Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
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.

Yes, but even for an unknown source, you should get an indication of where the source is. Supply chain? Distribution? Apple themselves? This article is just vague rumours.

Oh, and take a look here:

https://www.bloomberg.com/search?query=apple

Not one single positive article on the first page of results. That should tell you something.
 
Even if true, this is not uncommon. They are rumored to be adjusting their manufacturing tolerances to better match the realities of the assembly process. I’m sure that any change to the tolerances has been run through the engineering and software teams to not impact functionality.
Remember that Apple that does not build the parts themselves, so their initial asks may be beyond the real requirements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tooloud10 and KPOM
If the report is true, does it mean that the first batch of devices will be potentially less prone to Face ID defects?
 
And why is everyone talking about lowering the accuracy? The report from Bloomberg clearly states that they lowered the specs,
Actually the bloomberg article explicitly states that apple told makers to reduce the accuracy.

Apple came up with a solution: It quietly told suppliers they could reduce the accuracy of the face-recognition technology to make it easier to manufacture, according to people familiar with the situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demo Kit
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.

Fourth article on it in the last three days.

https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/ar...osing-its-supply-chain-mojo-is-a-major-threat

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ipments-to-be-half-of-forecast-nikkei-reports

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/vide...e-shares-are-up-despite-iphone-x-issues-video

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...truggle-to-get-the-iphone-x-to-market-on-time
 
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.
Yes, the demo showed us that the bio-lockout does work, which is good. It was a hiccup. But Face ID worked exactly like it was designed to do.

Omg I am going to paste the same paragraph from Apple's Face ID white paper once again:

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.


So, here is your proof. Apple cannot easily backtrack from their own white paper. Please take the time and read it. Heck, Apple even wrote to Senators. Do you really think they would go that far just to backtrack at the end?

Apple has mentioned it several times that it works with glasses (even when you are not wearing them all the time) during the keynote, interviews, white paper and even in their responses to Senators. What more proof do you want? Heck, even the dad from that girl's video yesterday wore glasses.
 
I call BS on this article, but if it is true then all the more reason to get one on launch day as supposedly the earlier ones would have more accurate FaceID.

They may have reduced it from 97% accuracy to 95% accuracy, I can live with that. But as I said before, I think it's BS just to get clicks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bnekic
I fail to see how Apple can lower the accuracy without exhaustive testing first unless they are confident in reducing the leniency...if this fails then Facegate, here we come
 
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.
A conspiracy theorist would say that another big company is behind those "leaks". But yeah, it seems obvious that somebody wants this phone to be in a bad light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartialEagle
Apple always does this, they always hold back so that next it will be 2 X as fast or 2.0 they did the same with Touch ID. This is getting old. Another reason to never buy 1st yr of new feature.
 
If true, this is a glaring mistake Apple will come to regret. When you cave in and compromise on your company ethos, you lose your edge over the competition and you are not Apple anymore: you are another Samsung.
[doublepost=1508924893][/doublepost]
The Bloomberg article says that Apple declined to comment.

Of course Apple had to decline... they probably did this on purpose to find the leaker from the conference room. They probably have couple of conference room for each fake meeting to find the leakers.

I don’t believe this one second.
 
The yearly upgrade cycle is killing quality.
This is also true for software, they used to make 1 Mac OS X every year and a half, and sometimes more, not it is yearly, and the quality thanked.... especially considering that back then they were "major" updates, and now they are mostly minor.
 
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'...
There is also no data on the false negatives of Touch ID. Just sayin'...
 
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."

It does not say that the FaceID will work if you sometimes wear glasses and sometimes wear contacts. The issue is not that glasses block light, but that they bend light, thereby potentially distorting the apparent 3D shape of the face. Perhaps FaceID will work no matter how you correct your vision if there is enough information in the lower part of the face and can learn to discount the upper half of the face. Perhaps it will generate two representations of the face (one with glasses, one without) in the hidden layers of the neural network processing the faces, but if so, this is information Apple has not provided so far as I am aware. Finally, infra-red will bounce off the frames of glasses, so there might be an issue if you wear more than one pair (normal glasses indoors, sunglasses outdoors) or if your glasses simply slip down your nose (moving relative to other features of the face). I guess we'll see soon enough once the phone is released.
 
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'...
I've been mildly amused by your posts in this thread. You've made some fundamental misconceptions regarding Face ID, the tech behind it, and biometric identification in general. Wasn't gonna say anything but you addressed me, so...
Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Your claim that Apple was eerily silent about false negatives is a complaint that doesn't stand scrutiny. You've essentially introduced a red herring to further a narrative. An incorrect one at that.

Apple clearly addressed false negatives. They did it in the most embarrassing way possible - a failed demo - but they addressed false negatives nonetheless. You simply enter your passcode. Just sayin'...
 
It does not say that the FaceID will work if you sometimes wear glasses and sometimes wear contacts. The issue is not that glasses block light, but that they bend light, thereby potentially distorting the apparent 3D shape of the face. Perhaps FaceID will work no matter how you correct your vision if there is enough information in the lower part of the face and can learn to discount the upper half of the face. Perhaps it will generate two representations of the face (one with glasses, one without) in the hidden layers of the neural network processing the faces, but if so, this is information Apple has not provided so far as I am aware. Finally, infra-red will bounce off the frames of glasses, so there might be an issue if you wear more than one pair (normal glasses indoors, sunglasses outdoors) or if your glasses simply slip down your nose (moving relative to other features of the face). I guess we'll see soon enough once the phone is released.
Yes of course infrared radiation bounces of frames. But that is why you have 30'000 dots. So that enough dots will match your data in the neural engine. And please just go to the website and you see that the model there first wears glasses then not, then has a beard then not and so on. And the glasses will for sure not be part of your profile so different glasses will not pose a problem.
Also; There is not one person that wears glasses all the time. So if Apple says that glasses are supported then the assume that people get that it means that you can wear them or not...
[doublepost=1508932571][/doublepost]
THE HEADLINE: APPLE REDUCES ACCURACY OF FACEID IN IPHONE X!

THE REALITY: FaceID takes 0.02 seconds longer, is practically unnoticable
Thank you! It will probably be like that. But the mainstream media will pick this up and have their ad revenue from all the clicks.
 
Yes, but they state below that it is not even sure if the false positive rate is affected.
Perhaps, but what you wrote was inaccurate. The article clearly states the accuracy level was reduced. You posted:
And why is everyone talking about lowering the accuracy

Everyone is talking about it, because the article's title, and contents mention the accuracy was reduced.
 
I am usually one who gets up in the middle of the night and pre-orders. This is is just another reason I will wait until the "S" version of this phone so I can get the version that has had all the kinks worked out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dominiongamma
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.

Anything Apple and especially iPhone is always good clickbait. But I don't perceive Bloomberg being nefarious here. They are just doing what news orgs do... gather information from sources and then present it in a a report. The fate of the X is in Apple's hands alone. Demand is there and news of a less accurate sensor will not sway early adopters.

If the sensors turn out to actually be unusable or less secure THAT will sway the 2nd round+ buyers. I would think Apple understands that and any lowering of sensor standards is that of ridiculously high to "merely" above-industry. End product won't really be anything the end-user will notice.

Really, if anything, these articles are helping Apple by softening availability expectations. I'm not concerned about build or part quality. I don't think Apple would ever (or could afford to) compromise quality for production in a way that the consumer would notice. Apple will not sacrifice its brand for a single product, esp. when that product is the future of the brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SwissGuy93
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.