4 ms·
It seemed really laggy and the touch-sensitivity seemed less than ideal. I was thinking, as a tablet, that just wont do. Then I noticed it's not branded as a ta
by JangoSteve 16y ago
It seemed really laggy and the touch-sensitivity seemed less than ideal. I was thinking, as a tablet, that just wont do. Then I noticed it's not branded as a tablet, but as a reader that happens to do other things. That's a very important distinction that I think makes all the difference, especially considering it costs less than my Android phone would unsubsidized.
- joezydeco 16y agoLast night I was just playing around with the scrolling on Safari on iPhone. In fact, I was on Hacker News. Placed my finger on an item, wiped up and down as fast as I could without lifting my finger, and after 30 seconds my finger was still pointing to the same item. I think the touchscreen tracking has to be the one core thing that makes the iPhone/iPad experience so enjoyable. The moment you get lag in that area, everything else falls apart.
- slantyyz 16y agoTo add to your point, I would say that the touchscreen might be the killer hardware part of iOS devices, while Safari would be the killer software app on the iOS devices. If the browsing experience was not very good, I'd be way more interested in Android's offerings.
- JangoSteve 16y agoI agree totally. But if this "tablet" is actually just a "reader," isn't it more appropriate to compare it to devices such as the Kindle, which don't have a touch-screen at all? The question becomes, would you rather have a laggy touch-screen or no touch screen at all? I think preferences could go either way.