jvarszegi wrote:But the fact remains that it is simply not as good functionally as a touchpad in real, measurable ways.
The only fact that remains is that you continue to confuse your own personal opinions with actual facts.
jvarszegi wrote:This is my view, and it's correct; just as I hold the view that 2 + 2 = 4.
Wrong. 2+2=4 is not a view, it's a fact. Your opinions are just that - opinions. A good lesson in logic may do you good.
ajkula66 wrote:Could you provide some verifiable data backing this statement up?
No, he cannot. There can never be any verifiable data backing this statement, because the statement itself is not even well-defined. Heck, how can you claim that something is faster or more accurate than something else, when speed and accuracy are user-configurable parameters of the device? Compare a trackpoint on fast speed with a touchpad on slow, and you have one picture. Reverse the configuration, and it changes. So it ultimately is only determined by the comfort level of the individual users, which means that it is a matter of personal preference and individual set of skills.
The analogy of cars is completely false, because cars do undergo performance test to determine their maximum speed, and you can quantify it. But just because the car can go 500 kilometers per hour does not mean you can actually navigate it at that speed in normal driving environments, so it's a pretty useless benchmark. When it comes to pointing devices, the driver's upper bound on sensitivity is there not because the devices cannot go faster, but because 99% of the users will find higher speeds unusable.
Not to mention that the trackpoint, the touchpad, the mouse, and the trackball are fundamentally different enough, that it's hard even to define reasonable benchmarks between them. It's not like comparing one car to another, but more like comparing a car to a motorcycle to a helicopter to a boat.