jmgregory1

It's crazy that Tim even needs to say publicly that they're working on product into the 2020's.  Does anyone think they just pull off new products each year with a 9-12 month window for anything new?  Even iPhone S updates are more than a year's development cycle.

DavidAlGregory said:

Reading this on an iPad Pro w LTE and see no need and have no desire for Face ID and if it cannot be turned off the answer is no sale.
It is proven to not be secure.

FaceID may indeed have a few more possibilities for unlocking by someone other than the owner, but unless you have a twin, or a child with very similar bone structure / face shape, or you're someone so important that there is a distinct potential that thieves will break into your home, tie you up and force you to allow an iPad Pro FaceID to scan you - or maybe they'd just 3D scan your face so they can create an exact 3D replica of your face so they can unlock your devices at will, you're probably pretty safe using an iPad with FaceID.

Not to mention, Apple will continue to improve on the security of FaceID to eliminate more of these potential unauthorized unlocks.

How does the saying go?  With great power comes great responsibility?  Apple's size and power forces them to do things that most other companies wouldn't, won't or can't do, even when it's not really an Apple issue or fault.  The Apple brand is such a huge click bait and lawsuit bait opportunity that someone out there is always ready to go after them for just about anything, knowing they'll get the clicks even if they "win" nothing from Apple.

This is such a crock of do-do.  What Apple did in engineering the iPhones to scale back processor performance as the battery ages has nothing to do with planned obsolescence.  Batteries in or powering any device or product (like a car) have a limited lifespan - perhaps French officials should be suing every battery manufacturer for making batteries that don't last forever, performing as new regardless of age and use?  So Apple should now remove this software and let people with old iPhones complain about their batteries dying - it's far easier for Apple to deal with battery life issues, because there is no such thing as a forever battery and everyone knows and accepts that.

williamh said:

jmgregory1 said:

Just not seeing the need for facial recognition on a device that will likely sit on a shelf and not be meant for regular and close-proximity interaction with users.  That's what the iPhone and iPad are for and the HomePod will connect to these devices already, so what's the need or use-case for FaceID on a home speaker?

The use case is ApplePay. It’s so funny how Family Guy made those Google Or Amazon devices (whichever) order stuff.  

Edit: Or was it South Park?

So, you’re going to walk over to your bookcase, where your Home Pod sits on a shelf, just so you can authenticate a purchase of something with FaceID?

Apple certainly isn’t pitching this as a countertop competitor to Amazon or Google IoT devices. And why would it need to be?  Apple is smart enough to recognize that not every product has to be or do everything that other products do - think iPad vs Surface. 

Taking this his line of thinking about FaceID, why not make every Beats headphones have it so you can buy stuff and authenticate just by looking at your headphones while wearing them?