|
2010-03-19
, 18:49
|
|
Posts: 2,050 |
Thanked: 1,425 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Bucharest
|
#12
|
|
2010-03-20
, 20:44
|
|
Posts: 2,173 |
Thanked: 2,678 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Cornwall, UK
|
#13
|
Maybe a survey like "What would you give up to have capacitive" with checkboxes would be more informative.
|
2010-03-20
, 20:53
|
Posts: 1,400 |
Thanked: 3,751 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ Arctic cold of northern .fi
|
#14
|
I honestly think too many people vote for capacitive based on an experience of resistive that is several years out of date or just because certain industry bloggers tell them it's superior. Personally, if all phones go capacitive, I shall be nursing my n900 into my (and its!) dotage.
|
2010-03-20
, 21:03
|
|
Posts: 2,361 |
Thanked: 3,746 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
@ Berlin - Love this city!!
|
#15
|
|
2010-03-20
, 21:21
|
Posts: 1,341 |
Thanked: 708 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#16
|
|
2010-03-20
, 21:26
|
|
Posts: 2,361 |
Thanked: 3,746 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
@ Berlin - Love this city!!
|
#17
|
|
2010-03-20
, 21:40
|
|
Posts: 422 |
Thanked: 320 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Israel
|
#18
|
This isn't "Design by Community" it is "Design by Community within the Parameters we're comfortable with"
You can only "vote" for a design that falls within the green zone. My vote would be for a 4" screen, resistive, QWERTY, hot key + one touch, 16x9. Oops, sorry keep tweaking, that's too far out there. Let me vote for it anyway. Maybe, just maybe, Nokia might find out that what they think is too far out there is what people want.
Or, how about a 5" screen, QWERTY, hot key only, 16x9? Only with non-touch screen. I guess I want a netbook with a 5" screen?
What do you want to bet, the device that comes out of this is 3.5" screen, capacitive, standard keypad, hot key only, 16x9? (dead center of the good zone)
|
2010-03-20
, 21:56
|
|
Posts: 2,361 |
Thanked: 3,746 times |
Joined on Dec 2007
@ Berlin - Love this city!!
|
#19
|
SURE! I'd like a phone with all those parameters maximized - the difference between me and you, is that I'll actually BUY IT when such a phone will be available.
Why such a difference? because a phone like this would cost A LOT, and you sir, back in your degenerated US cellphone market, would probably whine that it costs way above the "regular" 199$ that you're used to pay for a phone at your carriers.
Unfortunately, Nokia tries to obtain a grip in the US cellular market so they have to consider this variable in their equation so in this survey they use this "meter" thing as a way of telling you to keep it real - so, would YOU buy a phone which would cost 1000$ or more? I think not, then please stop whining about it...
The Following User Says Thank You to zehjotkah For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-03-20
, 21:59
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#20
|
Isn't it possible to have both, like resistive touchscreen underneath and thin capacitive screen top of it?
You can only "vote" for a design that falls within the green zone. My vote would be for a 4" screen, resistive, QWERTY, hot key + one touch, 16x9. Oops, sorry keep tweaking, that's too far out there. Let me vote for it anyway. Maybe, just maybe, Nokia might find out that what they think is too far out there is what people want.
Or, how about a 5" screen, QWERTY, hot key only, 16x9? Only with non-touch screen. I guess I want a netbook with a 5" screen?
What do you want to bet, the device that comes out of this is 3.5" screen, capacitive, standard keypad, hot key only, 16x9? (dead center of the good zone)
*Consumer*, not a developer! I apologize for any inconvenience.
My script to backup /home and /opt
Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant, Huawei S7, N900(retired), N800(retired)