Where's the outrage about the notch? Fandroids were getting their tighty-whities all in a bunch when Apple did it. Suddenly it's okay now?
F$@#$n hypocrites.
Why haven't you looked rather than assuming they aren't complaining? If you have time to type you could at least take a moment to check.
The likelihood of a notch on the XL version is being roundly ridiculed. If it turns out there's no reason other than "just because" I can't imagine how loud the complaints will get. Over 450 posts on a 5 hour old story...
I don't speak for the OP, but I suspect it's because they didn't have to go looking to see the fandroids bitching about the iPhone X Notch, they went out of their way to complain about it here. And normally if there were something about an Android phone, someone would stick their head in to take a swipe at the iPhone.
We don't have to go anywhere to see Apple fans going out of their way to bitch about the probable Pixel notch, just as some Apple fans here posted their displeasure with the iPhone notch.
Normally if there's something about the iPhone several someone's do the Whadabout Google swipe. Android fans just don't come here to complain about their Android phones as a rule. If you want to see if they're complaining and about what you need to venture outside the AI garden. You wouldn't typically go to Android Central to see what Apple fans are saying would you, altho there are a lot of Apple users on Android fan sites.
I would note anecdotally from my readings on various "neutral" sites, that at the time of the iPhone launch, most Android OS devices users were very much against the notch. I would also note that many AI users were as well, as you have stated.
Evidence has shown that actual users get over the notch in a very short amount of time, as will hesitant Pixel 3 users.
That said, Google's notch is larger comparatively than most notches on competitive devices, and there is that chin that is also a distraction. A bit of a miss design wise, but shouldn't effect sales to "pure" Android OS user base.
I think it will DEFINITELY affect the XL sales with the "normal" Pixel 3 getting a higher percentage of sales comparatively than last years models. We'll never know tho since Google doesn't break numbers down by specific model, and often not reporting numbers at all which is not all that unusual. Unless sales are spectacular (they're not) and worth crowing about why mention 'em?
I should note that I was completely unaware until today that only the XL would get the "notch".
While we revel in the hypocrisy of Google (a beloved weekly activity here), let's remember that the Pixels have, thus far, sold about a million units each or thereabouts per year.
Google has never announced numbers at all AFAIK, but IDC estimated that Google sold just shy of 4 million Pixel 2 models last year. Wow, sales doubled from 2016 according to the same source! Google couldn't build 'em fast enough (strange but true). Amazing growth! Yay!!
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
I have no big objections to the rear mounted sensor on one of my test devices (as you say, the position is very natural when getting the phone out of the pocket or bag). But it definitely is annoying when lying on the desk!
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
I have no big objections to the rear mounted sensor on one of my test devices (as you say, the position is very natural when getting the phone out of the pocket or bag). But it definitely is annoying when lying on the desk!
Most of the time that you need to use your phone while not actually holding it (mounted for satnav or lying on a desk) it is because you will be near it and need to check things regularly. Cooking and checking recipes comes to mind.
'Double tap to wake' resolves the issue in all my use cases. You may have to dig into settings if it needs activating.
Trusted voices/places can also be used but for me, double tap to wake works perfectly.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
I've used both, and still on occasion need to use both as I did last evening. I find the front fingerprint to be inconvenient and awkward and the rear-mounted one (assuming it's not the dumb place Samung put it) to be more natural, an easier pickup and unlock in the same motion. I'd guess if you're accustomed to using one the other might feel awkward to you, at least at first.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
I have an HTC Bolt at home with a front-mounted fingerprint sensor so they're not ALWAYS on the back (Sony puts 'em on the side IIRC). I seriously dislike both the device itself and the reader placement. Just feels awkward, and on top of that it's slooww. Wonderful audio tho and quite nice and "inventive" headphones included that customize the sound for my ears. That's all I ever use it for, music streaming.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
I think you got ahead of yourself again ;-)
As Muthuk_vanalingam said, it's still on the back, just better placed. It's now where it should have been from the start.
However, I never take a photo without swiping the lens protector with my shirt. Smartphone lenses can pick up grime from anywhere and if you live in a climate like where I live you will be sweating a lot.
As I said, it boils down to preference and although my current phone has a front mounted sensor I dearly miss the rear sensor.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
I have no big objections to the rear mounted sensor on one of my test devices (as you say, the position is very natural when getting the phone out of the pocket or bag). But it definitely is annoying when lying on the desk!
Most of the time that you need to use your phone while not actually holding it (mounted for satnav or lying on a desk) it is because you will be near it and need to check things regularly. Cooking and checking recipes comes to mind.
'Double tap to wake' resolves the issue in all my use cases. You may have to dig into settings if it needs activating.
Trusted voices/places can also be used but for me, double tap to wake works perfectly.
Waking it up is not an issue (as you say) but unlocking is. When lying on the desk I either must lift the phone to touch the sensor, or type the passcode. Voice, place or BT (watch) are not safe enough according to company mail (Exchange) rules. I'd like to have both front (under screen) and rear sensors.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
I have no big objections to the rear mounted sensor on one of my test devices (as you say, the position is very natural when getting the phone out of the pocket or bag). But it definitely is annoying when lying on the desk!
Most of the time that you need to use your phone while not actually holding it (mounted for satnav or lying on a desk) it is because you will be near it and need to check things regularly. Cooking and checking recipes comes to mind.
'Double tap to wake' resolves the issue in all my use cases. You may have to dig into settings if it needs activating.
Trusted voices/places can also be used but for me, double tap to wake works perfectly.
Waking it up is not an issue (as you say) but unlocking is. When lying on the desk I either must lift the phone to touch the sensor, or type the passcode. Voice, place or BT (watch) are not safe enough according to company mail (Exchange) rules. I'd like to have both front (under screen) and rear sensors.
Looks tricky if work is not letting you use certain options. That said, I think we are already on the third generation in-screen sensors. If prices come down we might see more phones with them.
My double tap to wake worked in my case as the phone was set to lock after 30min. The screen turned off before that point and unlocking wasn't necessary (just waking) and if I leave my phone alone for some reason I hit the side button to lock it, just in case.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
I have an HTC Bolt at home with a front-mounted fingerprint sensor so they're not ALWAYS on the back (Sony puts 'em on the side IIRC). I seriously dislike both the device itself and the reader placement. Just feels awkward, and on top of that it's slooww. Wonderful audio tho and quite nice and "inventive" headphones included that customize the sound for my ears. That's all I ever use it for, music streaming.
After a bit of googling, I've come to the conclusion that there was a fork in the road right after Apple's 5s, when Android OS device makers were scrambling to compete with their own versions of Touch ID, but were having problems sourcing parts thin enough to match the new iPhone's lower chin placement. This would likely account for the shift to the backside, and edge, which I conceptually abhor, with the rapid adaption within the Android OS device marketplace as the de facto standard.
In biology, this would be speciation.
Apple is in a position to deprecate Touch ID for some 70% of it's iPhone unit sales this fall, while Android OS device makers remain more than a generation if not two, behind Apple in implementing a widespread face ID solution.
With that, I'm curious if the current touch sensor location will remain as a "choice" for Android OS device users once facial ID is implemented in a widespread fashion.
With that, I'm curious if the current touch sensor location will remain as a "choice" for Android OS device users once facial ID is implemented in a widespread fashion.
It might, with the move cover as much of the front with a display as possible.
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
I have an HTC Bolt at home with a front-mounted fingerprint sensor so they're not ALWAYS on the back (Sony puts 'em on the side IIRC).
Well, I didn't mean ALL Android phones with that comment. I meant only those who put the FPS in back, had put it in the right place except Samsung. Samsung alone put FPS in the wrong place in 2017 flagships (S8/S8+/Note 8) and corrected it in 2018 flagships (S9, S9+, Note 9).
Oh boy, this "notch" thing is really getting interesting.
If this story is true, I'd like to hear from those who said that the iPhone X is ugly because of the "notch".
How about the ones who are proclaiming the Pixel XL is ugly because of "the notch"? The complaints from the Android faithful are pretty loud.
There is a rumor going about today that claims the notch is needed for Google's implementation of 3D face recognition, but I'm not at all convinced.
3D face recognition AND a fingerprint reader?
This is definitely one of those “wait and see” scenarios. If there is no face recognition then what is the point of the notch?
Why not ask Essential or Sharp?
Some phones have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND in screen sensors. Options can come in handy.
Please list said phones that have facial recognition, rear fingerprint sensors AND an in screen sensors, then note which of those modes is actually secure.
How did you manage to take 'options' and somehow link them with 'security'? Or were you just throwing security in, knowing full well that it wasn't even on the table?
There are pros and cons to all biometrics. That's why options are handy.
Any notch on screen (that includes iPhone) looks like crack in someones bottom part of body. It is simply ugly, weird flaw in screen. It is time to understand that rather than treating it as "cool thing".
Still, I have to wonder why so many Android OS users are so fond of, and vocal about, blindly fingering the touch ID sensor on the back of those devices that had them. You seem to confirm that it is a fixation with that region of the human anatomy, not that there is anything wrong with that, albeit it isn't my cup of tea.
If you had ever used one, you wouldn't have to wonder. Rear placed sensors are hit 100% of the time, first time, because your hand is holding the phone and 'knows' where the sensor is. Similar to how you can touch your nose although you can't see it.
Perhaps they are vocal because some people criticise them without even using one. At the end of the day it is a question of preference.
I prefer a rear mounted sensor.
So, you wax poetic about a device, the Mate RS, that has both an under screen and rear mounted touch ID sensor, then note how much you love the utility of rear sensors "because your hand is holding the phone and "knows' where the sensor is.
I'm surmising that the Mate RS has an under screen touch ID sensor precisely due to the limitations of a rear mounted sensor when the phone is sitting on a desk.
I'll take a touch ID on the front of a phone over a rear mounted sensor anytime.
BTW, you stated that there was a phone that had all three modes of unlock; a rear mounted, under screen, and Face ID sensor, yet the Mate RS only has two of those, AFAICT.
I said it was nice to have options.
You prefer front mounted, I prefer rear mounted. Preference.
The Mate RS has a rear mounted sensor, in-screen sensor and facial recognition.
Rear mounted sensors have not been a problem while mounted on a desk or in a support.
"The Note 9 is otherwise a modest evolution of last year's Note8, including previous features such as USB-C, dual rear cameras, a headphone jack, and a front-facing iris scanner. Samsung has however responded to complaints and moved the fingerprint reader from the side of the rear camera module to below it, making it easier to reach while reducing accidental lens smudges."
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
I have an HTC Bolt at home with a front-mounted fingerprint sensor so they're not ALWAYS on the back (Sony puts 'em on the side IIRC). I seriously dislike both the device itself and the reader placement. Just feels awkward, and on top of that it's slooww. Wonderful audio tho and quite nice and "inventive" headphones included that customize the sound for my ears. That's all I ever use it for, music streaming.
After a bit of googling, I've come to the conclusion that there was a fork in the road right after Apple's 5s, when Android OS device makers were scrambling to compete with their own versions of Touch ID, but were having problems sourcing parts thin enough to match the new iPhone's lower chin placement. This would likely account for the shift to the backside, and edge, which I conceptually abhor, with the rapid adaption within the Android OS device marketplace as the de facto standard.
In biology, this would be speciation.
Apple is in a position to deprecate Touch ID for some 70% of it's iPhone unit sales this fall, while Android OS device makers remain more than a generation if not two, behind Apple in implementing a widespread face ID solution.
With that, I'm curious if the current touch sensor location will remain as a "choice" for Android OS device users once facial ID is implemented in a widespread fashion.
I think you got this wrong. As far as I remember the sequence of events as below:
I) Xioami showcased a prototype Mi MIX 1st generation phone in 2016 (Sep-2016 at IFA if I remember correctly) with a near bezel-less design which was unique and set a new trend for others to follow (copied from Sharp Aquos of course, but Sharp phones did not leave the shores of Japan so outside world had not seen much of those anyway) ii) Samsung and LG decided to follow the trend in 2017 flagships with Samsung S8 and LG G6 adopting that trend set by Xioami. To achieve the high screen to body ratio of 80%+ and still retain FPS, the only place "available" was back. Even the smallish iPhone 5s FSP would reduce the Screen-To-Body ratio significantly if it were kept on front.
iii) Apple decided to follow the same trend in late 2017 flagship iPhone X, by bringing their own twist (Introducing the Notch)
After iPhone 5s and Before Xioami MI Mix, most of the Android flagship phones (Samsung S6/S7, Note 5, HTC 10 just to name few) had the FPS in the front only, though some of the other OEMs like LG were experimenting with rear-mounted FPS. Once the bezels became a bad word in smartphone design after Xioami MI Mix, back mounted FPS became the norm for most of the Android flagships now.
Comments
/s
'Double tap to wake' resolves the issue in all my use cases. You may have to dig into settings if it needs activating.
Trusted voices/places can also be used but for me, double tap to wake works perfectly.
No one could possibly imagine....
Front touch ID 1, Back touch ID 0
Not sure if you misunderstood what Samsung has done, or Am I reading you incorrect.... Samsung has put the FPS still in the back ONLY. Instead of putting it in the wrong place (adjacent to camera) like S8/S8+/Note 8, they have moved the FPS in Note 9 below the camera (not adjacent). Still on the back only, like all other Android OEMs (except Samsung) have been doing from the beginning.
As Muthuk_vanalingam said, it's still on the back, just better placed. It's now where it should have been from the start.
However, I never take a photo without swiping the lens protector with my shirt. Smartphone lenses can pick up grime from anywhere and if you live in a climate like where I live you will be sweating a lot.
As I said, it boils down to preference and although my current phone has a front mounted sensor I dearly miss the rear sensor.
I'd like to have both front (under screen) and rear sensors.
My double tap to wake worked in my case as the phone was set to lock after 30min. The screen turned off before that point and unlocking wasn't necessary (just waking) and if I leave my phone alone for some reason I hit the side button to lock it, just in case.
In biology, this would be speciation.
Apple is in a position to deprecate Touch ID for some 70% of it's iPhone unit sales this fall, while Android OS device makers remain more than a generation if not two, behind Apple in implementing a widespread face ID solution.
With that, I'm curious if the current touch sensor location will remain as a "choice" for Android OS device users once facial ID is implemented in a widespread fashion.
Synaptic have been busy, though…
Sticking with my iPhone 7 Plus as long as it lives...
I think you got this wrong. As far as I remember the sequence of events as below:
I) Xioami showcased a prototype Mi MIX 1st generation phone in 2016 (Sep-2016 at IFA if I remember correctly) with a near bezel-less design which was unique and set a new trend for others to follow (copied from Sharp Aquos of course, but Sharp phones did not leave the shores of Japan so outside world had not seen much of those anyway)
ii) Samsung and LG decided to follow the trend in 2017 flagships with Samsung S8 and LG G6 adopting that trend set by Xioami. To achieve the high screen to body ratio of 80%+ and still retain FPS, the only place "available" was back. Even the smallish iPhone 5s FSP would reduce the Screen-To-Body ratio significantly if it were kept on front.
iii) Apple decided to follow the same trend in late 2017 flagship iPhone X, by bringing their own twist (Introducing the Notch)
After iPhone 5s and Before Xioami MI Mix, most of the Android flagship phones (Samsung S6/S7, Note 5, HTC 10 just to name few) had the FPS in the front only, though some of the other OEMs like LG were experimenting with rear-mounted FPS. Once the bezels became a bad word in smartphone design after Xioami MI Mix, back mounted FPS became the norm for most of the Android flagships now.
The regular Pixel 3 will be looking better and better IMHO.