Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Reduced Face ID Accuracy to Speed Up iPhone X Production
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What if they don't have to upgrade their security claims? I am pretty sure that what they told us on the keynote still stands. Because it is not even sure if it compromises the false positive rate. Because we do not have any reliable information.
Erm... in addition to any concern about coatings on lenses blocking light, which does not appear to be the case, there is the issue that lenses alter the path of light, and hence the inference of the 3D shape of the head as illuminated by the laser dots. You can practically see around my head with the lenses I wear.... but sometimes I also wear contacts. I cannot imagine the system will be able to handle both contexts, and hence my concern that unlocking the phone will be a hassle.
The problem is 'How do we get biometrics in a phone where the front of the device is 95%+ screen?'. Some opted for fingerprint on the back, Apple opted for facial recognition.
For the last decade, smartphones have been moving to smaller and smaller bezels. This problem was always in the pipeline, and FaceID is a solution to that problem, not the other way round.
Apple has the problem by being 'mainstream' that any hardware issue whatsoever gets blown in to a humongous issue, because the majority of their customers haven't ever spent £1k on tech before (and probably wouldn't if there weren't monthly plans to entice them in). Looking back years ago at all those Powerbooks that first went aluminium that had the 'seam' around the edge, look at them after a while and they split, the same with the Plastic Macbooks of 2008, Macbook pro 15'' Nvidia graphics straight up failures. It's the thing in tech, some products have issues.
Oh and the old Apple rule, don't buy the first gen!
Oh and the old Apple rule, don't buy the first gen!
I have my doubts because I have performed research in the visual nervous system in the past. The computational problems that Apple will have to overcome to get FaceID working reliably (avoiding both false positives and false negatives) are enormous, and I am sceptical that Apple has truly solved them. I suspect that we'll find that FaceID works in the lab, but not so well in the real world. I'd be happy to be proven wrong... and for the ugly notch to go...
It is not a news story. Its a glorified rumor. There is no proof but y'all already hate Face ID without even having used it.
Sigh. No. glasses distort light paths even if they do not block light. I have not seen a demonstration of the iPhone recognising somebody with glasses, let alone recognising somebody wearing glasses and also recognising them wearing contacts. So, in point of fact, we do not know the answer to my question.
EDIT: getting fed up of making the point, so...
Look at the right sight of the picture, where the right edge of the right lens almost bends light around the head. Not to mention IR scatter off the frame itself.
Last edited:
That makes absolutely no sense. Hypothetically, even if the accuracy is reduced by half, it would still be 10x more accurate than Touch ID... according to Apple's presentation. Btw, Touch ID sensors were never 100% accurate. Face ID will never be 100% accurate. Apple had already stated different scenarios that would reduce the accuracy of Face ID even before this rumor surfaced. Face ID or Touch ID, the backend mathematical identification algorithm is still stored in the Secure Enclave. Both rely on the same process for authentication.
Yeah, Apple spent 3 years for it not to work. Sure.
According to 9to5Mac:
“The report does not detail exactly how Apple changed the specification, and what impact that will have on the experience in terms of Face ID reliability and speed.”
But every rumor site will run with this report because clicks and page views are king these days. MacRumors would probably love nothing more than the X being a major failure because of the traffic it would drive to their site. Sad.
“The report does not detail exactly how Apple changed the specification, and what impact that will have on the experience in terms of Face ID reliability and speed.”
But every rumor site will run with this report because clicks and page views are king these days. MacRumors would probably love nothing more than the X being a major failure because of the traffic it would drive to their site. Sad.
This forum is the epitome of manufactured outrage.
Every single time, it never fails to amuse how worked up people get over absolutely nothing.
Every single time, it never fails to amuse how worked up people get over absolutely nothing.
So you’re just fine with the bezels on the 8? Or you think Touch ID on the back of the phone would be a good experience?
In 2003 Steve Job stood on stage stating that Apple would be releasing 3 GHz Power Macs within a year. A year later the 2.5 GHz Power Mac was released.
We are all still waiting for Apple to release a 3 GHz Power Mac.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G5
Last edited:
No less of the rumors that have been swirling around about apple's inability to get the X made in quantities.
No less of a rumor that earlier this summer that Apple was going to facial recognition.
Believe it or not, some rumors turn out to be true and in this case where we see the component maker's inability to produce the components in quantity, its quite conceivable that apple lowered the accuracy to bump up the production. You may not believe it, and that's your right, but to me, it has a ring of truth
Why should it not be able to handle contact lenses? Apple literally said that there is no problem between wearing glasses and not. You also have to realise that infrared is not that easily broken by glass like visible light, as it is technically infrared radiation.
This here is straight from the Face ID white paper:
"Face ID is designed to work with hats, scarves, glasses, contact lenses, and many sunglasses. Furthermore, it's designed to work indoors, outdoors, and even in total darkness."
[doublepost=1508931236][/doublepost]
Yes but there is a difference between a hypothetical product announcement and a literal feature of a device.
And like y'all love to say: it's not Steve's Apple anymore.
Clearly someone wants this phone to fail. What is this now the 3rd negative story from Bloomberg? And these stories don’t really report concrete. It’s like they exist just to sow doubt and make people think the X isn’t ready for prime time.
Really, what in that article is anything other than speculation?
Who is this source? Where in the supply line? Heck, which continent are they on?
What specifications have they changed? Is the specification a feature one? a QC one? cost? accuracy?
The article has nothing but speculation from a completely unknown source.
You mean like the demo? *cough*
I have been using Apple products since the Lisa (yes, I have actually word processed on a Lisa), so it's not as though I am an Apple naysayer. I would imagine FaceID will work for the majority of people the most of the time. That still doesn't mean that the computational problems posed by things like glasses, or even puffiness of the face from allergies, won't throw the process off. We'll see how well Apple's neural networks can fill in missing information if parts of the face are obscured etc. However, going from TouchID (2D image under closely controlled lightening conditions of a body part that does not change) to FaceID (3D image with potential portions obscured by glasses etc.) is magnitudes more difficult.
We'll see how well Apple solved almost insurmountable problems. My guess is that they haven't and so when the phone is sold there will be something that says that FaceID will work only under certain conditions. As I have noted above, I have not seen any demonstration of FaceID on somebody wearing glasses and then contacts, and we don't know whether FaceID declines in accuracy if somebody wears glasses.
“I’m dead...quit bringing me up”
Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs
What! Why reduce its Price?!! What about Animoji.. isnt this worth $£1000?
Only joking.. totally agree. In fact if you asked me even with this face recognition bla bla it isnt worth the price hike Apple introduced. These guys at Apple got greedy and lost the balance between what end user need and the price bracket target
The source is unknown to you, not to them. Unnamed sources are part and parcel of the news industry - without them we wouldn't get half the news that is published.
Apple presented information about false positives (somebody else's face being able to unlock your phone) but was eerily silent about false negatives (failure to unlock your phone with your face). Just sayin'...
Yes, but they have all been reports. There has never been one single proof that there were actually difficulties with production. And as you for sure know those reports have been swirling around since the beginning of the iPhone. Here are just some examples from the past years:
„KGI expects Apple to have between 1.5 and 2.5 million iPhone 6s Plus units ready to ship for September 25th.“
„Both iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus might be facing supply shortage issues just weeks before their imminent arrival to the smartphone market.“
„A hiccup in the supply chain has slowed production of Apple's anticipated iPhone 6, leaving suppliers scrabbling to produce enough displays to prepare for the expected launch of the device, Reuters reported“
So, yes I am very critical when it comes to reports. Because I think we all should be. In a time where literally everyone wants to tell their own truth we have to be critical. And I don't see that anymore with a lot of you. You all eat up the reports no matter what. There have been conflicting reports for the iPhone X since the start. Some said that production had started (Kuo in September) others claimed it had not. Macrumors even posted two conflicting reports within a few hours. And there is no critical response from some of you. And that actually frightens me.
And why is everyone talking about lowering the accuracy? The report from Bloomberg clearly states that they lowered the specs, but they do also say that they do not know how AND IF it even affects the accuracy.