Apple has been 'all-in' on iPhone X Face ID replacing Touch ID for over a year - report

24

Comments

  • Reply 20 of 80
    Wow, what a report. I'm glad this information was released, because I had heard Apple decided on FaceID in late July; in fact, they made a firmware update while the X's were on the assembly line. It was TouchID initially, when Jonny Ive came running into the factory yelling, "Shut 'er down, SHUT 'ER DOWN!" while waving a USB stick with the FaceID firmware in his hand. 

     :/ 
    edited September 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    you know where faceID would be great -- on an MacBook. Sit down at the desk, open the machine and it says "Hello Asdasd" and logs you in. 
    edited September 2017 superkloton
  • Reply 23 of 80
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,754member
    sog35 said:
    tulkas said:
    mjtomlin said:
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    "Save face"

    That's laughable. Apple doesn't need to save face - they never publicly declared they were going that direction. They've mentioned time and time again how much they do that they end up saying no and shelving it. It could very well be that they DID get Touch ID working under the screen but decided not to use it, because they thought Face ID would be a better system especially with the advancement of AR over the passed few years.

    Furthermore, patenting something does not mean it will ever become a product. Apple has many patents relating to embedding different sensors into displays and rarely do any see the light of day - embedding a camera and speaker, etc. And buying a specific company does not always mean they want it for a specific product or technology. Sometimes they really want the talent - P.A. Semi was a company that designed PowerPC CPU's... Apple bought them for the talent to develop their Ax series of SoCs.
    Yes, save face. Even if he is right and they decided to go with an inferior authentication flow over a year ago, he is just doing damage control. i.e. helping them save face. That is his job, after all.

    And I can believe they would make that decision. I think they had every intention of having TouchID in the glass. But I also think that either they couldn't get it working as well as the Home Button implementation or they realized no one would use FaceID if TouchID was an option...or both. But now that they have gone with just FaceID, there is little chance of going back and adding TouchID in glass. That would be acknowledging a mistake. So, that's where their army of damage control "writers" comes in. Grub leads the pack.
    Bro you are dilusional

    Based on? What part of what I said is inaccurate?

    I get it. Some of you can't see fault with Apple. I'm a long time Apple user, longer than most of you have been alive. Hell, I've probably been commenting here longer than many of you have been alive. But being an Apple fan shouldn't mean turning off your brain.
    gatorguyasdasdMplsP
  • Reply 24 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    sog35 said:
    asdasd said:
    slurpy said:
    asdasd said:
    Gruber does know stuff, but it doesnt make sense really. If they could do both, if touchID worked on the screen then both together would be amazing. 
    Maybe, but Apple isn't known to throw in technology that has a redundant functionality, or to hedge their bets, or to over-engineer something by including components that a majority of people may not use. They believe into pushing the consumer to adopt something with confidence, by going all in. This has been crystal clear through all their product lines. It's like saying Apple "could have" included USB-A on their new MBPs to ease the transition, they "could have" kept the headphone jack, etc. Sure they could have. But they chose not to, which they believe is in the best long term interests of themselves, the product, and consumers. Samsung includes both a fingerprint sensor and a face scanner in their phones, because they know the face scanning is trash.
    Or they couldnt technically. There were reports of some attempts to put it on the back as well of course. And apparantly that failed, hence the delay. 
    the delay is because of OLED screens
    No it isnt. Anyway sog you are only perfectly happy with the iPhone X because the stock is high. Had the stock fallen on this announcement, or even were the stock lower to begin with,  you would hate it.

    Oh and your price predictions were way off. 
    waverboy
  • Reply 25 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member

    tulkas said:
    sog35 said:
    tulkas said:
    mjtomlin said:
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    "Save face"

    That's laughable. Apple doesn't need to save face - they never publicly declared they were going that direction. They've mentioned time and time again how much they do that they end up saying no and shelving it. It could very well be that they DID get Touch ID working under the screen but decided not to use it, because they thought Face ID would be a better system especially with the advancement of AR over the passed few years.

    Furthermore, patenting something does not mean it will ever become a product. Apple has many patents relating to embedding different sensors into displays and rarely do any see the light of day - embedding a camera and speaker, etc. And buying a specific company does not always mean they want it for a specific product or technology. Sometimes they really want the talent - P.A. Semi was a company that designed PowerPC CPU's... Apple bought them for the talent to develop their Ax series of SoCs.
    Yes, save face. Even if he is right and they decided to go with an inferior authentication flow over a year ago, he is just doing damage control. i.e. helping them save face. That is his job, after all.

    And I can believe they would make that decision. I think they had every intention of having TouchID in the glass. But I also think that either they couldn't get it working as well as the Home Button implementation or they realized no one would use FaceID if TouchID was an option...or both. But now that they have gone with just FaceID, there is little chance of going back and adding TouchID in glass. That would be acknowledging a mistake. So, that's where their army of damage control "writers" comes in. Grub leads the pack.
    Bro you are dilusional

    Based on? What part of what I said is inaccurate?

    I get it. Some of you can't see fault with Apple. I'm a long time Apple user, longer than most of you have been alive. Hell, I've probably been commenting here longer than many of you have been alive. But being an Apple fan shouldn't mean turning off your brain.
    Sog can be critical alright. He was one of Apples biggest critics merely a year ago, and we are a stock blip away from him hating the company and its leadership once again. 
    waverboy
  • Reply 26 of 80
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,784member
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    Apple buys a lot of stuff and it's anyone's guess what it's for. You mentioned Luxview. That is for Micro LED; not for TouchID. Privaris could be anything, but I suspect the technology could be for security at Apple Park.

    Apple has also been buying up Face recognition companies since 2013, which is when I think this effort began.

    Seems to be a lot of people praying that FaceID is the stopgap until they can get TouchID working under the screen (something that can't be anywhere near as hard as Facial recognition at that speed from such a small piece of kit). I think the reality is that TouchID was the stopgap until they got FaceID working.
    lostkiwiPickUrPoison
  • Reply 27 of 80
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,784member
    asdasd said:
    slurpy said:
    asdasd said:
    Gruber does know stuff, but it doesnt make sense really. If they could do both, if touchID worked on the screen then both together would be amazing. 
    Maybe, but Apple isn't known to throw in technology that has a redundant functionality, or to hedge their bets, or to over-engineer something by including components that a majority of people may not use. They believe into pushing the consumer to adopt something with confidence, by going all in. This has been crystal clear through all their product lines. It's like saying Apple "could have" included USB-A on their new MBPs to ease the transition, they "could have" kept the headphone jack, etc. Sure they could have. But they chose not to, which they believe is in the best long term interests of themselves, the product, and consumers. Samsung includes both a fingerprint sensor and a face scanner in their phones, because they know the face scanning is trash.
    Or they couldnt technically. There were reports of some attempts to put it on the back as well of course. And apparantly that failed, hence the delay. 
    You honestly think that Apple didn't have the technical chops to put a touch sensor on the back of the phone?

    Seriously?

    I think desperation is setting in. 
    StrangeDayssuperkloton
  • Reply 28 of 80
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,784member
    asdasd said:

    tulkas said:
    sog35 said:
    tulkas said:
    mjtomlin said:
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    "Save face"

    That's laughable. Apple doesn't need to save face - they never publicly declared they were going that direction. They've mentioned time and time again how much they do that they end up saying no and shelving it. It could very well be that they DID get Touch ID working under the screen but decided not to use it, because they thought Face ID would be a better system especially with the advancement of AR over the passed few years.

    Furthermore, patenting something does not mean it will ever become a product. Apple has many patents relating to embedding different sensors into displays and rarely do any see the light of day - embedding a camera and speaker, etc. And buying a specific company does not always mean they want it for a specific product or technology. Sometimes they really want the talent - P.A. Semi was a company that designed PowerPC CPU's... Apple bought them for the talent to develop their Ax series of SoCs.
    Yes, save face. Even if he is right and they decided to go with an inferior authentication flow over a year ago, he is just doing damage control. i.e. helping them save face. That is his job, after all.

    And I can believe they would make that decision. I think they had every intention of having TouchID in the glass. But I also think that either they couldn't get it working as well as the Home Button implementation or they realized no one would use FaceID if TouchID was an option...or both. But now that they have gone with just FaceID, there is little chance of going back and adding TouchID in glass. That would be acknowledging a mistake. So, that's where their army of damage control "writers" comes in. Grub leads the pack.
    Bro you are dilusional

    Based on? What part of what I said is inaccurate?

    I get it. Some of you can't see fault with Apple. I'm a long time Apple user, longer than most of you have been alive. Hell, I've probably been commenting here longer than many of you have been alive. But being an Apple fan shouldn't mean turning off your brain.
    Sog can be critical alright. He was one of Apples biggest critics merely a year ago, and we are a stock blip away from him hating the company and its leadership once again. 
    Yeah, can't wait for that...
  • Reply 29 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    Rayz2016 said:
    asdasd said:
    slurpy said:
    asdasd said:
    Gruber does know stuff, but it doesnt make sense really. If they could do both, if touchID worked on the screen then both together would be amazing. 
    Maybe, but Apple isn't known to throw in technology that has a redundant functionality, or to hedge their bets, or to over-engineer something by including components that a majority of people may not use. They believe into pushing the consumer to adopt something with confidence, by going all in. This has been crystal clear through all their product lines. It's like saying Apple "could have" included USB-A on their new MBPs to ease the transition, they "could have" kept the headphone jack, etc. Sure they could have. But they chose not to, which they believe is in the best long term interests of themselves, the product, and consumers. Samsung includes both a fingerprint sensor and a face scanner in their phones, because they know the face scanning is trash.
    Or they couldnt technically. There were reports of some attempts to put it on the back as well of course. And apparantly that failed, hence the delay. 
    You honestly think that Apple didn't have the technical chops to put a touch sensor on the back of the phone?

    Seriously?

    I think desperation is setting in. 
    apparantly not according to a report in this very site. Sometimes Apple can have difficulties with scaling up production, like everywhere else. 

    And whats with the desperation nonsense - I am buying the 8 or maybe the X. I have been on this site since 2003. I am an Apple fan but In this case it looks to me like they couldnt get TouchID to work to their satisfaction. I also believe that someday in the future they will. People like you tend to give Apple fans a bad name, what with the lack of accepting of any criticism of the company. 

    gatorguy
  • Reply 30 of 80
    Independent of what Apple intended, from the presentation and tidbits i felt the implementation not only on par or better than touchID. Main reasons being Notification Center on the top, re Lacing the side button for former home button clicks and that you cannot use it for more than one person. These are two me some steps back - albeit there are obvious pluses as well. 
    Anyone knows about twins (even when they are not evil) and sunglasses? Windows "hello" seems to manage that alright, doesn't it?
    tmay
  • Reply 31 of 80
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,148moderator
    If by 'for over a year' you mean five or more years, yeah, I can agree with that.  It's stronger security with less moving parts.  That's so Apple.
    eightzeroStrangeDays2old4funcalimrboba1
  • Reply 32 of 80
    Dracarys said:
    sog35 said:
    Ming Kuo once again proven to be a snake oil salesman.

    Sure he gets SOME things right.

    But he spews SO MANY THINGS that he is bound to get SOME things right.

    FaceID was always a possibility, even earlier than last year.  With the iPhone 7+ dual camera's with depth perceptions, FaceID was the next logical step.

    But like ALWAYS Ming Kuo always tries to paint Apple as incompetent and always facing supply issues.


    I stand by my word years ago:  Apple should hire a security team and visit Kuo at his home and office.  Nothing illegal or criminal.  But just let Kuo 'feel' Apple's presence.
    He got most things right. For all you know TouchID under the screen was the original plan but in case they couldn't get it completed in time were developing an alternate solution. 

    Also you're actually trying to say that Apple sends out people to intimidate him? That's ridiculous.
    The timing of his crap means he got NOTHING right. I'm tired of this, people Hindsight adjust his timing and what he says all the time to suit their argument.
    cali
  • Reply 33 of 80
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,784member
    Independent of what Apple intended, from the presentation and tidbits i felt the implementation not only on par or better than touchID. Main reasons being Notification Center on the top, re Lacing the side button for former home button clicks and that you cannot use it for more than one person. These are two me some steps back - albeit there are obvious pluses as well. 
    Anyone knows about twins (even when they are not evil) and sunglasses? Windows "hello" seems to manage that alright, doesn't it?
    Don't know about twins.
    Sunglasses is a good question. 

    Windows Hello takes several different shots of the same person (with hat, without hat, with sunglasses, without sunglasses), so it should be able to handle it, yes.

  • Reply 34 of 80
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 
    Gruber doesnt work for or own stock in Apple. He's a very well-respected blogger-analyst and wouldn't jeopardize his independent reputation (and million-dollar business) by trying to help Apple save-face. Nuts.

    As for patents -- Apple patents all kinds of shit that doesn't make it into finished products, so you're just cherry-picking.

    I'm sure they tested virtual home buttons. I'd guess they found the bottom-edge swipe better for one reason or another. That being said, Apple often changes how its software works, so I fail to understand why it's time to panic.
    edited September 2017 caliwatto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 80

    tulkas said:
    asdasd said:
    Gruber does know stuff, but it doesnt make sense really. If they could do both, if touchID worked on the screen then both together would be amazing. 
    If they had done that they there is a good chance no one would use FaceID.

    From a workflow and efficiency of movement FaceID is inferior to TouchID, but it has more cool factor. Having to pick up and look at your phone will always be more than just picking it up..or just touching it.
    Nope, because you have to look at the phone to use it anyway, therefore it's not an added step. The steps are the same: push home button if Touch ID, swipe up if Face ID. "Looking at it" is not a step because you're already doing that for either.
    caliwatto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 80
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,028member
    What replacement? You don't have to be Gruber to know that Apple has already released the MBP w/ Touch Bar with FaceTime camera attached to the T1 chip driving the Touch ID, two years ago. If Apple's intention was a replacement why it has released Touch ID on MBP? Why it has released a brand new iPhone series as 8 with Touch ID? Touch ID is not going anywhere from this year to next. The future of Face ID and Touch ID is multi biometrics, as revealed by strings discovered in the code.

    You're correct, Touch ID isn't going anywhere for a while. Face ID is part of what Apple considers "the future"; Apple's GPU, an advanced ISP, a Neural Engine, several sensors all highly calibrated, etc. all these things optimized to work together in real time. This system of "biometrics" is much, much more advanced and complicated than Touch ID, which requires a finger print scanner versus all the above.

    Apple put Touch ID in the MacBook Pro because that's what they had at the time, whether that changes in the future doesn't matter, why put off having biometric security when they have a perfectly secure and efficient system already?
  • Reply 37 of 80
    If by 'for over a year' you mean five or more years, yeah, I can agree with that.  It's stronger security with less moving parts.  That's so Apple.
    Agreed. They are all in on this for sure. The development costs are huge of course, but once complete, the margins are correspondingly large. As are the future benefits.

    I can see it propagating to just about every product. I can also see further refinement. The oft-maligned "notch" can be eliminated by moving sensors to the top edge with optical (and audio) refinement. 

    Others have commented on the breadth of the iPhone lineup. the SE is a great iPhone for like $350! All the way up to...nearly 4x the price. 
  • Reply 38 of 80
    tulkas said:
    mjtomlin said:
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    "Save face"

    That's laughable. Apple doesn't need to save face - they never publicly declared they were going that direction. They've mentioned time and time again how much they do that they end up saying no and shelving it. It could very well be that they DID get Touch ID working under the screen but decided not to use it, because they thought Face ID would be a better system especially with the advancement of AR over the passed few years.

    Furthermore, patenting something does not mean it will ever become a product. Apple has many patents relating to embedding different sensors into displays and rarely do any see the light of day - embedding a camera and speaker, etc. And buying a specific company does not always mean they want it for a specific product or technology. Sometimes they really want the talent - P.A. Semi was a company that designed PowerPC CPU's... Apple bought them for the talent to develop their Ax series of SoCs.
    Yes, save face. Even if he is right and they decided to go with an inferior authentication flow over a year ago, he is just doing damage control. i.e. helping them save face. That is his job, after all.

    And I can believe they would make that decision. I think they had every intention of having TouchID in the glass. But I also think that either they couldn't get it working as well as the Home Button implementation or they realized no one would use FaceID if TouchID was an option...or both. But now that they have gone with just FaceID, there is little chance of going back and adding TouchID in glass. That would be acknowledging a mistake. So, that's where their army of damage control "writers" comes in. Grub leads the pack.
    Ah, so you're just a troll. Got it. Because here outside of troll land is is fact that Gruber doesn't work for Apple and never has. He worked for a very popular mac software company then began his own incredibly popular blog and brand. It's idiotic to pretend he's taking directions from Apple when he has his personal financial platform tied to his independent reputation for intelligent, well-reasoned, sometimes critical, writings about Apple.

    Do you even, bro?
    eightzerocali
  • Reply 39 of 80

    tulkas said:
    sog35 said:
    tulkas said:
    mjtomlin said:
    tulkas said:
    Gruber is just trying to help them save face. He knows as well as everyone else that they intended for TouchID to be there. They filed patents. They bough LuxView, they bought up patents from Privaris. All to do scanner under the display. He might be right that it never comes back now, because they never want to admit a mistake so publicly. 

    But if you look at how clumsy the gestures are to compensate for removing the home button altogether (instead of adding a virtual button) and these are gestures that have been used and extended for entirely different purposes for years and recently and how clumsy the demo was and think about use cases, then it is pretty apparent, if one is being honest, that this was a concession. 

    "Save face"

    That's laughable. Apple doesn't need to save face - they never publicly declared they were going that direction. They've mentioned time and time again how much they do that they end up saying no and shelving it. It could very well be that they DID get Touch ID working under the screen but decided not to use it, because they thought Face ID would be a better system especially with the advancement of AR over the passed few years.

    Furthermore, patenting something does not mean it will ever become a product. Apple has many patents relating to embedding different sensors into displays and rarely do any see the light of day - embedding a camera and speaker, etc. And buying a specific company does not always mean they want it for a specific product or technology. Sometimes they really want the talent - P.A. Semi was a company that designed PowerPC CPU's... Apple bought them for the talent to develop their Ax series of SoCs.
    Yes, save face. Even if he is right and they decided to go with an inferior authentication flow over a year ago, he is just doing damage control. i.e. helping them save face. That is his job, after all.

    And I can believe they would make that decision. I think they had every intention of having TouchID in the glass. But I also think that either they couldn't get it working as well as the Home Button implementation or they realized no one would use FaceID if TouchID was an option...or both. But now that they have gone with just FaceID, there is little chance of going back and adding TouchID in glass. That would be acknowledging a mistake. So, that's where their army of damage control "writers" comes in. Grub leads the pack.
    Bro you are dilusional

    Based on? What part of what I said is inaccurate?

    I get it. Some of you can't see fault with Apple. I'm a long time Apple user, longer than most of you have been alive. Hell, I've probably been commenting here longer than many of you have been alive. But being an Apple fan shouldn't mean turning off your brain.
    Ah! The familiar "I'm a long-time Apple fan" troll trope!

    Sorry but no. If you cannot back up you outlandish claim that Gruber and Daring Fireball is an Apple shell front, then you're simply another troll who's full of shit and peddling FUD. I'm betting the latter. In fact, I'll bet you a $1,000 iTunes gift card that you cannot produce anything near that proof. Up for it?
    cali
  • Reply 40 of 80
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,454member
    So what was all the handwringing over whether Apple had solved the OLED under-the-screen fingerprint sensor or would they put it on the back like Samsung?
Sign In or Register to comment.