tablets/screens for that. A resistive touchscreen doesn't even come close to one of those and is about as useless (or useful) as a capacitive one.
Even better: since it isn't Apple, you can download and watch all the pr0n in the world on it.