As someone already brought up, it seems like a design flaw of sorts that FaceID autonomously tries to identify faces. I can just imagine handing my shiny new iPhone X to a couple friends to look at - and get back a locked-out device won't all this face recognizing also deplete the battery unnecessarily? On a related note: my wife and I have each other's fingerprints registered on our phones for convenience. No problem since TouchID allows up to 5 prints. But is it true that the iPhone X only allows a single registered face? That would be a terrible limitation :-(
I think Craig should have seized the moment to show us how it was a security feature and not a fail. Easier said than done. Speaking in front a large audience can make it difficult to think on the fly.
On another note. I can now see US border agents using the facial ID to unlock your phone on the spot without having to ask you to do it. I would suggest people not interested in allowing border agents access to their phones should disable Facial ID.
On a related note: my wife and I have each other's fingerprints registered on our phones for convenience. No problem since TouchID allows up to 5 prints. But is it true that the iPhone X only allows a single registered face? That would be a terrible limitation :-(
This is the feature that I don't like. It would be nice if it stores at least two face profiles. But ... I will still get one
I can't imagine it will only recognize a single face. My guess is that it will recognize a couple of trusted ones. Just for the sake of convenience (and safety) I have one of my wife's fingerprints registered on my phones too for times when it's necessary and I'm not readily available to unlock my phone. I'd be pretty sure Apple has thought of the same situation with FaceID so no worries. Apple tends to think about the little things.
EDIT: I guess I need to have more imagination. I'm wrong. It's locked to a single face per Apple themselves.
btw: It’s common for the eyes to open and stay open when a person dies, if you happened to wonder whether Face ID would be more secure than Touch ID in such a situation. I’m sure many of you wondered. 😁
Yeah, maybe you were one of those poo-pooing Touch ID when it premiered because, you know, dismembered fingers. Remember, it's Samsung who releases new hardware and features that only half-ass work. When Apple does it right people are skeptical because of Samsung's failure (see Retina Scan). Do you really think Apple hasn't tested this new feature extensively, consulted with medical professionals about the scenario you envision. Of course there will be people for whom Face ID doesn't work. There are people for whom Touch ID doesn't work and my wife is one of them. Not matter what she does, no matter how many fingerprint scans she enters, Touch ID stops working for her after a day or two. Meanwhile my own fingerprint scan in her same iPhone 6, as well as our oldest son's scan in said iPhone 6 continue to work every time, all the time and have since day one. Explain that one. Something about her skin chemistry? Something about her skin's texture? What?
If there really were a significant problem with Face ID tech, then Federighi should have continued to experience glitches within the AR mask and animoji segments. He didn't. Those worked flawlessly, and it stands to reason that they're not any less sophisticated in terms of scanning/tracking all of the various points on an individual's face.
I can't imagine it will only recognize a single face. My guess is that it will recognize a couple of trusted ones. Just for the sake of convenience (and safety) I have one of my wife's fingerprints registered on my phones too for times when it's necessary and I'm not readily available to unlock my phone. I'd be pretty sure Apple has thought of the same situation with FaceID so no worries. Apple tends to think about the little things.
I asked because a news outlet reported that one can only register one Face ID - just don't know how reputable that news outlet was (came to the news article via RSS client).
I can't imagine it will only recognize a single face. My guess is that it will recognize a couple of trusted ones. Just for the sake of convenience (and safety) I have one of my wife's fingerprints registered on my phones too for times when it's necessary and I'm not readily available to unlock my phone. I'd be pretty sure Apple has thought of the same situation with FaceID so no worries. Apple tends to think about the little things.
I asked because a news outlet reported that one can only register one Face ID - just don't know how reputable that news outlet was (came to the news article via RSS client).
A source I tend to trust especially as he had a phone in hand to try, Mark Gurman, says more than one face can be authenticated.
EDIT; And as it turns it Gurman is wrong. Dang, it really is locked to a single face. Frankly I'm more than a little surprised.
I am not a fan of the Force Touch ID of the iPhone 7/8 either. It feels fabricated, not as satisfying as the click of a real physical button.
My plea to Apple is to ignore both Face ID and Touch ID. Instead, have the Apple Watch as the primary unlock device.
And for those that do not own an Apple Watch, just have the pincode.
NOTE: Of course you could always have Face ID in combination with the Apple Watch or the pincode if you really want to add another layer of security.
>:x
I have major qualms with this. If you don't like Touch ID or Face ID for authentication then turn them off. Leave those features for those of us that A)Don't have an Apple Watch B)Can't afford an Apple Watch C)Can't wear an Apple Watch D)Don't want to wear an Apple Watch. It would be fine to allow the Watch to be an unlocking method.
The phrase is: the proof of the pudding is in the eating
It's true that that is the original but it's also true that the condensed version, as originally quoted, is possibly more common than the original in some areas.
...Phil in particular also looked bored when describing the iPhone 8...
There was definitely something wrong with Phil, personally my take on it was that he was still really really really pissed off at the GM leak ruining the delightful surprises. As for the face ID, it's annoying that before going on stage that Craig didn't check it first seeing as it is the tentpole feature and it is obvious that any tiny fail would be jumped upon. Maybe everyone was still so angry about the leak that they just let it get to them. Even Cook seemed a bit weirded out at the end when he announced the 'one more thing' knowing full well that the surprise factor was gone. In fact whether I imagined this or not I don't know but it felt like the audience didn't know whether to act surprised or not. That leak really annoyed them.
Having said that, it's all going to be moot because it looks like awesome technology that's going to leave all others eating dust.
I’m with you on the leak. I think it spoiled the reveal for Apple. I hope they find and fire the loser who did it.
"I'm a troll trying to capitalize on Apple's big Face ID fail for my notoriously anti-Apple YouTube Channel. Should I go with demogate or facegate? Which will be more SEO friendly?"
Well, as for the keynote presenters, I think Phil and Eddy should not return. They read from the TelePrompTer as if they’ve never seen the text before ... it’s been this way for a few Keynotes now. Phil in particular also looked bored when describing the iPhone 8 ... you could tell he just wanted to discuss the iPhone X. I’m not saying they are bad execs ... but neither convey enthusiasm. Clearly Craig, is the man for these events ... you can tell he lives and breathes Apple, and deeply understands what he’s talking about.
As for the Face ID fail ... that note on the screen was obvious at the time (I.e. PassCode required ..), I just assumed the phone had been rebooted (that’s when I usually see that message) ... in any case, people reporting it as a Fail are simply looking for something to criticise. The X is gorgeous! Will be pre-ordering as soon as my carrier lets me!
To me, Phil is smooth and never hiccups. Tim wasn't quite up to his usual self this time around. He's never what one would call a consummate presenter, but he's competent at hosting the others. I suspect this year there has been a lot more going on at Apple with the new headquarters move-in coming up, and so Tim's time has probably been stretched a bit thin. I'll bet he'll use this very busy period to make some staff additions in his own personal assistant staff. Just to keep all the balls in the air.
i agree about Craig. He's aces! Smooth, cool, and deeply knowledgeable. He owns his realm.
Phil is fine but we don’t really get the why with any of them. We get a lot of what, very little why. Even the Jony Ive video wasn’t really describing the thought process behind the X it was more just a voice over reading off device specs. That’s one thing I miss about Steve - telling the story.
"Indeed, Jobs' own keynote presentations became known as 'Jobsnotes.'" Maybe in "Mirror, Mirror" where Evil Jobs does the demos. On this side, they were Stevenotes.
Yeah i paused at that too, had never heard the phrase Jobsnotes before in my life. it’s Stevenotes.
I am not a fan of the Force Touch ID of the iPhone 7/8 either. It feels fabricated, not as satisfying as the click of a real physical button.
My plea to Apple is to ignore both Face ID and Touch ID. Instead, have the Apple Watch as the primary unlock device.
And for those that do not own an Apple Watch, just have the pincode.
NOTE: Of course you could always have Face ID in combination with the Apple Watch or the pincode if you really want to add another layer of security.
>:x
So when a criminal holds you up at gun point and takes your phone and watch. He has everything he needs to steal your Apple Pay...
Nope, because the watch pin is also needed since it’s locked when removed. So now in your fear-fantasy the boogeyman criminal takes your phone, your watch, and then puts on the watch, and then asks you to kindly tell him the PIN. I’m in a high crime city and this has never happened.
The phone didn't crash (that would be the real fail) and a passcode was asked. Actually showing that the system is secure in case it might not work. Naysayers have no clue of how complex the tech is to make FaceID work the way it does and it is brand new tech. It is an amazing feat that Apple is bringing it to the market, and it is not some laughable tech (e.g. Samsung's) that can be fooled by a printed version of your face... Let's move on please.
PS: I am more concerned about the fact that an authority or criminal can simply open your phone showing the device to you. With Touch ID they need to physically force you to put your finger. (or have the finger itself detached from your body). I think FaceID is the current solution for taking away the TouchID sensor from the front, avoiding putting it to the back (which is an ergonomic nightmare). The real secure version, will be TouchID integrated in the screen. Tech that clearly is not ready for prime time. Which also might explain why the iPhone 8 has the same A11 chip as the X, although it is not required to do any FaceID stuff (not considering the extra hardware required to do so). Which means that A11 has a much bigger role in the iPhone and future of Apple (a bit like introducing 64 bits a while ago) than FaceID itself, that we can foresee now (e.g. what will iOS12 bring to actually exploit A11 Neural engine, other than FaceID and pic taking features...).
To begin with, TouchID will not work with a severed finger as it relies on the movement of blood flow to work.
I did not know that. When did Apple make that change because it did not start out that way, instead designed (!) to detect the small electrical charge flowing thru supposed living tissue. Not saying you are incorrect but I'd love to see more about the blood-flow thing.
Yeah, my mistake. It isn't blood flow, it's electrical capacitance.
In any case, since it was first released, TouchID has never allowed access from a severed finger. It has to be attached.
K, understood.
To be honest, you're average thief probably doesn't know that, so if it comes to it, you're better off opening the phone and keeping the finger.
It’s all fear-fantasy nonsense. I live in a high crime city and people are mugged all the time. There has never, ever been a case of finger chopping off. The thugs don’t care if the phone is locked, they’re not out to browse your photos. They sell the hardware and that’s it.
I still think it failed. Here's why. If the phone had been rebooted it was already in the "requiring PIN mode", when he first turned on the screen it would've asked for the PIN, just like with Touch ID, and just like it did when he turned on the screen for the second attempt. It's likely that multiple people handling it ahead of time triggered the initial unlock attempts, but there was still one valid attempt left before requiring the PIN, and that was Craig's first attempt on the first phone. That first attempt DID NOT WORK, hence why when he tried a second time on the first phone, it required the PIN.
So it did fail to detect his face.
That being said, it's not THAT big of a deal. Touch ID fails for me a lot. At least one or two attempts out of every, I don't know, 100? I just lift and try again.
But the point is that Face ID did fail to identify Craig on that first attempt. Is it super horrible and damning? No, but it just also doesn't look good either. That is all.
Not necessarily. The phone allows for two attempts only. If two people failed to authenticate, then Craig was already out of tries when he picked up the phone.
FaceID works as designed, I'm just not so sure the design is right.
Does this mean that every time someone walks past and glances at the phone, it tries to recognise them? This is what I was talking about last week; I'm not happy with FaceID firing all the time; it needs to be triggered by a finger.
It doesn't start scanning until you either touch the screen to wake it, or you pick it up (i.e., you move it while it's in sleep mode). At which point the system likely first runs a face detection scan to determine whether, and where, a face appears within view of the sensors. Face detection is a lot less process intensive than face recognition, and so it could loop the face detection process until it finds a face or times out (assuming there's a time out). Once a face is acquired, it would then focus its face recognition efforts on just those areas of the scene where one or more faces were detected.
That does leave open the question as to why the backup phone didn't suffer the same issue during the on-stage demo since it too would have been handled by multiple people before the intro started.
Not really. There are a hundred different ways to prep, handle or transport a device. Did the handler not angle it down, was he rushing, did a slip cloth fall off, etc... Plenty of variables. There’s just no way to rationally conclude it failed and Apple is lying about it. Without being backstage we can only trust what they say. I have no reason not to. Those with agendas will have reason.
No, because looking at your phone is a given — you have to look at your phone to use it, so it’s not a step.
Not quite true: when I want to use Apple Pay, with TouchID, I can pull my phone out of the pocket, double-tap/hold it to the terminal without ever looking at it. The first time I look at it is to see whether the payment succeeded. Face ID based Apple Pay is not going to be as smooth as that.
Comments
On a related note: my wife and I have each other's fingerprints registered on our phones for convenience. No problem since TouchID allows up to 5 prints. But is it true that the iPhone X only allows a single registered face? That would be a terrible limitation :-(
On another note. I can now see US border agents using the facial ID to unlock your phone on the spot without having to ask you to do it. I would suggest people not interested in allowing border agents access to their phones should disable Facial ID.
EDIT: I guess I need to have more imagination. I'm wrong. It's locked to a single face per Apple themselves.
EDIT; And as it turns it Gurman is wrong. Dang, it really is locked to a single face. Frankly I'm more than a little surprised.
Nope, because the watch pin is also needed since it’s locked when removed. So now in your fear-fantasy the boogeyman criminal takes your phone, your watch, and then puts on the watch, and then asks you to kindly tell him the PIN. I’m in a high crime city and this has never happened.
You guys try so hard.
It’s all fear-fantasy nonsense. I live in a high crime city and people are mugged all the time. There has never, ever been a case of finger chopping off. The thugs don’t care if the phone is locked, they’re not out to browse your photos. They sell the hardware and that’s it.
This debate is complete nonsense.
Not really. There are a hundred different ways to prep, handle or transport a device. Did the handler not angle it down, was he rushing, did a slip cloth fall off, etc... Plenty of variables. There’s just no way to rationally conclude it failed and Apple is lying about it. Without being backstage we can only trust what they say. I have no reason not to. Those with agendas will have reason.
Not quite true: when I want to use Apple Pay, with TouchID, I can pull my phone out of the pocket, double-tap/hold it to the terminal without ever looking at it. The first time I look at it is to see whether the payment succeeded. Face ID based Apple Pay is not going to be as smooth as that.