You keep telling me stuff, and when I check, you turn out to be wrong. I don't think you are purposely misleading me, but you really ought to check your statements before you make them.
Diogenes, I know one hell of a lot about this than do you. . . and it is obvious. What I wrote is that Apple owns the patents on mulli-touch capacitance transparent screens, specifically on mobile platforms, not "touchscreens," not what you looked up. Look at the photograph you posted. Is either of those a transparent or a multitouch screen? Not by a long shot.
They are NOT. QED. They are single touch, capacitance screens which are not transparent and not even display screens. They were simple grids. I specified what Apple holds the patent on to do accurately it on mobile devices and with low voltages consistently at high speed. These were intractable problems. Apple holds the patents on all the multi-touch screens on mobile devices as I told you and makes quite a bit of money on the royalties from other makers from those patents. THESE are facts. Your looking up "facts" from a publicly editable Wikipedia proves nothing. . . where someone with an agenda can change what is written there weekly if they want and add that Apple is lying about it. Apple has no reason to lie about any of that. . . because it would be easily shown in a court of law, and has not.
You are so desperate to show Apple and I lying about something, that you grasp at straws. . . that is funny. I am not going to do your research for you. I am certain of my position on this. . . This has been proved multiple times in court and in challenges to the US Patent Office, and in challenges to the Federal Trade Commission.
Try looking up those patents at the US Patent office instead of Wikipedia. Stumpe's work is listed as prior art in Apple's patents among a huge list of predecessor work required to be listed leading up to their invention.