or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Home button fingerprint sensor in 'iPhone 5S' would give Apple a new leg up on the competition
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Home button fingerprint sensor in 'iPhone 5S' would give Apple a new leg up on the competition - Page 3

post #81 of 127

With apples home button problems would putting a finger print scanner under the home button be a good thing? I think putting it on the side of the phone would be a better option. Think of how you hold the phone when you look at it. all you would have to do is press it on the side with your thumb and it would unlock the phone.

post #82 of 127
Please don't. Fingerprint readers are just a nuisance.
post #83 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsimpsen 
As your fingerprint vectors would never leave the phone, there would be no chance of building dictionaries of them on the web.

That's really where the concern is over biometrics though. If someone either compromised a phone or persuaded you to use a hacked device, they could get hold of the source data from the scan, which is like a master key. They can inject the data directly into the hardware to unlock it. After stealing a phone, they could even replace the home button with a hacked one or maybe plug something in the Lightning port that works with a copy of a fingerprint and doesn't require a finger.

Even if the encryption process just sampled a portion of the scan to use as the encryption key, the verification program would have to ask for that pattern during another scan.

I think people have learned over the years that having a static master key is not a good idea. Obviously it can be made very difficult to get to but they'd probably have to encrypt data on the sensor itself and make that encryption unique to each button so that replacing the home button couldn't send the same data but they can't do this because breaking your home button would leave the device inaccessible.

That means every sensor has to output the same data and people can figure out how to replicate that. I think it's still better than a passcode unlock but not for all remote authentication. I prefer the idea of renewable keys because even if a vulnerability is found, you can update them.
post #84 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirdir View Post

Please don't. Fingerprint readers are just a nuisance.

 

Just like everything else Apple would give you the option to use it or not use it.

post #85 of 127
Seems to make more sense on the screen. Reads your fingerprint when you swipe to unlock. If it can't read the fingerprint for some reason (wearing winter touchscreen-compatible gloves maybe) the traditional keypad appears asking for your pin.
post #86 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricardo Dawkins View Post

uh fingerprint sensor ??? Where is your NFC, iPhone?

 

Well, Apple has been working on the FIngerprint ID technology and it takes a while.  Do you not understand R&D takes time that they first have to buy the company, merge together and then being the development cycle.

 

NFC?  Well, there are probably 2 or 3 valid reasons.  

 

1.  Charlie Miller, a well known hacker, has hacked NFC phones, and it's been in the process of getting patched, but not all phones have been patched.  While you might feel this is old news, Apple might have decided to wait for them to get a better handle on NFC and if it is really that secure and needed.  Your average smartphone probably doesn't know if their phone has an NFC chip, if they do most average users probably couldn't tell you what it does, and if they could they probably haven't used it, or it they have it's probably not that big of a deal where they actually use it on a daily basis.  My guess is only phone geeks know and maybe use it, which is s small percentage of the population. Just because you know about doesn't mean everyone else does.

 

2.  Apple might be waiting for a new chip out of Qualcomm, which is supposed to have it integrated and that chip wasn't available to use until after the iPhone 5 was ready to get announced.

 

3.  It's still not widely used or at least not 6 months ago when they were finalizing the iPhone 5, so Apple probably left it out to get passbook because that's something they'd rather push because they can update pre-existing phones to use it.

 

THere might be other reasons, but these are the three obvious ones I can think of.

 

I'm sure when Apple feels it's ready for them to announce it, they will, because it's technology that might not be that important as SOME might think.

 

This is purely MY opinion, if you want more clarification, go ask Apple.

post #87 of 127
I may need to see an eye doctor, but where do you guys see in this article any reference to replacing username/passwords anywhere outside of an iPhone? The writer is suggesting that Apple will put this AuthenTec sensor under the home button and that is highly possible. He is not even going beyond the Apple apps, which I think he should. All apps that would need any sort of authentication (banks/subscriptions/etc.) should work with this sensor.
post #88 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

Another great feature I'd love to see come to Passbook are loyalty cards.  I have a billion of those that get lost in my wallet or i just don't have at the time i'm in a store that I'd love for Apple to take initiative with.

CardStar?

http://www.cardstar.com/

It's been around for years...
post #89 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

Sure, the fingerprint scan can easily be linked back to keychain or whatever.  But currently, the iPhone doesn't use keychain...

Sure it does; it's in /Library/Keychains, just where one would expect it to be:

I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #90 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That's really where the concern is over biometrics though. If someone either compromised a phone or persuaded you to use a hacked device, they could get hold of the source data from the scan, which is like a master key. They can inject the data directly into the hardware to unlock it. After stealing a phone, they could even replace the home button with a hacked one or maybe plug something in the Lightning port that works with a copy of a fingerprint and doesn't require a finger.

 

Unless the biometrics is used as part of a multi factor authentication system.

 

Fingerprint, voice or face recognition plus a passcode is a lot more secure than any single one.

 

But many folks don't like biometrics so meh but given I don't want to carry anything else to use my phone it's probably the only option if you want to go two-factor.

 

 

Quote:
I think people have learned over the years that having a static master key is not a good idea. Obviously it can be made very difficult to get to but they'd probably have to encrypt data on the sensor itself and make that encryption unique to each button so that replacing the home button couldn't send the same data but they can't do this because breaking your home button would leave the device inaccessible.

 

Nah.  The device can provide the button with it's public key to encrypt data to send to the device.

post #91 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post


Sure it does; it's in /Library/Keychains, just where one would expect it to be:

you must have hacked your phone, because that setting is not on a US iPhone.  Or at least it's not a Native/Standard App setting.

post #92 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


CardStar?

http://www.cardstar.com/

It's been around for years...

 

 

Never heard of them but it appears Cardstar does everything I wish Passbook did. Its rated 4 stars at the App Store too.

post #93 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post


CardStar?

http://www.cardstar.com/

It's been around for years...

Great, another f#@king App.  That's all I want...you totally missed my point.  Native man...

post #94 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

 

The AMC app works exactly like that.  You should try it.  It's free.

 

Come to think of it, Starbucks and Fandango do too.  Right there in Passbook.  

 

In fact, Apple's iOS 6 page has all the details that you've apparently missed:

 

 

Here ya go.  Enlighten yourself: http://www.apple.com/ios/whats-new/#passbook

Again, You totally missed my point.  I don't want Passbook AND a vendor app.  Passbook should be THE app to store that crap.  Currently you have to have Passbook and every other F@*^@King app to go with it.  That's just stupid and a waste of my storage space.  I'm so sick of people saying, "there'a an App for that!".  I don't want MORE apps, I want simplicity.  That's what Passbook was marketed as, and it doesn't work that way.  It doesn't eliminate all the other crap apps you have to download to use passbook.  It's Crap, It sucks and I refuse to use it!

post #95 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

Sure it does; it's in /Library/Keychains, just where one would expect it to be:


you must have hacked your phone, because that setting is not on a US iPhone.  Or at least it's not a Native/Standard App setting.

It's not a hack, it was a free app, FileSystem, but it's not in the store anymore. It's pretty useless, as it only shows the directory structure. For geeks still cool though...
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
I’d rather have a better product than a better price.
Reply
post #96 of 127
Lenovo laptops have had fingerprint sensors built in for the past 7 or 8 years, and they range on any given day from great to terrible and frustrating, depending on how finicky the sensor and or software can be, to how sweaty your hands are, to if you've got a scratch on your finger, to the relative humidity in the room you're in.

Unlocking the phone with a 4-digit pin is quick. Using a fingerprint sensor is very slightly quicker. Trying the fingerprint sensor unsuccessfully 4 or 5 times before giving up, selecting "use pincode" and typing the 4-digit pincode once every 10-100 tries is irritating enough to turn the feature off. Think Windows Vista security irritating.
post #97 of 127

Fingerprint sensors were not practicle/useless on PDAs, PDA phones and PCs! Will it be different on the iphone??

post #98 of 127
There are a number of android phones out today that use finger print scanners. That said, the implementation i used recently had a scanner on the power/wake button. It was notoriously frustrating to use. Hopefully apple will have a better implementation.
post #99 of 127
This article is a joke, Hard to copy do to button placement? really? I see no more room under the home button than the others and how hard is it to move a button up or make the phone taller. They redesign these phones from scratch every 6 months-1yr.

With how phones are held it would be better to have it on the side or back.

Apple will never put it on the front of their beautiful phone, if they were going to do that they would have by now, this tech has been around a long time, there most be a newer better version of it that they will be the first to have or put it on one of the sides, even if it screws the case people.

Additionally you don;t need this to replace passwords, you need it to protect the passwords stored in the phone, it can start there and then branch out to the actual apps, if the phone locks itself one entry point will work just fine.
post #100 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

1.  Charlie Miller, a well known hacker, has hacked NFC phones, and it's been in the process of getting patched, but not all phones have been patched.  

 

Whenever someone repeats this myth that NFC was hacked, I cringe.   Miller didn't hack anything.

 

All he did was point out that you might be able to secretly pass a malicious website's URL via NFC to someone's phone without them noticing you did it.  Yeah sure.  Okay, let's say you did.

 

At that point, then the targeted user has to:

 

  1. Not be surprised or suspicious about why their phone woke up and has a strange website showing.
  2. Look at the website and click on a link. 
  3. Agree to the suspicious app download popup.
  4. Go find the downloaded app.
  5. Have app sideloading enabled.
  6. Install the app.
  7. Agree to all its permissions.

 

Oh wait.  This lengthy scenario could happen with suspicious MMS and email, too.  It really has little to do with NFC, and absolutely NOTHING to do with NFC payments.

 

Basically, he was just being a publicity hound.

post #101 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht 
The device can provide the button with it's public key to encrypt data to send to the device.

That would certainly save the button having its own key but I was thinking of the scenario where someone steals your print data. If the phone sends the button the public key and they have the source data, they just take the public key, encrypt the source and send it back to unlock. If the button had the key embedded, a thief would have to physically hack every button for every phone to recreate the response but as I say, that makes it very problematic if the sensor is somehow replaced in the phone e.g by a broken home button.

It depends on what exploits/scenarios are being prevented. Obviously if someone gets an OS exploit, you pretty much have what you want anyway. But if there was a mass remote exploit that intercepted the sensor data from a lot of phones, it could be shared online and phone thieves could then run that database to unlock stolen phones.

I'm sure they've tested loads of methods to see what can be bypassed so it'll be sufficiently secure but it can't be impervious to some form of bypass. At the end of the day, every security system involves verifying a piece of data. This piece of data:

- has to be hard to get hold of by a 3rd party
- has to be convenient to get hold of by the user
- has to be unique so it can't be guessed or subjected to a mass exploit

It's very difficult to find a piece of data that satisfies all of those conditions because during any verification step, the user has to present the data. An exploit is easy once it's intercepted and if you can't change the piece of data, it makes future exploits easier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass 
Lenovo laptops have had fingerprint sensors built in for the past 7 or 8 years, and they range on any given day from great to terrible and frustrating, depending on how finicky the sensor and or software can be, to how sweaty your hands are, to if you've got a scratch on your finger, to the relative humidity in the room you're in.

The tech Apple bought (TruePrint) is supposed to scan under the skin to avoid that. It says it detects a pulse too so it would be harder to use a fake finger. There were tests done in 2005 that bypassed one implementation of it:

http://courses.ece.ubc.ca/412/previous_years/2005/modules/term_project/reports/2005/A_Security_Analysis_of_RF_Biometric_Fingerprint_Scanners.pdf

but they have probably updated the sensor since then to detect the pulse. Manufacturers who use these scanners might find a problem implementing them now that Apple owns the company making the technology.
post #102 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

Well it wouldn't be a button if it was part of the screen.  One of it's uses is that it allows blind people to use the phone.  It has to be a physical button for that to work.  

 

Um, no. I did not say make it part of the screen. I said make it as a screen like the glass trackpads. So you will have the dedicated button, but it will also act as a mini trackpad/bio reader. 

 

Edited: I guess I see how this is confusing, sorry. So I suggest to make the home button a hybrid of a Home Button, Trackpad, and Biometric reader. This would add so much functionality to this button that awesome would not be a big enough word. 

 

This could be used to scrolling web/email pages as well as, well, anything really. Use it for games as a joystick. Zoom in/out for maps or camera. Same as pinch, but you don't have touch the screen which at time is not as natural. Act out the camera in landscape and work the button to zoom in/out. Feel natural does it not? 

 

I really think that could open up so many options and set the iPhone that much more apart from other phones. 


Edited by Richard Getz - 1/17/13 at 1:10pm
post #103 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

Um, no. I did not say make it part of the screen. I said make it as a screen like the glass trackpads. So you will have the dedicated button, but it will also act as a mini trackpad/bio reader. 

Edited: I guess I see how this is confusing, sorry. So I suggest to make the home button a hybrid of a Home Button, Trackpad, and Biometric reader. This would add so much functionality to this button that awesome would not be a big enough word. 

This could be used to scrolling web/email pages as well as, well, anything really. Use it for games as a joystick. Zoom in/out for maps or camera. Same as pinch, but you don't have touch the screen which at time is not as natural. Act out the camera in landscape and work the button to zoom in/out. Feel natural does it not? 

I really think that could open up so many options and set the iPhone that much more apart from other phones. 

If they were to put the sensors for finger print recognition in the home button then all of the possibilities you mentioned are opened up.

I would imagine that Apple could make an iPhone with a larger screen as well because then the whole 1 handed operation argument would be mute if most functions can be done via the home button.
post #104 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

Great, another f#@king App.  That's all I want...you totally missed my point.  Native man...

After checking out the CardStar app, it appears to be everything passbook was advertised to be but isn't. Physical cards can be uploaded and digital cards can be added all from the app's rich database.

No downloading apps to add passes (which that process I've found to be hit or miss in passbook). And a large database of passes available for upload.

Apple should either learn from CardStar or buy them, but Apple's track record with updating native apps is pretty sketchy. I hope they fix passbook sooner than later but I have my doubts.
post #105 of 127

Then you have Google going for an entirely different way of working with passwords and websites

 

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/01/google-password/

 

 

They see a future where you authenticate one device — your smartphone or something like a YubiKey — and then use that almost like a car key, to fire up your web mail and online accounts.

In the future, they’d like things to get even easier, perhaps connecting to the computer via wireless technology.

“We’d like your smartphone or smartcard-embedded finger ring to authorize a new computer via a tap on the computer, even in situations in which your phone might be without cellular connectivity,” the Googlers write.

 

But for Google’s password-liberation plan to really take off, they’re going to need other websites to play ball. “Others have tried similar approaches but achieved little success in the consumer world,” they write. “Although we recognize that our initiative will likewise remain speculative until we’ve proven large scale acceptance, we’re eager to test it with other websites.”

So they’ve developed a (as yet unnamed) protocol for device-based authentication that they say is independent of Google, requires no special software to work — aside from a web browser that supports the login standard — and which prevents web sites from using this technology to track users.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #106 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy 
Then you have Google going for an entirely different way of working with passwords and websites:

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2013/01/google-password/

They see a future where you authenticate one device — your smartphone or something like a YubiKey — and then use that almost like a car key, to fire up your web mail and online accounts.

This is really flawed because it makes 3rd party authentication dependent on the issuer:

http://www.linuxjournal.com/magazine/yubikey-one-time-password-authentication?page=0,0

Someone can hack or DDOS the core servers where everyone's private keys are stored. Google providing the service would be more reliable but I don't want to be blocked from accessing a service because someone else's authentication servers mess up or time out.

Requiring the user to keep special hardware is always going to be problematic and I don't think it's needed. Obviously it's used for payment systems (credit cards etc) but it's not convenient for regular services.

I think the best balance between security and convenience is to use challenge-response authentication and public key cryptography along with renewable and diverse private keys.

A practical example would be:

- sign up to a website and the server asks for a public key
- the device would generate a private key from fingerprint vectors and a random code and create a corresponding public key and sends the public key to the server
- the user device stores the random part of the private key behind a simple authentication
- when a server needs you to login, it just sends a random code encrypted using the public key
- your device decrypts this using both fingerprint and the random part of the private key and sends the decrypted code back for verification

If someone hacks the server, they'll only ever find the public key, which doesn't matter.
If someone challenges the server, they'll be sent an encrypted message, which they can't decode.
If someone intercepts the message, it's encrypted going down and just a random string going back. The connection would usually be over SSL anyway.
If someone spoofs a website, all they can do is send you a random code. They might be able to figure out the private key with a significant number of requests but the device would know to only submit a single response.
If someone steals your device, they have to bypass the local authentication, which can be behind a fingerprint id or passcode or both depending on circumstance. But they still only get half of the private key unless they recreate your finger touching the scanner.
These random parts of the private keys can be transparently or manually synced between devices with a fingerprint authentication and keys can be generated for devices without scanners.
It also means that if someone does recreate your finger authentication, they can't bypass all authentication systems because they still need the random parts of the private keys, which can be renewed and never leave a local device.

All Apple needs to do now is trademark 1-thumb purchasing before Amazon.
post #107 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post

The home button is an archaism. The era of edge-to-edge button-less design is coming and nothing can stop it.



Well sorta possible yet did you think it through that it still requires a digital button so home button forever.
post #108 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

Well sorta possible yet did you think it through that it still requires a digital button so home button forever.

 

The original physical button was necessary because iOS was new, and a simple wired interrupt button was easiest to implement.

 

Now, with a more robust OS and with the proper drivers, even an onscreen button should work fine.  Or if they were still worried, they could even build the interrupt capability into the touchscreen (or touchpad area) controller itself.

 

Either way, the upshot is that Apple could use a capacitive Home button if they wished.

 

Side note: It should really be called the "Apps" button, since it goes to a list of apps instead of a traditional phone home page.   That's also why Apple placed the image of a blank rounded app icon on it instead of a house.

post #109 of 127
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Now, with a more robust OS and with the proper drivers, even an onscreen button should work fine.  Or if they were still worried, they could even build the interrupt capability into the touchscreen (or touchpad area) controller itself.

 

Good luck with that: except it requires further sandboxing of apps, removing their top-level access to the touchscreen. I can imagine you'll have a few things to say about it when it (doesn't) happen… 

post #110 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Good luck with that: except it requires further sandboxing of apps, removing their top-level access to the touchscreen. I can imagine you'll have a few things to say about it when it (doesn't) happen… 

 

Strange comments.  

 

I'm neither pro nor con about it.   I'm just responding to those who want to know if it's technically possible.

 

The fact is, from an engineering standpoint, there is nothing preventing Apple from using a touch home button if they wished.  

 

Certainly there's no further sandboxing required.  Apps don't have direct touchscreen controller access.   Only the OS does. 

post #111 of 127
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Certainly there's no further sandboxing required.  Apps don't have direct touchscreen controller access.   Only the OS does. 

 

And yet both lock up when one locks up. That's why something in the hierarchy has to change.

post #112 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And yet both lock up when one locks up. That's why something in the hierarchy has to change.

 

You have a good point.  That's why I suggested that adding interrupt code to the touchscreen controller (or its port) could be an end solution.  That would make it outside of, and immune to, OS problems, just like a physical button. 

 

Tech explanation:  Apple uses a standalone touchscreen controller chip, which most likely communicates with the main CPU over an SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) line.  The CPU receiver should have an interrupt that can be fired when the controller sends touch data.  Or, they could go further and have TI custom make the controller to have an independent interrupt output that could go to a higher priority CPU interrupt input when the user touches the Home area.

 

It doesn't matter whether an external interrupt comes from a button or a controller.  To the CPU, it's the same thing.

 

Oops, forgot that readers might not know what an interrupt is.  In this case, it's an external wire coming into the CPU that tells it to stop (interrupt) what it's doing and go execute a special section of code (called an interrupt handler).   They're used for two main reasons:

 

2) Efficiency.  Old or cheap computers must spend their time constantly polling for inputs.  Keyboard scans, disk drive status, serial port in/output, touch, you name it... the CPU wastes its time checking to see if something is happening.   Interrupts only happen when some data is ready, which means the CPU only has to handle the input when it's ready, and can spend most of its time doing things for the user instead... or sitting idle to save battery.

 

1) Robustness.  Unless programmed code has turned off or masked an interrupt, the CPU must handle it.  (And there's also usually one interrupt that you cannot turn off... that's the reset line.)   That's the secret here:  even if an app is out of control using up the CPU, firing the signal on the interrupt line will stop whatever that app is doing, and force the CPU to handle the interrupt.  That's how they allow for the OS to take control back.  (Most embedded computers like in your car have what's called a watchdog timer just for this purpose.  No matter how the code fails, that timer is going to cause an interrupt and thus allow the CPU a chance to get back on track.)

 

 

Disclosure:  I've been programming CPU interrupts since my first 6800 microprocessor kit in 1978.  Back then, I had to compile assembly code to hex codes in my head and punch in those digits line by line.  Oldtimers here will have "fond" remembrances of doing this. 


Edited by KDarling - 1/19/13 at 11:43am
post #113 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

I hope this isn't true.  It would make far more sense to integrate it into the screen.  

 

Especially since they just spent millions buying a company with world-leading technology that does exactly that.  

I can see a potential problem with this in that your screen is going to get covered in greasy fingerprints leading to more wiping and irritation. At least in normal touch-screen operation it tends to be the finger-tips used fleetingly rather than the flat of the finger used for longer.

 

For that reason it would be better to have the finger-print reader off screen.

"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything" Robert Zemeckis/Bob Gale/Robert_E._Lee
Reply
post #114 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post

For that reason it would be better to have the finger-print reader off screen.

 

Plus, of course, the grease leaves your fingerprint on the screen itself, where a thief could lift it, assuming it was still there and okay.

 

(However, the better fingerprint recognition code of today also looks for a match to a previous login attempt.  Rather than letting you in as you might think, it assumes that a  _perfectly exact_ match to a previous login is likely to be a spoofing attempt using a fingerprint copy.   The code would rather that each attempt be slightly different in alignment, viewable areas, etc, thus indicating a real finger.)

post #115 of 127

Excuse me, was my post deleted?

 

Why shouldn't this technology be used for the gun industry? Put a thumbprint scanner on the gun so that only the registered owner can use it.

 

This is not a politically sensitive post, as I think both pro- and anti- gun rights advocates should agree that this is a good idea, no?

 

This post is related to the topic at hand, because we're talking about fingerprint scanning technology.

 

If some quick triggered (pun intended?) mod wants to delete this, then please have the courtesy to explain why.

post #116 of 127
Originally Posted by tonton View Post
Why shouldn't this technology be used for the gun industry? Put a thumbprint scanner on the gun so that only the registered owner can use it.

 

This is not a politically sensitive post, as I think both pro- and anti- gun rights advocates should agree that this is a good idea, no?

 

This post is related to the topic at hand, because we're talking about fingerprint scanning technology.

 

If some quick triggered (pun intended?) mod wants to delete this, then please have the courtesy to explain why.

 

Please do start a thread on this! I think it's a fine idea. But you'll need to start it in PO. 

 

I know why, you know why, your supporters know why, and your detractors know why. And it's not just because of topical events, but that is part of it. 

 

Now, if you'd offered a use for fingerprint recognition elsewhere in the tech industry, absolutely it would have stood. But really.

post #117 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobius View Post

I can see a potential problem with this in that your screen is going to get covered in greasy fingerprints leading to more wiping and irritation. At least in normal touch-screen operation it tends to be the finger-tips used fleetingly rather than the flat of the finger used for longer.

 

For that reason it would be better to have the finger-print reader off screen.

 

And if analyst are right it would give another job to the already overworked home button, and keep Apple ahead of the competition. Somehow.

post #118 of 127
RE: CardStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

Great, another f#@king App.  That's all I want...you totally missed my point.  Native man...

Hey... at least 3rd party apps are available to enhance your smartphone.

I'm glad apps like DownCast exist... I greatly prefer it to Apple's own Podcast app...

BTW... what's the difference between tapping on the CardStar icon... vs tapping on the Passbook icon?
post #119 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Originally Posted by tonton View Post
Why shouldn't this technology be used for the gun industry? Put a thumbprint scanner on the gun so that only the registered owner can use it.

 

This is not a politically sensitive post, as I think both pro- and anti- gun rights advocates should agree that this is a good idea, no?

 

This post is related to the topic at hand, because we're talking about fingerprint scanning technology.

 

If some quick triggered (pun intended?) mod wants to delete this, then please have the courtesy to explain why.

 

Please do start a thread on this! I think it's a fine idea. But you'll need to start it in PO. 

 

I know why, you know why, your supporters know why, and your detractors know why. And it's not just because of topical events, but that is part of it. 

 

Now, if you'd offered a use for fingerprint recognition elsewhere in the tech industry, absolutely it would have stood. But really.

 



Done.

post #120 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

RE: CardStar
Hey... at least 3rd party apps are available to enhance your smartphone.

I'm glad apps like DownCast exist... I greatly prefer it to Apple's own Podcast app...

BTW... what's the difference between tapping on the CardStar icon... vs tapping on the Passbook icon?

Separate app takes up space on iCloud and your device storage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Home button fingerprint sensor in 'iPhone 5S' would give Apple a new leg up on the competition
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Home button fingerprint sensor in 'iPhone 5S' would give Apple a new leg up on the competition