Let me start off by saying I was originally taking issue with the idea that touch precision is a problem. That it can't work in certain cases and that we'll al

Let me start off by saying I was originally taking issue with the idea that touch precision is a problem. That it can't work in certain cases and that we'll always need mice. And all that in a complaint that demonstrated a pretty narrow understanding of what has already been done with touch interfaces. It was never my intention to argue that touch is always the preferable interface for all workloads (something I tried to convey by pointing out how mice will remain relevant for quite some time, due entirely to day-long workloads). As applies to your concerns, I was just trying to suggest that workable solutions exist, even if they'll always be less-than-ideal for larger quantities of work. As to your specific concern, I still think a workable solution may be out there, even if it remains undoubtedly less efficient than a mouse and a larger screen. e.g. Wouldn't the sorts of drag and off-axis drag controls that are used for seek in many podcast/audio-player apps [1] address precision-selection in cases where too-much-zoom presents problems, and also obviate the concern about fingers obscuring the wave itself? [1] click to 'grab' the selection-marker/nubby on the wave/timeline, drag across the x axis to seek and then down on the y axis to control the speed of seek -- typically doing more and more fine-grained seek for a given x-axis drag length, as the finger gets further from the wave/timeline