Vietnamese firm trips up iPhone X's Face ID with elaborate mask & makeup

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 89
    SoliSoli Posts: 6,179member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Wow, thats so elaborate schme to steal my 999 phone....by that time you made my 3D face, that phone had been brick already....lost phone. Some company wants to make their names by elaborate schemes to dirt put others, go make names for your self by preventing cyber attacks maybe ill share you my money. 
    Obviously this could be used to target someone and have a 3D image of their face already made. 
    1) We've seen that sci-fi for at least a couple decades, and now that's certainly a real possibility with Face ID being much harder to crack than previous face recognition systems and 3D printers being commonplace, but I think the likelihood is still extremely low since it requires stealing the device, a great deal of tech knowledge, and some sort of reward that warrants it.

    2) 3D printers to make the face or a mold are the obviously choices here, but imagine if there was a system of movable points over a flexible exterior that could take IR scan data and within a few seconds adjust an attached mechanical face. Speed being key, you may even be able to snag the device, break into it so steal some data or install an app, go to a website that will exploit a bug to where you jailbreak the device for further snooping, or even send a message out that you then delete which could set that person up for a crime they didn't commit before you return the device without them being the wiser. We saw something like this in The Thomas Crown Affair, to name just one, where his keys were taken from his jacket, a copy of his house key was made, and the keys returned before they thought he knew. I'd still say this concept is still in the realm of spy movie or TV show over real life, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something like that being used in some future storyline.
  • Reply 62 of 89
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,123moderator
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    thrang said:
    does anyone give a crap about this?
    I do. While these tests are ultimately unimportant for normal users, I am curious to have the limitations mapped out.
    Not sure this does much to identify the limits, except for Apple, which might then do a bit more refining to strengthen the machine learning algos, which I’ll bet they’ll be doing regardless over the next year/years.  So just as someone thinks they grok the limits better than Apple already outlined them (has to see your eyes, nose and mouth) Apple might toss in an unreleased curveball in an update.  Back to square one for the hackers.
    You don't see how or why security firms and gov't agencies would want to know if a technology is secure and how secure it is?

    The same goes for passcode-based systems, even though we can use math to figure out the possible outcomes. For example, how many people will use “password” if that’s allowed, commonalities of PIN combinations, and even bugs in SW or logic issues with password recovery that can lead to bypassing a system.

    For instance, if law enforcement was better at their jobs they probably could've accessed the Plano, TX shooter's phone with ease. 
    Why do you do this?  Why do you take a comment made about a very specific scenario and assume it applies to a broad topic?  Are you asking me to delete your comments?  If so, just ask me, “Radar, please delete my comment because I going to put words into someone’s mouth.” Or is it your personality to go right to hyperbole?   Please tell us, as some here would really like to know which it is.
    1) The topic is security. If you don't understand that going into an article about a company saying they can bypass Face ID then your blind trust in a single company making a claim is ridiculous. Independent research, empirical data, and testable theories are what matter.

    2) Care to explain how the Plano, TX shooter's phone is hyperbole when it's literally a current topic in the media right now?


    3) I'll put it in very simple terms I hope you can understand: SECURITY COMPANIES ANALYSIS SECURITY SYSTEMS.
    I see what it is now.  You actually think others aren’t very intelligent.  Because anyone on this site with even modest intellect groks that Security is made better by challenges.  Duh.  So it’s that you don’t have a very good grasp on other’s level of intelligence.  I get it.  

    And, of course, in the words of Reagan, “there he goes again.” as you introduce yet another challenge that was never a part of my response.  Did I mention the TX shooter?  No.  From now on when I see you use the techniques you use, I’ll simply delete your comments.  If it gets to be too tedious to do that, I’ll simply block you.  I got your message loud and clear.  
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 63 of 89
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,177member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Wow, thats so elaborate schme to steal my 999 phone....by that time you made my 3D face, that phone had been brick already....lost phone. Some company wants to make their names by elaborate schemes to dirt put others, go make names for your self by preventing cyber attacks maybe ill share you my money. 
    Obviously this could be used to target someone and have a 3D image of their face already made. 
    Typing a far-fetched statement in bold and tacking “obviously” on the front doesn’t make it any less far-fetched. 
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 64 of 89
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,177member
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    thrang said:
    does anyone give a crap about this?
    I do. While these tests are ultimately unimportant for normal users, I am curious to have the limitations mapped out.
    Not sure this does much to identify the limits, except for Apple, which might then do a bit more refining to strengthen the machine learning algos, which I’ll bet they’ll be doing regardless over the next year/years.  So just as someone thinks they grok the limits better than Apple already outlined them (has to see your eyes, nose and mouth) Apple might toss in an unreleased curveball in an update.  Back to square one for the hackers.
    You don't see how or why security firms and gov't agencies would want to know if a technology is secure and how secure it is?

    The same goes for passcode-based systems, even though we can use math to figure out the possible outcomes. For example, how many people will use “password” if that’s allowed, commonalities of PIN combinations, and even bugs in SW or logic issues with password recovery that can lead to bypassing a system.

    For instance, if law enforcement was better at their jobs they probably could've accessed the Plano, TX shooter's phone with ease. 
    They didn’t need to be better at their jobs. All they needed to do was accept Apple’s offer to help when it was first offered. Instead, they chose to ignore so they could make a case for security backdoors later on. 

    Instead, they opted for attempting to score a political point over solving a mass murder crime. Whoever took that decision should be arrested for aiding and abetting a known felon. 
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 65 of 89
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,177member
    Rayz2016 said:

    cali said:
    Bet your a** Apple is working on FaceID 2.0.

    30,000 dots will probably be doubled, length will be extended, cameras will be better, InVisahe tech and who knows what else.

    This will allow better FaceID, more accurate Animoji, object recognition, Better AR, better photo filters etc.

    There’s a video on YouTube with a special camera that shows the dots and it obviously looks like 1st gen tech that can be improved. 
    Most definitely. 

    Meanwhile, Samsung will go one step further. I can’t say too much, NDAs and all that, but I can tell you that the new Samsung biometric system will blow FaceID out of the water. 

    It’s going to be called CheekSwabID and is much more convenient when used in conjunction with Samsung Pay. You approach the NFC terminal, put your phone in your mouth and give it a good wipe around. Take your phone out of your mouth and tap it against the terminal. Voila!

    It will also allow you to make emojis based on your gums. Gumojis are the next big thing. You read it here first!
    So funny!
    The original post (entitled “Samsung SemenSampleID”) didn’t make it past the in-house censor. 
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 66 of 89
    SoliSoli Posts: 6,179member
    Rayz2016 said:
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    thrang said:
    does anyone give a crap about this?
    I do. While these tests are ultimately unimportant for normal users, I am curious to have the limitations mapped out.
    Not sure this does much to identify the limits, except for Apple, which might then do a bit more refining to strengthen the machine learning algos, which I’ll bet they’ll be doing regardless over the next year/years.  So just as someone thinks they grok the limits better than Apple already outlined them (has to see your eyes, nose and mouth) Apple might toss in an unreleased curveball in an update.  Back to square one for the hackers.
    You don't see how or why security firms and gov't agencies would want to know if a technology is secure and how secure it is?

    The same goes for passcode-based systems, even though we can use math to figure out the possible outcomes. For example, how many people will use “password” if that’s allowed, commonalities of PIN combinations, and even bugs in SW or logic issues with password recovery that can lead to bypassing a system.

    For instance, if law enforcement was better at their jobs they probably could've accessed the Plano, TX shooter's phone with ease. 
    They didn’t need to be better at their jobs. All they needed to do was accept Apple’s offer to help when it was first offered. Instead, they chose to ignore so they could make a case for security backdoors later on. 

    Instead, they opted for attempting to score a political point over solving a mass murder crime. Whoever took that decision should be arrested for aiding and abetting a known felon. 
    I would classify all of that as ways they could've been better at their jobs. I can see an argument for obstruction of justice and that the person who made that call be charged with hindering an investigation, but I also think the decision to not use Apple could also be argued as a poor decision that would only result in a worthless reprimand, if it enough attention was brought to it.
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 67 of 89
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,177member
    Soli said:
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Wow, thats so elaborate schme to steal my 999 phone....by that time you made my 3D face, that phone had been brick already....lost phone. Some company wants to make their names by elaborate schemes to dirt put others, go make names for your self by preventing cyber attacks maybe ill share you my money. 
    Obviously this could be used to target someone and have a 3D image of their face already made. 
    1) We've seen that sci-fi for at least a couple decades, and now that's certainly a real possibility with Face ID being much harder to crack than previous face recognition systems and 3D printers being commonplace, but I think the likelihood is still extremely low since it requires stealing the device, a great deal of tech knowledge, and some sort of reward that warrants it.

    2) 3D printers to make the face or a mold are the obviously choices here, but imagine if there was a system of movable points over a flexible exterior that could take IR scan data and within a few seconds adjust an attached mechanical face. Speed being key, you may even be able to snag the device, break into it so steal some data or install an app, go to a website that will exploit a bug to where you jailbreak the device for further snooping, or even send a message out that you then delete which could set that person up for a crime they didn't commit before you return the device without them being the wiser. We saw something like this in The Thomas Crown Affair, to name just one, where his keys were taken from his jacket, a copy of his house key was made, and the keys returned before they thought he knew. I'd still say this concept is still in the realm of spy movie or TV show over real life, but I wouldn't be surprised to see something like that being used in some future storyline.
    Yeah, I think the argument is done when folk start mistaking real life for Total Recall
  • Reply 68 of 89
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 1,807member
    avon b7 said:

    I didn't bother reading Apple's white paper on the technology because I am perfectly happy with a fingerprint scanner. If I had to use a FaceID style solution, I don't think it would be an issue for me.
     Not to mention the fact your chinese knockoff brand doesn’t offer anything other than fingerprint scanning anyway..
    If you are talking about Huawei, you are wrong. They used both depth sensing technology and facial recognition before Apple. Just as they used OLED, fast charging, dual cameras, dual frontal cameras, etc before Apple.

    Just like they design their own batteries, modems etc (something Apple doesn't do).

    Apple made a bit of a deal about the camera app recognising QR codes but Huawei phones have done this for a long as I can remember.

    Portrait mode? Huawei had its own version long before Apple's went into beta. Re-illuminating a scene? Before Apple again. One handed use? Before Apple again. Being able to alter the focus point in a photo after taking it? Before Apple again.

    Who is knocking off who? Or are you simply speaking from ignorance?

    If you are asking yourself why they didn't bother uniting the depth sensing technology and facial recognition (which also employs eye tracking technology to switch off the screen when you aren't looking at it, btw) to go the FaceID route, it's simply because they didn't need to (hey! Just like Apple on the iPhone 8!) and and it would have increased the cost of the phone. FaceID simply another biometric scanner. Great to have another but that's it. And if you have a history of placing scanners on the rear, why on earth would you have to design something like FaceID if it would add unnecessary costs to the device?

    Now, if you insist on your 'knock off' claims, why not back them up with something? I've asked you to do that many times and you haven't answered. I'm interested to know where Huawei's R&D investment is going because they often invest more than Apple. Strange, if all they really need to do is copy Apple. Or is Apple simply snapping up other people's ideas and technology now? Because without that, FaceID probably would not even exist. 

    And please note that I have no issue with that but if you persist in your knock off claims you might find yourself on thin ice.




    edited November 2017
  • Reply 69 of 89
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 2,123moderator
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    I didn't bother reading Apple's white paper on the technology because I am perfectly happy with a fingerprint scanner. If I had to use a FaceID style solution, I don't think it would be an issue for me.
     Not to mention the fact your chinese knockoff brand doesn’t offer anything other than fingerprint scanning anyway..
    If you are talking about Huawei, you are wrong. They used both depth sensing technology and facial recognition before Apple. Just as they used OLED, fast charging, dual cameras, dual frontal cameras, etc before Apple.

    Just like they design their own batteries, modems etc (something Apple doesn't do).

    Apple made a bit of a deal about the camera app recognising QR codes but Huawei phones have done this for a long as I can remember.

    Portrait mode? Huawei had its own version long before Apple's went into beta. Re-illuminating a scene? Before Apple again. One handed use? Before Apple again. Being able to alter the focus point in a photo after taking it? Before Apple again.

    Who is knocking off who? Or are you simply speaking from ignorance?

    If you are asking yourself why they didn't bother uniting the depth sensing technology and facial recognition (which also employs eye tracking technology to switch off the screen when you aren't looking at it, btw) to go the FaceID route, it's simply because they didn't need to (hey! Just like Apple on the iPhone 8!) and and it would have increased the cost of the phone. FaceID simply another biometric scanner. Great to have another but that's it. And if you have a history of placing scanners on the rear, why on earth would you have to design something like FaceID if it would add unnecessary costs to the device?

    Now, if you insist on your 'knock off' claims, why not back them up with something? I've asked you to do that many times and you haven't answered. I'm interested to know where Huawei's R&D investment is going because they often invest more than Apple. Strange, if all they really need to do is copy Apple. Or is Apple simply snapping up other people's ideas and technology now? Because without that, FaceID probably would not even exist. 

    And please note that I have no issue with that but if you persist in your knock off claims you might find yourself on thin ice.




    As long as you’re aware that being out with something a few months before Apple doesn’t really mean anything.  Or even a year in the case of some of these technologies.  Because it takes longer than a year to implement some of this tech, especially for a company that needs to be able to ramp production to meet demand for many tens of millions in the first couple quarters the product ships.  As far as I know, only Apple has that particular constraint.  And so technologies like TouchID were in work at Apple for at least two years before they shipped the first iPhone with it, and so others (was it Motorola?) who slapped a fingerprint reader on a handset during that time really have little to brag about.  Especially if it didn’t stick around like TouchID did until being replaced by a more secure biometric method.  

    Evaluating Huawei’s firsts, or Qualcomm’s, or any other vendors, against Apple, in this light brings a bit more insight to the comparisons.  
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 70 of 89
    Rayz2016 said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    cali said:
    Bet your a** Apple is working on FaceID 2.0.

    30,000 dots will probably be doubled, length will be extended, cameras will be better, InVisahe tech and who knows what else.

    This will allow better FaceID, more accurate Animoji, object recognition, Better AR, better photo filters etc.

    There’s a video on YouTube with a special camera that shows the dots and it obviously looks like 1st gen tech that can be improved. 
    Most definitely. 

    Meanwhile, Samsung will go one step further. I can’t say too much, NDAs and all that, but I can tell you that the new Samsung biometric system will blow FaceID out of the water. 

    It’s going to be called CheekSwabID and is much more convenient when used in conjunction with Samsung Pay. You approach the NFC terminal, put your phone in your mouth and give it a good wipe around. Take your phone out of your mouth and tap it against the terminal. Voila!

    It will also allow you to make emojis based on your gums. Gumojis are the next big thing. You read it here first!
    So funny!
    The original post (entitled “Samsung SemenSampleID”) didn’t make it past the in-house censor. 
    Was a popcorn surprise invvolved?
    Rayz2016
  • Reply 71 of 89
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 1,807member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    I didn't bother reading Apple's white paper on the technology because I am perfectly happy with a fingerprint scanner. If I had to use a FaceID style solution, I don't think it would be an issue for me.
     Not to mention the fact your chinese knockoff brand doesn’t offer anything other than fingerprint scanning anyway..
    If you are talking about Huawei, you are wrong. They used both depth sensing technology and facial recognition before Apple. Just as they used OLED, fast charging, dual cameras, dual frontal cameras, etc before Apple.

    Just like they design their own batteries, modems etc (something Apple doesn't do).

    Apple made a bit of a deal about the camera app recognising QR codes but Huawei phones have done this for a long as I can remember.

    Portrait mode? Huawei had its own version long before Apple's went into beta. Re-illuminating a scene? Before Apple again. One handed use? Before Apple again. Being able to alter the focus point in a photo after taking it? Before Apple again.

    Who is knocking off who? Or are you simply speaking from ignorance?

    If you are asking yourself why they didn't bother uniting the depth sensing technology and facial recognition (which also employs eye tracking technology to switch off the screen when you aren't looking at it, btw) to go the FaceID route, it's simply because they didn't need to (hey! Just like Apple on the iPhone 8!) and and it would have increased the cost of the phone. FaceID simply another biometric scanner. Great to have another but that's it. And if you have a history of placing scanners on the rear, why on earth would you have to design something like FaceID if it would add unnecessary costs to the device?

    Now, if you insist on your 'knock off' claims, why not back them up with something? I've asked you to do that many times and you haven't answered. I'm interested to know where Huawei's R&D investment is going because they often invest more than Apple. Strange, if all they really need to do is copy Apple. Or is Apple simply snapping up other people's ideas and technology now? Because without that, FaceID probably would not even exist. 

    And please note that I have no issue with that but if you persist in your knock off claims you might find yourself on thin ice.




    As long as you’re aware that being out with something a few months before Apple doesn’t really mean anything.  Or even a year in the case of some of these technologies.  Because it takes longer than a year to implement some of this tech, especially for a company that needs to be able to ramp production to meet demand for many tens of millions in the first couple quarters the product ships.  As far as I know, only Apple has that particular constraint.  And so technologies like TouchID were in work at Apple for at least two years before they shipped the first iPhone with it, and so others (was it Motorola?) who slapped a fingerprint reader on a handset during that time really have little to brag about.  Especially if it didn’t stick around like TouchID did until being replaced by a more secure biometric method.  

    Evaluating Huawei’s firsts, or Qualcomm’s, or any other vendors, against Apple, in this light brings a bit more insight to the comparisons.  
    To be honest, the 'being first' bit is irrelevant nowadays. Most tech companies innovate, most tech companies buy-in technology or partner with others. This should not surprise anyone.

    What is surprising though, is the claim that someone can incessantly label Huawei or any other major tech company a 'knock-off' when the facts are sitting there in front of them and telling a different story.

    And often, it isn't a question of just months ahead or readiness either. Supercharge 3 is the third iteration of Huawei's fast charging technology, they hit the ground running with their dual cameras and their modems are consistently best in class (logical because they also produce a large percentage of the world's backbone infrastructure that the modems connect to). Now we have dual, simultaneous VoLTE, Cat18, AI enhancement of call quality etc.

    I'm not seeing the knock-off bit.

    singularitymuthuk_vanalingamgatorguy
  • Reply 72 of 89
    Something a little shady about this, especially this shot at the end. I'm betting it's a clone of some sort. If a true-to-life Hollywood mask can't unlock it, I highly doubt that thing can. 

  • Reply 73 of 89
    Ok so let’s call this BS face gate! So far for the week I have had my phone it’s been flawless. I’ve gotten used to all the new gestures and like it much better than having a home button. 
  • Reply 74 of 89
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Wow, thats so elaborate schme to steal my 999 phone....by that time you made my 3D face, that phone had been brick already....lost phone. Some company wants to make their names by elaborate schemes to dirt put others, go make names for your self by preventing cyber attacks maybe ill share you my money. 
    Obviously this could be used to target someone and have a 3D image of their face already made. 
    Obviously it would take many more construction and tweaking attempts than the five allocated before triggering the passcode. This demo is a scam. 
  • Reply 75 of 89
    Rayz2016 said:
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Wow, thats so elaborate schme to steal my 999 phone....by that time you made my 3D face, that phone had been brick already....lost phone. Some company wants to make their names by elaborate schemes to dirt put others, go make names for your self by preventing cyber attacks maybe ill share you my money. 
    Obviously this could be used to target someone and have a 3D image of their face already made. 
    Typing a far-fetched statement in bold and tacking “obviously” on the front doesn’t make it any less far-fetched. 
    Yeah it’s hard to take a guy seriously who’s under some misguided notion that he must use the bold tag on the entirety of EVERY ONE of his own posts. 
  • Reply 76 of 89

    Rayz2016 said:
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    thrang said:
    does anyone give a crap about this?
    I do. While these tests are ultimately unimportant for normal users, I am curious to have the limitations mapped out.
    Not sure this does much to identify the limits, except for Apple, which might then do a bit more refining to strengthen the machine learning algos, which I’ll bet they’ll be doing regardless over the next year/years.  So just as someone thinks they grok the limits better than Apple already outlined them (has to see your eyes, nose and mouth) Apple might toss in an unreleased curveball in an update.  Back to square one for the hackers.
    You don't see how or why security firms and gov't agencies would want to know if a technology is secure and how secure it is?

    The same goes for passcode-based systems, even though we can use math to figure out the possible outcomes. For example, how many people will use “password” if that’s allowed, commonalities of PIN combinations, and even bugs in SW or logic issues with password recovery that can lead to bypassing a system.

    For instance, if law enforcement was better at their jobs they probably could've accessed the Plano, TX shooter's phone with ease. 
    They didn’t need to be better at their jobs. All they needed to do was accept Apple’s offer to help when it was first offered. Instead, they chose to ignore so they could make a case for security backdoors later on. 

    Instead, they opted for attempting to score a political point over solving a mass murder crime. Whoever took that decision should be arrested for aiding and abetting a known felon. 
    It’s all nonsense anyway, we know who the shooter was and who he shot and with what. So he has a locked phone, so what. If he had a locked safe they wouldn’t be demanding back doors, they’d just work on cracking it. Same thing with his phone...crack it or don’t crack it, doesn’t really matter. 
  • Reply 77 of 89

    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    I didn't bother reading Apple's white paper on the technology because I am perfectly happy with a fingerprint scanner. If I had to use a FaceID style solution, I don't think it would be an issue for me.
     Not to mention the fact your chinese knockoff brand doesn’t offer anything other than fingerprint scanning anyway..
    If you are talking about Huawei, you are wrong. They used both depth sensing technology and facial recognition before Apple. Just as they used OLED, fast charging, dual cameras, dual frontal cameras, etc before Apple.

    Just like they design their own batteries, modems etc (something Apple doesn't do).

    Apple made a bit of a deal about the camera app recognising QR codes but Huawei phones have done this for a long as I can remember.

    Portrait mode? Huawei had its own version long before Apple's went into beta. Re-illuminating a scene? Before Apple again. One handed use? Before Apple again. Being able to alter the focus point in a photo after taking it? Before Apple again.

    Who is knocking off who? Or are you simply speaking from ignorance?

    If you are asking yourself why they didn't bother uniting the depth sensing technology and facial recognition (which also employs eye tracking technology to switch off the screen when you aren't looking at it, btw) to go the FaceID route, it's simply because they didn't need to (hey! Just like Apple on the iPhone 8!) and and it would have increased the cost of the phone. FaceID simply another biometric scanner. Great to have another but that's it. And if you have a history of placing scanners on the rear, why on earth would you have to design something like FaceID if it would add unnecessary costs to the device?

    Now, if you insist on your 'knock off' claims, why not back them up with something? I've asked you to do that many times and you haven't answered. I'm interested to know where Huawei's R&D investment is going because they often invest more than Apple. Strange, if all they really need to do is copy Apple. Or is Apple simply snapping up other people's ideas and technology now? Because without that, FaceID probably would not even exist. 

    And please note that I have no issue with that but if you persist in your knock off claims you might find yourself on thin ice.
    You have the mistaken notion that being “first!” is the same as being better, or even useful. 

    As as for your comment/threat about thin ice, I have no idea what you’re even suggesting or protesting. I will continue to call the knockoffs knockoffs. All of their broad strokes are reactions to apple — touchscreen slabs running an iOS-knockoff operating system, available in Apple-knockoff colors, often utilizing the same design language and elements of the iphones their knocking off, to varying degrees of success. All second-rate, third-rate, or worse.


    edited November 2017
  • Reply 78 of 89
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 1,807member

    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:

    I didn't bother reading Apple's white paper on the technology because I am perfectly happy with a fingerprint scanner. If I had to use a FaceID style solution, I don't think it would be an issue for me.
     Not to mention the fact your chinese knockoff brand doesn’t offer anything other than fingerprint scanning anyway..
    If you are talking about Huawei, you are wrong. They used both depth sensing technology and facial recognition before Apple. Just as they used OLED, fast charging, dual cameras, dual frontal cameras, etc before Apple.

    Just like they design their own batteries, modems etc (something Apple doesn't do).

    Apple made a bit of a deal about the camera app recognising QR codes but Huawei phones have done this for a long as I can remember.

    Portrait mode? Huawei had its own version long before Apple's went into beta. Re-illuminating a scene? Before Apple again. One handed use? Before Apple again. Being able to alter the focus point in a photo after taking it? Before Apple again.

    Who is knocking off who? Or are you simply speaking from ignorance?

    If you are asking yourself why they didn't bother uniting the depth sensing technology and facial recognition (which also employs eye tracking technology to switch off the screen when you aren't looking at it, btw) to go the FaceID route, it's simply because they didn't need to (hey! Just like Apple on the iPhone 8!) and and it would have increased the cost of the phone. FaceID simply another biometric scanner. Great to have another but that's it. And if you have a history of placing scanners on the rear, why on earth would you have to design something like FaceID if it would add unnecessary costs to the device?

    Now, if you insist on your 'knock off' claims, why not back them up with something? I've asked you to do that many times and you haven't answered. I'm interested to know where Huawei's R&D investment is going because they often invest more than Apple. Strange, if all they really need to do is copy Apple. Or is Apple simply snapping up other people's ideas and technology now? Because without that, FaceID probably would not even exist. 

    And please note that I have no issue with that but if you persist in your knock off claims you might find yourself on thin ice.
    You have the mistaken notion that being “first!” is the same as being better, or even useful. 

    As as for your comment/threat about thin ice, I have no idea what you’re even suggesting or protesting. I will continue to call the knockoffs knockoffs. All of their broad strokes are reactions to apple — touchscreen slabs running an iOS-knockoff operating system, available in Apple-knockoff colors, often utilizing the same design language and elements of the iphones their knocking off, to varying degrees of success. All second-rate, third-rate, or worse.


    Thin ice because you are wrong. And demonstrably so. The ice just broke.

    I have no such notion that 'being first' means anything. In this very thread I made that clear as I have in other threads too. That is yet another example if you trying to put words in someone's mouth. I simply use it to prove what you are saying is wrong. If someone is first with something, it cannot possibly be a knock-off. I gave you a nice list to play with. Or are you suggesting that Huawei travelled into the future, stole Apple's ideas and then traveled back to the present to implement them before Apple?

    That's the only reason I mention being first. Because it shows your claims for what they are: Absurd.

    As for being 'better'? I gave you examples too. Would you like some more?

    As for the image you posted, was it a joke? That's your claim? You do know that there are only so many design traits you can implement on a phone, don't you? You do realise that, in spite of those constraints, Huawei has lots of phone designs that look nothing like iPhones even if a couple do share common traits. Or are you trying to claim that rounded corners are in some way a Jony Ive speciality?








    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 79 of 89
    saobang198xsaobang198x Posts: 2unconfirmed, member

    BKAV only confirmed that face id is not the best way to protect it. I think apple should check and fix but limitations of FACE ID
  • Reply 80 of 89
    saobang198xsaobang198x Posts: 2unconfirmed, member
    Bebe said:
    This is just another company seeking attention as one poster said.  Not worried about it.  Can't wait for mine  :s
    This is an network security. my opinion that is working to make warning to the factory
Sign In or Register to comment.