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

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 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. 
    But that's not what LuxVue was working on at all, was it?

    Filing of patents isn't a declaration of intent, it's protecting an invention that may or may not be used. Privaris could have been acquired solely in a defensive stance, so that Apple can hold the patents and have them for when they might be infringed upon by other phone makers. 


    StrangeDays
  • Reply 62 of 80
    No concerns here.. Media and bashers are in a frenzy and spreading FUD.
  • Reply 63 of 80
    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
    No one claims biometric authentication in our devices is the holy grail of security. They're more convenient than passcodes, but not more secure. That's why they fall back to passcodes.
  • Reply 64 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.
    I'm not understanding your post. Previously you cited patents and suggested Apple wanted under-screen touch ID but Samsung couldn't build it. I said patents alone are not proof that that's what they were going to do at all, because Apple patents all kinds of stuff they never end up using. This is known. So citing patents doesn't mean anything and you cannot draw valid conclusions from that.
  • Reply 65 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.
    I'm not understanding your post. Previously you cited patents and suggested Apple wanted under-screen touch ID but Samsung couldn't build it. I said patents alone are not proof that that's what they were going to do at all, because Apple patents all kinds of stuff they never end up using. This is known. So citing patents doesn't mean anything and you cannot draw valid conclusions from that.
    It does mean many things. First of all, Touch ID is a working product, right? It is not the analog jack, USB-A port or SD card slot that can be removed without harming the system considerably. Second thanks to these patents we witness some of Apple's efforts to fit Touch ID into a bezel-less design, right? Filing a patent is not as easy as writing a blog post. Maybe it is the most complicated and the most elite of all engineering jobs. So one cannot undervalue the patents like "those are just patents bro"... Those patents reveal Apple's serious research. By filing a patent you disclose at least your engineering secrets, how one can disregard them? So despite all those patents and serious research they reveal, Apple comes up with an  implementation lacking such a crucial feature, one may necessarily question what happened to Touch ID and the first answer that comes to mind are technical barriers. Why does that appear so unnatural to you?
    asdasd
  • Reply 66 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member

    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. 
    Nobody is panicing. FaceID is a great technology. It will be even more fantastic on  desktops or laptops. On a device touchID is more, to my mind, useful and discrete. 

    Apple always say they won't bring anything to market unless it is 100%. They have a patent for under screen biometric fingerprint reading, other companies are also looking into this, Samsung are expected to debut it next year . Why is it so fanciful to believe that apple have this working in a lab, but are not happy that it's at 100%
  • Reply 67 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    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.
    You bug me. Take your strawman arguments about the "sky falling in" somewhere else and go on ignore. Nobody said that. I certainly idn't . And clearly faceID is a long term gestation and isn't a stop gap mesure . This doesn't mean that they were also in parallel not testing under screen touch, just that they weren't happy with the results . This isn't a case of say LCID vs OLED. It's not one or the other. They can have both and sometime in the future they will. 
    gatorguy
  • Reply 68 of 80
    The amount of engineering it takes to achieve the reliability and functionality of Face ID, it most definitely HAS to be something that has been in development for quite some time. This isn't a last minute addition.
  • Reply 69 of 80
    I think they are aiming for both, but there were technical problems with TouchID. 
    For some people and situations FaceID will be better and others TouchID. Having both would be good.
  • Reply 70 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    vmarks 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. 
    But that's not what LuxVue was working on at all, was it?

    Filing of patents isn't a declaration of intent, it's protecting an invention that may or may not be used. Privaris could have been acquired solely in a defensive stance, so that Apple can hold the patents and have them for when they might be infringed upon by other phone makers. 


    I don't think apple is a patent troll. If it has patents for a technology, that technology works in the lab. 
  • Reply 71 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.  
    That is the correct question. "To touch (then bezels) or not to Touch (then no bezels)" Which one should we prefer? "If we have no other place to Touch then let's not Touch, but preserve the Touch models" And that is the conclusion they came with.

    The release of iPhone 8 with Touch ID reveals that they have absolutely no intention to dismiss Touch ID or replace it with something else. The existence of Touch ID on the new release of LCD models is an insurance against the lack of Touch ID in the X.

    It is only when they manage to implement Touch ID in a bezel-free design that the purpose of bezels may be questioned and the continuation of such models may be revized. Until then, bezel designs with Touch ID will persist.
  • Reply 72 of 80
    If Face ID works, then why have Touch ID.. if Face ID doesn't work, then why include it? This isn't Samsung who are looking for more 'ticks marks' on the box, it's product features that people will actually use.
  • Reply 73 of 80
    It's just pr, of course Apple is going to paint a picture as this was there plan all along. I believe the rumors that Apple was working hard to get Touch ID and face id to work together.  I also suspect Apple will bake in retinal scanning into face id to make it more secure. Apple can always bring back Touch ID. But I do think they will move away from it. 
  • Reply 74 of 80
    It seems to be desperately important for a handful of posters, on this and a couple other rumor sites, to push the BS theory that Apple wanted touchID under the X's display but couldn't make it work. I guess it supports their belief that Apple engineering is somehow incompetent or incapable. These posters go to hilariously ridiculous lengths attempting to defend their fantasy. 

    But there's absolutely no evidence that Apple would have preferred TouchID over FaceID for the X, and a mountain of evidence that, quite simply, they finally got FaceID working so well that they can leave TouchID in the rear view mirror. 

    Yeah it's costly wrt BOM and R&D, but the system enables more capabilities than just biometric authentication. I have no doubt it will be rolled out to MacBook and iMac, though I expect TouchID in next year's iPhone 8S (9?) series, alongside an X2 and new X2 Plus (larger OLED model). 
  • Reply 75 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    If Face ID works, then why have Touch ID.. if Face ID doesn't work, then why include it? This isn't Samsung who are looking for more 'ticks marks' on the box, it's product features that people will actually use.
    Why have two forms of biometric systems? For two different types of customers. They could even make it so you need both to login, for an increase in security.


    We know that Apple have a patent on this, and it is on a specific implementation, and is a pretty detailed patent. Since they are not patent trolls that means that that technology exists in their labs and is working there, no doubt. 

    If they can get it to work at scale then it will ship sometime. 
  • Reply 76 of 80
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member
    It seems to be desperately important for a handful of posters, on this and a couple other rumor sites, to push the BS theory that Apple wanted touchID under the X's display but couldn't make it work. I guess it supports their belief that Apple engineering is somehow incompetent or incapable. These posters go to hilariously ridiculous lengths attempting to defend their fantasy. 

    But there's absolutely no evidence that Apple would have preferred TouchID over FaceID for the X, and a mountain of evidence that, quite simply, they finally got FaceID working so well that they can leave TouchID in the rear view mirror. 

    Yeah it's costly wrt BOM and R&D, but the system enables more capabilities than just biometric authentication. I have no doubt it will be rolled out to MacBook and iMac, though I expect TouchID in next year's iPhone 8S (9?) series, alongside an X2 and new X2 Plus (larger OLED model). 
    hey, thanks for accusing those of us who have been on this site for more than a decade of trolling Apple. You with your two posts.

    Theres plenty of evidence that Apple was looking into under the screen touchID, not least fairly old patents on the issue. And as they have repeatedly said they don't rush to market with new ideas, they wait until they are perfect.


    And you don't even have to blame Apple, Maybe samsung couldn't build the screens to Apple's satisfaction. Do you feel better blaming Samsung? 
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 77 of 80
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,974administrator

     You with your two posts.


    You know what? Nobody do this anymore. Everybody stop with the whole "I've been an apple customer for XX years" or "You have [low number] of posts so STFU" schtick.

    Post count here doesn't guarantee quality comments. It is not a badge of insight, or proof that your opinion is better than anybody else's. Being in the Apple ecosystem doesn't guarantee you anything. Take the posts at face value.

    You want to debate opinions, and counter with facts? Fine. Just don't do this whole "I have more posts than you do, so your opinion is meaningless" schtick. Be better to each other.
    edited September 2017 gatorguyMplsP
  • Reply 78 of 80
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,255member
    New developer guidelines. some specific to FaceID and ARKit, now posted:
    https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

    and an article highlighting the most pertinent changes:
    https://www.hackingwithswift.com/articles/14/new-app-store-review-guidelines-cover-face-id-arkit-and-more

    "...developers using the LocalAuthentication framework to enable Face ID unlock (in the same way apps can already use Touch ID authentication) must offer an alternate method of unlock for children under the age of 13 to use...
     This is a strange requirement as the API does not give developers raw access to face data, just a signal that the user was successfully authenticated."

    And an odd change for something that I would have assumed has been in place for a long time but apparently not: No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.

    The full list of major changes are as follows per the second linked article:
    1. The list of apps that are considered to host objectionable content has expanded to include those that are discriminatory based on “national/ethnic origin”.
    2. No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.
    3. Apps that use facial recognition for account authentication “must use LocalAuthentication (and not ARKit or other facial recognition technology)”, including a requirement for providing an alternate authentication method for users under 13 years old.
    4. Apps may now allow users to send money to others as a gift on two conditions. Fisrt, the gift must be a completely optional choice by the giver, and second 100% of the funds must go to the receiver of the gift.
    5. Apple are requiring that all ARKit apps “provide rich and integrated augmented reality experiences”, which means that something as simple as dropping a model into an ARKit view or replaying some animation will not be enough.
    6. In terms of privacy, Apple is making it clear that you may not attempt to identify other people or guess their user profiles based on ARKit’s facial mapping tools, explicitly banning data mining on ARKit facial data.

    "There’s one more addition that I’ll let speak for itself, because clearly something very serious has happened:

    In extreme cases, such as apps that are found to facilitate human trafficking and/or the exploitation of children, appropriate authorities will be notified."

    edited September 2017
  • Reply 79 of 80
    gatorguy said:
    New developer guidelines. some specific to FaceID and ARKit, now posted:
    https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

    and an article highlighting the most pertinent changes:
    https://www.hackingwithswift.com/articles/14/new-app-store-review-guidelines-cover-face-id-arkit-and-more

    "...developers using the LocalAuthentication framework to enable Face ID unlock (in the same way apps can already use Touch ID authentication) must offer an alternate method of unlock for children under the age of 13 to use...
     This is a strange requirement as the API does not give developers raw access to face data, just a signal that the user was successfully authenticated."

    And an odd change for something that I would have assumed has been in place for a long time but apparently not: No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.

    The full list of major changes are as follows per the second linked article:
    1. The list of apps that are considered to host objectionable content has expanded to include those that are discriminatory based on “national/ethnic origin”.
    2. No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.
    3. Apps that use facial recognition for account authentication “must use LocalAuthentication (and not ARKit or other facial recognition technology)”, including a requirement for providing an alternate authentication method for users under 13 years old.
    4. Apps may now allow users to send money to others as a gift on two conditions. Fisrt, the gift must be a completely optional choice by the giver, and second 100% of the funds must go to the receiver of the gift.
    5. Apple are requiring that all ARKit apps “provide rich and integrated augmented reality experiences”, which means that something as simple as dropping a model into an ARKit view or replaying some animation will not be enough.
    6. In terms of privacy, Apple is making it clear that you may not attempt to identify other people or guess their user profiles based on ARKit’s facial mapping tools, explicitly banning data mining on ARKit facial data.

    "There’s one more addition that I’ll let speak for itself, because clearly something very serious has happened:

    In extreme cases, such as apps that are found to facilitate human trafficking and/or the exploitation of children, appropriate authorities will be notified."

    You know, the more I think about Face ID, the less I like it. At least with Touch ID, there is intention behind the act of using a fingerprint reader. With face detection, accidental activation and unintended consequences I feel will be commonplace. I don't want my phone "assuming" I want to unlock it every time I look at it. I won't be getting an X, but I might just get the 8 Plus.
    edited September 2017
Sign In or Register to comment.