Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It's interesting how the same posters that are so quick to point out that some overly large Android-based phone has a higher resolution than the iPhone (despite being a considerably lower PPI) are now claiming tht dual-point touch is just as useful as eleven-point touch. Even a FULL (three-point) multouch would be a huge improvement in usability over a dual-touch display.
Long time reader, first time poster. I read these forums all the time but have thus far refrained from posting, but the rhetoric being used is driving me crazy. So, my question is, where did anyone say that 2 point multi touch is superior to 11 point multi touch? I must have missed that claim. 2 IS multi, but the use of multi is all about context. If i were describing my macbook, it has a dual core processor. Describing my desktop, it has a hexa-core processor. In either statement i could have correctly substituted multi, but I wanted to be more descriptive. So basically, your right, it is a dual-point touch screen. And DaHarder is right, it is a multi-touch screen. The fact that this is something even worth arguing is astounding.
I don't see anyone claiming that the Kindle fire is superior to the iPad. It's not, and it wasn't meant to be. It is a value proposition. I actually own both, and I find I have been using the kindle fire more, mainly because its easier to carry with me. I could care less how many points of touch are on it, because I watch movies, check email, surf the internet, occasionally read a book when I don't have my e-ink kindle with me, etc. Its fantastic for people invested in Amazon services. The touchscreen can be a bit wonky on the fire(recent update much improved). You get what you pay for.