@ihatescreennames ... You sound like a semi smart person - what exactly are you battling with?
Let's say hypothetically there are 10 x Android phones on the market. Now, 8 x of these have 2D facial recognition and 2 x of these have the same 3D recognition system as the iPhone.
Surely if you wanted to select the best phones to compete with the revolutionary iPhone 3D system, from the sample, you'd include the two 3D systems? But no, they've selected the inferior system *and* deactivated any security settings (bizarre!) ... It's just a very weird test.
But hey - if it makes you feel good ... Who am I to get in your way?
With the video, I just wanted to point out that although the fake 3D head opened the purposely unsecured Android system, there wasn't a single mention of the real people opening the secure iPhone.
PS : I recommend going to read up on what a 2D and 3D system do differently to each other and how each work. I suspect you aren't grasping the concept
I personally believe, and it's supported by some testers, that Apple's implementation of 3D facial recognition is still significantly more reliable and less prone to false positives than even the best examples of Android's 3D face feature. Had they tested against those 3D Android versions as you propose instead of the 2D ones they used (you're right they should have if they didn't) it probably would have been a better showing but Apple would still come out on top. The others still need a little seasoning if you're going to strictly rely on them as your first line of defense IMHO. Apple's FaceID is pretty darn good, and pretty darn secure. I wouldn't trust anyone else's at this point except as a convenience feature.
@gatorguy ... Someone that understands - thank you. I just feels they purposely avoided the Mate 20 Pro with the same 3D system. As you say, it would have been better.
And I've seen both the systems in the real world - they're pretty much as fast as each other. As you pointed out, it opened once in error - but zero other issues. As I said, the iPhone also had an issue once too.
But I don't think that fake head would open the phone if I'm honest ... And then it wouldn't have been the epic article that they wanted. Now we'll never know ...
@ihatescreennames ... You sound like a semi smart person - what exactly are you battling with?
I'm not the one on an Apple-centric website complaining about testing methodology used at a completely different, unrelated website. What exactly are you battling with?
Let's say hypothetically there are 10 x Android phones on the market. Now, 8 x of these have 2D facial recognition and 2 x of these have the same 3D recognition system as the iPhone.
As I mentioned before, the phones that are using 2D facial recognition are not marketed by their manufacturers as using inferior technology, they are marketed as having facial recognition, that's it, full stop. How many consumers out there ever realize there's a difference when shopping for a phone?
Surely if you wanted to select the best phones to compete with the revolutionary iPhone 3D system, from the sample, you'd include the two 3D systems? But no, they've selected the inferior system *and* deactivated any security settings (bizarre!) ... It's just a very weird test. ... With the video, I just wanted to point out that although the fake 3D head opened the purposely unsecured Android system, there wasn't a single mention of the real people opening the secure iPhone.
And:
TheDude121 said: And I've seen both the systems in the real world - they're pretty much as fast as each other. As you pointed out, it opened once in error - but zero other issues. As I said, the iPhone also had an issue once too.
It's interesting that you keep mentioning it being a very weird test, but you also keep bringing up the same instance of Face ID being unlocked by a similar looking family member who was too young for Face ID to be accurate on a not fully trained iPhone. The way that reads to me is: it's unacceptable and totally not cool to use an inferior system and deactivate security settings on an Android, but it's totally cool and acceptable that someone got a false positive with Face ID by not training it properly and using someone who looks very similar.
But hey - if it makes you feel good ... Who am I to get in your way?
You really are talking in circles with no idea of what you're trying to say. It seems you're just trying to justify a rather stupid test. I have eveneven simpli it for you ... I really can't dumb it down much further.
Your quotes make absolutely zero sense either. In fact, your arguments make no sense either ...
@ihatescreennames ... Let me be blunt : The Huawei Mate 20 Pro is generally considered one of the best Android mobile phones of the year. It has many specs better than the iPhone - but one in particular is the same as the iPhone : 3D Facial recognition with IR system that blasts out dots to build up the face.
Why was this particular phone not chosen to compete in this test, considering it is a far closer fit?
It seems you're just trying to justify a rather stupid test.
Please show me where I've tried to justify this test.
I have eveneven simpli it for you ... I really can't dumb it down much further.
I can see you're struggling here.
Your quotes make absolutely zero sense either. In fact, your arguments make no sense either ...
You realize my quotes are your words, right? So if they aren't making sense that's on you.
Why was this particular phone not chosen to compete in this test, considering it is a far closer fit?
This is a question best posted on the Forbes website. You know, the original article by the people who actually did the test. There's even a link to it in this paragraph:
A recent test of four Android smartphones and an iPhone X was recently performed byForbes, to try and fool the face-based security systems using a replica head. Produced by the UK-based Backface, a subject's head was created into a 3D image that was then 3D printed to life-size proportions using gypsum powder, at a cost of around 300 ($380).
@ihatescreennames ... The only reason you joined was to justify the test. I simply commented it isn't a fair test at all, and quite inaccurate. You joined to tell me how right and perfect it was (ie, you justified)
And you really don't need to tell me where the report comes from - I'm full aware. But I as you've been agreeing with them over and over, you may an answer (you do for everything else, even things you don't actually understand)
justify/ˈdʒʌstɪfʌɪ/verb1.show or prove to be right or reasonable."the person appointed has fully justified our confidence"synonyms:give grounds for, give reasons for, give a justification for, show just cause for, explain, give an explanation for, account for, show/prove to be reasonable, provide a rationale for, rationalize;
@ihatescreennames ... The only reason you joined was to justify the test. I simply commented it isn't a fair test at all, and quite inaccurate. You joined to tell me how right and perfect it was (ie, you justified)
And you really don't need to tell me where the report comes from - I'm full aware. But I as you've been agreeing with them over and over, you may an answer (you do for everything else, even things you don't actually understand)
justify
/ˈdʒʌstɪfʌɪ/
verb
1.
show or prove to be right or reasonable.
"the person appointed has fully justified our confidence"
synonyms:
give grounds for, give reasons for, give a justification for, show just cause for, explain, give an explanation for, account for, show/prove to be reasonable, provide a rationale for, rationalize;
I'm beginning to think you have reading comprehension issues. Instead of showing me where in this thread (or anywhere for that matter) I've justified the test you gave me the definition of "justify". I realize you can't show me that because there are no examples. I also haven't been agreeing with Forbes over and over. If you think I have show me the post where I did.
Since you seem to have forgotten the context, in your first post on this thread you said, "So wait - the aim was test the 3D recognition feature of the iPhone against the Androids? But then they selected only 2D facial recognition systems in the Androids? So, the compared a feature that the Androids didn't even have?"
The Forbes article doesn't mention 3D or 2D recognition at all. You are the one who started down the 3D vs 2D path. All I did was point out that the test wasn't about 3D recognition, it was about facial recognition. The Forbes article mentions that OnePlus calls their facial recognition implementation "Face Unlock" and their spokesperson doesn't even mention anything about it being 2D.
While you're reviewing my previous posts for the things I didn't say that you're putting on me, also find where I said anything was "right and perfect".
Good luck with that.
Again, I'm sorry you're upset that your brand didn't fare well. I get it, that's no fun. But the questions you're asking would be better placed on the website of the people that could answer them. How is anyone on AppleInsider supposed to know why people at Forbes chose the phones they chose? That's just bizarre.
Again you're missing point ... 'my' brand WASN'T in the test to start with.
On another note, I love my BMWs and especially my BMW M2. I've compared it to my neighbours' Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and Mercedes-Benz C200. I annihilated them ... My car is far more advanced than any of the competition!
BMWBlog is congratulationing me and telling me how awesome my car is, but some reason, the real car forums are all like ''wtf" ... But I don't care : I dominated!
Again you're missing point ... 'my' brand WASN'T in the test to start with.
On another note, I love my BMWs and especially my BMW M2. I've compared it to my neighbours' Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and Mercedes-Benz C200. I annihilated them ... My car is far more advanced than any of the competition!
BMWBlog is congratulationing me and telling me how awesome my car is, but some reason, the real car forums are all like ''wtf" ... But I don't care : I dominated!
It’s you missing your own point. Here we go with that reading comprehension issue again. Maybe try slowing down and starting back at the top.
As as I mentioned in my very last post (and backed myself up with your very own words), you said it was a test about 3D facial recognition, but that is incorrect.
I’ll take your lack of finding proof for your claims of things I said as a tacit acknowledgement that I didn’t actually say any of it. Thanks for that.
Also, your brand is Android and was certainly in the test.
In my car example above, you'll see that I chose to compare my BMW M2 with cheap, lesser cars and purposely avoided the real competition (I'm a bit scared of comparing against the real competitor).
I hoped you'd be able to see a similarly ... But you can't Fundamentally, that's all the test did - avoided the real competition because they were scared ...
And I'm ok with that - I just thought perhaps you would have a smarter come back.
To be clear - the test EXCLUDED the comparative Androids which would, all likelyhood, not have the same result. Yes - site didn't do the test, but they all believe it and stand by it.
Lack of finding for what? What are you even talking about?
Thanks for making it clear, you definitely have reading comprehension issues or you're being deliberately obtuse or a combination of the two. Reading comprehension is a required skill for forum chats.
It seems that you're trying your best to come across smart and in the process, you're totally off point again.
Wrong.
Right now, no one understands you - not even yourself.
Wrong.
And the sad thing is I'm really dumb.
FTFY
It's always good to have new people on the boards. I hope you can get your issues resolved and post well in the future.
Again you're missing point ... 'my' brand WASN'T in the test to start with.
On another note, I love my BMWs and especially my BMW M2. I've compared it to my neighbours' Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and Mercedes-Benz C200. I annihilated them ... My car is far more advanced than any of the competition!
BMWBlog is congratulationing me and telling me how awesome my car is, but some reason, the real car forums are all like ''wtf" ... But I don't care : I dominated!
It’s you missing your own point. Here we go with that reading comprehension issue again. Maybe try slowing down and starting back at the top.
As as I mentioned in my very last post (and backed myself up with your very own words), you said it was a test about 3D facial recognition, but that is incorrect.
I’ll take your lack of finding proof for your claims of things I said as a tacit acknowledgement that I didn’t actually say any of it. Thanks for that.
His point was very valid. He was also correct when he stated that the test was really comparing a 2D system against a 3D system.
You are being pendantic by claiming article was on facial recognition. Strictly speaking, it was facial recognition but you would have to wilfully ignore the other aspects. The problem was that the phones tested weren't comparable among themselves. Would you agree that the testing was worthless from the outset?
It is like saying I am going to test 'communication' and compare two cans connected by a piece of string and cell phones. Whichever way you look at it, it would be communication but the comparison would be utterly worthless (just like the article is).
The Bloomberg article states very clearly that the Android phones tested use facial recognition as a - convenience - feature.
Now, I am sure many iPhone users without FaceID would love to have access to a 2D facial recognition system (even being well aware of the security limitations involved).
Apple chooses, on behalf of its users, not to provide that option.
Of course, the TheDude121, also quite reasonably questioned why the Android test candidates did not include Android phones with 3D facial recognition. Perhaps the results wouldn't have changed but at least the comparison would have made more sense.
Of course, the real point of interest for Android users is that their 2D facial recognition systems are actually quite robust. If someone has to go to the lengths of getting the users phone and creating a 3D model head, it is well worth the cheaper cost of entry. Moreso when far more expensive iPhones do not have any facial recognition options. No one has ever got into my phone using any of the biometric options available on it. I've asked lots of people to give it a go.
On another note, security is not compromised as 2D systems are not activated for payments etc and users can isolate sensitive data behind a passcode or alternative biometric option.
His point was very valid. He was also correct when he stated that the test was really comparing a 2D system against a 3D system.
Incorrect. As I've repeatedly stated, the original point was it was a test of 3D facial recognition which it wasn't. How can that even be said when only one phone had a 3D system out of 5 phones in the test. And again, 2D and 3D systems aren't even mentioned in the entire article.
You are being pendantic by claiming article was on facial recognition. Strictly speaking, it was facial recognition but you would have to wilfully ignore the other aspects. The problem was that the phones tested weren't comparable among themselves. Would you agree that the testing was worthless from the outset?
No. All the phones have "facial recognition". Explain how testing facial recognition on phones that have facial recognition is worthless. (I admit, I get a kick out of saying I'm being pedantic in one sentence and in the very next sentence saying basically agreeing with me)
It is like saying I am going to test 'communication' and compare two cans connected by a piece of string and cell phones. Whichever way you look at it, it would be communication but the comparison would be utterly worthless (just like the article is).
Either this is a poor analogy or you're saying 2D facial recognition is equivalent to two cans connected by a piece of string and therefore worthless. Which is odd, because a little later in you post we have this:
Now, I am sure many iPhone users without FaceID would love to have access to a 2D facial recognition system (even being well aware of the security limitations involved).
And then this:
Of course, the real point of interest for Android users is that their 2D facial recognition systems are actually quite robust.
So, is 2D facial recognition worthless or something people would love and actually quite robust? Your post isn't clear on this.
The Bloomberg article states very clearly that the Android phones tested use facial recognition as a - convenience - feature.
I don't know what the point of that statement is. (And I think you meant Forbes unless you're referring to something else)
Of course, the TheDude121, also quite reasonably questioned why the Android test candidates did not include Android phones with 3D facial recognition. Perhaps the results wouldn't have changed but at least the comparison would have made more sense.
Finally! Yes, it's a reasonable question, but not for AppleInsider. That question is for Forbes. As I mentioned several times, it's highly unlikely that anyone at AppleInsider or on these forums can answer questions about decisions made by Forbes. That's just bizarre.
At the end of the day, all the phones in the test have facial recognition. in the real world, everyone's head is 3D so even phones with a 2D facial recognition will be used by people who are in 3D.
Comments
Let's say hypothetically there are 10 x Android phones on the market. Now, 8 x of these have 2D facial recognition and 2 x of these have the same 3D recognition system as the iPhone.
Surely if you wanted to select the best phones to compete with the revolutionary iPhone 3D system, from the sample, you'd include the two 3D systems? But no, they've selected the inferior system *and* deactivated any security settings (bizarre!) ... It's just a very weird test.
But hey - if it makes you feel good ... Who am I to get in your way?
With the video, I just wanted to point out that although the fake 3D head opened the purposely unsecured Android system, there wasn't a single mention of the real people opening the secure iPhone.
https://www.androidauthority.com/huawei-mate-20-pro-face-unlock-915881/
And I've seen both the systems in the real world - they're pretty much as fast as each other. As you pointed out, it opened once in error - but zero other issues. As I said, the iPhone also had an issue once too.
But I don't think that fake head would open the phone if I'm honest ... And then it wouldn't have been the epic article that they wanted. Now we'll never know ...
As I mentioned before, the phones that are using 2D facial recognition are not marketed by their manufacturers as using inferior technology, they are marketed as having facial recognition, that's it, full stop. How many consumers out there ever realize there's a difference when shopping for a phone?
And:
It's interesting that you keep mentioning it being a very weird test, but you also keep bringing up the same instance of Face ID being unlocked by a similar looking family member who was too young for Face ID to be accurate on a not fully trained iPhone. The way that reads to me is: it's unacceptable and totally not cool to use an inferior system and deactivate security settings on an Android, but it's totally cool and acceptable that someone got a false positive with Face ID by not training it properly and using someone who looks very similar. I don't know what this is in reference to.
You really are talking in circles with no idea of what you're trying to say. It seems you're just trying to justify a rather stupid test. I have eveneven simpli it for you ... I really can't dumb it down much further.
Your quotes make absolutely zero sense either. In fact, your arguments make no sense either ...
The Huawei Mate 20 Pro is generally considered one of the best Android mobile phones of the year. It has many specs better than the iPhone - but one in particular is the same as the iPhone : 3D Facial recognition with IR system that blasts out dots to build up the face.
Why was this particular phone not chosen to compete in this test, considering it is a far closer fit?
You realize my quotes are your words, right? So if they aren't making sense that's on you.
This is a question best posted on the Forbes website. You know, the original article by the people who actually did the test. There's even a link to it in this paragraph:
And you really don't need to tell me where the report comes from - I'm full aware. But I as you've been agreeing with them over and over, you may an answer (you do for everything else, even things you don't actually understand)
justify/ˈdʒʌstɪfʌɪ/verb1.show or prove to be right or reasonable."the person appointed has fully justified our confidence"synonyms:give grounds for, give reasons for, give a justification for, show just cause for, explain, give an explanation for, account for, show/prove to be reasonable, provide a rationale for, rationalize;
Since you seem to have forgotten the context, in your first post on this thread you said, "So wait - the aim was test the 3D recognition feature of the iPhone against the Androids? But then they selected only 2D facial recognition systems in the Androids? So, the compared a feature that the Androids didn't even have?"
The Forbes article doesn't mention 3D or 2D recognition at all. You are the one who started down the 3D vs 2D path. All I did was point out that the test wasn't about 3D recognition, it was about facial recognition. The Forbes article mentions that OnePlus calls their facial recognition implementation "Face Unlock" and their spokesperson doesn't even mention anything about it being 2D.
While you're reviewing my previous posts for the things I didn't say that you're putting on me, also find where I said anything was "right and perfect".
Good luck with that.
Again, I'm sorry you're upset that your brand didn't fare well. I get it, that's no fun. But the questions you're asking would be better placed on the website of the people that could answer them. How is anyone on AppleInsider supposed to know why people at Forbes chose the phones they chose? That's just bizarre.
On another note, I love my BMWs and especially my BMW M2. I've compared it to my neighbours' Toyota Camry, Honda Civic and Mercedes-Benz C200. I annihilated them ... My car is far more advanced than any of the competition!
BMWBlog is congratulationing me and telling me how awesome my car is, but some reason, the real car forums are all like ''wtf" ... But I don't care : I dominated!
As as I mentioned in my very last post (and backed myself up with your very own words), you said it was a test about 3D facial recognition, but that is incorrect.
I’ll take your lack of finding proof for your claims of things I said as a tacit acknowledgement that I didn’t actually say any of it. Thanks for that.
Also, your brand is Android and was certainly in the test.
What are you even talking about?
It seems that you're trying your best to come across smart and in the process, you're totally off point again.
This isn't a competition - you can lower your guard and chat like you would normally. Right now, no one understands you - not even yourself.
And the sad thing is I've really dumbed this down for you.
I hoped you'd be able to see a similarly ... But you can't
And I'm ok with that - I just thought perhaps you would have a smarter come back.
To be clear - the test EXCLUDED the comparative Androids which would, all likelyhood, not have the same result. Yes - site didn't do the test, but they all believe it and stand by it.
It's always good to have new people on the boards. I hope you can get your issues resolved and post well in the future.
My TV it's 65" screen and it the **largest out there as well.
And my car is the ***fastest you can buy
*excluding the Android competition
** excluding any screen above 65"
*** excluding any car faster
You are being pendantic by claiming article was on facial recognition. Strictly speaking, it was facial recognition but you would have to wilfully ignore the other aspects. The problem was that the phones tested weren't comparable among themselves. Would you agree that the testing was worthless from the outset?
It is like saying I am going to test 'communication' and compare two cans connected by a piece of string and cell phones. Whichever way you look at it, it would be communication but the comparison would be utterly worthless (just like the article is).
The Bloomberg article states very clearly that the Android phones tested use facial recognition as a - convenience - feature.
Now, I am sure many iPhone users without FaceID would love to have access to a 2D facial recognition system (even being well aware of the security limitations involved).
Apple chooses, on behalf of its users, not to provide that option.
Of course, the TheDude121, also quite reasonably questioned why the Android test candidates did not include Android phones with 3D facial recognition. Perhaps the results wouldn't have changed but at least the comparison would have made more sense.
Of course, the real point of interest for Android users is that their 2D facial recognition systems are actually quite robust. If someone has to go to the lengths of getting the users phone and creating a 3D model head, it is well worth the cheaper cost of entry. Moreso when far more expensive iPhones do not have any facial recognition options. No one has ever got into my phone using any of the biometric options available on it. I've asked lots of people to give it a go.
On another note, security is not compromised as 2D systems are not activated for payments etc and users can isolate sensitive data behind a passcode or alternative biometric option.
At the end of the day, all the phones in the test have facial recognition. in the real world, everyone's head is 3D so even phones with a 2D facial recognition will be used by people who are in 3D.
A few people that understand ... So it seems it's rather a lack of understanding on the receiving end.