Apple Says Claims Face ID Was Downgraded to Speed Up Production Are 'Completely False'

[citysnaps]

I totally got your point. My original comment was directed more as a statement then a real question. But that's the internet for you. People take something written and interpret it out of context, throwing someone under the bus. It is what it is... and for clarification here.. no I'm not saying you are doing that.

I understood your question and response, and there was no intention of throwing you under the bus. I was merely trying to point out there was, IMO, a much better question to ask.

 

[KPOM]

"The quality and accuracy of Face ID haven't changed."

1.... what Apple saying is its quality and accuracy hasn't changed.

2... no deny on the parts being downgraded.



my feeling? they are 100% using different parts, however the affect on user is mininal (just like the whole chip-gate)

What difference does it make whether the specs on the parts changed if the results are the same?

 

[agsystems]

Doesn't matter. Once these phones are in the wild and being reviewed, we're gonna have a good idea about how good or gimmick this really is. I'm leaning toward "good."

no s**t - they are removing a proven technology like touch ID for Face ID - this thing has to be bullet proof -no ifs or buts -re-entering your ping many times a day its not a proper fallback.

Unfortunately, everyone that wants one on a reasonable time will have to purchase sight unseen - this is one product we should wait for reviews and the yahoos from consumer reports to have a crack at it.

 

[KPOM]

no s**t - they are removing a proven technology like touch ID for Face ID - this thing has to be bullet proof -no ifs or buts -re-entering your ping many times a day its not a proper fallback

Exactly. If they had any doubts they’d have incorporated TouchID as a fallback, either on the back of the phone or a side button.

 

[shanson27]

Samsung was behind this fake news

 

[BvizioN]

Then get a purse!

Hmm. Truly awsome advice however not a purse type. That being said, I am absolutely fine with you using yours.

 

[bobob]

I think you're missing my point...

Before asking the rhetorical, "Well, what would you expect Apple to say," as if Apple would reflexively and intentionally lie, a much more appropriate question is, "Why would you believe an unsourced rumor lock stock and barrel, like it was fact?"

That's the problem today. People are not very fussy when it comes to assessing "news." Especially when one has a firmly held narrative begging for support, and a juicy piece of fake news is ripe for the taking.

It's a real shame journalism isn't a required subject in high school today. Not for creating more journalists in the world, but to help consumers of news better understand what quality reporting is about, and what the difference is between rumor, editorial, and fact-checked and sourced news.

It is difficult to believe that so many educated people are gullible enough to believe this fabricated piece of disruptive disinformation conveniently released on the eve of pre-orders.

 

[fatalogic]

Seems to me that both stories are correct. The quote in the report seems to be talking about specification tolerances of a specific part where as apple's statement is talking about accuracy of the technology. So many people are quick to defend Apple or take down Apple but the truth is hardly ever so black and white.

 

[jmpmntwnty3]

I knew this was "fake news." Hopefully, those production woes are in that category as well. I'm looking forward to holding my shiny new iPhone X in my hand by next Friday, or the Friday after next at the latest.

 

[BiscottiGelato]

Maybe they downgraded it from 1 in 2,000,000 to 1 in 1,000,000 just before the presentation~

 

[ravenstar]

Seems to me that both stories are correct. The quote in the report seems to be talking about specification tolerances of a specific part where as apple's statement is talking about accuracy of the technology. So many people are quick to defend Apple or take down Apple but the truth is hardly ever so black and white.

Agreed. The controversy seems to be in so many people reading the words but failing to understand their meaning. There never was a claim about FaceID being less secure or less reliable, but so many people didn't think beyond "relaxing specifications" to try to understand how or whether it might affect the final product.

 

[scrapesleon]

jesus apple, this is just awful.

i was so excited, but after this it's too much. i definitely won't be staying up to preorder on saturday at 4am and i highly discourage you all from getting one as well, especially if it's a 256gb space gray!

lmao u know you're gonna stay up and order anyway we waited long enough for this one phone

 

[KrispE00]

What a ridiculous claim. This would take months of R&D & testing to approve a downgraded FaceID.

 

[JayMBP]

From my exp. working in CE manufacturing, I think a better way to read this is to lower the QA guideline.

Let's say the original QA threshold was to complete 10 readouts with 1 error permitted during the test, and with such a high precision requirement, they may be having a 60% yield rate (so for every 10units that completes, 6 are good to go while 4 are rejected for quality reasons) based on the 1/10 error guideline.

Now if they allow 2/10 error, they'd might have a much higher, say 90% yield rate (so now only 1unit gets rejected).

Nevertheless, it's still a worrisome approach.

 

[BruceEBonus]

P

haha... so tragically misinformed and uneducated...

The fact you think the words 'misinformed" and 'uneducated' are inextricably linked says more about your own education than mine.

 

[Brandhouse]

Can we all just agree now that 99% of what these so-called "analysts" spout out is complete rubbish?

They're given so much airtime and manage to define the narrative despite being so wrong so often.

For Apple to denounce a story this comprehensively is quite unprecedented.

Can we also get less analyst rubbish on here. If there's nothing worthy to put up on here MAcrumors, don't resort to the carp that you've been putting up with Ming this, Mng that, Ming wiped his bottom, Ming wiped his nose and had an idea?

 

[convergent]

they LITERALLY said the accuracy of 1,000,000 is still the same. What are you thinking

And how exactly would anyone prove otherwise? I seriously doubt they have any accurate way of knowing if it is 1,000,000 to one since they didn't test it on multiples of that quantity. So if it is half that, you'd know? Of course not. And if you were able to prove it, you'd probably here, "you are holding it wrong", so what difference does it make.

It really cracks me up that people accept everything Apple says with 100% trust even though they have misled customers in the past. They are going to "spin" a situation just like any other company is.
[doublepost=1508970064][/doublepost]

Can we also get less analyst rubbish on here. If there's nothing worthy to put up on here MAcrumors, don't resort to the carp that you've been putting up with Ming this, Mng that, Ming wiped his bottom, Ming wiped his nose and had an idea?

That is hilarious... you are on a site called Mac RUMORS and criticizing the credibility of said rumors. You do know what a rumor is, right?

 

[sbailey4]

Hmm is Bloomberg affiliated with CNN?

 

[Sevendaymelee]

I'm not one for suing but doesn't this fall into the "liable" area?

 

[citysnaps]

It is difficult to believe that so many educated people are gullible enough to believe this fabricated piece of disruptive disinformation conveniently released on the eve of pre-orders.

I'm not so sure it's a matter of education. Rather, I think there's a huge crowd of anti-Apple people on the forum just waiting for a tasty piece of chum to drop in the water that supports their hatred of the company, hoping that anything the company does will be, as some fresh out of high school would call it, a MASSIVE FAIL.

 

[maverick2007]

What's that old saying? "It's better to stay silent and let others think you are stupid rather than open your mouth and prove them correct."

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Looks like they responded Lol.

Yes, I saw that too. Not sure what the "lol" is in reference to though. Did I miss a joke?

 

[flat five]

will faceid work if i set it up without facial hair but grow my facial hair out due to being off for several days straight?

heh, i'll be a good candidate for seeing how well iPhone X is at learning in that situation.

i generally shave once every 2 weeks or so... i think the day-to-day will be fine but i'm wondering how well it's going to deal with the shave days.

i'm expecting at most, it will require a passcode on those days but maybe it's not such as drastic change and will allow a slight facial hair removal to happen without the additional verification.

 

[CartoonCat]

Hmm...What about my evil twin?

 

[charlituna]

I didn't see Apple doing this anyways.

Anyone that has followed Apple history knows that there are tons of fake ‘issue’ rumors right before a phone release. It’s all to drive down the stock value so a few folks can make a quick buck
[doublepost=1508975307][/doublepost]

I would imagine a change in resolution would create a need to adjust software algorithms that have received months of testing. There is no way Apple would allow this to happen, especially after the Samsung face unlock fiasco.

Exactly. Degrading the sensors isn’t as simple as it sounds.
[doublepost=1508975393][/doublepost]

They had problems with getting underscreen fingerprint ID working so FaceID was pushed apparently.

So you work for Apple. I mean you must if you know that rumor to be true. So what department are you in exactly. I mean we deserve to know exactly how authorative your claim of fact is. Don’t worry we won’t tell Tim that you ratted the company out. It will be our little secret
[doublepost=1508975500][/doublepost]

Sometime, in 2018:

Apple: "Did you get the keynote invite for the iPhone release?"

Bloomberg: "What invite?"

Apple: "That's right."

More like:
Bloomberg: “Hey Apple we didn’t receiver our invite”
Apple: *crickets*
[doublepost=1508975624][/doublepost]

Or: original requirement "1 in 10 million". Spec: meet requirement. New requirement "1 in 1 million". Spec: unchanged (meet requirement).

Tim said that spec in a publicly available announcement, if they changed it behind the scenes folks would leak it and there would be lawsuits.
[doublepost=1508975738][/doublepost]

Oh boy, this is getting to be like a he said she said...who do we believe? Let's keep this article handy when next yrs iPhone X comes out to see if they release Face ID 2.0 faster than last yrs.

Of course, if they continue face id, there will be a 2.0 next year. That’s apple’s way. Always going for better on these features.