i'm sure many commenters above have said this already, but really, this is total f'ing vapor-ware from SS. CES is THE annual orgy of vapor-ware announcements.
ALL the responses by other OEM's so far to Apple's TouchID to date have been vapor-ware - or defective products that just don't work right.
call me up when anyone of them actually has a product for sale that works.
The last thing I want to do is shove a smartphone against my eyeball every time I want to use the smartphone. I am sure Apple considered and discarded the idea.
Dint you know that Sammy takes all those Apple discarded ideas for there phones anyways ?
Don't worry about poor lighting condition or people wearing glasses, Samsung can add a weapon grade laser to the phone which can be beam to your eyes and illuminate your iris even there is a wall between you and the phone!
Most iris scanners are closely monitored by the US government for security reasons and accessing the technology without paying for it might be more difficult than borrowing it from Apple for a few years without paying.
The little unspoken truth about willful infringements: When you're eventually found guilty in court you STILL OWE MONEY for past infringements.
Using an Iris Scanner that fits comfortably inside a smartphone?
Not yet, anyway.
Yes, right now. The leading researcher in the world on iris recognition flat out states, “We can use an iPhone, an iPad, even Google Glasses as well as any digital camera."
They have already used the technology inside of a smartphone as an iris scanner. Now, as some people have pointed out, some hardware improvements would be needed to make it more robust and as I pointed out any IR filters would need to be removed to help increase secutiry, but there is nothing necessary to keep the current level of technology from being used as an iris scanner.
However, this doesn't automatically mean that it will be a good implementation.
Interesting read but if read properly it looks like it requires an additional light source to induce dilation of the pupil (flickering light, pen light etc).
Now wouldn't that be amusing if each time you wanted to unlock the phone, it caused a flash in your eyes. It be flashy for sure :-D
Not sure how the eye works exactly but it might be possible to reach to smaller levels of movement I guess.
Another thing I wonder whether it would consistently work in different levels of lights, particularly low light. Most of these iris recognition technologies are used in relatively bright areas with consistent lighting (airports, security check points, etc). New algorithms and possibly technologies would have to be used to adapt to a less controlled situation such as that experienced by a typical phone user.
The point of the article about forcing eye contraction was to catch people trying to avoid detection / recognition by an iris scanner. In other words, if you were a terrorist trying to sneak into a country you could try to avoid detection be the means stated. Interestingly, a smartphone's implementation is almost the exact opposite. Any of these methods wouldn't give access to the phone they would fail the match and keep the phone locked.
Now, light levels and light temperature is a very valid concern. To address this I would expect that phone manufacturers would have to build in flash/illumination LEDs into the front of the camera. One of these LEDs should also be a near IR LED for IR illumination. As for the algorithms, you might be correct, although it seems to me that as long as the phone can get a good image then the algorithm should be just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikilok
The issues with iris scanning.
1) so if your wearing regular glasses it could distort the sensors view at the iris because of lens refraction or lens glare from a light source.
2) what if your wearing sun glasses on a sunny day outside ? You expect me to take it off to unlock my phone ?
3) what if your unlocking ur phone in a dark room in the middle of the night. Expect me to turn on the lights to unlock ?
4) you need to point the device at ur face to unlock.
5) what about people wearing colored contact lenses ?
Enough said. This is bound to fail.
1) I have read a few articles which state that regular glasses do not interfere with the scan.
2) Sunglasses would interfere with the scan. Just like wearing gloves interferes with a fingerprint scanner. So, yes, you would be expected to take off your gloves for TouchID and your sunglasses for an iris scan.
3) This one is a very valid concern and I would say that any good implementation of this would require illumination LEDs to be installed on the front of the phone. If momentary night blindness is a concern due to illumination the phone could revert to IR illumination only if the environment is too dark.
4) Yes.
5) People who wear colored contact lenses might not be able to use this, or they might. The article that I linked to mentioned a way around this, but I don't know what it entails.
You are seeming to argue that it shouldn't be implemented because it might cause some inconvenience. Well, any security causes some inconvenience. If your convenience is more important to you than security then I am sure that you could turn it off, just like with any smartphone's security feature.
Again, I am not saying that iris scanning is necessarily a better solution than fingerprint scanning, it is just more secure, while also being less convenient. The ideal solution is a phone with both, and I hope that Apple eventually gets around to implementing both.
I think that Samsung will be the first to release it though, and I think that implementation will be Samsung's usual, terrible implementation.
Don't worry about poor lighting condition or people wearing glasses, Samsung can add a weapon grade laser to the phone which can be beam to your eyes and illuminate your iris even there is a wall between you and the phone!
So apart from exploding batteries, we now have to worry about exploding eyeballs as well?
Samsung makes excellent hardware, but I feel they don't really have a great track record of successfully integrating technology into their devices in a way that best benefits the user. Heck, they even admit as much in a recent interview.
Interesting concept but there are a number of challenges in execution I think. With a few obstacles that I think ultimately will handicap it's use for the end client. Just my opinion though.
First the technical limitations - if you read the wiki on iris recognition (not retina scanning) it seems to work with few false positives. Except according to wiki "Many commercial iris scanners can be easily fooled by a high quality image of an iris or face in place of the real thing". If that's true than unlike fingerprints which they were able to break the iPhone 5S security by creating a model based off a fingerprint, then in theory a high quality picture would do.
A second technical limitation which I found a bit amusing was "Alcohol consumption causes recognition degradation as the pupil dilates/constricts causing deformation in the iris pattern" So it might not work if you're drunk!?
A third limitation I can see is light or lack thereof. If there is not enough light for the CCD camera to see the iris?
A fourth limitation might exist for people with glasses might cause a reflection degrading the image. Or colour contacts. Definitely sunglasses.
Other questions from a technology standpoint are how long does it have to scan an eye to achieve a result and how stable does the eye have to be? Also where is the data being stored? Seperately like the iPhone5s or somewhere in memory. And how easy would it be take control of the CCD camera and send a signal to it or send a virus to override it? The fingerprint scanner is totally separate from everything (or so I think) while the CCD camera on a phone is used for multiple purposes which I think in theory makes it more vulnerable. I also wonder how much power consumption is required comparing the two. If it comes at a cost of battery life (or phone weight) that wouldn't be good.
Moving away from technology I think the user experience also has to be taken into consideration. One of the reasons I would want a iPhone5s (i currently have a 5) is because it would allow me to easily access my phone while driving. Don't know how many times the password lock has made it a pain to quickly check something (maybe this is a good thing but there are certain times that a quick check or access of a address or phone number you have in an open email would be useful).
Second is as people mentioned the way people access the phone. The reader built into the home button is a natural progression of what they normally do. I don't think iris recognition is.
Ultimately it sounds like a "cool" technology rather than a non-intrusive technology like the iPhone 5s.
To be fair, I think we would want to see how it's executed but not sure how useful it's going to be... but having said that at least for me one of the primary reasons for wanting the fingerprint scanner would not be met with a iris recognition technology.
Brilliant appraisal and demolition. Do you work for Apple? If not, you should!
From Samsung's interview, it's kind of funny how people deride Apple for being just a "marketing company" and laud Samsung, Google, and Microsoft as the real innovators. The irony in that statement is that Apple has never resorted to Samsung's tactics to promote their products. For starters, the amount that Samsung spent on marketing in 2013 is more than three times what Apple spent on R&D in that year. Apple executives don't give media interviews to talk about future product releases. Just about the only case I can think of where Apple did what Samsung did as described in this article was when Tim Cook promised an update to the Mac Pro a whole year before it was released without giving any details.
Samsung was talking up the SG5 and Galaxy Gear in a clear-cut attempt to generate buzz in order to get people to hold out for those products rather than buy an existing product. The promise of an updated Galaxy Gear is even more laughable. Samsung simply shouldn't have released the Gear in that form. It was fundamentally flawed on so many levels. For starters, the Galaxy Gear looks terrible on the wrist. Secondly, it needs to be connected to a phone running Android 4.3 in order to work. Since only the latest models have Android 4.3, the usability of the Gear was limited. Last but not least, the battery life was just terrible. Samsung should have had much more pride than to release such a product. What good is to release an update for a product that hasn't been on the market for even a year?
Also, it is a well-known fact that Samsung was fined for paying college students to post comments on tech blogs that praise Samsung's products while deriding competitor's products. Samsung's clear-cut message in their commercials is that Samsung products are the "next big thing." They project an image of their products being superior to others' products. If their products are so good, why do they have to resort to paying for favorable reviews?
Samsung’s Galaxy S5, the next generation of its flagship smartphone, will be released by April and may include innovative eye-scanning technology.
So we have an unannounced and unreleased product that is tentatively scheduled to be released in April but could be changed and may include eye-scanning technology which may or may not work but we'll just call it innovative anyway?
Comments
1) so if your wearing regular glasses it could distort the sensors view at the iris because of lens refraction or lens glare from a light source.
2) what if your wearing sun glasses on a sunny day outside ? You expect me to take it off to unlock my phone ?
3) what if your unlocking ur phone in a dark room in the middle of the night. Expect me to turn on the lights to unlock ?
4) you need to point the device at ur face to unlock.
5) what about people wearing colored contact lenses ?
Enough said. This is bound to fail.
i'm sure many commenters above have said this already, but really, this is total f'ing vapor-ware from SS. CES is THE annual orgy of vapor-ware announcements.
ALL the responses by other OEM's so far to Apple's TouchID to date have been vapor-ware - or defective products that just don't work right.
call me up when anyone of them actually has a product for sale that works.
Dint you know that Sammy takes all those Apple discarded ideas for there phones anyways
Maybe ear recognition would be better, since people are already accustomed to holding their phone up to their ear!
(Kidding, of course.)
Remove (Kidding of course.) and you'd be closer to a powerful observation... and one would not need to hold the phone to the ear.
Removing the phone would make it an even more powerful conversation.
Removing the phone would make it an even more powerful conversation.
Lol - I'll admit that I couldn't find the word I wanted, a bit distracted right now.
The little unspoken truth about willful infringements: When you're eventually found guilty in court you STILL OWE MONEY for past infringements.
Using an Iris Scanner that fits comfortably inside a smartphone?
Not yet, anyway.
Yes, right now. The leading researcher in the world on iris recognition flat out states, “We can use an iPhone, an iPad, even Google Glasses as well as any digital camera."
They have already used the technology inside of a smartphone as an iris scanner. Now, as some people have pointed out, some hardware improvements would be needed to make it more robust and as I pointed out any IR filters would need to be removed to help increase secutiry, but there is nothing necessary to keep the current level of technology from being used as an iris scanner.
However, this doesn't automatically mean that it will be a good implementation.
Quote:
I am including an excerpt of the article ("Closing the Door on ?Iris Recognition Vulnerabilities") from http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=node/11607.
Interesting read but if read properly it looks like it requires an additional light source to induce dilation of the pupil (flickering light, pen light etc).
Now wouldn't that be amusing if each time you wanted to unlock the phone, it caused a flash in your eyes. It be flashy for sure :-D
Not sure how the eye works exactly but it might be possible to reach to smaller levels of movement I guess.
Another thing I wonder whether it would consistently work in different levels of lights, particularly low light. Most of these iris recognition technologies are used in relatively bright areas with consistent lighting (airports, security check points, etc). New algorithms and possibly technologies would have to be used to adapt to a less controlled situation such as that experienced by a typical phone user.
The point of the article about forcing eye contraction was to catch people trying to avoid detection / recognition by an iris scanner. In other words, if you were a terrorist trying to sneak into a country you could try to avoid detection be the means stated. Interestingly, a smartphone's implementation is almost the exact opposite. Any of these methods wouldn't give access to the phone they would fail the match and keep the phone locked.
Now, light levels and light temperature is a very valid concern. To address this I would expect that phone manufacturers would have to build in flash/illumination LEDs into the front of the camera. One of these LEDs should also be a near IR LED for IR illumination. As for the algorithms, you might be correct, although it seems to me that as long as the phone can get a good image then the algorithm should be just fine.
The issues with iris scanning.
1) so if your wearing regular glasses it could distort the sensors view at the iris because of lens refraction or lens glare from a light source.
2) what if your wearing sun glasses on a sunny day outside ? You expect me to take it off to unlock my phone ?
3) what if your unlocking ur phone in a dark room in the middle of the night. Expect me to turn on the lights to unlock ?
4) you need to point the device at ur face to unlock.
5) what about people wearing colored contact lenses ?
Enough said. This is bound to fail.
1) I have read a few articles which state that regular glasses do not interfere with the scan.
2) Sunglasses would interfere with the scan. Just like wearing gloves interferes with a fingerprint scanner. So, yes, you would be expected to take off your gloves for TouchID and your sunglasses for an iris scan.
3) This one is a very valid concern and I would say that any good implementation of this would require illumination LEDs to be installed on the front of the phone. If momentary night blindness is a concern due to illumination the phone could revert to IR illumination only if the environment is too dark.
4) Yes.
5) People who wear colored contact lenses might not be able to use this, or they might. The article that I linked to mentioned a way around this, but I don't know what it entails.
You are seeming to argue that it shouldn't be implemented because it might cause some inconvenience. Well, any security causes some inconvenience. If your convenience is more important to you than security then I am sure that you could turn it off, just like with any smartphone's security feature.
Again, I am not saying that iris scanning is necessarily a better solution than fingerprint scanning, it is just more secure, while also being less convenient. The ideal solution is a phone with both, and I hope that Apple eventually gets around to implementing both.
I think that Samsung will be the first to release it though, and I think that implementation will be Samsung's usual, terrible implementation.
Funny, surprised no one came up with that sooner.
Don't worry about poor lighting condition or people wearing glasses, Samsung can add a weapon grade laser to the phone which can be beam to your eyes and illuminate your iris even there is a wall between you and the phone!
So apart from exploding batteries, we now have to worry about exploding eyeballs as well?
Samsung makes excellent hardware, but I feel they don't really have a great track record of successfully integrating technology into their devices in a way that best benefits the user. Heck, they even admit as much in a recent interview.
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-35284_1-57617020/samsung-exec-were-being-more-cautious-with-unproven-device-features/
Brilliant appraisal and demolition. Do you work for Apple? If not, you should!
Samsung was talking up the SG5 and Galaxy Gear in a clear-cut attempt to generate buzz in order to get people to hold out for those products rather than buy an existing product. The promise of an updated Galaxy Gear is even more laughable. Samsung simply shouldn't have released the Gear in that form. It was fundamentally flawed on so many levels. For starters, the Galaxy Gear looks terrible on the wrist. Secondly, it needs to be connected to a phone running Android 4.3 in order to work. Since only the latest models have Android 4.3, the usability of the Gear was limited. Last but not least, the battery life was just terrible. Samsung should have had much more pride than to release such a product. What good is to release an update for a product that hasn't been on the market for even a year?
Also, it is a well-known fact that Samsung was fined for paying college students to post comments on tech blogs that praise Samsung's products while deriding competitor's products. Samsung's clear-cut message in their commercials is that Samsung products are the "next big thing." They project an image of their products being superior to others' products. If their products are so good, why do they have to resort to paying for favorable reviews?
Who's the marketing company now?
Yup its a cool waiting ... for s5 ;-)
For your first post, can you please be less obvious in showing your true colours? Tnx
Signature screams ‘spambot’ from the highest ramparts. Just toss in a report.
Tnx. I did that, only after hitting Submit. Next time I won't even reply.
Samsung’s Galaxy S5, the next generation of its flagship smartphone, will be released by April and may include innovative eye-scanning technology.
So we have an unannounced and unreleased product that is tentatively scheduled to be released in April but could be changed and may include eye-scanning technology which may or may not work but we'll just call it innovative anyway?