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 :-(
No, designing it around the edge case of showing off a new device to friends would be the design flaw. That scenario just doesn’t matter.
Nor is the face limitation. Tell your partner the passcode if you need multi access.
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.
This is old news in ios 11 — you can quickly disable all biometrics via rapidly pressing the side button.
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.
Huh? Not really what, "unexplained"? So then explain it.
I don't know why you would infer I was saying Apple is lying. I don't doubt at all that Apple is being at least mostly forthcoming about the miss on the first device. Still doesn't explain why the second device succeeded. Did the security that caused the first phone to fail operate as designed just as Apple says but perhaps failed on the second phone? Is there some inconsistency between the two in actual use simply because the software is still being tweaked and not yet as reliable as it will be on shipping devices (which IMHO may be playing a part in it)?
Since Apple doesn't explain it then it's by definition "unexplained" isn't it?
"People were handling the device for stage demo ahead of time," says a rep, "and didn't realize Face ID was trying to authenticate their face. After failing a number of times, because they weren't Craig, the iPhone did what it was designed to do, which was to require his passcode." In other words, "Face ID worked as it was designed to."
Really? Let me get this right -- if you hand someone your phone to, I don't know, take a picture of you, and it comes back locked, that's "as it was designed to [work]"? (And don't get me started on when you shave a beard. "Sorry, can't read your email. I shaved this morning.")
It's that's "as it was designed", it's poorly designed. Ask Federighi if his use case passed. If a face isn't within X% of the pass face, why should it count as one of two fails? It's not like every other face looking at the phone is actively trying breach security like entering a passcode or touching a finger to a fingerprint sensor would be. Unfamiliar faces are not hacking attempts. If it was Arya wearing your face, I get it. But these backstage folks have names.
Lame. Let's admit this is new tech, and like any new tech or plan, it rarely survives its first encounter with its audience unscathed.
Even if a Criminal runs up to you, grabs your phone, shows it to your face to unlock, then what? Because when you go into settings and want to change your passlock code or anything like that, you have to again enter your passcode.
All you have to do is close your eye's and FaceID won't work. Sleeping, no more kids holding your phone up to your finger to unlock. FaceID is not going to work.
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.
No, it was a preparation failure. The person who is responsible for making a preparation ... let's call him Adam. Adam put the iPhone for Craig and unknown to him, the iPhone X have already tried to recognize Adam's face twice. By then, it locked with a passcode. Adam already put it on the table. There is no obvious warning. Craig picked it up and it said it needs a passcode to unlock. Apple has implemented that it can only do two retries before asking for a passcode.
It makes perfect sense. It's actually a nice feature to me as it would let me know that someone tried to use my iPhone.
...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.
Its gotta be very demoralizing for Apple because of some idiot to purposely leak something Apple has been working on for well over a year. The entire team has worked tirelessly day in and day out for months getting these products ready for the big unveiling and then some asshat has to spoil it for everyone. I agree...I hope this person is fired and possibly have legal action taken against them if possible. This is not fair to all of the employees at Apple who worked their asses off on these products.
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.
I think the leaks over the weekend deflated everyone. Except for Craig, they looked more lackluster than normal. Craig should be onstage from beginning to end.
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.
No, it was a preparation failure. The person who is responsible for making a preparation ... let's call him Adam. Adam put the iPhone for Craig and unknown to him, the iPhone X have already tried to recognize Adam's face twice. By then, it locked with a passcode. Adam already put it on the table. There is no obvious warning. Craig picked it up and it said it needs a passcode to unlock. Apple has implemented that it can only do two retries before asking for a passcode.
It makes perfect sense. It's actually a nice feature to me as it would let me know that someone tried to use my iPhone.
And the truth is that it works in the exact same way TouchID does. When it fails repeatedly, iOS just locks that option and presents you with a passcode dialog. So, function wise - there is nothing new here.
"People were handling the device for stage demo ahead of time," says a rep, "and didn't realize Face ID was trying to authenticate their face. After failing a number of times, because they weren't Craig, the iPhone did what it was designed to do, which was to require his passcode." In other words, "Face ID worked as it was designed to."
Really? Let me get this right -- if you hand someone your phone to, I don't know, take a picture of you, and it comes back locked, that's "as it was designed to [work]"? (And don't get me started on when you shave a beard. "Sorry, can't read your email. I shaved this morning.")
It's that's "as it was designed", it's poorly designed. Ask Federighi if his use case passed. If a face isn't within X% of the pass face, why should it count as one of two fails? It's not like every other face looking at the phone is actively trying breach security like entering a passcode or touching a finger to a fingerprint sensor would be. Unfamiliar faces are not hacking attempts. If it was Arya wearing your face, I get it. But these backstage folks have names.
Lame. Let's admit this is new tech, and like any new tech or plan, it rarely survives its first encounter with its audience unscathed.
You hand your phone over to that person already UNLOCKED, don't you? That is to say, it is unlocked and iOS is not attempting to recognize anyone's faces.
"It's that's "as it was designed", " - exactly. As it was designed. "it's poorly designed" - or it is just you, who does not understand that test case at all, and ended up making up a lot of stuff here.
"Unfamiliar faces are not hacking attempts. If it was Arya wearing your face, I get it. But these backstage folks have names. " Just like wrong PIN enter attempts are not, and failed touch ID attempts are not. What is your point?
" Let's admit this is new tech, and like any new tech or plan" Lets admit that you have come up with a strawman of how faceID works.
Nope, explaination doesn't cut it. If it was asking for the passcode before his first failed attempt, then it would make sense, but it didn't ask for the passcode until after his second failed attempt, Face ID failed both of those times to recognize his face, plain and simple. Its new technology, its gonna have bugs and luckily because its software, it can be improved and updated after launch (as long as its not a problem with the cameras and sensors in the front) . No need for everyone to be in denial about it, just fess up to it and say its still in beta and will improve.
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 :-(
It is perfectly designed for the FaceID to fail and goes passcode because it is not you who pick up the phone. The faceID is designed so it will activate only if you are the one who pick the phone and see the screen, no one else.
Nope, explaination doesn't cut it. If it was asking for the passcode before his first failed attempt, then it would make sense, but it didn't ask for the passcode until after his second failed attempt, Face ID failed both of those times to recognize his face, plain and simple. Its new technology, its gonna have bugs and luckily because its software, it can be improved and updated after launch (as long as its not a problem with the cameras and sensors in the front) . No need for everyone to be in denial about it, just fess up to it and say its still in beta and will improve.
There are differences between fail and safety fail. In this case, it is designed as intended. You will need a passcode everytime your phone has been handled by other people. You should keep your phone for yourself if you are going to use FaceID. As simple as that.
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.
The first statement in the video tells the story:
The goal has always been to make the hardware disappear and as technology evolves, it allows them to get closer to this. Removing the buttons, including the home button, takes it further. They are removing the processes that people need to do consciously to get the result they want. Originally, in order to unlock the phone you have to process the slide to unlock, then you had to use the touch id. Now you don't have to do anything consciously, you just start using the software. Same with wireless audio and power just like it has been with wifi. The intermediate processes are being removed.
With AR, the larger screen to bezel ratio improves the view to make it look like a window:
Face ID has been used hundreds of times in the hands-on demos with no reports of failures. Craig's demo was clearly locked for security as the message said Face ID had been disabled. There's a hands-on here where the presenter isn't authenticated and when he turns it to the person who is, it unlocks immediately (1:48):
That system is actually better than touch id for viewing notifications because it stays on the lockscreen. If you activate the display normally and don't unlock with touch id, the display will go back off quickly. If you authenticate with touch id, it skips past the notifications list. Now it lets you read them.
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.
Some people just want to "eat their cake and have it too". (That is the original phrase, also often mis-quoted.)
and an article highlighting the most pertinent changes: https://www.hackingwithswift.com/articles/14/new-app-store-review-guidelines-cover-face-id-arkit-and-more "...developers using the LocalAuthentication framework to enable Face ID unlock (in the same way apps can already use Touch ID authentication) must offer an alternate method of unlock for children under the age of 13 to use... This is a strange requirement as the API does not give developers raw access to face data, just a signal that the user was successfully authenticated."
And an odd change for something that I would have assumed has been in place for a long time but apparently not: No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.
The full list of major changes are as follows per the second linked article:
The list of apps that are considered to host objectionable content has expanded to include those that are discriminatory based on “national/ethnic origin”.
No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.
Apps that use facial recognition for account authentication “must use LocalAuthentication (and not ARKit or other facial recognition technology)”, including a requirement for providing an alternate authentication method for users under 13 years old.
Apps may now allow users to send money to others as a gift on two conditions. Fisrt, the gift must be a completely optional choice by the giver, and second 100% of the funds must go to the receiver of the gift.
Apple are requiring that all ARKit apps “provide rich and integrated augmented reality experiences”, which means that something as simple as dropping a model into an ARKit view or replaying some animation will not be enough.
In terms of privacy, Apple is making it clear that you may not attempt to identify other people or guess their user profiles based on ARKit’s facial mapping tools, explicitly banning data mining on ARKit facial data.
There’s one more addition that I’ll let speak for itself, because clearly something very serious has happened:
In extreme cases, such as apps that are found to facilitate human trafficking and/or the exploitation of children, appropriate authorities will be notified.
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.
Some people just want to "eat their cake and have it too". (That is the original phrase, also often mis-quoted.)
Wow! I had no idea about that one. Curious and consider me guilty of misquoting it :-(
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.
The first statement in the video tells the story:
The goal has always been to make the hardware disappear and as technology evolves, it allows them to get closer to this. Removing the buttons, including the home button, takes it further. They are removing the processes that people need to do consciously to get the result they want. Originally, in order to unlock the phone you have to process the slide to unlock, then you had to use the touch id. Now you don't have to do anything consciously, you just start using the software. Same with wireless audio and power just like it has been with wifi. The intermediate processes are being removed.
With AR, the larger screen to bezel ratio improves the view to make it look like a window:
Face ID has been used hundreds of times in the hands-on demos with no reports of failures. Craig's demo was clearly locked for security as the message said Face ID had been disabled. There's a hands-on here where the presenter isn't authenticated and when he turns it to the person who is, it unlocks immediately (1:48):
That system is actually better than touch id for viewing notifications because it stays on the lockscreen. If you activate the display normally and don't unlock with touch id, the display will go back off quickly. If you authenticate with touch id, it skips past the notifications list. Now it lets you read them.
These.
Also, the decision to stay on lockscreen is the best, at least for me, because most of the time I just need to check the time and/or my setup notifications.
Comments
Nor is the face limitation. Tell your partner the passcode if you need multi access.
This is old news in ios 11 — you can quickly disable all biometrics via rapidly pressing the side button.
I don't know why you would infer I was saying Apple is lying. I don't doubt at all that Apple is being at least mostly forthcoming about the miss on the first device. Still doesn't explain why the second device succeeded. Did the security that caused the first phone to fail operate as designed just as Apple says but perhaps failed on the second phone? Is there some inconsistency between the two in actual use simply because the software is still being tweaked and not yet as reliable as it will be on shipping devices (which IMHO may be playing a part in it)?
Since Apple doesn't explain it then it's by definition "unexplained" isn't it?
It's that's "as it was designed", it's poorly designed. Ask Federighi if his use case passed.
If a face isn't within X% of the pass face, why should it count as one of two fails? It's not like every other face looking at the phone is actively trying breach security like entering a passcode or touching a finger to a fingerprint sensor would be.
Unfamiliar faces are not hacking attempts. If it was Arya wearing your face, I get it. But these backstage folks have names.
Lame. Let's admit this is new tech, and like any new tech or plan, it rarely survives its first encounter with its audience unscathed.
All you have to do is close your eye's and FaceID won't work. Sleeping, no more kids holding your phone up to your finger to unlock. FaceID is not going to work.
It makes perfect sense. It's actually a nice feature to me as it would let me know that someone tried to use my iPhone.
So, function wise - there is nothing new here.
"It's that's "as it was designed", " - exactly. As it was designed.
"it's poorly designed" - or it is just you, who does not understand that test case at all, and ended up making up a lot of stuff here.
"Unfamiliar faces are not hacking attempts. If it was Arya wearing your face, I get it. But these backstage folks have names. "
Just like wrong PIN enter attempts are not, and failed touch ID attempts are not. What is your point?
" Let's admit this is new tech, and like any new tech or plan"
Lets admit that you have come up with a strawman of how faceID works.
The goal has always been to make the hardware disappear and as technology evolves, it allows them to get closer to this. Removing the buttons, including the home button, takes it further. They are removing the processes that people need to do consciously to get the result they want. Originally, in order to unlock the phone you have to process the slide to unlock, then you had to use the touch id. Now you don't have to do anything consciously, you just start using the software. Same with wireless audio and power just like it has been with wifi. The intermediate processes are being removed.
With AR, the larger screen to bezel ratio improves the view to make it look like a window:
Face ID has been used hundreds of times in the hands-on demos with no reports of failures. Craig's demo was clearly locked for security as the message said Face ID had been disabled. There's a hands-on here where the presenter isn't authenticated and when he turns it to the person who is, it unlocks immediately (1:48):
That system is actually better than touch id for viewing notifications because it stays on the lockscreen. If you activate the display normally and don't unlock with touch id, the display will go back off quickly. If you authenticate with touch id, it skips past the notifications list. Now it lets you read them.
https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/
and an article highlighting the most pertinent changes:
https://www.hackingwithswift.com/articles/14/new-app-store-review-guidelines-cover-face-id-arkit-and-more
"...developers using the LocalAuthentication framework to enable Face ID unlock (in the same way apps can already use Touch ID authentication) must offer an alternate method of unlock for children under the age of 13 to use...
This is a strange requirement as the API does not give developers raw access to face data, just a signal that the user was successfully authenticated."
And an odd change for something that I would have assumed has been in place for a long time but apparently not: No app may market itself as “including content or services that it does not actually offer” – specifically iOS-based virus and malware scanners, which have always been nonsense.
The full list of major changes are as follows per the second linked article:
There’s one more addition that I’ll let speak for itself, because clearly something very serious has happened:
Also, the decision to stay on lockscreen is the best, at least for me, because most of the time I just need to check the time and/or my setup notifications.