Touchscreen phone comparison Q3 - U.S. carriers

advertisment:

Touchscreen:

There are two main types of technology for touchscreen displays: capacitive and resistive. The more common resistive screen has several layers, one of which is electrically conductive and another which is resistive. When pressure is applied to the screen these two layers touch and the panel interprets the resulting current change. These displays work off the force exerted upon them, and any force such a stylus or gloved finger will work. A capacitive screen is coated with an electrically conducive material which sends a constant current across its sensor, giving it what is known as capacitance. When another object possessing capacitance, such as a bare finger, interacts with the display, the sensors interpret the change. Capacitive screens are more precise, but they cannot be used with objects that don’t exhibit capacitance which is why they do not work with a stylus or gloved finger. Not such a big deal in Miami, but a real concern in Minnesota.

The iPhone uses the more precise capacitive display, whereas the Vu, Dare and Instinct all utilize resistive screen technologies. The iPhone- at least the first time around- paired excellent software with this more precise input method, and the result was the best interface mobile users had ever experienced. This time around Apple is having issues, and the iPhone 3G at time exhibits lag and unresponsiveness that the original never did. It is not consistent, but there are times when we’ll press an item and the screen won’t respond, or other times when the button animation plays but it takes a second or two or five before finally performing the action. Given the performance of the original, however, we are inclined to chalk this up to software issues. The 3.5” display uses 16 million colors at a 320x480 pixel resolution, producing brilliantly vivid and detailed graphics. It is by far the best of the four units.

The Vu and Dare appear to have identical screens, as they have the exact same specifications (262k colors, 240x400px resolution, 3” in size,) come from the same manufacturer and most importantly perform the same. Both phones offer haptic feedback, meaning that the screen vibrates slightly when pressed. This is a very nice feature which supposedly lets the user know the press has been registered. While a good idea in theory, it does not translate to real world experience on these units. With both phones we’ve gotten haptic response, button animation and even audio confirmation…but nothing happened. This becomes especially frustrating when messaging, and typing with any speed and accuracy is impossible.

The Instinct also uses resistive touch with haptic feedback, but with a much better result than the LG phones. It is slightly larger at 3.1” and 240x432px, but still features 262k colors. We encountered slight lag every so often, but when we got haptic feedback our presses were always registered. When both are running properly the iPhone is noticeably smoother than the Instinct, but the gap between the two is narrow. As we’ll touch upon later we prefer the Instinct for messaging, and as of right now the Instinct is an overall better experience because of the iPhone’s software issues. Still, we know that when Apple gets them sorted out the iPhone will again be the best out there.

Rating: iPhone 5, Instinct 4.5, Dare 2.5, Vu 2.5


Design:

All four phones feature a large display at the expense of a physical keyboard, and as you might expect the designs are relatively similar. The iPhone is the largest overall, with the Instinct slightly taller but significantly narrower. The Vu and Dare are both considerably smaller than the other two.



In terms of in-hand feel the Vu and Dare are both remarkably light, almost to a fault. The Vu feels especially cheep; it’s constructed almost entirely of hard plastic, with only a chrome ring around the side to break up the monotony. The Dare at least has a soft-touch finish to give it a more reassuring feel, but even still its casing is harder than soft touch finishes we’ve seen on the Treo or Q, for instance. Their lightness and overall plasticy feel make the plastic screen more apparent, and on both there is more screen flex than we’d like, especially the Vu. Both phones could have done with some extra weight. We think the Dare would probably hold up better to everyday wear and tear, but wouldn’t feel comfortable dropping either one.



The iPhone 3G uses a glass display panel, making it the heaviest of the four units at 4.7oz. It is also tied for the thinnest unit at just 12.3 mm. Its edges are beveled, which lets the phone rest in the hand more naturally and makes it feel thinner than it really is. It’s construction is top notch; though we would never want to throw anything this beautiful around we feel the iPhone could stand up to it. Our only complaint is that the phone is a bit wide for the average person. Those with larger hands will probably appreciate the added width, but for most people, including the overwhelming majority of females, the phone is too wide to be comfortable holding for long periods of time.

The Instinct has the same plastic screen as the Dare and Vu, but there is less flex to it resulting in a more reassuring feel. Whether or not this has to do with the Instinct’s better touchscreen performance we’re not sure, but none-the-less it both feels and performs better. It’s taller than the other three units, especially the LG phones where it is 0.5” taller than the Dare. It has significantly more weight than the LG units, but is 0.3 oz lighter than the iPhone. It is the narrowest of the four phones however (tied with the Vu at 55mm) and just as thin as the iPhone. The solid weight, thinness and narrowness give it the best in-hand feel of the three phones. Like the iPhone, the Instinct’s build quality is top notch and we have no misgivings about its ability to withstand wear and tear.

Rating: Instinct 5, iPhone 4.5, Dare, 3.25, Vu 2.5