When getting rid of trolls and abusers turns into a demodding, I can't imagine.
I wouldn't be casting any stones in that glass bubble you live in if you think that was the reason you were demoted and banned twice. Demodding is not a word by the way but a demodulator is an electric circuit and you certainly like to cause sparks.
Having worked with AuthenTek before it was purchased by Apple on embedded designs, I understand that the sensor needs to push against the finger. The large sensor did not need a swipe but smaller ones do. Competitors devices need a long swipe (ST for example). I have no doubt that Apple can improve on the SW I saw a decade ago or more to enable non swipe less reads that are intuitive and Sapphire makes a lot of sense as a Si substrate that can also encase. I'd expect it would be offset so it didn't protrude and cause false button presses. I also don't see what convex is a problem as it would allow a larger finger to be focused on a smaller sensor.
The iPhone is a GEM already but now it maybe can truly house one if the rumors are true.
All this said, I disdain all of these leaked rumors - let them surprise and delight us folks! This misinformation just helps competitors..
and what boundary might that be? does your fingerprint in a database put you in prison? Does it persecute you? Does it remove your freedom of expression or of movement?
Can it be used for bad things? yes, but so does a driving license or any other identification, and all of them are necessary in order to live in a organized society. They are instruments!
If you want to draw a line, then you should regulate how those instruments are used, you should keep the government and its agencies in check
but none of this is actually relevant to this technology! The scan is different from an optical image of you fingerprint, which makes it quite useless for other purposes since the only place to get a match is in the phone!
The boundary between the government having a database and a government have total knowledge of everything we do and say (and if don't see any relation between knowledge about biometrics and surveillance, with enough cameras, and the UK within cities is not far away from it, and facial data from everybody they can track people, and since this thread is originally about fingerprint sensor, who says that if we install cameras, why not install fingerprint sensor at every door handle).
But since so far you are ignoring my main point: the difference of biometrics in ID papers (which provides all the identification that was needed in the past and even a much better identification than we ever had) and a database containing the fingerprints of all citizens, it's rather meaningless to keep talking to you.
What makes you so certain that the limitations of some other technology would be relevant to this technology?
Furthermore, why did you choose the thinnest STOCK thickness (25 microns) rather than the thinnest they can make (10 microns)?
Even more importantly, why did you ignore the possibility of the sapphire being deposited in an even thinner film rather than sliced from a large crystal?
It beats me why the Apple competitors don't just hire KDarling!
Besides the fact that I work for a company that uses all brands of devices, your comment makes no sense in this thread. This discussion has nothing to do with Apple competitors, or even Apple. This is about an analyst's prediction:
He first said that a convex shape was needed to hold the sensor, which is incorrect.
Then he said that since it would stick out, it needed better protection, and came up with sapphire, which is not the best choice. See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
What makes you so certain that the limitations of some other technology would be relevant to this technology?
I'm not. We're all talking about currently known tech, which is the only thing we can check against right now.
Quote:
Furthermore, why did you choose the thinnest STOCK thickness (25 microns) rather than the thinnest they can make (10 microns)?
Sorry, I didn't notice their comment about being able to slice down to 10 microns, with difficulty.
However, that's still not a convex shape, and it's still almost an order of magnitude away from the usual 0.5 to 2 microns thickness that's normally used on fingerprint sensors.
Capacitance is inversely proportional to distance, and therefore sensitivity will drop as more material gets in the way between the sensor and the fingerprint. Assuming it's a capacitive based system, of course.
Quote:
Even more importantly, why did you ignore the possibility of the sapphire being deposited in an even thinner film rather than sliced from a large crystal?
Do you know of any technology to deposit sapphire into a thin film directly on top of an integrated circuit without destroying the circuit?
In any case, for the past decade, many fingerprint sensors have used a thin layer of silicon carbide, a substance which is harder than sapphire.
Just another reason why this analyst's guess makes no technical or practical sense.
Anything's possible, I guess, but this rumor wouldn't seem to work well with current Authentec sensors.
<span style="line-height:1.231;">A covering for capacitive or RF is usally only a few microns thick. Can sapphire slices be made that thin? Wouldn't carving out a convex version be extremely wasteful, too?</span>
Not to mention that convex sounds like a terrible idea in one's pocket. A button sticking out is going to get clicked all the time. That was the whole idea behind the current concave design... to not easily be accidentally clicked.
Also, the home button isn't big enough for a whole-finger scanner, so you'd need to swipe, and a raised button sounds like it would easily get clicked.
I just don't see this whole idea of a scanner in the Home button anyway. Next to it would make more sense. Unless the whole idea is that waking up the phone by punching the Home button, fully authenticates the user for the entire time that the phone remains awake.
kdarling, "That was the whole idea behind the current concave design... to not easily be accidentally clicked."
I have the feeling that if you accidently click the button that does not detect a fingerprint, it will do nothing.
Excessive clicking is still harmful in long run just say 3 times a day has over 1000 a year, with finger detector over used, battery waisted, home button over used.
Wrong. A concave polygon is a two dimensional construct. A device like a home button is three dimensional.
You need to start by learning that 'square' does not describe a three dimensional object. Not to mention, of course, that we're not talking about squares in this case, anyway.
But even if the object were flat and square shaped, it would not be 'convex' in the context of the finger contact area. It would be flat.
Aww come on... I used a square to simplify the case.
It's a simple rule really... if you can 'shoot' a line anywhere through a shape, and only 'hit' 2 points of the shape or stay at the surface, it's a convex shape. So any shape without 'dents' in it, is a convex shape... Taking that from 2d to 3d: a cube would be perfectly convex too...
"A polyhedron is said to be convex if its surface (comprising its faces, edges and vertices) does not intersect itself and the line segment joining any two points of the polyhedron is contained in the interior or surface."
And you're right, we're not talking about squares anyway (I thought that would be easier to understand)... In the case of the iPhone home button, it could be a cylindric shape. Perfextly convex, without necessarily sticking out. Flat on the surface... Is it really that hard?
It's also the major reason why competitors rampantly copy Apple's products.
Because they do the hard design, development, testing, re-design, re-development, re-testing, ad nauseam.
Much easier, faster, and cheaper to just copy Apple instead of doing all that work.
What Apple work? AuthenTec sensors have been selling in other devices for years. The only thing Apple is responsible for is the packaging.
The whole idea that a fingerprint sensor is a huge radical leg up over competitors is silly. The sensor is the equivalent of a PIN, it is simply another way of authenticating to the keychain of the device. There are many ways to authenticate: biometric fingerprint readers, voice print, retina, NFC tokens, et al.
In fact, there are a number of NFC rings out there right now. And the NFC ring or token has the advantage that it can authenticate to devices by proximity alone, so you just sit down and start using your computer, or pick up your tablet. There is no need to press a button to scan anything.
I mean, the fingerprint is a small incremental improvement on PINs and passwords, but really, something no other competitor can compete with? First it presumes it's valuable enough that consumers will make it their busy decision. I don't think consumers make buying decisions on authentication hassle.
What Apple work? AuthenTec sensors have been selling in other devices for years. The only thing Apple is responsible for is the packaging.
The whole idea that a fingerprint sensor is a huge radical leg up over competitors is silly. The sensor is the equivalent of a PIN, it is simply another way of authenticating to the keychain of the device. There are many ways to authenticate: biometric fingerprint readers, voice print, retina, NFC tokens, et al.
In fact, there are a number of NFC rings out there right now. And the NFC ring or token has the advantage that it can authenticate to devices by proximity alone, so you just sit down and start using your computer, or pick up your tablet. There is no need to press a button to scan anything.
I mean, the fingerprint is a small incremental improvement on PINs and passwords, but really, something no other competitor can compete with? First it presumes it's valuable enough that consumers will make it their busy decision. I don't think consumers make buying decisions on authentication hassle.
Why judge something before you've seen or used it?
And Apple has done way more than package it. You'll see when (if) it comes out later this year.
[SIZE=3][/SIZE][SIZE=3][/SIZE]Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
[QUOTE]I don't know why people keep thinking your fingerprint will be stored somewhere as a simple image or that someone could copy it. Do you think passwords are stored as plain text? There will be a mathematical formula that converts your fingerprint into some type of data that can't be converted back to a fingerprint.
Others have mentioned that fingerprints are not 100% unique. Irrelevant. This is not going to be something that's used to identify you among all the hundreds of millions of other iOS users. It's simply a method to verify if the proper owner of the iPhone is actually trying to use it. It would also be very secure for mobile payments as the odds of your iPhone getting into the hands of someone with a close-enough fingerprint to fool it are astronomical.[/QUOTE]
I get it!: an iPad with a restaurant POS app that can text the customer's bill to the customer's phone along with the instruction: "Press the Home Button to pay your bill."
Customer presses Home Button
"Thank you for dining with us."
- - - -
In short, it's a simple physical button that may well change the way we all order and pay for things forever.
This is soooo Apple, and I bet it has SJ's fingerprints all over it.
I get it!: an iPad with a restaurant POS app that can text the customer's bill to the customer's phone along with the instruction: "Press the Home Button to pay your bill."
Cool idea, and that would require first giving the food seller your phone number, which is neither convenient nor desirable by many people.
This situation is one where anonymous and less interceptible comm methods like NFC shine.
You could just lay your phone on a portable NFC payment plate, add a tip, and swipe your finger to confirm.
(Payment apps would need to know to display a tip calculation field for restaurants. Sounds like a potential patent!)
While we're all speculating on rumors, what are the odds of placing a fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone? The Fujitsu REGZA has an AuthenTec fingerprint scanner on the back of the phone and it appears to work fine there. It can then be flush and may fit better in the useable space (one of the problems this rumor suggests Apple is having).
From what I've read the new AuthenTec technology is radically different. It was shopped around (for development) -- then Apple bought the company, gaining exclusivity.
For all you fingerprint whorls out there... The new technology doesn't use fingerprints as we know them, today.
It is a nice feature to add but not really a wow! feature. Do't get me wrong in that I think it will be useful and a nice differentiator from other phones but I just can't see many people citing that as a reason to buy an iPhone 5S. I see more benefit from increasing the storage from 16GB to 32GB on the base model and improving the camera for most people than adding a fingerprint scanner.
...
It's not the feature. itself -- it's what the feature enables (with the proper infrastructure). Simply stated it allows you to:
have secure access to all your stuff (wherever it exists).
have entry into secured areas (home, office, school, etc.)
to securely buy/pay for things
to avail yourself of services (tollroads, trains, etc.)
I envision Apple's implementation to be something like iTunes in the cloud... Where your iPhone can securely identify you to any portal (credit card terminal, etc.) and this will be passed along through iTunes where the appropriate actions, routing, disbursement will take place -- based on accounts and rules you have established in iTunes.
For example, you should be able to access [buy] a song, a sandwich, a car, a soda... with the same ease.
It was said that JFK never carried a wallet (or keys). Everyone knew who he was (and he never paid for anything, anyway).
With a proper implementation of this feature, we all can gain the advantage of celebrity [instant recognition] when, and if, we need it.
I bet that Oprah will be first in line for this service
From what I've read the new AuthenTec technology is radically different. It was shopped around (for development) -- then Apple bought the company, gaining exclusivity.
I've read that too. However, so far I've seen nothing to back up the claim.
A lot of "tech" reporters don't understand half the stuff they write about. Like when many at first claimed that Apple bought Authentec for their "NFC fingerprint sensor technology", which was utter nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
It's not the feature. itself -- it's what the feature enables (with the proper infrastructure). Simply stated it allows you to:
have secure access to all your stuff (wherever it exists).
have entry into secured areas (home, office, school, etc.)
to securely buy/pay for things
to avail yourself of services (tollroads, trains, etc.)
Of course, that's all available without a fingerprint sensor.
Fingerprint sensors have been around for a long time, and never got popular even when they worked well.
--
So maybe Apple isn't exactly using it for authentication alone. It feels like something else is up. Something unexpected.
Like maybe having a capacitive Home button that recognizes when you mash your finger down on it, distorting the whorls. That might explain a convex bump as a finger guide and distorter.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
When getting rid of trolls and abusers turns into a demodding, I can't imagine.
I wouldn't be casting any stones in that glass bubble you live in if you think that was the reason you were demoted and banned twice. Demodding is not a word by the way but a demodulator is an electric circuit and you certainly like to cause sparks.
The iPhone is a GEM already but now it maybe can truly house one if the rumors are true.
All this said, I disdain all of these leaked rumors - let them surprise and delight us folks! This misinformation just helps competitors..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ppietra
and what boundary might that be? does your fingerprint in a database put you in prison? Does it persecute you? Does it remove your freedom of expression or of movement?
Can it be used for bad things? yes, but so does a driving license or any other identification, and all of them are necessary in order to live in a organized society. They are instruments!
If you want to draw a line, then you should regulate how those instruments are used, you should keep the government and its agencies in check
but none of this is actually relevant to this technology! The scan is different from an optical image of you fingerprint, which makes it quite useless for other purposes since the only place to get a match is in the phone!
The boundary between the government having a database and a government have total knowledge of everything we do and say (and if don't see any relation between knowledge about biometrics and surveillance, with enough cameras, and the UK within cities is not far away from it, and facial data from everybody they can track people, and since this thread is originally about fingerprint sensor, who says that if we install cameras, why not install fingerprint sensor at every door handle).
But since so far you are ignoring my main point: the difference of biometrics in ID papers (which provides all the identification that was needed in the past and even a much better identification than we ever had) and a database containing the fingerprints of all citizens, it's rather meaningless to keep talking to you.
LOL, that's true of most topics, the trolls on this forum should stop wasting their time here and go and help Sacamsung! Oh wait a minute ....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
What makes you so certain that the limitations of some other technology would be relevant to this technology?
Furthermore, why did you choose the thinnest STOCK thickness (25 microns) rather than the thinnest they can make (10 microns)?
Even more importantly, why did you ignore the possibility of the sapphire being deposited in an even thinner film rather than sliced from a large crystal?
Thin film deposition of sapphire?
Can you explain how that works?
You think they haven't already?
There's one thing I can tell you about jragosta and that is that he knows his stuff.
http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/mobile/proceeding.aspx?articleid=977556
http://www.orc.soton.ac.uk/viewpublication.html?pid=486P
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
It beats me why the Apple competitors don't just hire KDarling!
Besides the fact that I work for a company that uses all brands of devices, your comment makes no sense in this thread. This discussion has nothing to do with Apple competitors, or even Apple. This is about an analyst's prediction:
He first said that a convex shape was needed to hold the sensor, which is incorrect.
Then he said that since it would stick out, it needed better protection, and came up with sapphire, which is not the best choice. See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
What makes you so certain that the limitations of some other technology would be relevant to this technology?
I'm not. We're all talking about currently known tech, which is the only thing we can check against right now.
Quote:
Furthermore, why did you choose the thinnest STOCK thickness (25 microns) rather than the thinnest they can make (10 microns)?
Sorry, I didn't notice their comment about being able to slice down to 10 microns, with difficulty.
However, that's still not a convex shape, and it's still almost an order of magnitude away from the usual 0.5 to 2 microns thickness that's normally used on fingerprint sensors.
Capacitance is inversely proportional to distance, and therefore sensitivity will drop as more material gets in the way between the sensor and the fingerprint. Assuming it's a capacitive based system, of course.
Quote:
Even more importantly, why did you ignore the possibility of the sapphire being deposited in an even thinner film rather than sliced from a large crystal?
Do you know of any technology to deposit sapphire into a thin film directly on top of an integrated circuit without destroying the circuit?
In any case, for the past decade, many fingerprint sensors have used a thin layer of silicon carbide, a substance which is harder than sapphire.
Just another reason why this analyst's guess makes no technical or practical sense.
Excessive clicking is still harmful in long run just say 3 times a day has over 1000 a year, with finger detector over used, battery waisted, home button over used.
if it required the same properties of a touch screen then both of these last listed are less problematic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Wrong. A concave polygon is a two dimensional construct. A device like a home button is three dimensional.
You need to start by learning that 'square' does not describe a three dimensional object. Not to mention, of course, that we're not talking about squares in this case, anyway.
But even if the object were flat and square shaped, it would not be 'convex' in the context of the finger contact area. It would be flat.
Aww come on... I used a square to simplify the case.
It's a simple rule really... if you can 'shoot' a line anywhere through a shape, and only 'hit' 2 points of the shape or stay at the surface, it's a convex shape. So any shape without 'dents' in it, is a convex shape... Taking that from 2d to 3d: a cube would be perfectly convex too...
"A polyhedron is said to be convex if its surface (comprising its faces, edges and vertices) does not intersect itself and the line segment joining any two points of the polyhedron is contained in the interior or surface."
And you're right, we're not talking about squares anyway (I thought that would be easier to understand)... In the case of the iPhone home button, it could be a cylindric shape. Perfextly convex, without necessarily sticking out. Flat on the surface... Is it really that hard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
It's also the major reason why competitors rampantly copy Apple's products.
Because they do the hard design, development, testing, re-design, re-development, re-testing, ad nauseam.
Much easier, faster, and cheaper to just copy Apple instead of doing all that work.
What Apple work? AuthenTec sensors have been selling in other devices for years. The only thing Apple is responsible for is the packaging.
The whole idea that a fingerprint sensor is a huge radical leg up over competitors is silly. The sensor is the equivalent of a PIN, it is simply another way of authenticating to the keychain of the device. There are many ways to authenticate: biometric fingerprint readers, voice print, retina, NFC tokens, et al.
In fact, there are a number of NFC rings out there right now. And the NFC ring or token has the advantage that it can authenticate to devices by proximity alone, so you just sit down and start using your computer, or pick up your tablet. There is no need to press a button to scan anything.
I mean, the fingerprint is a small incremental improvement on PINs and passwords, but really, something no other competitor can compete with? First it presumes it's valuable enough that consumers will make it their busy decision. I don't think consumers make buying decisions on authentication hassle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjc999
What Apple work? AuthenTec sensors have been selling in other devices for years. The only thing Apple is responsible for is the packaging.
The whole idea that a fingerprint sensor is a huge radical leg up over competitors is silly. The sensor is the equivalent of a PIN, it is simply another way of authenticating to the keychain of the device. There are many ways to authenticate: biometric fingerprint readers, voice print, retina, NFC tokens, et al.
In fact, there are a number of NFC rings out there right now. And the NFC ring or token has the advantage that it can authenticate to devices by proximity alone, so you just sit down and start using your computer, or pick up your tablet. There is no need to press a button to scan anything.
I mean, the fingerprint is a small incremental improvement on PINs and passwords, but really, something no other competitor can compete with? First it presumes it's valuable enough that consumers will make it their busy decision. I don't think consumers make buying decisions on authentication hassle.
Why judge something before you've seen or used it?
And Apple has done way more than package it. You'll see when (if) it comes out later this year.
[QUOTE]I don't know why people keep thinking your fingerprint will be stored somewhere as a simple image or that someone could copy it. Do you think passwords are stored as plain text? There will be a mathematical formula that converts your fingerprint into some type of data that can't be converted back to a fingerprint.
Others have mentioned that fingerprints are not 100% unique. Irrelevant. This is not going to be something that's used to identify you among all the hundreds of millions of other iOS users. It's simply a method to verify if the proper owner of the iPhone is actually trying to use it. It would also be very secure for mobile payments as the odds of your iPhone getting into the hands of someone with a close-enough fingerprint to fool it are astronomical.[/QUOTE]
I get it!: an iPad with a restaurant POS app that can text the customer's bill to the customer's phone along with the instruction: "Press the Home Button to pay your bill."
Customer presses Home Button
"Thank you for dining with us."
- - - -
In short, it's a simple physical button that may well change the way we all order and pay for things forever.
This is soooo Apple, and I bet it has SJ's fingerprints all over it.
(no pun intended)
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Beige
I get it!: an iPad with a restaurant POS app that can text the customer's bill to the customer's phone along with the instruction: "Press the Home Button to pay your bill."
Cool idea, and that would require first giving the food seller your phone number, which is neither convenient nor desirable by many people.
This situation is one where anonymous and less interceptible comm methods like NFC shine.
You could just lay your phone on a portable NFC payment plate, add a tip, and swipe your finger to confirm.
(Payment apps would need to know to display a tip calculation field for restaurants. Sounds like a potential patent!)
That's old AuthenTec technology!
From what I've read the new AuthenTec technology is radically different. It was shopped around (for development) -- then Apple bought the company, gaining exclusivity.
For all you fingerprint whorls out there... The new technology doesn't use fingerprints as we know them, today.
It's not the feature. itself -- it's what the feature enables (with the proper infrastructure). Simply stated it allows you to:
I envision Apple's implementation to be something like iTunes in the cloud... Where your iPhone can securely identify you to any portal (credit card terminal, etc.) and this will be passed along through iTunes where the appropriate actions, routing, disbursement will take place -- based on accounts and rules you have established in iTunes.
For example, you should be able to access [buy] a song, a sandwich, a car, a soda... with the same ease.
It was said that JFK never carried a wallet (or keys). Everyone knew who he was (and he never paid for anything, anyway).
With a proper implementation of this feature, we all can gain the advantage of celebrity [instant recognition] when, and if, we need it.
I bet that Oprah will be first in line for this service
LOL
? Hell Tutor Vectors...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
From what I've read the new AuthenTec technology is radically different. It was shopped around (for development) -- then Apple bought the company, gaining exclusivity.
I've read that too. However, so far I've seen nothing to back up the claim.
A lot of "tech" reporters don't understand half the stuff they write about. Like when many at first claimed that Apple bought Authentec for their "NFC fingerprint sensor technology", which was utter nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
It's not the feature. itself -- it's what the feature enables (with the proper infrastructure). Simply stated it allows you to:
have secure access to all your stuff (wherever it exists).
have entry into secured areas (home, office, school, etc.)
to securely buy/pay for things
to avail yourself of services (tollroads, trains, etc.)
Of course, that's all available without a fingerprint sensor.
Fingerprint sensors have been around for a long time, and never got popular even when they worked well.
--
So maybe Apple isn't exactly using it for authentication alone. It feels like something else is up. Something unexpected.
Like maybe having a capacitive Home button that recognizes when you mash your finger down on it, distorting the whorls. That might explain a convex bump as a finger guide and distorter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I bet that Oprah will be first in line for this service
I thought Oprah is all but sold to Microsoft and its RT Tablet, she even tweeted about it to the world from her iPad.