2 ms·

Comparing latency with maximum tap rate is the same kind of fallacy as comparing it with reaction time.

• kurthr 2y ago
  "It practically guarantees people will think it's not working and tap again" Please provide a link to your data and analysis. Seriously, I hope you don't work for a major touchscreen supplier. A good UI can deal with relatively high latency input, a bad UI can make any latency unusable. Finger motion before/after contact and rapid high force contact bounces are common problems. Many high performance interfaces "gracefully" degrade report latency to similar levels under high interference conditions.
  • mrob 2y ago
    "People" says nothing about how common it will be, only that it will happen. It's happened to me and I'm confident I'm not the only one.
    • kurthr 2y ago
      There is something called a FAR/FRR (False Accept Ratio)/(False Reject Ratio) where parameters on a UI system are tuned to optimize accurate interpretation of user intent (or user identification) for a given environment and action. Limiting response rate (eg debounce) to 2-3x the report rate is a common parameter change. There are always outliers in both user intent and experience, but a typical setting of <1% false reject and 1-100ppm false accept rate is achievable and usually acceptable. I'd also note that under video review people are notoriously bad at actually knowing how they interact with a touchscreen. Interestingly, fast response rates (and tactile response) reduce user complaints about proper operation even when UI errors remain constant. The users often assume they made the error rather than the machine. There are also interesting cognitive load effects.