No, I was referring to the Fujitsu one - I misinterpreted the four wire thing to mean four layers.

Re: qwazix: Actually, Stantum uses the same normal amount of layers too. As I said in the longer previous post I made a page or so back, the difference is they have spacer dots. A normal resistive screen can detect every single one of their sensor 'points' (intersections of the wires in the screen) at once - it's just that it has no way of understanding that it's multiple touches, vs one odd-shaped one, because two touches push in the screen area between them, and thus trigger all those points in between.

What the Stantum screen's spacer dots do is prevent this 'spill over', because the spacer dots keep the pressure on any given section of the screen from pushing down any part of the screen beyond the sector contained within a set of spacer dots.

The only problem is that it means that they can't detect true pressure differences per se (unless each section is itself precise enough to have multiple sensor points); because a normal resistive screen measures pressure based on how far away from the 'center' of the touch the sensor points are activated by the press(es). IE, I press lightly, screen bends in only so much, and only so many points around the touch get pressed. I press harder, and a larger area of the screen it pressed to the point of contact.

However, because of the spacer dots, the screen will never get pressed down in more sectors that the touching object actually touches. (So - and they admit this on the site - the way Stantum screens detect pressure is by how much area is affected - which makes sense for objects that bend/flex/have-any-give-and-area, like fingers, paint brushes, etc. A finger that presses down harder flattens itself more, and thus pushes on more sectors. However, I could drive a needle through the screen so hard it stabbed though, and the stantum screen wouldn't be able to detect the pressure difference from that, and a feather light press of the same needle. I'm sure this would be resolved as resistive screen sensor resolution becomes better, as sectors could have far more sensor points each, and math done on how much pressure each sector has would give a good pressure measurement on top of sectors-pressed-based measurements.)

Alternatively, someone could invent pressure-detecting spacer dots soon enough, which would handle that part of it.

Precisely, no, not exactly. I AM pretty sure that it can emulate most of the functions with complicated enough mathematics. However, much like emulating multitouch on a device that can't distinguish more than one touch at once, there's going to be cases where the emulation confuses some other set of events for normal gyroscope behavior. EG, a certain type of device movement can make the accelerometer values be exactly the same as they would be during the gyroscope-detected rotation, etc.

I haven't read anything on the subject though, nor have I thought TOO detailed'ly about this, so it's probably true that there's other exceptions I haven't thought of that are that much harder to properly account for.

Either way, gyroscopes remain far more resource efficient, probably far more so to justify using gyroscope emulation on an embedded device regularly if at all.