Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
iPhone X is not a replacement for the Plus model. Aspect ratios don't match. The X has just the width of an iPhone 7. That can't be a replacement for a Plus. Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
That is *not* an extra step -- because you have to look at your phone to use it at all! Yes, even with Touch ID you will still look at the screen when you're ready to start using it, and you don't count it as a step then. So you can't count it as a step for Face ID either. In either case, you must at some point, you know, look at the screen. Same steps.
Unless of course one is being intellectually dishonest and trying to find a way to paint a narrative by counting differently.
My phone gives me feedback (vibration) if the fingerprint unlock fails. It has a programmable side button which in my case activates a voice recorder. I can, and do, activate recording without ever looking at the screen.
Also, is there a difference between 'looking' at the screen and 'staring' at the screen?
It's one of the things that caught my attention when I saw Craig in the video of FaceID asking for the password (I didn't see the keynote, I followed the live blog). It wasn't until later that I read that you supposedly had to stare at the phone for FaceID to work.
As an aside, I wonder if requiring a passcode in the supposed situation that the phone failed in is the best option. That is to say, if the phone should use its intelligence to determine that those attempts or weren't real attempts to unlock or the failed attempts had so little similarities with the owner that no one was even trying to unlock it anyway.
I think this is the area we are moving towards.
Also, if you have screen rotation on 'auto', will the phone rotate the screen if the phone switches from portrait to horizontal and the user is also horizontal, or does the rotation get overridden?
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
To the contrary, senior VP of software engineering Craig Federighi has said almost exactly that. They feel it is the continued evolution and that all the panic from those that haven't used it is just like the same panic before Touch ID, and that these fears will "melt away" when it's in end users hands.
Now everyone's worried because they can't imagine life without Touch ID. We're going to see exactly the same thing with Face ID.
Federighi went on to say that as much as Apple loves Touch ID, Face ID is "that much better." He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication
He went on to say he understands the uncertainty, but that it will "melt away" once people experience the product. "You don't even think about it," he said.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
To the contrary, senior VP of software engineering Craig Federighi has said almost exactly that. They feel it is the continued evolution and that all the panic from those that haven't used it is just like the same panic before Touch ID, and that these fears will "melt away" when it's in end users hands.
Now everyone's worried because they can't imagine life without Touch ID. We're going to see exactly the same thing with Face ID.
Federighi went on to say that as much as Apple loves Touch ID, Face ID is "that much better." He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication
He went on to say he understands the uncertainty, but that it will "melt away" once people experience the product. "You don't even think about it," he said.
...as a senior apple exec, he sounds pretty confident. Gruber suggests Touch ID will not be returning to new models of the X and I believe him.
I've read all of these. Federighi also said "multiple setup" which authors interpret as "FaceID + password"... But it is not, as already revealed by code strings, what Federighi gives a hint about is multi biometrics. Password is not biometrics, it is knowledge.
Edit: here it is, in the MacRumors link above (the sentence you snipped intentionally the rest): "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense." That is multi biometrics...
Pretty much in agreement. They can't hide the sensors, like for ten years they didn't have the tech to hide the Home button functionality under the display, and so they chose to embrace it as iconic. Yup.
I think there would be less criticism of the notch if it was part of a small bezel but then of course you’d lose the rounded corners and it would look like every other smartphone out there. I think people will get used to it quickly but I’d like to see Apple figure out a better way of displaying the UI in landscape mode.
It would be easier to produce and I'm sure people would say it's a Samsung knockoff using a Samsung display. People here like to automatically hate anything that isn't Apple but if this was how the iPhone X's chin and forehead looked I'd be impressed.
sorry. That isn't as impressive as having all 4 corners being bezel free. And having 3 of 4 sides bezel free also.
The Galaxy has zero bezeless corners and only 2 bezeless sides.
The Galaxy basically looks like a 5 year old Galaxy with slightly smaller bezels.
The X looks much more futuristic and beautiful.
And don't forget that the Samsung design requires having the fingerprint sensor AT THE BACK OF THE PHONE. HORRIBLE. Also the NOTCH allows all those amazing sensors/cameras that the Samsung can't compete with. The NOTCH will allow the X to have AR capabilites that the Samsung can't even dream of.
So not only is the X design more beautiful and stunning, its also more practical.
Apple could have EASILY designed a 100% bezeless phone. By just deleting the extra sensors. But then you would not have the amazing AR abilities and would have to have a shitty back of the device fingerprint scanner.
Well, actually, it isn’t true that the NOTCH makes those sensors possible. I don’t understand how you could think that. Are you really expecting us to believe that if Apple extended the bezel to both ends, they couldn’t have had all of those sensors, cameras, projectors, etc.? Seriously? You really mean it when you say that having more room for them would make it impossible for them to be there?
maybe you should rethink your position on that.
The signature design of the iPhone X is the consistently thin frame and the obround screen; the tab, or notch, depending on your perspective, is the compromise to the addition of Face ID and the removal of Touch ID.
In essence, Apple is attempting to achieve the same look as the the Apple Watch, an obround screen with a narrow frame. Taken to the logical conclusion, once Apple can do Face ID under the screen, if that is even possible, the same can be achieved in the Apple Watch. At that point, it will be almost identical design language, and identical security.
Ok, but that’s not a response to what he said. I agree that there’s a design esthetic here. All phones have one, some better than others. It he was making a physical claim that’s not true, unless he didn’t explain it well.
its not likely that Apple could do Face ID from behind the screen any more than they could do Touch ID. Some here might remember that a few years ago, Apple patented a camera design that used the screen itself, or at least a large portion of it as the camera itself. It was an interesting patent, but not practical for a number of reasons.
I look at the iPhone X, and I look at my Apple Watch, and we very little in common, design wise.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
Interestingly enough, when Apple finally came around with a "phablet" sized device in the 6 and 6 Plus, a double buttload of money was made by Apple, so I'm guessing that Android OS and OEM's should take credit for that too. Credit Samsung as well with giving the screen to Apple that it needed to make the iPhone X happen. Will there be a "Plus" version of the iPhone X next year? Maybe, but I'm guessing that the iPhone X form factor has just about hit the sweet spot for size.
I noted this earlier, and maybe there isn't anything to this, that Apple already demonstrated what the design language of the iPhone X would be; it's the Apple Watch.A simple black screen with rounded corners and a skinny bezel. More to the point, Apple has "hinted" of including Face ID in many more products, potentially including the Apple Watch, which would be a huge innovation in wearables; all it has to do is "disappear" the notch by shrinking and/or packing the technology under screen.
So, it's possible that you can be correct about "phablet" bashing and at the same time, others can be correct about "the most beautiful iPhone ever". Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the constant bashing of Apple by the throngs of "the other team" worshipping the arrival of the next big thing, the Pixel 2, while simultaneously denigrating Apple's accomplishments, usually by noting a list of devices that had one or more "breakthrough" features that Apple didn't have.
Same as it ever was.
Things move back and forth between Android OEMs and Apple these days, because much of what they’ve done earlier was the low hanging fruit. What matters most is not whether one is taking ideas from the other, but rather, who does it properly.
as far as the screen goes, no, I’m not giving Samsung “credit” for “giving” the screen to Apple, because Samsung makes a very large portion of its parts sales, and profits, from Apple, without which, Samsung’s parts sales would drop by more than 40%. That includes memory as well. This is a business decision between these two. If Samsung couldn’t/wouldn’t produce LCDs for Apple this year, Apple would have spent more money with Samsung’s competitors to get their OLED production up to speed, as they are doing now, for next year.
if Samsung didn’t sell to Apple, they would lose an estimated $10,800,000,000 in OLED sales. That’s what the 90 million screens Apple ordered at $120 (estimated between $120 - $130 per screen) each for this year. Losing almost $11 billion in sales is what motivated them to “give” Apple those screens. Let’s just pray that they are using some of Apple’s OLED patents so that we don’t get a Samsung Pentile screen.
”All” Apple has to do is to do what may be impossible. Bringing these sensors, cameras, IR blaster, dot projector, and everything else behind the screen may seem easy to someone who isn’t thinking this through, but it’s extremely difficult. Much more difficult than having Touch ID behind the screen. I wish people would think these things out before making breezy statements.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
What extra step, it's already ready to be unlocked if you glance at it and the swipe brings the home screen. Don't think you understand how this thing works. if you want to go to the home screen your looking at it already thus no extra step, the swipe replaces the touch to get to the home screen.
If the didn't do that you could never see your notifications
So I have to look at my phone, then swipe up. How is that more convenient than Touch ID today? As I said before if I want to see notifications on my lock screen I just push the sleep/wake button. Most of the time I don’t care so I just press the home button and boom I’m at the home screen or whatever app I was just using. Obviously we need reviews but at first glance Face ID doesn’t seem more convenient if you have to swipe to get past the lock screen.
I don’t think it would be correct to say that Face ID is more convenient. I would think that, assuming it works well, that is, it would be about *as* convenient.
moving from a password to Touch ID was such a major step up in convenience, that it’s not likely that anything will ever match that move. Right now, if this is around the same, I will be happy. I can see that some are unhappy, and that’s to be expected. After all, we had a lot of wailing when Touch ID first came out.
but this was, I’m sure, a wrenching decision for Apple. They’ve been working on this since before 2013, when they bought PrimeSense. That would make it a good five years, a long time! If it’s true that they were, like Samsung, attempting to have Touch ID work behind the screen, then either they wanted to hedge their bets, or wanted to provide those who may not have liked the idea of Face ID, or who couldn’t use it, an alternative.
hopefully, at some point, someone at Apple will give us the story on that.
I just want to point out that the Super Retina HD display Apple has been touting is a lesser display than the one Samsung has already put on its phones, and worse, is a display that is actually manufactured and sold by Samsung to Apple.
It's not an Apple invention, and as AI itself has pointed out, Apple is having trouble getting anyone else to even make a display like Samsung can.
I do think iOS is still the only plausible option for anyone because Apple is the only one keeping any sort of user privacy in mind, while Android is increasingly a vector for Google to know more about my life.
What are you talking about? Why is it a lesser display? We know little about it so far, except that it’s brighter than Samsung’s, under controllable conditions, which, at its brightest, Samsung’s is not. Other than that, what is there? It does HDR, which Samsung’s doesn’t. It does DCI-P3, which Samsung’s does, though Android makes it difficult to use it.
Apple has a bunch of OLED patents. We don’t know if this is a standard Samsung Pentile display, which I sure hope it isn’t, or something somewhat different.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
IMO for two reasons:
1-It forces a deliberate action to turn on/unlock the phone..
Otherwise accidental glances by the owner or others my triger the unlock.....resulting in unintended unlocks....
....and in case of others accidentally glancing, it would result into unsuccessful unlocks.. after few of which the phone would be forced into passcode unlock mode . Not very practical and convenient.
2-the detection device would have to be on all the time , by forcing a deliberate swipe up.. the detection device will only come on when needed and save battery .
All that said.. i think iphone 8 with glass construction and X with the glass and stainless construction are absolutely Gorgeous!!!
Regarding #2 I believe you are mistaken. Swiping up for home takes place after face authentication.
I believe the reason is to allow one to review the lock screen if desired.
I also wonder whether the home action as a force touch on the bottom edge would be a good option. i have to assume they tested it but not sure why swipe prevailed.
Are you sure about that or guessing? ... that would mean that the detection mechanism has to be on all the time not very good for battery life.. i doubt Apple would make a choice like that.
The detection happens when you wake it, not all the time, and not when you swipe. You raise to wake, it 1) looks for a face, 2) checks face is looking at screen if face-attention is activated as is by default, 3) checks if it’s your face. if you swipe any time during this process it will bring you past the lock screen once authentication is complete. if you do not swipe it leaves you at lock screen.
im certain about all of this per Craig F.
But that brings another issue to mind. if the detection mechanism does not wake up at swipe time but rather when phone is raised to wake....what happens if ones phone is sitting on a desk or the saddle in the car and one want to unlock it without having to or being able to raise it up. (Ir.. being in car saddle) Wouldnt it be more practical if the users touch/swipe woke the detection system up? That way a deliberate action from the user will wake up the detection and also one wont have to pick the phone up ....
if you look at it, it’s supposed to wake up without you having to pick it up. I imagine that you have to swipe up after that to pass the lock screen.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
Ok, so that I don’t get. Aren’t you planning on looking at the phone after you wake it up? If not, what are you planning to do with it? This seems like a made up argument.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
How long did you search before you could find a picture of particularly small hands holding that Samsung. I know you were trying to be comical but in the process probably completely unaware how the iPhone 8+ would look in that same hand. Is the 8+ also therefore "unwieldy, cumbersome, uncomfortable and ridiculous"? I would suspect most here would say it is not despite the similar similar dimensions.
-Galaxy Note 2 you used as your example: 80.5 x 151.1 x 9.4 mm
-Apple iPhone 8+: 78.1 x 158.4 x 7.5 ...or even the iPhone 7+: 77.9 x 158.2 x 7.3
Footnote: That old Galaxy Note 2 while 2mm thicker than current iPhones I mentioned also had a rounded back so that it helped fit the hand better, avoiding abrupt edges. So "holdability" and comfort is likely quite comparable.
Kinda like posting this pic and claiming it's representative of how you look wearing Airpods.
Speaking of which, did they mention whether the X will include AirPods, or Lightning EarPods in the box?
Seriously? AirPods cost $159. You really think they would include that?
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
That is *not* an extra step -- because you have to look at your phone to use it at all! Yes, even with Touch ID you will still look at the screen when you're ready to start using it, and you don't count it as a step then. So you can't count it as a step for Face ID either. In either case, you must at some point, you know, look at the screen. Same steps.
Unless of course one is being intellectually dishonest and trying to find a way to paint a narrative by counting differently.
My phone gives me feedback (vibration) if the fingerprint unlock fails. It has a programmable side button which in my case activates a voice recorder. I can, and do, activate recording without ever looking at the screen.
Also, is there a difference between 'looking' at the screen and 'staring' at the screen?
It's one of the things that caught my attention when I saw Craig in the video of FaceID asking for the password (I didn't see the keynote, I followed the live blog). It wasn't until later that I read that you supposedly had to stare at the phone for FaceID to work.
As an aside, I wonder if requiring a passcode in the supposed situation that the phone failed in is the best option. That is to say, if the phone should use its intelligence to determine that those attempts or weren't real attempts to unlock or the failed attempts had so little similarities with the owner that no one was even trying to unlock it anyway.
I think this is the area we are moving towards.
Also, if you have screen rotation on 'auto', will the phone rotate the screen if the phone switches from portrait to horizontal and the user is also horizontal, or does the rotation get overridden?
All they mean by staring is that you are looking directly at the screen.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
That is *not* an extra step -- because you have to look at your phone to use it at all! Yes, even with Touch ID you will still look at the screen when you're ready to start using it, and you don't count it as a step then. So you can't count it as a step for Face ID either. In either case, you must at some point, you know, look at the screen. Same steps.
Unless of course one is being intellectually dishonest and trying to find a way to paint a narrative by counting differently.
My phone gives me feedback (vibration) if the fingerprint unlock fails. It has a programmable side button which in my case activates a voice recorder. I can, and do, activate recording without ever looking at the screen.
But you still have to look at it to use it. You cannot escape this -- you must look at the device in either use case. Thus "looking at the device" is not a step, unless you're going to count it in both. But you don't.
Unlocking with Face ID does not incur any added-step penalty. Contrary to the panic being presented here, you don't need to "stare" at it as you're suggesting. You just look at it as you would were you using any device. Done.
You guys are just inventing panic and FUD for reason I can't fathom.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
To the contrary, senior VP of software engineering Craig Federighi has said almost exactly that. They feel it is the continued evolution and that all the panic from those that haven't used it is just like the same panic before Touch ID, and that these fears will "melt away" when it's in end users hands.
Now everyone's worried because they can't imagine life without Touch ID. We're going to see exactly the same thing with Face ID.
Federighi went on to say that as much as Apple loves Touch ID, Face ID is "that much better." He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication
He went on to say he understands the uncertainty, but that it will "melt away" once people experience the product. "You don't even think about it," he said.
...as a senior apple exec, he sounds pretty confident. Gruber suggests Touch ID will not be returning to new models of the X and I believe him.
I've read all of these. Federighi also said "multiple setup" which authors interpret as "FaceID + password"... But it is not, as already revealed by code strings, what Federighi gives a hint about is multi biometrics. Password is not biometrics, it is knowledge.
Edit: here it is, in the MacRumors link above (the sentence you snipped intentionally the rest): "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense." That is multi biometrics...
I trimmed it because 1) You claimed no Apple exec said this was the future. Yet there, he said exactly that. 2) could doesn't mean anything, and Gruber, who speaks to these guys and others off the record, has said it's not happening.
I know you're panicked, but you just need to accept the change.
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
Ok, so that I don’t get. Aren’t you planning on looking at the phone after you wake it up? If not, what are you planning to do with it? This seems like a made up argument.
Thank you. It's like he's so eager to be "concerned" that he's omitting this critical fact -- you're already going to be looking at it!!
So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it? The action makes your intent clear.
When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor).
This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone.
I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
Swipe up replaces the home button press. It's not an extra step if it replaces it. Why is that so hard to understand?
It is an extra step if you have to look at it first.
NO IT'S NOT.
Scenario A 1) place finger on Touch ID to unlock 2) press Touch ID to go to Home
Scenario B 1) look at phone to unlock 2) swipe up to go to Home
Both of these are two steps. With the newer gen of Touch ID sensors, and from everything we've read about Face ID, both steps 1 & 2 in both scenarios can happen at essentially the exact same time if you want to go straight to Home. You don't like, spend time looking at your phone for a while while twiddling your thumbs, then swipe up.
Speaking of which, did they mention whether the X will include AirPods, or Lightning EarPods in the box?
Honestly, Apple, that’s just not acceptable.
LOL so now you guys expect $160 headphones thrown in for free? lawd.... They can barely fulfill the demand for AirPods now, it's going to be a while longer before they're cheap enough to toss in the box.
Not to mention how stupid it would be to include expensive wireless headphones in the box when x numbers of people already may already have AirPods or other wireless headphones to begin with. These aren't cheap enough to toss in a drawer because they were freebies in the box and never get used.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
iPhone X is not a replacement for the Plus model. Aspect ratios don't match. The X has just the width of an iPhone 7. That can't be a replacement for a Plus. Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
Honestly the fact the X is the same point-width as the 7 is giving me serious pause. I had initially thought the extra width meant more actual point real estate, and of course glossed over this when reading Gruber's resolution breakdown, etc. Height I guess is cool, but the biggest advantage to jumping to the 6 for me was the extra portrait width for reading text.
Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow.
That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells.
I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years. So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
I don't think so.
I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.
I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.
Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom. Apple is racing to the top.
I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year. But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets". Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...
...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen". Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again.
The Plus model iPhones may have qualified somewhat as phablet but the iPhone X is their replacement. Once they can drop the price down, the X can displace the Plus models entirely.
I'd quite like a smaller iPhone X mini with just under 5" display but the iPhone X size is much better than the Plus model and phablets while offering the same benefits.
Both iPhone 8 and 8 Plus will survive until Apple comes up with a TouchID solution for the X to achieve multi biometrics. FaceID is not a replacement for TouchID either, none of the Apple execs has said that, this is just a divination of the blog writers.
To the contrary, senior VP of software engineering Craig Federighi has said almost exactly that. They feel it is the continued evolution and that all the panic from those that haven't used it is just like the same panic before Touch ID, and that these fears will "melt away" when it's in end users hands.
Now everyone's worried because they can't imagine life without Touch ID. We're going to see exactly the same thing with Face ID.
Federighi went on to say that as much as Apple loves Touch ID, Face ID is "that much better." He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication
He went on to say he understands the uncertainty, but that it will "melt away" once people experience the product. "You don't even think about it," he said.
...as a senior apple exec, he sounds pretty confident. Gruber suggests Touch ID will not be returning to new models of the X and I believe him.
I've read all of these. Federighi also said "multiple setup" which authors interpret as "FaceID + password"... But it is not, as already revealed by code strings, what Federighi gives a hint about is multi biometrics. Password is not biometrics, it is knowledge.
Edit: here it is, in the MacRumors link above (the sentence you snipped intentionally the rest): "He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense." That is multi biometrics...
I trimmed it because 1) You claimed no Apple exec said this was the future. Yet there, he said exactly that. 2) could doesn't mean anything, and Gruber, who speaks to these guys and others off the record, has said it's not happening.
I know you're panicked, but you just need to accept the change.
"He confirmed" is not the same as "he said". He confirmed what and how? The rest of the sentence explains what he confirmed: "he confirmed... with the caveat that..." Given that caveat, how one can claim that Face ID is absolutely the future of biometric authentication? The emphasis is on the caveat in this reported conversation.
I don't deal with personal offenses. Save your efforts, or don't save, whatever you need...
Comments
Also, is there a difference between 'looking' at the screen and 'staring' at the screen?
It's one of the things that caught my attention when I saw Craig in the video of FaceID asking for the password (I didn't see the keynote, I followed the live blog). It wasn't until later that I read that you supposedly had to stare at the phone for FaceID to work.
As an aside, I wonder if requiring a passcode in the supposed situation that the phone failed in is the best option. That is to say, if the phone should use its intelligence to determine that those attempts or weren't real attempts to unlock or the failed attempts had so little similarities with the owner that no one was even trying to unlock it anyway.
I think this is the area we are moving towards.
Also, if you have screen rotation on 'auto', will the phone rotate the screen if the phone switches from portrait to horizontal and the user is also horizontal, or does the rotation get overridden?
Now everyone's worried because they can't imagine life without Touch ID. We're going to see exactly the same thing with Face ID.
Federighi went on to say that as much as Apple loves Touch ID, Face ID is "that much better." He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication
He went on to say he understands the uncertainty, but that it will "melt away" once people experience the product. "You don't even think about it," he said.
https://daringfireball.net/thetalkshow/2017/09/15/ep-200
https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/15/interview-apples-craig-federighi-answers-some-burning-questions-about-face-id/
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/15/craig-federighi-addresses-face-id-concerns/
...as a senior apple exec, he sounds pretty confident. Gruber suggests Touch ID will not be returning to new models of the X and I believe him.
Edit: here it is, in the MacRumors link above (the sentence you snipped intentionally the rest):
"He confirmed that Apple believes Face ID is the future of biometric authentication, with the caveat that there are settings where different biometric techniques or combinations of biometrics could make sense."
That is multi biometrics...
its not likely that Apple could do Face ID from behind the screen any more than they could do Touch ID. Some here might remember that a few years ago, Apple patented a camera design that used the screen itself, or at least a large portion of it as the camera itself. It was an interesting patent, but not practical for a number of reasons.
I look at the iPhone X, and I look at my Apple Watch, and we very little in common, design wise.
as far as the screen goes, no, I’m not giving Samsung “credit” for “giving” the screen to Apple, because Samsung makes a very large portion of its parts sales, and profits, from Apple, without which, Samsung’s parts sales would drop by more than 40%. That includes memory as well. This is a business decision between these two. If Samsung couldn’t/wouldn’t produce LCDs for Apple this year, Apple would have spent more money with Samsung’s competitors to get their OLED production up to speed, as they are doing now, for next year.
if Samsung didn’t sell to Apple, they would lose an estimated $10,800,000,000 in OLED sales. That’s what the 90 million screens Apple ordered at $120 (estimated between $120 - $130 per screen) each for this year. Losing almost $11 billion in sales is what motivated them to “give” Apple those screens. Let’s just pray that they are using some of Apple’s OLED patents so that we don’t get a Samsung Pentile screen.
”All” Apple has to do is to do what may be impossible. Bringing these sensors, cameras, IR blaster, dot projector, and everything else behind the screen may seem easy to someone who isn’t thinking this through, but it’s extremely difficult. Much more difficult than having Touch ID behind the screen. I wish people would think these things out before making breezy statements.
moving from a password to Touch ID was such a major step up in convenience, that it’s not likely that anything will ever match that move. Right now, if this is around the same, I will be happy. I can see that some are unhappy, and that’s to be expected. After all, we had a lot of wailing when Touch ID first came out.
but this was, I’m sure, a wrenching decision for Apple. They’ve been working on this since before 2013, when they bought PrimeSense. That would make it a good five years, a long time! If it’s true that they were, like Samsung, attempting to have Touch ID work behind the screen, then either they wanted to hedge their bets, or wanted to provide those who may not have liked the idea of Face ID, or who couldn’t use it, an alternative.
hopefully, at some point, someone at Apple will give us the story on that.
Apple has a bunch of OLED patents. We don’t know if this is a standard Samsung Pentile display, which I sure hope it isn’t, or something somewhat different.
What’s not acceptable?
Unlocking with Face ID does not incur any added-step penalty. Contrary to the panic being presented here, you don't need to "stare" at it as you're suggesting. You just look at it as you would were you using any device. Done.
You guys are just inventing panic and FUD for reason I can't fathom.
I trimmed it because 1) You claimed no Apple exec said this was the future. Yet there, he said exactly that. 2) could doesn't mean anything, and Gruber, who speaks to these guys and others off the record, has said it's not happening.
I know you're panicked, but you just need to accept the change.
Thank you. It's like he's so eager to be "concerned" that he's omitting this critical fact -- you're already going to be looking at it!!
Scenario A
1) place finger on Touch ID to unlock
2) press Touch ID to go to Home
Scenario B
1) look at phone to unlock
2) swipe up to go to Home
Both of these are two steps. With the newer gen of Touch ID sensors, and from everything we've read about Face ID, both steps 1 & 2 in both scenarios can happen at essentially the exact same time if you want to go straight to Home. You don't like, spend time looking at your phone for a while while twiddling your thumbs, then swipe up.
Not to mention how stupid it would be to include expensive wireless headphones in the box when x numbers of people already may already have AirPods or other wireless headphones to begin with. These aren't cheap enough to toss in a drawer because they were freebies in the box and never get used.
Honestly the fact the X is the same point-width as the 7 is giving me serious pause. I had initially thought the extra width meant more actual point real estate, and of course glossed over this when reading Gruber's resolution breakdown, etc. Height I guess is cool, but the biggest advantage to jumping to the 6 for me was the extra portrait width for reading text.
I don't deal with personal offenses. Save your efforts, or don't save, whatever you need...