Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Would Steve Jobs green lighted the notch from day one on the iPhone X?
OIP.jpg
 
I wonder why they even bother. That one or two mm won't make any kind of difference. If they were getting rid of it completely, now THAT would be another story. But yea making it thinner to gain like 20 pixels of screen real estate. Erm okay.
This article refers to chip size and has nothing to do with the notch.
 
Would Steve Jobs green lighted the notch from day one on the iPhone X?
No question. This was the guy that said “You’re holding it wrong.” :) If whatever it was solved a particular engineering problem and enabled other features, he was fully onboard. Again, when Apple decided to change FCP, they knew that it wouldn’t be popular, but also knew the future product would stand on it’s own.

Plus, all of the rounded sections, even of the notch, are still squircles :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: AirunJae
The notch is the face mask of the iPhone.

This is meant to be funny. I really have no stance on either subject, just seems like something people like to waa waa waa bout either way.
 
While I appreciate Apple forcing new technologies into a rapid maturation by continuing to push forward, I do miss TouchID dearly.
 
i think, ideally, the end goal is to have both — people who live in colder climates will still want face id for when they're wearing gloves.

Ah yes. Apple would be like 'iPhone - now secure even in cold climates.' /s 😂

I think the aim of both, if they did - would be that you could use one or the other for majority of stuff you do at the moment - and both for things that require that further security, banking apps I can see as justified, but probably other use cases that are not yet available at the moment.
 
Ah yes. Apple would be like 'iPhone - now secure even in cold climates.' /s 😂

I think the aim of both, if they did - would be that you could use one or the other for majority of stuff you do at the moment - and both for things that require that further security, banking apps I can see as justified, but probably other use cases that are not yet available at the moment.
or, or, it could be so people would stop complaining about the iphone lacking one or the other :)
 
If you need 900 chips, and the yield was 300 a wafer, that’s 3 wafers. If the yield is now 450 a wafer, that’s 2 wafers. A reduction of 1 wafer.

I know the actual chips-per-wafer ratios are orders of magnitude higher, but you get the concept.
That's increasing output but reducing the number of wafers needed. It's poorly written saying it reduces wafer output when it's an increase per wafer.
 
Let's hope we see it in Macs soon too.
So we have to lean into the screen to get it to unlock? no thanks. My laptop is 3-4 feet away from me. My phone barely works arms length away from my face. Touch ID is fine for me for a computer. Wish it came back to iPhones
 
So we have to lean into the screen to get it to unlock? no thanks. My laptop is 3-4 feet away from me. My phone barely works arms length away from my face. Touch ID is fine for me for a computer. Wish it came back to iPhones

Fair enough. I‘ve been using it on my iPad Pro for 2.5 years which I essentially have a few feet away like a laptop and its been excellent.

Also, who says they can’t improve it for Mac use with stronger sensors?

I much prefer the passive authentication rather than active.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x-evil-x
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.