🚀 go-pugleaf

>From SAUNDERS@USC-ISIB Tue Jul 14 12:58:01 1981
Why do all the answers in the digested replies on touchpanels share
these glaring misconceptions?

   - that a touchpanel must be mounted in front of the display;
   - that a touchpanel's resolution is limited to fingertip size.

1. Any of several touchpanel technologies, including the Elographics
   and Sierracin commercial units, is entirely suitable for use away
   from the display surface -- say, just where you would put a
   "tablet" (pen-on-a-wire type), but without ever having to find &
   pick up a pen or even find the mouse where you left it.  The desk
   area used need not be larger than a mouse-field.

2. This same touchpanel technology, at least, offers resolution that
   is much much finer than the size of the touching fingertip -- I
   have personally built and used some, and with cursor feedback I
   can select individual pixel positions *within* the (projected)
   area of my contact "fingerprint".  This is done simply and
   naturally (noone has to be coached) by rolling the fingertip.
   The resistive material reads out the centroid (in some sense)
   of the contact patch, allowing very sensitive control for fine
   positioning, as well as instantaneous pointing without having
   to find the pointer (pen or mouse) first.

*Of course* there is a tracking cursor on the display, just like a
mouse/tablet.  To assume absence of this well-understood software
device gives extremely unfair comparisons.

Now that we all have that straight, how about some reconsidered
answers?  Preferably this time from users of real touchpanels,
not those low-resolution or screen-mounted special-purpose
devices that were blasted (rightly) in the recent batch of
replies.

		Steve