Testing Finds Inaccurate Touch Sensing on iPhone 5s/5c, But Neglects Perspective Compensation

[Beautyspin]

Ahh it is the spin

I cannot but laugh at the apologists touting a bug as a feature.. Best of luck with your crippled iPhones guys. You deserve them. You deserve to be ripped off. You are the reason iPad2 exists at the cost it does..Well done Apple. You have accurately estimated your customers intelligence when you sued Samsung (basically insulting your own customers by telling the court that they cannot read the Samsung Logo on the phone)...

Wow!

 

[mykem]

I also find it odd that the tester compared the much older Galaxy S3 to the newest iPhones.

There's a significant difference in technology: the Galaxy S3 uses a separate touch panel on top of the display whereas the iPhone 5s/5c/5 use the in-cell touch LCD technology also found in the newer Galaxy S4.

I'm guessing the dedicated touch panel on older phones like the S3 or the iPhone 4/4S would prove to be more accurate.

Here's the cutout of the two different technology:

The main purpose of using in-cell LCD is to reduce not only the thickness of the phone but also screen reflection. But probably at the expense of some touch accuracy.

It would probably makes more sense if the Galaxy S4 was tested against the iPhone 5s/5c or as I pointed earlier, the S3 against the iPhone 4/4S.

 

[nia820]

This is such a touchy subject for apple and android fanboys.

 

[kis]

Yes, because that's EXACTLY how everybody uses their phones: with an artificial finger dangling from a robot arm. /s

yupp - it's just funny how some people here were bashing Samsung when the same company released their touch-screen accuracy thing last time, where the 5 won. This time around, of course, the study is flawed. Of course.

 

[pure3d2]

I noticed the touch sensing on my iPhone 5 kind of sucks too compared to the 4 or 4S.

 

[theelysium]

I've had a Hard time typing on my 5s I don't know if its ****** 7 or the screen, but wrong keys get hit or they don't respond.

 

[AFDoc]

You have plenty of excuses for the iPhone when it proves inferior with touch sensing, but when it wins on other tests like speed of browser opening, it's a totally legit test.

Good one.

But is it "inferior"? I don't seem to have an issue typing or tapping on any of my i's but have had issues with both on my s4.

If it's supposed to be that way by design, how can it be labelled as anything but simply "different"?

I cannot but laugh at the apologists touting a bug as a feature.. Best of luck with your crippled iPhones guys. You deserve them. You deserve to be ripped off. You are the reason iPad2 exists at the cost it does..Well done Apple. You have accurately estimated your customers intelligence when you sued Samsung (basically insulting your own customers by telling the court that they cannot read the Samsung Logo on the phone)...

You ok?

 

[Jayomat]

why are they testing against a S3, a 1 1/2 year old phone? Is there no data available for newer devices?

 

[sunseeker]

"Stop trying to hit me, and hit me"

In my experience, those who try too hard fail to hit the desired keys often.
Once they stop thinking about precision and also understand how to accept or reject autocorrect properly their success rate improves.

 

[kdarling]

There's a significant difference in technology: the Galaxy S3 uses a separate touch panel on top of the display whereas the iPhone 5s/5c/5 use the in-cell touch LCD technology also found in the newer Galaxy S4.

Actually, the Samsung flagships don't use a separate touch panel either. They use what's called "on-cell" technology, which places the sensors on top of the display and thus removes layers like "in-cell" does... but is probably not as susceptible to interference as in-cell is next to the LCD lines.



Their AMOLED displays also are thinner because they do not need the relatively thick backlight and polarizer layers that LCDs require.

The next big thing will be putting the sensors on the cover glass instead of in/on the displays. This is because when you put sensors in/on the displays, you add another possible failure point in manufacturing and thus raise costs. (I.e. if the sensor fails final tests, they have to toss the display as well.)

I'm guessing the dedicated touch panel on older phones like the S3 or the iPhone 4/4S would prove to be more accurate.

Probably not, because it's more software related. Apple's touch processor is looking for the average center of the entire finger's touch patch, and thus fails towards the edges where part of the finger is off-screen. Remember this test that was done about a year ago?



I think it's okay for capacitive touchscreen software to lean towards helping people's fingers. For more accurate needs, an additional and separate active pen and digitizer meant for that purpose makes sense.

As for the tests these companies do with whiting out the screen or launching a browser, they're not measuring the touch response speed. They're measuring OS, GPU, code, etc timings, instead.

 

[/V\acpower]

I cannot but laugh at the apologists touting a bug as a feature.. Best of luck with your crippled iPhones guys. You deserve them. You deserve to be ripped off. You are the reason iPad2 exists at the cost it does..Well done Apple. You have accurately estimated your customers intelligence when you sued Samsung (basically insulting your own customers by telling the court that they cannot read the Samsung Logo on the phone)...

Wow!

Yeah, the kind of bug Apple spent a lot of their time and money in R&D on purposefully doing...

 

[hleewell]

Data, statistics, metrics, specs are all boring.
Iphones will still millions of handsets,
and Samsung Galaxy will always be the
lesser bro.

 

[kis]

Data, statistics, metrics, specs are all boring.
Iphones will still millions of handsets,
and Samsung Galaxy will always be the
lesser bro.

Yes, ALWAYS!!!!

 

[DVNIEL]

You're touching it wrong?

That's what she said.

 

[Bahroo]

Sponsored by .... Samsung. Who would've thought?

where do you see that?

 

[white4s]

pointless test. a robotic finger in non-real world conditions, ok.

go home opto you're drunk

 

[bassfingers]

I cannot but laugh at the apologists touting a bug as a feature.. Best of luck with your crippled iPhones guys. You deserve them. You deserve to be ripped off. You are the reason iPad2 exists at the cost it does..Well done Apple. You have accurately estimated your customers intelligence when you sued Samsung (basically insulting your own customers by telling the court that they cannot read the Samsung Logo on the phone)...

Wow!

iOS is known to compensate for typical user patterns. I don't see how that's spin at all. I would rather a company pay close attention to detail than to just slap a touch panel on there and say "good luck".

Here is an easy analogy for you:
The speaker arrays for concerts in big venues don't have a flat frequency response. They are directionally tuned for different sections of the venue where the acoustics behave differently. Samsung is the type of company that would just throw some speakers up, leave them at a flat response, crank the volume and hope for the best. Apple, by analogy and comparison, would properly tune the speakers for the room.

If someone did a test with a reference mic held up against the speakers, one might conclude that Apple's tuned speakers were "off" or "wrong" or "imbalanced" when in fact they were intelligently set that way on purpose

 

[suvsbob]

thank you for breathing some sense, sane, knowledge and logic into this discussion. I like Apple, but don't worship it, don't sell my soul to it. Many fans like to show off their stupidity. Make me dizzy and vomiting.

Actually, the Samsung flagships don't use a separate touch panel either. They use what's called "on-cell" technology, which places the sensors on top of the display and thus removes layers like "in-cell" does.

Their AMOLED displays also are thinner because they do not need the relatively thick backlight and polarizer layers that LCDs require.

The next big thing will be putting the sensors on the Gorilla Glass instead of the displays. This is because when you put sensors in/on the displays, you add another possible failure point in manufacturing and thus raise costs. (I.e. if the sensor fails final tests, they have to toss the display as well.)



Probably not, because it's more software related. Apple's touch processor is looking for the average center of the entire finger's touch patch, and thus fails towards the edges where part of the finger is off-screen. Remember this test that was done about a year ago?

View attachment 443481

I think it's okay for capacitive touchscreen software to lean towards helping people's fingers. For more accurate needs, an additional and separate active pen and digitizer meant for that purpose makes sense.

As for the tests these companies do with whiting out the screen or launching a browser, they're not measuring the touch response speed. They're measuring OS, GPU, code, etc timings, instead.

 

[olowott]

using android robots to test phone screens, what do you expect ?

 

[XboxMySocks]

Try tapping buttons with your iOS upside-down (with orientation lock on) and you'll see how different it is. I know the article kinda mentions this feature, but I thought I'd make it clear how it actually works.

Wow... Just tried that. It was like using an S4!

 

[ekiro]

You know what I hate about Android?

When you touch something and it doesn't know what you meant to touch... so it zooms in that little area and forces you to touch again. Every time that happens 1-2 second of my life is wasted. That time adds up over the course of my Android experience. And that's simply unacceptable. So I could care less about what these 'tests' are finding... iOS has NEVER disappointed me with its touch technology.

 

[kdarling]

You know what I hate about Android?

When you touch something and it doesn't know what you meant to touch... so it zooms in that little area and forces you to touch again. Every time that happens 1-2 second of my life is wasted.

You know what I hate about [fill in the blank - iOS or Android] ?

When you touch something and it guesses the wrong link... so you end up loading the wrong page and you're forced to go back again. Every time that happens 5-10 (or more) seconds of my life is wasted.

Waste is relative. What's the saying? Measure twice, cut once

 

[Konrad9]

No, he didn't. You inferred that.

What he said was "Apple intentionally did that".

What he means, is this:
"Apple intentionally made it so the screen recognized touch a certain, small amount of distance away from where the finger was actually touching to account for user perspective, thereby making it easier to use."

What you've inferred, is this:
"Apple intentionally made the device hard to use".

You're wrong.

Yes, he did. Sorry you disagree, but you're wrong.

----------

Stop trolling and taking things out of context... the person you're quoting said trying to use the phone with UI UPSIDE DOWN is more difficult because of this intentional touch sensing mechanism

I didn't take it out of context. He literally said that.

----------

No, they made it easier to use. In the real world, your device is held in front of you below eye level and away from you. The compensation is most noticeable when you have the iPhone on the table slightly away from you. Try pressing a button, but hold your finger there. Now bring your head directly above the screen and you will probably see your finger is a few mm below the actual button. Without the compensation, the button would have never registered a tap because technically the tappable area wasn't that far below.

I've noticed things closer to the home button will have touch targets directly on the tappable area whereas the touch targets near the top of the screen will have their tappable area shifted down to compensate for perspective.

The device determines this compensation by looking at the orientation of the device, and I wouldn't be surprised if Apple uses the gyro to determine tilt of device too.



You're not supposed to notice it

It's reminds me of how the Greeks made the Parthenon with curved lines so when you look at the building, the lines actually look straight due to perspective. Usability and having the device do what you expect without having you to think about it is better than any benchmark.

So you are also telling me they intentionally made portions of their screen unresponsive because you touch those areas less? Really?

 

[Rootus]

You know what I hate about Android?

When you touch something and it doesn't know what you meant to touch... so it zooms in that little area and forces you to touch again. Every time that happens 1-2 second of my life is wasted. That time adds up over the course of my Android experience. And that's simply unacceptable. So I could care less about what these 'tests' are finding... iOS has NEVER disappointed me with its touch technology.

Better to verify than to make an incorrect assumption. iOS used to be pretty good at picking out touches. Somewhere along about iOS5, I noticed a serious degradation in the ability of my iPhone to figure out what the hell I was hitting. Suddenly I was using a lot of backspace to correct typing mistakes. Maybe that's when they turned on this supposed 'perspective compensation' LOL

 

[Cubytus]

Would the precision improve with any fine-pointed stylus? Would they be usable anyways?

It hasn't been long since I read that Apple's iPhones had in fact the best touch screen accuracy. Where went it?