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

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80

    asdasd said:
    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. 

    One doesnt need to accept every criticism as valid, because some of it simply isn't. This notion that Apple was incapable of putting Touch ID on the back if they had wanted to, for example. That's absurd, and I for one don't accept it.

    I also don't believe for a second that they're going to add touch ID back into future flagships which also contain Face ID. No more than they're going to put the legacy headphone jack back in. Or serial ports. Etc... Instead, what will happen is all the folks panicking right now over things they haven't even used will in time use them, and stop panicking. 
  • Reply 42 of 80
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,721member
    sog35 said:
    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.
    FALSE.

    TouchID is useless if your hands have any moisture on it or gloves on it.
    But will Face ID work if you have sunglasses on or a scarf covering your mouth?

    I agree, a combination of the two would be awesome. If you look at the configuration of the 8, there's no reason they couldn't have the sensor array at the top and do both next year for the iPhone 8s. 

    Simply from looking at the implementation, it's clear that they've been 'all in' for a while. This wasn't some quick, modified photo-tag implementation like Samsung tried. They developed a whole new set of sensors and algorithms to get it right (assuming it works as advertised.) 

    As to the rumors, I quit reading those long ago - half of them are wrong but no one knows which half. What's the point wasting time digging through the endless stream of rumors about what might come out next year? 
    edited September 2017 cali
  • Reply 43 of 80
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,783member
    asdasd said:
    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. 

    A 'report'? On a rumours site? We're going with that now, are we? Y'see that's what I meant by desperation setting in.

    Let's look at what we know:
    They have been buying up companies and developing this technology for five years.
    They have tested it against a million faces.
    They have built an AI platform that can be trained to recognise faces at at angles, in the dark, with beards, without beards, with glasses, without glasses
    They have enlisted Hollywood special effects crews to build faces to train it.

    What in all of that sounds anything like a 'stopgap'?

    If there was a problem with TouchID working under a screen then they would simply leave it where it was until next year.  

    Oh, and I'll tell you what really gives Apple fans a bad name: running around screaming the sky is falling when they haven't even tried what they're frightened of.

    As I've said before, I have yet to be convinced, but criticising something I haven't even seen yet is just plain stupid.
    StrangeDayscalimrboba1
  • Reply 44 of 80
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,431member

    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?
    Long time Apple users who still live in the Mac universe and have become disaffected by Apple's course can become the most vile trolls out there. Apple has, in their minds, scorned them and they intend to make Apple pay.
  • Reply 45 of 80
    jbdragon said:
    FaceID with all that it requires and I'm going to assume limited quantity in parts, plus higher cost currently I would assume is why Apple has limited it to only the iPhone X, and hasn't put it into a Macbook. TouchID works now. Apple can get it in the numbers they need and so that is what's mostly being used. I think it's days are numbered. The whole TouchID in the screen was a RUMOR. It wasn't a FACT!!! Lots of RUMORS go out there and most are completely wrong. Apple is not going to have both FaceTD and TouchID in the screen. It also takes time to design a phone and the parts going into it. It doesn't happen in 6 months. I don't think TouchID in the screen was ever the plan. FaceID is far more secure then TouchID. No more kids holding a phone to your finger while you sleep. Holding the phone to your face is not going to work when your eye's are closed when sleeping. Designing the display, and all that went into it with True Tone and 3D touch on a new OLED display. I just can't picture then trying to cram TouchID into it also when there really was no need for it.
    Not so much. There were patents:

    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2015/11/apples-most-advanced-oled-display-invention-to-date-surfaces-with-a-fingerprint-reader-under-the-display-of-an-ipad.html

    Samsung just couldn't get even the basic OLED production done. That's it.
    asdasd
  • Reply 46 of 80
    MplsP said:
    sog35 said:
    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.
    FALSE.

    TouchID is useless if your hands have any moisture on it or gloves on it.
    But will Face ID work if you have sunglasses on or a scarf covering your mouth?
    Scarf from the demo:




    ...ok the scarf is on his neck and not his mouth, so what? You pull it down for a second. If it's that cold you likely have gloves on and would have to remove them for touch id.
    cali
  • Reply 47 of 80
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 1,721member
    MplsP said:
    sog35 said:
    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.
    FALSE.

    TouchID is useless if your hands have any moisture on it or gloves on it.
    But will Face ID work if you have sunglasses on or a scarf covering your mouth?
    Scarf from the demo:




    ...ok the scarf is on his neck and not his mouth, so what? You pull it down for a second. If it's that cold you likely have gloves on and would have to remove them for touch id.
    True. Actually, my wife has a pair of 'touch' gloves that she uses in the winter and simply enters the pass code when it's so cold she doesn't want to take off her gloves. The bigger issue in winter is that the battery seems to die if the phone gets too cold. Then again, Apple says its algorithms learn and adjust to your face, so maybe it will learn the scarf as the weather gets colder?

    The sunglasses are the actually real question in my mind. People typically wear them year 'round, especially in the summer. Seems like this is a case where Touch ID would be superior.


    edited September 2017
  • Reply 48 of 80
    I strongly suspect it's been a lot longer than that. Why else would they buy Prime Sense? 
  • Reply 49 of 80
    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. 
    the one face per device limit could be due to performance/speed limitation to match multiple faces using the current A11 Bionic neural engine. If after several years Apple still cannot make it possible to do multiple faces match, they might bring Touch ID back and put it on the back for those occasional that you want your significant to unlock your phone. But for normal use, I don't see any reason to have both. It is going to jack up the price of the phone. 
  • Reply 50 of 80
    I'll regard Apple as "all in" for Face ID when it is included on all the new iPhones released in a given year. By that definition, this is a transition period, and full commitment is at least a year away.
    asdasd
  • Reply 51 of 80
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    "Report". I clicked thinking it was a Tim Cook interview or statement from Apple only to find a tweet from a 3rd party. Fine this under "rumor". 

    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.
    Apple NEVER stated they would place TouchID under the display. Gruber isn't an Apple employee he's just commenting on rumors.

    It's impossible for him to help Apple save face in something they never even acknowledged.

    This sir, is where you turned your brain off.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 52 of 80
    jbdragon said:
    FaceID with all that it requires and I'm going to assume limited quantity in parts, plus higher cost currently I would assume is why Apple has limited it to only the iPhone X, and hasn't put it into a Macbook. TouchID works now. Apple can get it in the numbers they need and so that is what's mostly being used. I think it's days are numbered. The whole TouchID in the screen was a RUMOR. It wasn't a FACT!!! Lots of RUMORS go out there and most are completely wrong. Apple is not going to have both FaceTD and TouchID in the screen. It also takes time to design a phone and the parts going into it. It doesn't happen in 6 months. I don't think TouchID in the screen was ever the plan. FaceID is far more secure then TouchID. No more kids holding a phone to your finger while you sleep. Holding the phone to your face is not going to work when your eye's are closed when sleeping. Designing the display, and all that went into it with True Tone and 3D touch on a new OLED display. I just can't picture then trying to cram TouchID into it also when there really was no need for it.
    Not so much. There were patents:

    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2015/11/apples-most-advanced-oled-display-invention-to-date-surfaces-with-a-fingerprint-reader-under-the-display-of-an-ipad.html

    Samsung just couldn't get even the basic OLED production done. That's it.
    1) Patents are not proof of anything. The Apple patent blog has hundreds if not more for things Apple never deployed.

    2) You don't know that it was a Samsung production issue. You don't know anything as fact, none of us do. Not even mystic Kuo knows. Only Apple knows, and they ain't sayin'.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 53 of 80
    sog35 said:
    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.
    FALSE.

    TouchID is useless if your hands have any moisture on it or gloves on it.
    And face ID is useless when wearing a helmet or face covering winter clothes, it's understandable that you have to defend AAPL as it is in you're interest but can we stop trying to make this tech as some kinda holy gracile of security, face ID just takes fancy pictures of your face it doesn't actually recognize you the way your mother does. The question here is whether it's sound technically for a company so invested in user's privacy not to push for as many different means of authentication working in concert to better protect users
  • Reply 54 of 80
    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. 
    Exactly! I believe that Face ID is here to stay but that doesn't mean Touch ID isn't coming back. 
    asdasd
  • Reply 55 of 80
    Rayz2016 said:
    asdasd said:
    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. 

    A 'report'? On a rumours site? We're going with that now, are we? Y'see that's what I meant by desperation setting in.

    Let's look at what we know:
    They have been buying up companies and developing this technology for five years.
    They have tested it against a million faces.
    They have built an AI platform that can be trained to recognise faces at at angles, in the dark, with beards, without beards, with glasses, without glasses
    They have enlisted Hollywood special effects crews to build faces to train it.

    What in all of that sounds anything like a 'stopgap'?

    If there was a problem with TouchID working under a screen then they would simply leave it where it was until next year.  

    Oh, and I'll tell you what really gives Apple fans a bad name: running around screaming the sky is falling when they haven't even tried what they're frightened of.

    As I've said before, I have yet to be convinced, but criticising something I haven't even seen yet is just plain stupid.
    So is praising it, the thing about touch ID is that it has less point of operation it's just a really detailed picture taken insanely close to its subject, face ID has a million things going on at once, not that that means its inherently a bad technology, but to so audaciously claim with out any proof or actual correspondence, that Apple if they could integrate touch ID into the screen just decided not to is bull shit of highest oder  
  • Reply 56 of 80
    dinoone said:
    Did Apple have enough time to deploy a (software) patch for its Secure Enclave in the new A11 Bionic chip used on the new iPhone X, iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus, handling the security/privacy of Face ID and Touch ID, after xerub published the Secure Enclave firmware decryption key in mid August? Or maybe a hardware patch is necessary, so everybody will have to wait for forthcoming updated versions of the A11 and A10 deploying such patches?
    There's nothing to patch.

    What xerub published was the decryption key for the software bundle, used on one model of iPhone (that a jailbreak already existed for) That does mean researchers can examine the SEP OS in more detail, but it does nothing directly to make the Secure Enclave Processor itself or it's OS less secure. However...

    Apple effectively did the same thing for the kernel , as part of the iOS 10 beta , but for all devices , and it hasn't yet to an avalanche of exploits .

    Now theoretically , xerub might be able to apply the same technique to other models of device and people could then see what the SEP OS looked like on them as well (and that could likely be impressive) if he's just dumping RAM from. Jail broken device mid-upgrade to suck the key out of RAM, then the technique will only ever work on devices that are already have a jail break available.
  • Reply 57 of 80
    cali said:
    "Report". I clicked thinking it was a Tim Cook interview or statement from Apple only to find a tweet from a 3rd party. Fine this under "rumor". 

    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.
    Apple NEVER stated they would place TouchID under the display. Gruber isn't an Apple employee he's just commenting on rumors.

    It's impossible for him to help Apple save face in something they never even acknowledged.

    This sir, is where you turned your brain off.
    It was highly rumored thus in some way highly expected as a good chunk of rumors turn out to be true as you witnessed during the key note, Gruber is Apple frienemy in that you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, He was after all amongst a very small special group chosen for news about the pending Mac pro, so he isn't the most independent pundit and also He does have little Apple birdies and who knows who the hell those are we can only assume is some major
  • Reply 58 of 80
    jbdragon said:
    FaceID with all that it requires and I'm going to assume limited quantity in parts, plus higher cost currently I would assume is why Apple has limited it to only the iPhone X, and hasn't put it into a Macbook. TouchID works now. Apple can get it in the numbers they need and so that is what's mostly being used. I think it's days are numbered. The whole TouchID in the screen was a RUMOR. It wasn't a FACT!!! Lots of RUMORS go out there and most are completely wrong. Apple is not going to have both FaceTD and TouchID in the screen. It also takes time to design a phone and the parts going into it. It doesn't happen in 6 months. I don't think TouchID in the screen was ever the plan. FaceID is far more secure then TouchID. No more kids holding a phone to your finger while you sleep. Holding the phone to your face is not going to work when your eye's are closed when sleeping. Designing the display, and all that went into it with True Tone and 3D touch on a new OLED display. I just can't picture then trying to cram TouchID into it also when there really was no need for it.
    Not so much. There were patents:

    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2015/11/apples-most-advanced-oled-display-invention-to-date-surfaces-with-a-fingerprint-reader-under-the-display-of-an-ipad.html

    Samsung just couldn't get even the basic OLED production done. That's it.
    1) Patents are not proof of anything. The Apple patent blog has hundreds if not more for things Apple never deployed.

    2) You don't know that it was a Samsung production issue. You don't know anything as fact, none of us do. Not even mystic Kuo knows. Only Apple knows, and they ain't sayin'.
    They don't have to say anything, facts speak by themselves. Here is again the most successful iPhone ever, with a new generation, with a new enclosure and plenty of innovations enclosed in the most successful form factor and with the must successful authentication system in the history.
  • Reply 59 of 80
    sog35 said:
    holyone said:
    sog35 said:
    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.
    FALSE.

    TouchID is useless if your hands have any moisture on it or gloves on it.
    And face ID is useless when wearing a helmet or face covering winter clothes, it's understandable that you have to defend AAPL as it is in you're interest but can we stop trying to make this tech as some kinda holy gracile of security, face ID just takes fancy pictures of your face it doesn't actually recognize you the way your mother does. The question here is whether it's sound technically for a company so invested in user's privacy not to push for as many different means of authentication working in concert to better protect users
    Nice going bringing up rare situations where FaceID would not work.

    If you are wearing winter clothes than TouchID won't work either.

    If you are wearing a helmet, then take the damn helmet off to unlock your phone.

    I'm sorry but for 90% of the population having moisture on your hands is much more common than wearing a mask on your face.
    Thanks, drying you're finger on you're cloths is much easer that unzipping off a jacket that goes up to the nose just to check a message and a helmet is even worse, which isn't even the point I'm all for face ID I was hoping Apple would go this direction but as an addition to touch ID not a replacement, but Apple will sell a lot of the X which is what you really care about, not that I mind we all have interests to look after, but a little objectivity would be nice 
  • Reply 60 of 80
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,431member
    Of one thing we can be sure. YouTube will be full of Android pansies claiming to have fooled Face ID soooooo... easily.
Sign In or Register to comment.