The Nokia N900 is weaving its way around the world as we speak and anyone who has placed a pre-order is probably holding it lightly and gleefully laughing to themselves. However, the arrival of the Nokia N900 has thrown up something of a debate – which screen would be better for the Nokia N900: Resistive or Capacitive?
Ben has done a couple of cracking Nokia N900 reviews this week that really get under the hood and skin of the new Maemo 5 device. The 3.5-inch touchscreen is a good size and with its beefed up resolution, it really makes neat work of web browsing and your messaging. However, we’ve had a couple of comments about the screen and how the use of a ‘Resistive Display’ is a potential flaw in the device.
Two NokNok readers, Paul and Toucan Murphy feel that switching to a Capacitive Display would be a problem with the Nokia N900 and the decision made by Nokia to stay with the tried-and-trusted Resistive Display was the best one.
As Paul put it ‘There ARE positives to using a resistive screen over capacitive, such as higher accuracy, the ability to use multiple objects to control it (such as gloves, a stylus, etc), and the ability to use a nail to control it. Honestly, when I use a capacitive screen I feel like I have little kid gloves on, having to use the biggest part of my finger to control anything, the accuracy is horrible.’
Now, we’re no tech-heads here but that kind of got us thinking, which would be the best way forward for the Nokia N900? That’s why we’re turning to you guys – what do you think? Has Nokia made the right decision with their choice of Resistive Display or do you side with Ben and think that Capacitive is the way forward?
We’d genuinely like to know what you think, as it is a question that is likely to come up a great deal in the coming months.
No comments:
Post a Comment