iPhone X took over two years to develop, marks new chapter in iPhone design, says Jony Ive...

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 90
    My first Apple product was a IIe. My first Mac was a Mac IIfx. I currently own 5 Apple products. I own APPL stock. I have NO doubt that Face Recognition could very well be the biggest fiasco Apple has ever had to deal with.
    5 devices? bro...you gotta read this thread:

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/discussion/202241/
  • Reply 62 of 90

    mrboba1 said:
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Hardly. I think all this crap about some notch is some sort of wart on a phone is ridiculous at best, no matter who may have put one there. Also, it has been in the hands of only a very few, and pictures of phones never do reality any justice.

    Most of the time it will be filled with informational stuff, just like the top is now. It will be a non-issue except for those who just want to nit-pick.
    That informational stuff on top can make the notch unnoticeable, I agree. The marketing department made a mistake IMHO by using pictures emphasizing the notch so much. In actual usage the notch will be barely noticeable in portrait orientation, noticeable only if you enlarge the content to fill the screen.
    Define “mistake”? I predict the X will sell out immediately. To me this suggests there was no mistake.
    patchythepirate
  • Reply 63 of 90
    mrboba1 said:
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Hardly. I think all this crap about some notch is some sort of wart on a phone is ridiculous at best, no matter who may have put one there. Also, it has been in the hands of only a very few, and pictures of phones never do reality any justice.

    Most of the time it will be filled with informational stuff, just like the top is now. It will be a non-issue except for those who just want to nit-pick.

    100% right.  It's hard for me to wrap my head around someone even posing the question: "The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch?"  That makes as much sense as "do you think cruise control is worth the unsightly button on the steering wheel?"
    StrangeDaysJWSCfastasleep
  • Reply 64 of 90
    holyone said:
    holyone said:
    "Discussing the inner workings of iPhone X, Ive said the inclusion of Face ID is the culmination of years of work toward a non-contact user interface. From a user's perspective, features that do not require physical interaction make a device feel simpler, yet at the same time more robust. Ive goes on to say the replacement of Touch ID, a capacitive fingerprint reading solution included in all iPhone models since iPhone 5s, equates to a heightened user experience." Wow Jony what dubious reasoning, sure raising the iPhone and have it ready and unlocked with out interaction is less friction, but the home button paradigm was just as simple considering that you don't just look at iPhone X and have it read youre mind thus forfulling this zero interaction premiss, you still have to touch the phone to interacting with it and since you're going to touch the phone any ways using one of those " touchese" for biometric features is just as clean I think. The fact is the iPhone user experience is still firmly interaction heavy and very much "heightened", IMO killing touch ID is a horrendous mistake and is testament to Apple being technology drunk, technological fetuses are just being thrown in there for technology sake with weak and half assed though, the touch bar in MBP's which though not completely useless is just there because Apple can put it there and serves little els, the cylindrical Mac which looked great but was as a result of technology allowing it and no other consideration, if you looking at where those things are now its disappointing. Personally I'm thrilled with Face ID I've been hoping for it on the MBs and iMacs forever but it should have been in addition to Touch ID not replacement for it, not that the X in not great, but Face ID seems like a fan boy geeking out with little thought beyond the obvious, this becomes clear if you unbiasedly consider "simplicity" in touch ID Apple pay and face ID Apple pay. But hey who cares when all that matters is profits on top of profits, shout out to sog 35 ;) and to Strange Days and gang unless to challenge points above please spare me, thanks
    Regarding the ‘technology drunk’ view, this doesn’t exactly hold water.  FaceID as a replacement for TouchID frees up space in the handset while providing far greater security.  The touch bar on tne Mac is a fine replacement for fixed function keys that needed to be Shifted, Ctrl’d, or Alt’d to expand beyond single use.  The litmus test is not a comparison to what many are accustomed to.  The litmus test is which solution you would choose had both been available from the start.  To my mind a dynamic touch bar wins out easily over a row of fixed keys.  To my mind a more secure face recognition solution wins out over an extra component that’s less secure, is subject to smudges and dirt and other means of failure.  As to Apple Pay, those who have been paying attention are aware that the process is equally simple via FaceID versus  TouchID.

    Again youre points satisfy the underlining reasoning of, and to quote Jony him self when introducing touch ID as something that was not, "technology for technology's sake" which is in violation of sacred principles that design should not accommodate technology but technology should accommodate design which should accommodate usability. an iPhone is a tool and the best made tools are those that in their evolution impose the least transion cost. When touch ID was implemented it was in a way that was intrinsic to how the iPhone's home screen operated such that it wasn't even an adoption, it was seamless.

     My annoyance isn't with the technology it self nor how it works but with the sentiment that face ID is better on any level that (Face ID+Touch ID), and even more annoying is that it was to setify a shallow tech feature of edge to edge display. The argument here is that you have a screen as big as the 7Plus in a form factor of the 7, in design terms this means that the screen then is high in importants in this paradigm, but the X screen has a distinctive notch distruping this very primary focal point of the design objective, thus making the screen subject to the FID tech wich is primarily there so an iPhone can loose the home button and have an edge to edge display wich Offcause is a circular argument, this does not make sence.

    To you're point about the touch bar, it's dynamic nature dose not compensate for the fact that you have to look at it to use it, a tool you coud once use blind folded becomes less usefull when that ability tied to productivity is removed. You're point about apple pay is true depending on how you look at it which is to my point that, there's little gained other then face ID being mathematically more secure which Offcause is irrelevant since touch ID is still an industry's best and I don't know of any instance where it has been defeated, as to do so still requires a great deal of effort.

     The point which can't get through because people are too infatuated with the new and the shinny is that a door with two locks is just more secure. I challenge you to offer a reason why face ID would not work on the 8 and 8Plus in their current form and home button with out referencing shallow narow minded things like smaller size big screen and I'd be more then willing to never coment on this subject again.

    I think holyone is pulling our leg in the tradition of parody.  The first clue was the atrocious spelling and grammar, but what made this crystal clear was the point that the iPhone X is less useful for blindfolded users than the iPhone 7.  Touche.
    fastasleep
  • Reply 65 of 90
    Rayz2016 said:
    My first Apple product was a IIe. My first Mac was a Mac IIfx. I currently own 5 Apple products. I own APPL stock. I have NO doubt that Face Recognition could very well be the biggest fiasco Apple has ever had to deal with.

    :smiley: 

    Did anyone guess precisely where this was going long before he reached the end of his Apple kit list?

    And he misspelled AAPL. 
    Rayz2016
  • Reply 66 of 90

    So, Ive says the iPhone X is a new “chapter”, not the “ultimate expression” of the iPhone. The previous “expressions” of iPhone will persist. Touch ID will persist, iPhone X doesn’t signal its replacement. Face ID may be better, more natural, not invasive but it can’t replace Touch ID in all cases. It is ineffective against twins and kids below 13 years old.
    And Touch ID is useless if you don’t have fingers or use your phone in the rain.
    You can dry your hands and try again. Those without fingers cannot type password either, so this is a wholly different situation. Of course when Apple is able to implement multibiometrics, both Touch ID and Face ID, the Home button may become a relic, provided that the upward swipe gesture is adopted as a reliable Home button substitute by the majority. Actually it is not without the help of the other hand.
  • Reply 67 of 90

    mrboba1 said:
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Hardly. I think all this crap about some notch is some sort of wart on a phone is ridiculous at best, no matter who may have put one there. Also, it has been in the hands of only a very few, and pictures of phones never do reality any justice.

    Most of the time it will be filled with informational stuff, just like the top is now. It will be a non-issue except for those who just want to nit-pick.
    That informational stuff on top can make the notch unnoticeable, I agree. The marketing department made a mistake IMHO by using pictures emphasizing the notch so much. In actual usage the notch will be barely noticeable in portrait orientation, noticeable only if you enlarge the content to fill the screen.
    Define “mistake”? I predict the X will sell out immediately. To me this suggests there was no mistake.
    If they didn't emphasize the notch so unnecessarily there wouldn't be so much flame about it. It would be merged with the background and many people wouldn't even notice it on pictures.
  • Reply 68 of 90
    JWSCJWSC Posts: 143member
    Face ID may be better, more natural, not invasive but it can’t replace Touch ID in all cases. It is ineffective against twins and kids below 13 years old.
    And you know this how?
  • Reply 69 of 90
    holyoneholyone Posts: 377member
    mrboba1 said:
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Hardly. I think all this crap about some notch is some sort of wart on a phone is ridiculous at best, no matter who may have put one there. Also, it has been in the hands of only a very few, and pictures of phones never do reality any justice.

    Most of the time it will be filled with informational stuff, just like the top is now. It will be a non-issue except for those who just want to nit-pick.

    100% right.  It's hard for me to wrap my head around someone even posing the question: "The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch?"  That makes as much sense as "do you think cruise control is worth the unsightly button on the steering wheel?"
    but @ randominternetperson are you suggesting that face ID is some how intrinsically bound to the notch and functional only as a notch on an edge to edge display and couldn't funtion in any other form factor like in the 8 and 8Plus ?. Is the truth not that Face ID is there because Apple was chasing an edge to edge display and non here nor at Apple can give as compelling a reason for an edge to edge display then can be given for touch ID, other than bigger screen on smaller phone even if that screen has a notch at the top of it ?, people forget that the notch justifies the screen not the other way round.
  • Reply 70 of 90
    JWSC said:
    Face ID may be better, more natural, not invasive but it can’t replace Touch ID in all cases. It is ineffective against twins and kids below 13 years old.
    And you know this how?
    "The probability of a false match is different for twins and siblings that look like you as well as among children under the age of 13, because their distinct facial features may not have fully developed. If you're concerned about this, we recommend using a passcode to authenticate."

    Face ID Security Guide
    https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf

    I said "twins" but it says "twins and siblings". So your brother or sister may unlock your iPhone X if they look like you.
    edited October 2017 holyoneJWSCspheric
  • Reply 71 of 90
    holyoneholyone Posts: 377member
    holyone said:
    holyone said:
    "Discussing the inner workings of iPhone X, Ive said the inclusion of Face ID is the culmination of years of work toward a non-contact user interface. From a user's perspective, features that do not require physical interaction make a device feel simpler, yet at the same time more robust. Ive goes on to say the replacement of Touch ID, a capacitive fingerprint reading solution included in all iPhone models since iPhone 5s, equates to a heightened user experience." Wow Jony what dubious reasoning, sure raising the iPhone and have it ready and unlocked with out interaction is less friction, but the home button paradigm was just as simple considering that you don't just look at iPhone X and have it read youre mind thus forfulling this zero interaction premiss, you still have to touch the phone to interacting with it and since you're going to touch the phone any ways using one of those " touchese" for biometric features is just as clean I think. The fact is the iPhone user experience is still firmly interaction heavy and very much "heightened", IMO killing touch ID is a horrendous mistake and is testament to Apple being technology drunk, technological fetuses are just being thrown in there for technology sake with weak and half assed though, the touch bar in MBP's which though not completely useless is just there because Apple can put it there and serves little els, the cylindrical Mac which looked great but was as a result of technology allowing it and no other consideration, if you looking at where those things are now its disappointing. Personally I'm thrilled with Face ID I've been hoping for it on the MBs and iMacs forever but it should have been in addition to Touch ID not replacement for it, not that the X in not great, but Face ID seems like a fan boy geeking out with little thought beyond the obvious, this becomes clear if you unbiasedly consider "simplicity" in touch ID Apple pay and face ID Apple pay. But hey who cares when all that matters is profits on top of profits, shout out to sog 35 ;) and to Strange Days and gang unless to challenge points above please spare me, thanks
    Regarding the ‘technology drunk’ view, this doesn’t exactly hold water.  FaceID as a replacement for TouchID frees up space in the handset while providing far greater security.  The touch bar on tne Mac is a fine replacement for fixed function keys that needed to be Shifted, Ctrl’d, or Alt’d to expand beyond single use.  The litmus test is not a comparison to what many are accustomed to.  The litmus test is which solution you would choose had both been available from the start.  To my mind a dynamic touch bar wins out easily over a row of fixed keys.  To my mind a more secure face recognition solution wins out over an extra component that’s less secure, is subject to smudges and dirt and other means of failure.  As to Apple Pay, those who have been paying attention are aware that the process is equally simple via FaceID versus  TouchID.

    Again youre points satisfy the underlining reasoning of, and to quote Jony him self when introducing touch ID as something that was not, "technology for technology's sake" which is in violation of sacred principles that design should not accommodate technology but technology should accommodate design which should accommodate usability. an iPhone is a tool and the best made tools are those that in their evolution impose the least transion cost. When touch ID was implemented it was in a way that was intrinsic to how the iPhone's home screen operated such that it wasn't even an adoption, it was seamless.

     My annoyance isn't with the technology it self nor how it works but with the sentiment that face ID is better on any level that (Face ID+Touch ID), and even more annoying is that it was to setify a shallow tech feature of edge to edge display. The argument here is that you have a screen as big as the 7Plus in a form factor of the 7, in design terms this means that the screen then is high in importants in this paradigm, but the X screen has a distinctive notch distruping this very primary focal point of the design objective, thus making the screen subject to the FID tech wich is primarily there so an iPhone can loose the home button and have an edge to edge display wich Offcause is a circular argument, this does not make sence.

    To you're point about the touch bar, it's dynamic nature dose not compensate for the fact that you have to look at it to use it, a tool you coud once use blind folded becomes less usefull when that ability tied to productivity is removed. You're point about apple pay is true depending on how you look at it which is to my point that, there's little gained other then face ID being mathematically more secure which Offcause is irrelevant since touch ID is still an industry's best and I don't know of any instance where it has been defeated, as to do so still requires a great deal of effort.

     The point which can't get through because people are too infatuated with the new and the shinny is that a door with two locks is just more secure. I challenge you to offer a reason why face ID would not work on the 8 and 8Plus in their current form and home button with out referencing shallow narow minded things like smaller size big screen and I'd be more then willing to never coment on this subject again.

    I think holyone is pulling our leg in the tradition of parody.  The first clue was the atrocious spelling and grammar, but what made this crystal clear was the point that the iPhone X is less useful for blindfolded users than the iPhone 7.  Touche.
    The blind fold analogy was in regards to the touch bar on the MBP in that you can't use it with out looking at it unlike the traditional fiction keys. But since you can't comprehend anything that threatens the little fanboy bubble you and many here live in I'll leave you to it, love that when points can't be challenged these are the kinds of moronic pots that's are offered, you would be worth more consideration if you'd at-least reference something I actually said.  
  • Reply 72 of 90
    Soli said:
    MacRumors are going nuts about this interview with Jony Ive. They keep saying that if it's not about the 10 year anniversary they why call it iPhone X. Clearly that's the marketing department capitalizing on the timing, not the technology involved to create this amazing jump into the future of the iPhone.
    Windows 8 went straight to Windows 10 and it wasn't even Windows' tenth anniversary, but MacRumors isn't shitting on Microsoft for doing that. Yet these guys nod their head with Microsoft and regurgitate the story of how Windows 10 is such a "yuge leap" over Windows 8 that it deserves to skip a version number.
    patchythepirate
  • Reply 73 of 90
    holyone said:
    holyone said:
    holyone said:
    "Discussing the inner workings of iPhone X, Ive said the inclusion of Face ID is the culmination of years of work toward a non-contact user interface. From a user's perspective, features that do not require physical interaction make a device feel simpler, yet at the same time more robust. Ive goes on to say the replacement of Touch ID, a capacitive fingerprint reading solution included in all iPhone models since iPhone 5s, equates to a heightened user experience." Wow Jony what dubious reasoning, sure raising the iPhone and have it ready and unlocked with out interaction is less friction, but the home button paradigm was just as simple considering that you don't just look at iPhone X and have it read youre mind thus forfulling this zero interaction premiss, you still have to touch the phone to interacting with it and since you're going to touch the phone any ways using one of those " touchese" for biometric features is just as clean I think. The fact is the iPhone user experience is still firmly interaction heavy and very much "heightened", IMO killing touch ID is a horrendous mistake and is testament to Apple being technology drunk, technological fetuses are just being thrown in there for technology sake with weak and half assed though, the touch bar in MBP's which though not completely useless is just there because Apple can put it there and serves little els, the cylindrical Mac which looked great but was as a result of technology allowing it and no other consideration, if you looking at where those things are now its disappointing. Personally I'm thrilled with Face ID I've been hoping for it on the MBs and iMacs forever but it should have been in addition to Touch ID not replacement for it, not that the X in not great, but Face ID seems like a fan boy geeking out with little thought beyond the obvious, this becomes clear if you unbiasedly consider "simplicity" in touch ID Apple pay and face ID Apple pay. But hey who cares when all that matters is profits on top of profits, shout out to sog 35 ;) and to Strange Days and gang unless to challenge points above please spare me, thanks
    Regarding the ‘technology drunk’ view, this doesn’t exactly hold water.  FaceID as a replacement for TouchID frees up space in the handset while providing far greater security.  The touch bar on tne Mac is a fine replacement for fixed function keys that needed to be Shifted, Ctrl’d, or Alt’d to expand beyond single use.  The litmus test is not a comparison to what many are accustomed to.  The litmus test is which solution you would choose had both been available from the start.  To my mind a dynamic touch bar wins out easily over a row of fixed keys.  To my mind a more secure face recognition solution wins out over an extra component that’s less secure, is subject to smudges and dirt and other means of failure.  As to Apple Pay, those who have been paying attention are aware that the process is equally simple via FaceID versus  TouchID.

    Again youre points satisfy the underlining reasoning of, and to quote Jony him self when introducing touch ID as something that was not, "technology for technology's sake" which is in violation of sacred principles that design should not accommodate technology but technology should accommodate design which should accommodate usability. an iPhone is a tool and the best made tools are those that in their evolution impose the least transion cost. When touch ID was implemented it was in a way that was intrinsic to how the iPhone's home screen operated such that it wasn't even an adoption, it was seamless.

     My annoyance isn't with the technology it self nor how it works but with the sentiment that face ID is better on any level that (Face ID+Touch ID), and even more annoying is that it was to setify a shallow tech feature of edge to edge display. The argument here is that you have a screen as big as the 7Plus in a form factor of the 7, in design terms this means that the screen then is high in importants in this paradigm, but the X screen has a distinctive notch distruping this very primary focal point of the design objective, thus making the screen subject to the FID tech wich is primarily there so an iPhone can loose the home button and have an edge to edge display wich Offcause is a circular argument, this does not make sence.

    To you're point about the touch bar, it's dynamic nature dose not compensate for the fact that you have to look at it to use it, a tool you coud once use blind folded becomes less usefull when that ability tied to productivity is removed. You're point about apple pay is true depending on how you look at it which is to my point that, there's little gained other then face ID being mathematically more secure which Offcause is irrelevant since touch ID is still an industry's best and I don't know of any instance where it has been defeated, as to do so still requires a great deal of effort.

     The point which can't get through because people are too infatuated with the new and the shinny is that a door with two locks is just more secure. I challenge you to offer a reason why face ID would not work on the 8 and 8Plus in their current form and home button with out referencing shallow narow minded things like smaller size big screen and I'd be more then willing to never coment on this subject again.

    I think holyone is pulling our leg in the tradition of parody.  The first clue was the atrocious spelling and grammar, but what made this crystal clear was the point that the iPhone X is less useful for blindfolded users than the iPhone 7.  Touche.
    The blind fold analogy was in regards to the touch bar on the MBP in that you can't use it with out looking at it unlike the traditional fiction keys. But since you can't comprehend anything that threatens the little fanboy bubble you and many here live in I'll leave you to it, love that when points can't be challenged these are the kinds of moronic pots that's are offered, you would be worth more consideration if you'd at-least reference something I actually said.  
    You're right; I misread the sentence about the blindfold (which, in my defense included at least 6 spelling and grammatical errors).  Sorry about that.  Having said that, I don't know that "you can't use it if you're blindfolded" is a fatal flaw of the useful and innovative touch bar...
    fastasleepStrangeDays
  • Reply 74 of 90
    It took two years for Apple to develop iPhone X and yet Samsung is practically ready to announce the Galaxy S9 after just releasing the Galaxy S8 and Galaxy Note. Samsung must have a really fast-working R&D center. What's disappointing is that the critics are already saying the both of Samsung's recent smartphones are much better than the not-yet-released iPhone X. Oh, well. Everyone has an opinion.
  • Reply 75 of 90
    holyone said:
    mrboba1 said:
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Hardly. I think all this crap about some notch is some sort of wart on a phone is ridiculous at best, no matter who may have put one there. Also, it has been in the hands of only a very few, and pictures of phones never do reality any justice.

    Most of the time it will be filled with informational stuff, just like the top is now. It will be a non-issue except for those who just want to nit-pick.

    100% right.  It's hard for me to wrap my head around someone even posing the question: "The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch?"  That makes as much sense as "do you think cruise control is worth the unsightly button on the steering wheel?"
    but @ randominternetperson are you suggesting that face ID is some how intrinsically bound to the notch and functional only as a notch on an edge to edge display and couldn't funtion in any other form factor like in the 8 and 8Plus ?. Is the truth not that Face ID is there because Apple was chasing an edge to edge display and non here nor at Apple can give as compelling a reason for an edge to edge display then can be given for touch ID, other than bigger screen on smaller phone even if that screen has a notch at the top of it ?, people forget that the notch justifies the screen not the other way round.
    Wow your posts are really painful to read.  Let me try to answer your questions though.

    "Is the truth not that Face ID is there because Apple was chasing an edge to edge display and non here nor at Apple can give as compelling a reason for an edge to edge display then can be given for touch ID, other than bigger screen on smaller phone even if that screen has a notch at the top of it ?"  

    Um, I don't know that Apple was "chasing" anything.  It seems fairly obvious to me that Apple wanted to include Face ID--independent of the size of the screen.  Then they had a choice of either having the screen start below the Face ID camera or wrap the screen around it.  Frankly it makes almost no difference to me either way and I expect I'm in the majority.  Apple decided to have the screen go all the way to the top to not "waste" the space on both sides of the Face ID camera.  Seems reasonable.

    "
    people forget that the notch justifies the screen not the other way round."

    What?  Why are notches "justifying" screens or vice versa?  

    What I think you're missing is that the iPhone X is intentionally a paradigm shifting phone.  It's almost like a "concept car" where they make bold, controversial decisions to get attention and test the waters.  The iPhone X is the bleeding edge device that won't be the best fit for everyone.  If the "notch" offends you or you can't live without Touch ID, get one of the 5 (6?) other iPhone models that Apple sells.
    fastasleepStrangeDays
  • Reply 76 of 90
    It took two years for Apple to develop iPhone X and yet Samsung is practically ready to announce the Galaxy S9 after just releasing the Galaxy S8 and Galaxy Note. Samsung must have a really fast-working R&D center. What's disappointing is that the critics are already saying the both of Samsung's recent smartphones are much better than the not-yet-released iPhone X. Oh, well. Everyone has an opinion.
    Making a phone is about a 2 to 3 year process no matter who the company is. You think the galaxy S8 and Note took a year to design, build and test? 
    edited October 2017 StrangeDays
  • Reply 77 of 90
    AI_lias said:
     I see some comments about the notch. The test question is this: would you like the notch if you saw it on an Android phone? And the answer is, you would ridicule it, whether you want to admit it or not. So, no, the notch is not good. The thing is this: do you think the Face ID is worth the notch? The alternative is to use Touch ID on the back side, and whatever there is left to put on the front, would probably fit in the edge that would be left at the top, since iPhone X bezels are quite thick for a "bezel-less" phone. In my opinion, Touch ID is just fine, and did not need to be replaced with a fancy Face ID. And putting it on the back would not have been that bad. It would not have been the first thing we copied from the Android side.
    Didn't we already pass your hypothetical "test question" with the release of the camera notch Andy Rubin Essential Phone? Fandroids are divided on it, but generally positive, from the reviews I read. The Essential Phone isn't criticized so much for its notch than its mediocre hardware components.
  • Reply 78 of 90
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 249member
    JWSC said:
    holyone said:
    ... IMO killing touch ID is a horrendous mistake and is testament to Apple being technology drunk ...

    ... Face ID seems like a fan boy geeking out with little thought beyond the obvious ...

    Has it not dawned on you that Face ID is far more secure than Touch ID ever could be?

    More secure, yes. More practical, not sure yet. There comes a point where even if it is more secure than Touch ID, the difference does not have many practical implications. I'm not worried about anyone bypassing my Touch ID, and it seems that the price you need to pay for it, in design, in convenience, and in well, price, is not worth it. The only way it's worth it, is if Apple wants to get a competitive advantage over others manufacturers, and in that way, we end up paying for it. It will probably be like the Touch bar. Might not be worth it, since it will be all touch screens soon. That's were the iPad is already moving to: using a keyboard and a touch screen.
  • Reply 79 of 90
    JWSC said:
    Face ID may be better, more natural, not invasive but it can’t replace Touch ID in all cases. It is ineffective against twins and kids below 13 years old.
    And you know this how?
    "The probability of a false match is different for twins and siblings that look like you as well as among children under the age of 13, because their distinct facial features may not have fully developed. If you're concerned about this, we recommend using a passcode to authenticate."

    Face ID Security Guide
    https://images.apple.com/business/docs/FaceID_Security_Guide.pdf

    I said "twins" but it says "twins and siblings". So your brother or sister may unlock your iPhone X if they look like you.
    Asserting facts not in evidence, your honor!  This is just saying that the probability of a false match is different (from the 1 in a million figure in an earlier sentence) for people who look like you.  Does that mean that the probability of a match in 1 in 1000?  1 in 10?  Automatic?  We won't know until people get their hands on them and start testing.  I suspect the answer is that the typical pair of twins will not be able to unlock each others phones.
  • Reply 80 of 90
    rf9rf9 Posts: 70member
    AI_lias said:
    JWSC said:
    holyone said:
    ... IMO killing touch ID is a horrendous mistake and is testament to Apple being technology drunk ...

    ... Face ID seems like a fan boy geeking out with little thought beyond the obvious ...

    Has it not dawned on you that Face ID is far more secure than Touch ID ever could be?

    More secure, yes. More practical, not sure yet. There comes a point where even if it is more secure than Touch ID, the difference does not have many practical implications. I'm not worried about anyone bypassing my Touch ID, and it seems that the price you need to pay for it, in design, in convenience, and in well, price, is not worth it. The only way it's worth it, is if Apple wants to get a competitive advantage over others manufacturers, and in that way, we end up paying for it. It will probably be like the Touch bar. Might not be worth it, since it will be all touch screens soon. That's were the iPad is already moving to: using a keyboard and a touch screen.
    The entire point of FaceID was to shrink the body of the phone down to the screen by eliminating the bottom bezel.  If that's valuable, then it's worth it.
    Personally I'm getting the iPhone X for that one specific reason and no others.  I prefer the smaller (non-Plus) size iPhone but want the dual cameras in the Plus size.  The larger screen in the Plus size is nice to have too.  For all intents and purposes it's an iPhone 8 plus in the body of an iPhone 8, and that's exactly what I want.  But I admit that probably a relative few really care that much about the size like I do and that's obvious when people say they'd get an iPhone X Plus because it would be an even bigger screen.
    Truth is, I'd probably not have got the iPhone 7 Plus if it weren't for the cameras.  I feel like iPhone X gets me exactly the benefits of Plus in the smaller body.

    The more I think about day to day use case of FaceID, the more optimistic I am about it.  The more I pay attention the more inconvenient I realize TouchID can actually be and I realize that if I had FaceID the phone would have already been authenticated seconds ago.  This was specifically apparent when I was at Disneyland and TouchID started failing a lot because my hands were sweaty.  I ended up disabling TouchID for unlock and setting it to a 5 min timeout with pass code.
    edited October 2017 fastasleepStrangeDays
Sign In or Register to comment.