Apple's 'iPhone 8' orders, Samsung demands impacting Chinese component supply for other ve...

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 26
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,290member
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
  • Reply 22 of 26
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
    I'll tell you this, from having been a partner, and designer, in an electronics firm: If Samsung stood on the sidelines, and did nothing to advance that particular part hardware, and of course, the software, which they were entirely responsible for, while the project went into the toilet, then they are entirely responsible for the fiasco.
  • Reply 23 of 26
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,290member
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
    I'll tell you this, from having been a partner, and designer, in an electronics firm: If Samsung stood on the sidelines...
    Keyword: IF
    Of course neither you nor I know if they stood on the sidelines or not, correct? They could have made every effort possible to assist Synaptics who still wan't able to deliver. Or not. I'm not presuming to know all the facts, and doubt you really meant to either. 
  • Reply 24 of 26
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
    I'll tell you this, from having been a partner, and designer, in an electronics firm: If Samsung stood on the sidelines...
    Keyword: IF
    Of course neither you nor I know if they stood on the sidelines or not, correct? They could have made every effort possible to assist Synaptics who still wan't able to deliver. Or not. I'm not presuming to know all the facts, and doubt you really meant to either. 
    Look, this is more complex than you think. If you went to the link I gave earlier, you would see that Samsung couldn't get their screens to function properly with the sensor behind. That's not a sensor issue.This is very much a Samsung issue. I just don't get your refusal to understand that.
  • Reply 25 of 26
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,290member
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
    I'll tell you this, from having been a partner, and designer, in an electronics firm: If Samsung stood on the sidelines...
    Keyword: IF
    Of course neither you nor I know if they stood on the sidelines or not, correct? They could have made every effort possible to assist Synaptics who still wan't able to deliver. Or not. I'm not presuming to know all the facts, and doubt you really meant to either. 
    Look, this is more complex than you think. If you went to the link I gave earlier, you would see that Samsung couldn't get their screens to function properly with the sensor behind. That's not a sensor issue.This is very much a Samsung issue. I just don't get your refusal to understand that.
    And what link with quotes and facts from Samsung are you referring to Mel? I looked back thru the thread and can't find one. I did see one to a RUMOR site. Is that the one?

    I'm not going to keep arguing over something you have no proof of one way or the other. It's silly to continue down a dead-end path in a never-ending quest to prove you're right. Believe whatever you wish. I have no proof to post, just another link as factual as your own. 
    http://www.barrons.com/articles/tech-today-synaptics-rumors-2017-smartphones-faradays-grim-future-1482505900
    Dec/16: Shares of touch-sensor controller maker Synaptics are down $1.34, or 2.4%, at $53.63, after a report from boutique research outfit OTR Global this morning claimed the company’s technology for fingerprint detection won’t be ready to be used in Samsung Electronics’s “Galaxy S8... OTR, according to a write-up by Theflyonthewall, claims that production yields have been stymied for Synaptics’s part.

    http://www.theinvestor.co.kr/view.php?ud=20170313000834
    “Samsung poured resources into Synaptics’ fledgling technology last year but the results were frustrating,” a source briefed on the matter on condition of anonymity....
    the efforts went down the drain after California-based Synaptics failed to develop the technology on time." 

    But to avoid even more distraction from the thread topic: You're right Mel. 

    *sigh*
    edited June 2017
  • Reply 26 of 26
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,982member
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    gatorguy said:
    melgross said:
    avon b7 said:
    On all current phones, there is nothing wrong, ergonomically or otherwise, with rear placed FPS when compared with front facing scanners. It is all preference based on use habits.

    Just as with front facing implementations, there are sweet spots but it all boils down to taste and how you use the device.

    An underscreen sensor centred just below the halfway point down on the screen would be a nice new addition to current options.

    Currently, the rear mounted, recessed, centred scanner is my favourite option. Followed quickly by scanner gestures.
    It's been mentioned in every review of several Android phones that have the scanner in the back about how inconvenient that is. First, you have to fish around with your finger, because most people's hands don't place their finger tip right on top of that sensor. That's a hassle. Secondly, most people, in fishing around, put fingerprints on the camera lens, right above the sensor. And thirdly, you have to pick the phone up, if it's laying on a surface, to get to the sensor, rather than just lightly laying your finger on it.

    all reasons why a rear mounted sensor is a poor choice.
    http://pocketnow.com/2017/03/25/fingerprint-sensor-back-or-front

    FWIW some Android phones have fingerprints sensors on the front, others on the back, and some even on the side. With a good sensor I personally think it doesn't matter all that much, it's simply personal preference. For myself I prefer one properly designed for the back. As you mentioned Samsung's placement this year is less than ideal, brought on by Synaptics failure to deliver as promised. 
    Don't blame Synaptics. You can be sure that Samsung has their fingers, ahem, all over that design, both in software, and hardware. Is just as much their fault as Synaptics. And it's more, because of their apparent assumption of "What can go wrong?", and so failing to have a backup plan.
    Could be true, or maybe not. Neither of us were "in the room" AFAIK. All that's factually known is that Synaptics couldn't have the hardware ready in time, because that's actually been reported.  We can all have our guesses on the whys and what-fors. 
    I'll tell you this, from having been a partner, and designer, in an electronics firm: If Samsung stood on the sidelines...
    Keyword: IF
    Of course neither you nor I know if they stood on the sidelines or not, correct? They could have made every effort possible to assist Synaptics who still wan't able to deliver. Or not. I'm not presuming to know all the facts, and doubt you really meant to either. 
    Look, this is more complex than you think. If you went to the link I gave earlier, you would see that Samsung couldn't get their screens to function properly with the sensor behind. That's not a sensor issue.This is very much a Samsung issue. I just don't get your refusal to understand that.
    And what link with quotes and facts from Samsung are you referring to Mel? I looked back thru the thread and can't find one. I did see one to a RUMOR site. Is that the one?

    I'm not going to keep arguing over something you have no proof of one way or the other. It's silly to continue down a dead-end path in a never-ending quest to prove you're right. Believe whatever you wish. I have no proof to post, just another link as factual as your own. 
    http://www.barrons.com/articles/tech-today-synaptics-rumors-2017-smartphones-faradays-grim-future-1482505900
    Dec/16: Shares of touch-sensor controller maker Synaptics are down $1.34, or 2.4%, at $53.63, after a report from boutique research outfit OTR Global this morning claimed the company’s technology for fingerprint detection won’t be ready to be used in Samsung Electronics’s “Galaxy S8... OTR, according to a write-up by Theflyonthewall, claims that production yields have been stymied for Synaptics’s part.

    http://www.theinvestor.co.kr/view.php?ud=20170313000834
    “Samsung poured resources into Synaptics’ fledgling technology last year but the results were frustrating,” a source briefed on the matter on condition of anonymity....
    the efforts went down the drain after California-based Synaptics failed to develop the technology on time." 

    But to avoid even more distraction from the thread topic: You're right Mel. 

    *sigh*
    Look, I'm just going to say this flat out. The statements you make defending Apple's competitors have never even been worth reading, though I try. We all know where you come down on all of this, and it's vrap.
Sign In or Register to comment.