Many I am sure. The Nokia Nuron came out well after the N900. Though not a phone the Archos 32 only recently came out and is resistive.
What's the point of this anyway? Why would you or anyone possibly care?
Both have advantages and disadvantages, which have been discussed for much longer than a decade.
It's silly when people speak about one being "better" than the other.
Although, I think touch-screens are overkill for most devices, and they promote lazy GUI programming. ie. no button shortcuts for the things you use most often.
Both have advantages and disadvantages, which have been discussed for much longer than a decade.
It's silly when people speak about one being "better" than the other.
Although, I think touch-screens are overkill for most devices, and they promote lazy GUI programming. ie. no button shortcuts for the things you use most often.
THANK YOU! I agree. I regret that devices like the N800 (with a D-pad) weren't improved upon with better D-pads instead of dropping them altogether, as an example. We would have FAR better directional controls in addition to the touchscreen GUI's and MUCH better gaming.
I would very much like the claimed N900 (N9.. N950.. whatever it will be... if it will be...) replacement to have a resistive touch screen as I can use it with my motorcycle gloves on and cannot with capacitive screens.
Would be great if the directional keys were in a D-Pad like arrangement. That was one weak spot in the n900 keyboard (the space bar was a little odd also).
