click speeds (and to some extent pressure required for contact), can be a bit subjective… (**)
the hardware/firmware will use a kind of ‘window’ for these, (*)
(and this will be different for buttons, pads and encoders)
but because we all have naturally have slightly different tendencies, for some we will fall into this window and not notice anything , but other users might be a tad faster/slower and fall outside of it, and so it feels less predictable.
the good news is this is largely a function of the firmware, so can be fine tuned, and often is for products during early firmware revisions.
SO… the important thing here is to give FEEDBACK to Squarp… this will help then refine and improve the feel for more users, either by widening/moving the ‘window’ a bit, or (if necessary) allow this to be more user customisable (like we have for Pad Hold)
so, if the ‘feel’ is good for you use the contact form and let them know, they can then work with you to get see if the feel can be improved.
note: the only time I would ‘worry’ is if some buttons/encoders/pad feel significantly different from others of the same type (e.g. pads, encoders and switches will vary) , there will be some variation (hardware tolerances etc)
again, if this is the case … or any other suspect hardware issue, your first stop should be to contact Squarp directly via contact form, and work through the issue to see if its really a hardware issue that needs resolving or if its a possible firmware issue.
(*) there are a few reasons for this window, and without seeing the code - Im not going to speculate on exactly how wide this window can be.
e.g. Squarp might not be UX like long press, short press currently, but it doesn’t mean they dont want to leave this option open for future UI improvements (esp when the simple button shortcuts are ‘used up’)
(**) to be clear, here we aren’t referring to the encoder click issue, which is the main subject of this topic… which is a hardware related, but can be worked around… as detailed in the first post of this topic.