But if these "leaks" were from the same source that "inspired" Samsung to move their fingerprint reader to the back of their phone (and who in their right mind would do such a thing unless they were ripping the idea off of someone else), I'm all for it. A fingerprint sensor on the back is as dumb as a bag of hammers.
I recommend a brief read on Apple's Human Interface Guidelines. Does anyone have figures on hand diversity compared to phone size and button placement?
I must admit though, if there was an additional sensor technology in this button (i.e. Glucose or such) I might expect such a position to provide the required contact strength.
I need to correct the earlier statement on Apple never doing this. Steve Jobs would never have allowed this...
I think that Apple will use a DNA based security system, in which a tiny needle will pick your finger with the power button, and then unlock the phone if the DNA matches. Now that James Comey is gone from the FBI, Apple feels comfortable that the government will not press Apple to share DNA identification with the government. /double s
That's crazy talk. Isn't it obvious, with the better water resistance, that Apple intends to use a non-invasive urine unlock mechanism on this year's iPhone? It'll be called Wee ID. The circular opening on the back of the phone provides a target to aim at. /s^2
Let's see Samsung copy any of these crazy ..cough.. cough... I mean innovative ideas!
I am inclined to believe the "circular cut out" on the back that could possibly be the Touch ID is actually the contact point for inductive charging for the 7s/7s+ and not the Touch ID for the iPhone 8 or x or edition or pro
I think that Apple will use a DNA based security system, in which a tiny needle will pick your finger with the power button, and then unlock the phone if the DNA matches. Now that James Comey is gone from the FBI, Apple feels comfortable that the government will not press Apple to share DNA identification with the government. /double s
That's crazy talk. Isn't it obvious, with the better water resistance, that Apple intends to use a non-invasive urine unlock mechanism on this year's iPhone? It'll be called Wee ID. The circular opening on the back of the phone provides a target to aim at. /s^2
Let's see Samsung copy any of these crazy ..cough.. cough... I mean innovative ideas!
I really don't think this one passes basic usability testing. After all, most men can't hit a much larger target than an iPhone, so I'd expect a lot of failures.
Also, what if you've been eating asparagus? Will that confuse the sensor?
I think they'll implement facial recognition, using the existing TouchID sensor. In order to authorise your phone, you need to rub the sensor all over your face.
...does every Apple 'upgrade' seem to have some potential (present or future) privacy risk reach...? Such things as the latest hidden mic in the new iMac, and the always on system level (can't be deleted) Photos image tagging come to mind... Would getting additional finger prints, and facial recognition be consistent with such a potential privacy creep zeitgeist...?
...does every Apple 'upgrade' seem to have some potential (present or future) privacy risk reach...? Such things as the latest hidden mic in the new iMac, and the always on system level (can't be deleted) Photos image tagging come to mind... Would getting additional finger prints, and facial recognition be consistent with such a potential privacy creep zeitgeist...?
I remember the leaks of the first camera that wasnt flush. Nobody believed that either.
The Camera bump isn't a user interface issue; it's just a 0.020 inch protrusion that's barely an annoyance in the worst case..
There will be no Touch ID on the backside; it would be an acknowledged failure to place it there.
So, if Apple is relying on 3D Facial recognition, then it will have to be superior to Touch ID, and more secure.
Still, this is all rumors, so I'll be happy to be proven right or wrong when Apple actually announces said product, whatever it will be called.
There were people strongly doubting it on this forum nevertheless. "Apple would never do that."
Apple has to do what it has to do. It they want to go full screen, and if the touch doesnt work under the screen, it goes on the back. Face Recognition is a far worse solution.
It might be ok, could get used to picking it up and running your index finger (it wont be the thumb for most people anymore). Actually I think the idea spot for that would be where the Apple logo is now.
Your opinion is of no value.
You have no idea what Apple has achieved with 3D face detection. It could be potentially hundreds of times more accurate than Touch ID. A person's face has hundreds perhaps thousands of unique "fingerprints" all over it...that can be aggregated together.
Touch ID is not going on the back. As OP said, it would be acknowledgement of failure, as embedded in the display would be inarguably better.
Touch ID is going away in favor of a far more accurate and convenient solution.
I remember the leaks of the first camera that wasnt flush. Nobody believed that either.
The Camera bump isn't a user interface issue; it's just a 0.020 inch protrusion that's barely an annoyance in the worst case..
There will be no Touch ID on the backside; it would be an acknowledged failure to place it there.
So, if Apple is relying on 3D Facial recognition, then it will have to be superior to Touch ID, and more secure.
Still, this is all rumors, so I'll be happy to be proven right or wrong when Apple actually announces said product, whatever it will be called.
There were people strongly doubting it on this forum nevertheless. "Apple would never do that."
Apple has to do what it has to do. It they want to go full screen, and if the touch doesnt work under the screen, it goes on the back. Face Recognition is a far worse solution.
It might be ok, could get used to picking it up and running your index finger (it wont be the thumb for most people anymore). Actually I think the idea spot for that would be where the Apple logo is now.
Front or back doesn't matter. Between the two, the only difference is that of preference.
I remember the leaks of the first camera that wasnt flush. Nobody believed that either.
The Camera bump isn't a user interface issue; it's just a 0.020 inch protrusion that's barely an annoyance in the worst case..
There will be no Touch ID on the backside; it would be an acknowledged failure to place it there.
So, if Apple is relying on 3D Facial recognition, then it will have to be superior to Touch ID, and more secure.
Still, this is all rumors, so I'll be happy to be proven right or wrong when Apple actually announces said product, whatever it will be called.
There were people strongly doubting it on this forum nevertheless. "Apple would never do that."
Apple has to do what it has to do. It they want to go full screen, and if the touch doesnt work under the screen, it goes on the back. Face Recognition is a far worse solution.
It might be ok, could get used to picking it up and running your index finger (it wont be the thumb for most people anymore). Actually I think the idea spot for that would be where the Apple logo is now.
Your opinion is of no value.
You have no idea what Apple has achieved with 3D face detection. It could be potentially hundreds of times more accurate than Touch ID. A person's face has hundreds perhaps thousands of unique "fingerprints" all over it...that can be aggregated together.
Touch ID is not going on the back. As OP said, it would be acknowledgement of failure, as embedded in the display would be inarguably better.
Touch ID is going away in favor of a far more accurate and convenient solution.
sorry mate, my opinion is empirically more valuable than yours. All surveys show this.
Facial recognition is a worse solution than the touchID on the back, moreover both are failures because Apple clearly would prefer touchID to work under the screen. If they cant do that, there are 2 options.
1) Keep touchID 2) Get rid of touchID
clearly 2 is not tenable. Even if you use an inferior technology like facial recogniton getting rid of touchID would be seen by everybody whose opinion is worthwhile as a regression. You might as well use password only, as that is also an inferior technology. If they use facial recognition it will be supplemental to touchID -- which will have to go on the back if it doesnt go on the Front.
TouchID is not going away. Apple might use facial recognition to allow some transactions, like opening the screen when in a trusted environment ( like at home, determined by location) but most people are going to feel stupid holding the phone up to login. TouchID, if it is on the back, will be what we use for banking etc.
TouchID. Not going away. Might be going on the back, but not going away.
Comments
But if these "leaks" were from the same source that "inspired" Samsung to move their fingerprint reader to the back of their phone (and who in their right mind would do such a thing unless they were ripping the idea off of someone else), I'm all for it. A fingerprint sensor on the back is as dumb as a bag of hammers.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/1/15147998/samsung-galaxy-s8-fingerprint-reader-location
I must admit though, if there was an additional sensor technology in this button (i.e. Glucose or such) I might expect such a position to provide the required contact strength.
I need to correct the earlier statement on Apple never doing this. Steve Jobs would never have allowed this...
I really don't think this one passes basic usability testing. After all, most men can't hit a much larger target than an iPhone, so I'd expect a lot of failures.
Also, what if you've been eating asparagus? Will that confuse the sensor?
I think they'll implement facial recognition, using the existing TouchID sensor. In order to authorise your phone, you need to rub the sensor all over your face.
Such things as the latest hidden mic in the new iMac, and the always on system level (can't be deleted) Photos image tagging come to mind...
Would getting additional finger prints, and facial recognition be consistent with such a potential privacy creep zeitgeist...?
You have no idea what Apple has achieved with 3D face detection. It could be potentially hundreds of times more accurate than Touch ID. A person's face has hundreds perhaps thousands of unique "fingerprints" all over it...that can be aggregated together.
Touch ID is not going on the back. As OP said, it would be acknowledgement of failure, as embedded in the display would be inarguably better.
Touch ID is going away in favor of a far more accurate and convenient solution.
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.
Facial recognition is a worse solution than the touchID on the back, moreover both are failures because Apple clearly would prefer touchID to work under the screen. If they cant do that, there are 2 options.
1) Keep touchID
2) Get rid of touchID
clearly 2 is not tenable. Even if you use an inferior technology like facial recogniton getting rid of touchID would be seen by everybody whose opinion is worthwhile as a regression. You might as well use password only, as that is also an inferior technology. If they use facial recognition it will be supplemental to touchID -- which will have to go on the back if it doesnt go on the Front.
TouchID is not going away. Apple might use facial recognition to allow some transactions, like opening the screen when in a trusted environment ( like at home, determined by location) but most people are going to feel stupid holding the phone up to login. TouchID, if it is on the back, will be what we use for banking etc.
TouchID. Not going away. Might be going on the back, but not going away.