I think it's a synthetic face where they've mirrored one side. It's not passing your subconscious uncanny valley test.That Tiger Woods-lookin' guy always creeps me out...
🤣
I think it's a synthetic face where they've mirrored one side. It's not passing your subconscious uncanny valley test.That Tiger Woods-lookin' guy always creeps me out...
🤣
Would Steve Jobs green lighted the notch from day one on the iPhone X?
This article refers to chip size and has nothing to do with the notch.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.
No question. This was the guy that said “You’re holding it wrong.”Would Steve Jobs green lighted the notch from day one on the iPhone X?
Steve Jobs would try to convince everyone that the notch was the perfect size...until he could make it smaller...then he'd say that NOW it was the perfect size.Would Steve Jobs green lighted the notch from day one on the iPhone X?
And, if they figure out how to remove it, it’d be the “truest representation of facial recognition”.Steve Jobs would try to convince everyone that the notch was the perfect size...until he could make it smaller...then he'd say that NOW it was the perfect size.
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.
or, or, it could be so people would stop complaining about the iphone lacking one or the otherAh 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.
and don't forget "thinner," too 😆It would be great if they will make the notch smaller too.![]()
Why not have both? Choice is good.not for me: happy with TouchID on the M1 Macs.
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.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.
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 iPhonesLet'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