I hope my question is in the right category…
I have a Nextion 7 inch resistive panel in some applications. Today’s touchscreen are mostly capacitive, thence users tend to get used to gentle tapping on the screens. The resistive requires some “force”, I wonder if this is somewhere adjustable in the Nextion (setting or firmware change).
I guess they average a number of measurements to detect the press with a “very high” degree of certainty, whereas I could do with “a reasonable” degree.
Anybody?
Hi and welcome @DirkH,
I don’t know if there’s a way to hack the hardware but on the software side there’s no option to do it. Neither officially nor inofficially.
Kind regards,
Max
Both types of screens might look similar to the naked eye, but there is a different manufacturing process involved.
Resistive has more layers (hence not as bright) involved than capacitive.
Resistive are also cheaper to make.
There’s a good overview here:
As you will appreciate, it not a firmware “setting” that changes the characteristics.
Thanks for the quick replies (After weeks of silence from Nextion, I now clearly understand why this ‘unofficial’ forum has been established 
I know the technology of both types very well, and indeed, simply stated, by construction: resistive “requires force”, whereas capacitive 'requires presence".
But as you might notice on the Nextion resistive, when using a stylus (or fingernail-tip) instead of your full fingertip, it reacts more “user friendly”. Of course when using a tip, the force is higher (because concentrated), but also: the spread is lower. Normally in res screens, the XY voltage is sampled multiple times, and then averaged. This is to cancel out “noise”, which can be electrical, but also mechanical (fingertip pressure is changing, moving: think of your finger on a in-car touchscreen!)
Basic systems simply average N measurements, and the result is mostly OK. They are fast but sometimes inprecise.
Smart systems continue measuring, eventually apply statistics, until the result is stable during X sampling sessions, and only then they conclude. Their result comes slower, but is always with high location precision.
I guess that Nextion is of the second kind, and I hoped that X could be (dynamically) “hacked”.
For those interested: why could I do with less precision?
In my application I have a (sort of) keypad, and only some pre-defined input values are permitted by the software, kinda “autocorrect”. E.g. if “123” and “127” would be the only inputs allowed, then when I already have “12”, I know that the next keypress must be either “3” or “7”. I could really roughly accept “left-top” of the keypad as being a “7”, and "lower-right as being a “3”.
Thanks again for your quick response.