First look: Hands-on with Apple's iPhone X

11617192122

Comments

  • Reply 361 of 436
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,516member
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 362 of 436
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    IMO for two reasons: 1-It forces a deliberate action to turn on/unlock the phone.. Otherwise accidental glances by the owner or others my triger the unlock.....resulting in unintended unlocks.... ....and in case of others accidentally glancing, it would result into unsuccessful unlocks.. after few of which the phone would be forced into passcode unlock mode . Not very practical and convenient. 2-the detection device would have to be on all the time , by forcing a deliberate swipe up.. the detection device will only come on when needed and save battery . All that said.. i think iphone 8 with glass construction and X with the glass and stainless construction are absolutely Gorgeous!!!
    Regarding #2 I believe you are mistaken. Swiping up for home takes place after face authentication. 

    I believe the reason is to allow one to review the lock screen if desired. 

    I also wonder whether the home action as a force touch on the bottom edge would be a good option. i have to assume they tested it but not sure why swipe prevailed. 
    Are you sure about that or guessing? ... that would mean that the detection mechanism has to be on all the time not very good for battery life.. i doubt Apple would make a choice like that. 
  • Reply 363 of 436
    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
  • Reply 364 of 436
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,071member
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Samsung Trapper Keeper is surely coming.
    fastasleep
  • Reply 365 of 436
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,424member
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets".  Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...

    ...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen".  Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
    avon b7
  • Reply 366 of 436
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets".  Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...

    ...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen".  Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
    Things do change but the need for large screen doesn't disappear. Those who need an iPad still have to carry that, a phablet is not a solution. And those who need to carry an iPhone Plus must still buy the iPhone 8 Plus, iPhone X is not a substitute to a Plus size iPhone.

    Aspect ratio is more important than full screen. And that, is the single factor that will determine the outcome of the X model, IMHO. There is a reason the initial designers of the iPhone have made those bezels, otherwise they could remove the Home button since the beginning.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 367 of 436
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    IMO for two reasons: 1-It forces a deliberate action to turn on/unlock the phone.. Otherwise accidental glances by the owner or others my triger the unlock.....resulting in unintended unlocks.... ....and in case of others accidentally glancing, it would result into unsuccessful unlocks.. after few of which the phone would be forced into passcode unlock mode . Not very practical and convenient. 2-the detection device would have to be on all the time , by forcing a deliberate swipe up.. the detection device will only come on when needed and save battery . All that said.. i think iphone 8 with glass construction and X with the glass and stainless construction are absolutely Gorgeous!!!
    Regarding #2 I believe you are mistaken. Swiping up for home takes place after face authentication. 

    I believe the reason is to allow one to review the lock screen if desired. 

    I also wonder whether the home action as a force touch on the bottom edge would be a good option. i have to assume they tested it but not sure why swipe prevailed. 
    Are you sure about that or guessing? ... that would mean that the detection mechanism has to be on all the time not very good for battery life.. i doubt Apple would make a choice like that. 
    The detection happens when you wake it, not all the time, and not when you swipe. You raise to wake, it 1) looks for a face, 2) checks face is looking at screen if face-attention is activated as is by default, 3) checks if it’s your face. if you swipe any time during this process it will bring you past the lock screen once authentication is complete. if you do not swipe it leaves you at lock screen.

    im certain about all of this per Craig F. 
    edited September 2017 radarthekat
  • Reply 368 of 436
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets".  Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...

    ...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen".  Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
    Interestingly enough, when Apple finally came around with a "phablet" sized device in the 6 and 6 Plus, a double buttload of money was made by Apple, so I'm guessing that Android OS and OEM's should take credit for that too. Credit Samsung as well with giving the screen to Apple that it needed to make the iPhone X happen. Will there be a "Plus" version of the iPhone X next year? Maybe, but I'm guessing that the iPhone X form factor has just about hit the sweet spot for size.

    I noted this earlier, and maybe there isn't anything to this, that Apple already demonstrated what the design language of the iPhone X would be; it's the Apple Watch.A simple black screen with rounded corners and a skinny bezel. More to the point, Apple has "hinted" of  including Face ID in many more products, potentially including the Apple Watch, which would be a huge innovation in wearables; all it has to do is "disappear" the notch by shrinking and/or packing the technology under screen.

    So, it's possible that you can be correct about "phablet" bashing and at the same time, others can be correct about "the most beautiful iPhone ever". Meanwhile, I'm enjoying the constant bashing of Apple by the throngs of "the other team" worshipping the arrival of the next big thing, the Pixel 2, while simultaneously denigrating Apple's accomplishments, usually by noting a list of devices that had one or more "breakthrough" features that Apple didn't have.

    Same as it ever was.
    radarthekat
  • Reply 369 of 436

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 370 of 436

    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets".  Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...

    ...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen".  Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
    No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again. 
    radarthekat
  • Reply 371 of 436

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
  • Reply 372 of 436
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,762member

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
    There isn't any reason that Apple couldn't change that in the future, nor even allow multiple users. For the first generation though, Apple will be keeping Face ID on a tight leash. They don't need some users "accidentally" finding security holes through arcane means.
  • Reply 373 of 436
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,339member

    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    Well, Tim Cook did say the iPhone X is what Apple envisions for the next ten years.  So I assume, at some time, prices will come down to more mainstream levels once production ramps up to Apple's scale, probably two to three years.
    I don't think so.

    I thin Apple is breaking new ground: true luxury phones.

    I expect next year or the year after to offer an X phone with a 6.5+ inch screen that will start at $1099 or more.

    Apple has to do this. All the other brands are racing to the bottom.  Apple is racing to the top.
    I agree, Apple will come out with a bigger version of the iPhone X next year.  But there's only so far up you can go before you get consumer push back and sales start to hurt.
    I honestly don't know why there aren't 13.5" screen Android phones today. Not sure why manufacturers are so hestitant to go above 6" - 7" screens. Once you enter ridiculous size territory, actual usability no longer holds manufacturers back, and it's just a mad grab for attention and bragging rights.
    Just 42 months ago or so one of the fun games here was ridiculing 5"+ "phablets".  Funny pictures of big ol' phones held up to faces got thumbs-up, yeah take that Android, with comments by the dozen that they were unusable 'cause you couldn't reach your thumb to the corners and who wants to use a phone with two hands? Dozens more claiming Apple would never do such an obviously dumb thing with iPhones, and if you wanted a big ultra-portable screen Apple already had that covered the right way with the iPad Mini (before that it was "just carry an iPad with you") and everyone else was just absolutely ridiculous with those big phone screens that made you look downright silly and laughable...

    ...only to morph into "OMG the iPhone X is the most beautiful phone I've ever seen".  Things do have a way of changing in a relatively short time don't they?
    No, because the sizes in those memes and from some of the knockoffs are still stupidly large. Neither X nor Plus are stupidly large. Try again. 
    "No"?? "Try again"??

    Not necessary. Re-read his post. 

    How large, or 'stupidly large' isn't the issue.

    The issue is that larger screens were supposedly not necessary. Not larger or 'stupidly' larger. Nothing. Things were as they should be, at least in the eyes of those people and no size increase was necessary.

    Those people were wrong, if sales and subsequent models are anything to go by, at least.

    Apple now has a spread of sizes to suit most people's needs. That is good.

    It also now has a spread of prices to meet most people's needs, and that was also contested ad nauseum by many people here.


    yojimbo007gatorguy
  • Reply 374 of 436
    Rayz2016 said:
    Think about this:

    You're asleep on the sofa, and your kids decide they want to buy ten add-ons for some game. 

    Which is more likely to wake you?

    Placing your finger on the TouchID button, or trying to pry your eye open to trigger FaceID?
    Doesn't work with your eyes closed.  And I think two hands in your eyes would both throw off the FR or wake you up....
  • Reply 375 of 436
    BebeBebe Posts: 145member
    Been enjoying as an AI reader for almost 2 decades but not too much of a poster.

    IMO, the notch that a lot of people dislike is part of the design.  As some people said, it is iconic just like the Home button.

    I like the TouchID as I use it many many times but I welcome the new FaceID technology.  I am not bothered about the notch and am hoping to get 2 of the X soon, one for me and one for the wifey  :)
    pscooter63
  • Reply 376 of 436

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
    What extra step, it's already ready to be unlocked if you glance at it and the swipe brings the home screen. Don't think you understand how this thing works.
    if you want to go to the home screen your looking at it already thus no extra step, the swipe replaces the touch to get to the home screen.

    If the didn't do that you could never see your notifications
    pscooter63radarthekat
  • Reply 377 of 436
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,629member
    tshapi said:
    schlack said:
    Interesting to see that Apple now has a phone lineup that spans from $350 to $1150, wow. That $1150 price point feels just absurd. Will be interesting to see how this sells. I guess I'll be holding on to my (perfectly awesome) iPhone 7 for at least another year or two.
    The sad part is believe it or not the iPhone X will probably be successful.  Take into account how many people here blindly decree "wallet open,take my money Apple" on simple rumors. 
    Keep it three years (I'm currently using a 2 1/2 year old iPhone 6 and will definitely keep it three years if only because the new phones will be in short supply for a while and because I don't do lines) and the cost even on that highest price model is $7.37 per week, less than coffee money for a lot of people.   Plus, if you pay full price and 'bring your own phone', many carriers give you a break on the service, so if it lowers your monthly bill by even $10 a month, the actual cost is $5.06 a week.  

    Buy the $1000 model (do you really need all that memory?), and it's $6.41 per week and $4.10 if the carrier gives you a $10 a month credit.  

    Having said that, I totally agree that $1000 or $1150 is a lot of money to spend on a phone that one only intends to keep for a few years at most.    On the other hand, that fully loaded cost of $7.37 a week for the highest-price model (not including sales taxes or accessories) is less than 3 slices of pizza where I live.   All the capability of that phone for less than 3 slices of pizza a week.   I think that's miraculous.     I think the cover price on the NY Times is now $2.75 a day.   That's $13.75 a week for just weekdays, almost twice what the phone would cost.  A freaking miracle. 
    tmayradarthekat
  • Reply 378 of 436
    foggyhill said:

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
    What extra step, it's already ready to be unlocked if you glance at it and the swipe brings the home screen. Don't think you understand how this thing works.
    if you want to go to the home screen your looking at it already thus no extra step, the swipe replaces the touch to get to the home screen.

    If the didn't do that you could never see your notifications
    So I have to look at my phone, then swipe up. How is that more convenient than Touch ID today? As I said before if I want to see notifications on my lock screen I just push the sleep/wake button. Most of the time I don’t care so I just press the home button and boom I’m at the home screen or whatever app I was just using. Obviously we need reviews but at first glance Face ID doesn’t seem more convenient if you have to swipe to get past the lock screen.
  • Reply 379 of 436
    I just want to point out that the Super Retina HD display Apple has been touting is a lesser display than the one Samsung has already put on its phones, and worse, is a display that is actually manufactured and sold by Samsung to Apple.

    It's not an Apple invention, and as AI itself has pointed out, Apple is having trouble getting anyone else to even make a display like Samsung can.

    I do think iOS is still the only plausible option for anyone because Apple is the only one keeping any sort of user privacy in mind, while Android is increasingly a vector for Google to know more about my life.
  • Reply 380 of 436
    foggyhill said:

    thompr said:
    So why do you have to swipe up to get to the home screen when unlocking the device? Why doesn’t Face ID take you directly to the home screen? Seems slower than Touch ID.
    Because sometimes you want to look at your phone but not unlock it?  The action makes your intent clear.
    When I want to do that I just push the sleep/wake button. They should give users an option to unlock directly to the home screen.
    That doesn’t match iOS today. today there is a distinct difference between touch id unlocking (touch finger to sensor), and going to the home screen (click home button or force press sensor). 

    This is the right way. Using raise to wake should show the lock screen, even if it becomes automatically unlocked via face id authentication. This is so users can read notifications, look at the big clock, or tap the quick items like flashlight and camera. If it were to move past the home screen it would take you to your last used app, which could be anything and thus not consistent or intended. many times i want the camera from the lock screen so i can quickly take a picture. having to use the wake button is worse than simply raising to wake my iphone. 
    I want it to bypass the lock screen and take me directly to the home screen. Right now when I ‘click’ on the home button it tales me to the home screen (or an app if I was in one and didn’t minimize back to the home screen). I want what I have now. With Face ID there is the extra step of having to swipe up to get past the lock screen.
    What extra step, it's already ready to be unlocked if you glance at it and the swipe brings the home screen. Don't think you understand how this thing works.
    if you want to go to the home screen your looking at it already thus no extra step, the swipe replaces the touch to get to the home screen.

    If the didn't do that you could never see your notifications
    So I have to look at my phone, then swipe up. How is that more convenient than Touch ID today? As I said before if I want to see notifications on my lock screen I just push the sleep/wake button. Most of the time I don’t care so I just press the home button and boom I’m at the home screen or whatever app I was just using. Obviously we need reviews but at first glance Face ID doesn’t seem more convenient if you have to swipe to get past the lock screen.
    You said it was more inconvenient, it is not, at most in your case it would be the same; go look at the hands on.
    You swipe up and "boom" (sic) its in the home screen.
    Also, please read WTH you write; seriously. What you did is goalpost moving.


    In theory, under normal conditions, you get less false negatives with the face. That's an improvement.


    If the phone is locked as soon as you don't look at it. It would be an improvement to security.
Sign In or Register to comment.