Apple Says Face ID Didn't Fail Onstage During iPhone X Keynote

[Shade12]

failed or it didn't fail I'm not spending 1100 for a phone lol

During an iPhone X demo conducted by Craig Federighi in yesterday's keynote, Face ID appeared to fail to recognize his face, leading to doubts about the feature's reliability and accuracy.

There was a lot of speculation about just what went wrong on stage, ranging from a Face ID failure to a passcode lock, and according to Apple, it was the latter issue that caused the device not to work properly on stage. In a statement provided to Yahoo's David Pogue, Apple says the device locked after several people interacted with it ahead of Federighi, causing it to require a passcode to unlock.While Touch ID locks the iPhone and requires users to input a passcode after five failed entry attempts, Face ID only allows for two failed recognition attempts before it locks the iPhone and requires a passcode to access the device, according to developer documentation. There were arguments over how many times Federighi attempted to unlock the iPhone X with Face ID while on stage given that two attempt limitation, but Apple's explanation makes sense. A secondary iPhone X unlocked with no issues during the demonstration.

The ins and outs of Face ID and its reliability will remain largely unknown until the iPhone X launches in November and is in the hands of customers. Members of the media received hands-on time with the device following the event, but reviews were somewhat mixed. Most people were generally impressed with Face ID and saw it work seamlessly, but there was also at least one report of a problems with the feature not working until the display was turned on and off.

Face ID uses infrared scanning techniques to create a mathematical model of a user's face, which is compared to a facial scan stored on the device to authenticate. Because it uses infrared, Face ID works in the dark and in low lighting conditions, and Apple says it also works with hats, glasses, and beards, makeup, and other items that might partially obscure the face.

Article Link: Apple Says Face ID Didn't Fail Onstage During iPhone X Keynote

 

[Bacillus]

Yes, as a "former" Apple customer and current one to some degree, I agree. That was my point in mentioning that my "eureka" moment was in being told not to buy an iPhone 7 if the lack of a phone jack was so bothersome - so, as I decided with the MacBook Pro a year and a half ago, I didn't buy one, updated my 6+ to a 6S+ (last model with a phone jack), and bought an LG V20 to use with my nice wired headphones. In any case, Apple lost me as a phone/laptop customer (still plan to get a new iMac and iPad in the next year or so). I didn't mean to "disrespect" anyone by suggesting that, if they don't like the new iPhones for heart felt reasons, just don't buy one - get another phone. Perhaps Apple won't care, at least for now, as they seem to have enough business without some of their former, at one time "loyal", customers. When Apple dropped the phone jack it was a calculated move suggesting that a thinner aesthetic would have a greater appeal than the practical retention of the 3.5mm sound jack. In my case, it did not work. If the 8/8+ models had sound jacks I'd be ordering one right now, as they are just attractive enough at less than $1000. The X, at least for me, is just too expensive for what it offers, so I won't buy one. If it had a phone jack I'd at least be borderline. Apologies if that offends people.

Surprisingly, this is almost exactly my story. Stopped at the 6S and MBAir.
No LG (yet)
Have come to despise the Apple organisation with its crazy greed and incumbent behavior (10.000 patents and hardly developing anything useful)

 

[FactVsOpinion]

Stop basing your blind fanboyism purely off of conjecture. The phone was NOT turned off then ON. They even said it themselves.

Stop basing your disrespect for our community members on hatred and conjecture about individuals you know nothing about.

Also pay more attention to comments before you criticize them: "LIKE" when resetting the phone. LIKE...

Nobody said the phone was reset.

 

[Swift]

So what this means is if I am showing a funny text on my lockscreen to my friends... the phone is going to go into "require a passcode mode" after it gets passed around to 3 of my friends before it gets back to me?

If this were Touch ID, this wouldn't be an issue. I don't think each one of my friends would be "touching the home button" of my phone with each of their fingers. (sounds dirty)

No, you've already unlocked it, and you've set how long you want it to remain unlocked. Same as Touch ID. If your friend is holding the phone when it fades to black, then only you can unlock it, either with your finger or with the passcode.

 

[MacLoveMacHate]

Being Apple, I'd be the first to doubt this, though it did appear to work consistently after he entered his passcode.

 

[curtvaughan]

Surprisingly, this is almost exactly my story. Stopped at the 6S and MBAir.
No LG (yet)
Have come to despise the Apple organisation with its crazy greed and incumbent behavior (10.000 patents and hardly developing anything useful)

I won't go to using the old "What would Apple be if Jobs still ran it?", as that's all pure speculation - he, after all, was at the helm when the first iPhone was developed. It was "his" baby, and the inspired delivery he gave upon its release clearly shows that. What has changed since his death, though, is two-fold. Apple has shifted its primary R&D and marketing push to phones and their accessories/corollaries (iWatch, iPad); they have, especially to the chagrin of older Apple customers, slowed down in development of their Mac lines of computers, and much of the remaining development in those areas has been to more closely align Macs with phones, both with the emphasis on "thinner" and in OS development. The main trend, which now applies to all of Apple's products, is in huge price increases. Who can say how Apple might have changed if Jobs was still around, but I would hope that he would be concentrating on the next revolutionary product to eclipse mobile phones altogether - who knows?

The other concern is that Apple tends to set trends with its competition, especially in the phone arena. The most obvious copycat trend the last several years has been in the demise of user swappable batteries across nearly all top end phones in order to accommodate more thinness, leading to an almost universal need to replace phones every two years (or pay a large fee to have the battery replaced at the shop). If the facial recognition technology really takes off, you'll see copying in that area. Thankfully, at least so far, most competitive high end phones still provide a 3.5mm sound jack. Unlike with phones, the desktop/laptop competition seems to have been truly competitive with Apple in their hardware lines, and at prices which remain more reasonable than Apple's offerings (hence, last year I bought a Dell XPS-13 rather than a MacBook Pro - don't like Windows, so run Linux on it and love the thing). I still keep my old MacBook Pro (1,1), which I bought in 2006, around just for nostalgia. That wonderful old box still runs, though I put Linux on it after Apple withdrew OS updates. Anyway, I digress

 

[Bacillus]

I won't go to using the old "What would Apple be if Jobs still ran it?", as that's all pure speculation - he, after all, was at the helm when the first iPhone was developed. It was "his" baby, and the inspired delivery he gave upon its release clearly shows that. What has changed since his death, though, is two-fold. Apple has shifted its primary R&D and marketing push to phones and their accessories/corollaries (iWatch, iPad); they have, especially to the chagrin of older Apple customers, slowed down in development of their Mac lines of computers, and much of the remaining development in those areas has been to more closely align Macs with phones, both with the emphasis on "thinner" and in OS development. The main trend, which now applies to all of Apple's products, is in huge price increases. Who can say how Apple might have changed if Jobs was still around, but I would hope that he would be concentrating on the next revolutionary product to eclipse mobile phones altogether - who knows?

The other concern is that Apple tends to set trends with its competition, especially in the phone arena. The most obvious copycat trend the last several years has been in the demise of user swappable batteries across nearly all top end phones in order to accommodate more thinness, leading to an almost universal need to replace phones every two years (or pay a large fee to have the battery replaced at the shop). If the facial recognition technology really takes off, you'll see copying in that area. Thankfully, at least so far, most competitive high end phones still provide a 3.5mm sound jack. Unlike with phones, the desktop/laptop competition seems to have been truly competitive with Apple in their hardware lines, and at prices which remain more reasonable than Apple's offerings (hence, last year I bought a Dell XPS-13 rather than a MacBook Pro - don't like Windows, so run Linux on it and love the thing). I still keep my old MacBook Pro (1,1), which I bought in 2006, around just for nostalgia. That wonderful old box still runs, though I put Linux on it after Apple withdrew OS updates. Anyway, I digress

Jobs left with the famous quote "Stay young, stay foolish" - which imho essentially means that he wanted Apple to remain the champ of disruptive innovation. It remains speculative indeed, but by now he would have redefined some product categories that Cook & the Cookettes now chose to milk out to the extreme.
For instance, I would expect him to have merged iPad and Mac into an uncompromised touchscreen laptop (which would leapfrog lagging iPad and MacBook sales) and to have made foldable iPhone designs with far better batteries. He probably would have done serious breakthrough pilots to really shift TV and selfdriving car paradigms - whether commercially successful or not.
The current Board chose for worldwide commercial leadership, which shifted them into subservience to financial systems/interests that Jobs would have never sought nor accepted, because any new product gets benchmarked against immensive financial criteria; disruptive innovation now => consolidation.
That's not my definition of an interesting or innovative business, and I can only conclude that Steve's ideology has been severly betrayed. Oh, and on the personal level he would have kick-assed Phil, Joni and Eddy. What a bunch of lamenting, mentally lazy cowards (ehhh, in His perspective of course...)

 

[BigBadBoogie]

I knew it. I always trust apple. God bless them.

Sorry to say, Apples explanation does not hold.
if that was true, he should have gotten the passcode at first attempt.
The passcode did not pop up until second attempt.

That leaves 2 options:
1. It failed twice, chances on that according to Apple data is 1/91 000.
= Face Id is not working when it comes to recognition.
Not even when being extremely prepared and perfectly tought like it must have been prior to the event. No one believes that this was not double checked over and over before the event I hope =)

2. Someone managed to get into the phone by his own wrong face and reprogram face id to his own = face Id is not safe at all.

Sorry, but apple have a lot of work to do prior selling this device if they want to avoid totall fiasco.

 

[NewdestinyX]

Jobs left with the famous quote "Stay young, stay foolish" - which imho essentially means that he wanted Apple to remain the champ of disruptive innovation. It remains speculative indeed, but by now he would have redefined some product categories that Cook & the Cookettes now chose to milk out to the extreme.
For instance, I would expect him to have merged iPad and Mac into an uncompromised touchscreen laptop (which would leapfrog lagging iPad and MacBook sales) and to have made foldable iPhone designs with far better batteries. He probably would have done serious breakthrough pilots to really shift TV and selfdriving car paradigms - whether commercially successful or not.
The current Board chose for worldwide commercial leadership, which shifted them into subservience to financial systems/interests that Jobs would have never sought nor accepted, because any new product gets benchmarked against immensive financial criteria; disruptive innovation now => consolidation.
That's not my definition of an interesting or innovative business, and I can only conclude that Steve's ideology has been severly betrayed. Oh, and on the personal level he would have kick-assed Phil, Joni and Eddy. What a bunch of lamenting, mentally lazy cowards (ehhh, in His perspective of course...)

Indeed the iPad and MacBook should have been merged. That the PC world got to that innovation first would make Steve Jobs roll over in his grave.

But you can't accuse Apple of being "innovation-less" - at least here with the X. That Face ID technology - in the Smart Phone is ALL Apple. No smartphone tech got there before Apple - to this degree with photo and mask-rejection algorithms. Apple's been lack luster on innovation since Steve's death... he11, even in the last years before his death. But they're upping the game now.... slowly.

But I also keep asking people.. and they can rarely answer this question: "WHAT MORE needs 'innovating' in a SMARTPHONE????"

It's a phone.. for heaven's sake.. well.. and a mini computer.. granted.. But I think the issue is more that - 'all there is to innovate' in a phone is pretty much done. It was a couple years back. Since 2013 - there hasn't really been a whole lot of 'innovation' from ANY smartphone company.. including Apple. There are 'enhancements'.. but not really 'innovation'.. I'll consider TouchID and FaceID as true innovations - though both have existed as paradigms in government installations for over a decade. Maybe Retinal scan is the next?? But that wouldn't, again, be an innovation for a smartphone company per se.. since they didn't invent it.

Some folks have different ideas of what the word 'innovation' means.

 

[BigBadBoogie]

Since 2013 - there hasn't really been a whole lot of 'innovation' from ANY smartphone company.. including Apple.

There are 'enhancements'.. but not really 'innovation'.. I'll consider TouchID and FaceID as true innovations - though both have existed as paradigms in government installations for over a decade. Maybe Retinal scan is the next??

Some folks have different ideas of what the word 'innovation' means.

No innovations - wrong, its just that iPhone is faaaar behind regarding innovations.
1. 2012 - wireless charging Nokia Lumia 920
2. 2015 - Retina recognition. Lumia 950 & xl
3. 2013 - 41Mpix large chip image sensor with smart downscale to 8Mpix - Nokia Lumia 1020
4.2012- optical image stabilisation - Nokia Lumia 920
5. 2012 - HAAC microphones - Nokia Lumia 920
6. 2017 - Ozo spatial surround sound that can be played back in any phone, stereo aso without any special decoder - Nokia 8
7. 2012 - Display with 60Hz update rate (in reality closer to 110Hz) - Nokia Lumia 920

As some of you might know Apple recently signed an updated patent agreement with Nokia to be able to use their patented products. A smart move since Nokia holds most mobile patents in the world.
This means that apple invents even less, they just use other company's inventions. Same goes for the Samsung Amoled on the iPhone X.

Then of course Apple tries to make people think it's an industry first and its their invention, but that is seldom true. An apple first yes, but others have done it before in most cases ;-)

So with regards to the question retinal scan is next, see above. It has existed for two years, but apple community seldom look outside the apple sphere and thus miss out on all inventions =)

 

[NewdestinyX]

No innovations - wrong, its just that iPhone is faaaar behind regarding innovations.
1. 2012 - wireless charging Nokia Lumia 920
2. 2015 - Retina recognition. Lumia 950 & xl
3. 2013 - 41Mpix large chip image sensor with smart downscale to 8Mpix - Nokia Lumia 1020
4.2012- optical image stabilisation - Nokia Lumia 920
5. 2012 - HAAC microphones - Nokia Lumia 920
6. 2017 - Ozo spatial surround sound that can be played back in any phone, stereo aso without any special decoder - Nokia 8
7. 2012 - Display with 60Hz update rate (in reality closer to 110Hz) - Nokia Lumia 920

As some of you might know Apple recently signed an updated patent agreement with Nokia to be able to use their patented products. A smart move since Nokia holds most mobile patents in the world.
This means that apple invents even less, they just use other company's inventions. Same goes for the Samsung Amoled on the iPhone X.

Then of course Apple tries to make people think it's an industry first and its their invention, but that is seldom true. An apple first yes, but others have done it before in most cases ;-)

So with regards to the question retinal scan is next, see above. It has existed for two years, but apple community seldom look outside the apple sphere and thus miss out on all inventions =)

I said "Facial" recognition - not retina ( 2 HUGELY different technologies) - is an APPLE innovation for smartphone. No one got there before Apple on Facial (except maybe government gurus invented something like it).. but Apple gets first patent on their FaceID scanning technique from a smartphone.

Less innovation - but not '0'.

 

[BigBadBoogie]

I said "Facial" recognition - not retina ( 2 HUGELY different technologies)

In you post, and my quote, 3 lines from bottom you wrote

Maybe Retinal scan is the next??

Which I replied to. So yes you did write retinal scan my friend. And as I listed, retinal scan was already available 2015 on the Lumia 950, so no, Apple will not be first there if they "invent" that 2018.
And facial recognition is already available on Samsung and other manufacturers have thought of adding it but held back due to discussions if the IR light could be harmful for your eyes.
When Apple now has a likely even more powerful IR-flooder shooting all over your face it will be interesting to see if that discussion comes up again.

 

[NewdestinyX]

In you post, and my quote, 3 lines from bottom you wrote

Which I replied to. So yes you did write retinal scan my friend.

I said NEXT time.. but read my post more carefully - you stated NO innovation. I countered with proving you wrong by citing Face ID. It was clearly my main point.

I think we agree more than disagree. Apple's been very LIGHT on innovation in recent years. But NOT 'zero' - which was your contention.

And Lumia's retina detection was a joke. Even the simplest of Google searches proves out an Epic FAIL. Apple will KILL it and rightfully be hailed as the real innovators there too.

Other smartphone companies get to market with any old shoddy release JUST to beat Apple. But Apple does it right.

 

[Bacillus]

Indeed the iPad and MacBook should have been merged. That the PC world got to that innovation first would make Steve Jobs roll over in his grave
But you can't accuse Apple of being "innovation-less" - at least here with the X. That Face ID technology - in the Smart Phone is ALL Apple. No smartphone tech got there before Apple - to this degree with photo and mask-rejection algorithms. Apple's been lack luster on innovation since Steve's death... he11, even in the last years before his death. But they're upping the game now.... slowly.
But I also keep asking people.. and they can rarely answer this question: "WHAT MORE needs 'innovating' in a SMARTPHONE????"
It's a phone.. for heaven's sake.. well.. and a mini computer.. granted.. But I think the issue is more that - 'all there is to innovate' in a phone is pretty much done. It was a couple years back. Since 2013 - there hasn't really been a whole lot of 'innovation' from ANY smartphone company.. including Apple. There are 'enhancements'.. but not really 'innovation'.. I'll consider TouchID and FaceID as true innovations - though both have existed as paradigms in government installations for over a decade. Maybe Retinal scan is the next?? But that wouldn't, again, be an innovation for a smartphone company per se.. since they didn't invent it.
Some folks have different ideas of what the word 'innovation' means.

FaceID is both fascinating and advanced, but it replaces a function that was already proven and near-perfect.
We'll have to see what its practical value/benefit over is touchID, what issues arise, how it develops.
However, all that effort could have been put into better batteries, more compelling form factors, fold-out screens, self-repairing materials (anything better than glass). The top-10 issues that billions and billions of people have and never get adressed. When improving camera's, start improving the focus speed because that's the no 1. issue.
If batteries don't improve, split the existing into two and make them alternatingly replaceable on-the-go so that you NEVER have to dock your phone anymore. Do they ever use their iPhone themselves on their trips around the world ? If others don't innovate, then take the lead instead of running behind and declaring other innovations "immature".
Keep thinking out of the box, and stop that arrived/superior attitude that makes me sick.
The iPhone 8 is an iPhone 6 refurb III (the laureate of the 10-year bezel pollution - man, they seem to have grown by current standards)
Start using those many idea's in the 10.000's of patents that they registered are mostly defensive and never used - or give those back to the world.

 

[ErikGrim]

Being Apple, I'd be the first to doubt this, though it did appear to work consistently after he entered his passcode.

He never entered his passcode. He switched to the back up unit. Listen to the latest Talk Show podcast and he describes exactly what happened.

 

[Roller]

FaceID is both fascinating and advanced, but it replaces a function that was already proven and near-perfect.
We'll have to see what its practical value/benefit over is touchID, what issues arise, how it develops.
However, all that effort could have been put into better batteries, more compelling form factors, fold-out screens, self-repairing materials (anything better than glass). The top-10 issues that billions and billions of people have and never get adressed. When improving camera's, start improving the focus speed because that's the no 1. issue.
If batteries don't improve, split the existing into two and make them alternatingly replaceable on-the-go so that you NEVER have to dock your phone anymore. Do they ever use their iPhone themselves on their trips around the world ? If others don't innovate, then take the lead instead of running behind and declaring other innovations "immature".
Keep thinking out of the box, and stop that arrived/superior attitude that makes me sick.
The iPhone 8 is an iPhone 6 refurb III (the laureate of the 10-year bezel pollution - man, they seem to have grown by now)
Start using those many idea's in the 10.000's of patents that they registered are mostly defensive and never used - or give those back to the world.

You say that Face ID replaces a near-perfect function and that Apple isn't thinking out of the box. However, 3D facial mapping has more potential benefits than as a biometric ID (or as a way to animate poop emoji, for that matter.) I can think of several medical applications, for example—changes in facial expression and function may be early signs of disease. I'm sure that there will be others.

And how do you know that Apple isn't working on the other improvements that you mention? Despite Apple's extensive resources, some of these are very difficult to accomplish and will require major advances in materials science. Also, even if Apple can implement things like self-repairing materials in the lab, translating that technology to mass production of tens of millions of units may prove too expensive for now.

Not that I disagree with your suggestions, but putting them into the real-world is much harder than you make it seem.

 

[Bacillus]

You say that Face ID replaces a near-perfect function and that Apple isn't thinking out of the box. However, 3D facial mapping has more potential benefits than as a biometric ID (or as a way to animate poop emoji, for that matter.) I can think of several medical applications, for example—changes in facial expression and function may be early signs of disease. I'm sure that there will be others.

I understand the implications of advanced 3D mapping.
But they should have explained its value with e.g. stress detection that makes the phone automatically lock, call 911, activate FindMyFriends etc. (instead of the poop-emoji ridiculisation)
Advanced stuff deserves thought-out applications; now it is clear it is in only beta status

And how do you know that Apple isn't working on the other improvements that you mention? Despite Apple's extensive resources, some of these are very difficult to accomplish and will require major advances in materials science. Also, even if Apple can implement things like self-repairing materials in the lab, translating that technology to mass production of tens of millions of units may prove too expensive for now.

Not that I disagree with your suggestions, but putting them into the real-world is much harder than you make it seem.

Agree to some extend - as the original discussion went about corp. strategy and my point was that instead of being "young and foolish" (Steve's words about being a disruptive innovator focusing at product before commercial interests) Apple chose for the market leader / incumbent / milking strategy. Which indeed has some of the burdens you describe.
However - then we're also thinking inside the box
To avoid those mass provisioning burdens, they could very well produce a smaller scale business case to enforce the more innovative/risky/courageous pilot products (that may "fail") - much as they essentially do with the beta programs in software. Which would avoid all the pressure and controversy around the iPhone X's FaceID/nozzle and prevent market misconception of the iPhone 8 as the negative/poormans choice.
I would prefer that scenario to retrofitting better electronics in older designs (the iPhone SE super milking scenario, which is so typically Cook) because it would allow 10's thousands of patents to come alive, seduce Joni from trees and doorlocks and have Apple skating where the puck will be vs. following it.
And put all the Music, Beats, Television content, self-driving car adventures on the third plan. That mixed bag of mediocrisy that a large part of the userbase has funded but hardly cares about.

 

[Roller]

Agree to some extend - as the original discussion went about corp. strategy and my point was that instead of being "young and foolish" (Steve's words about being a disruptive innovator focusing at product before commercial interests) Apple chose for the market leader / incumbent / milking strategy. Which indeed has some of the burdens you describe.
However - then we're also thinking inside the box
To avoid those mass provisioning burdens, they could very well produce a smaller scale business case to enforce the more innovative/risky/courageous pilot products (that may "fail") - much as they essentially do with the beta programs in software. Which would avoid all the pressure and controversy around the iPhone X's FaceID/nozzle and prevent market misconception of the iPhone 8 as the negative/poormans choice.
I would prefer that scenario to retrofitting better electronics in older designs (the iPhone SE super milking scenario, which is so typically Cook) because it would allow 10's thousands of patents to come alive, seduce Joni from trees and doorlocks and have Apple skating where the puck will be vs. following it.
And put all the Music, Beats, Television content, self-driving car adventures on the third plan. That mixed bag of mediocrisy that a large part of the userbase has funded but hardly cares about.

I don't defend all of Apple's decisions: for example, I think that their desktop and laptop offerings are tired, and their foray into autonomous cars seems ill-conceived to me. But it would be difficult for them to do what you suggest in the mobile space by releasing other, possibly risky products in limited markets and still satisfy their shareholders, given the importance of the iPhone to their bottom line.

This is an interesting transition for the iPhone. Some of the technology in the X (e.g., OLED display) isn't new per se, though based on what I've read they've implemented it very well. Other advances, like 3D facial mapping, will bear more fruit over time. I'd be surprised if Apple reinstates Touch ID in the X's successor next year, even if they can, if John Gruber is to be believed on this point. As for the infamous notch, there are ways to hide it in software unless Apple can put everything under the screen.

I also think that because of the X, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus are getting short shrift. In most years, features like Qi charging, improved camera functions, A11 chip, and a better display would make for a pretty compelling upgrade, especially for people on two-year cycles, as I've been for years.

 

[BigBadBoogie]

He never entered his passcode. He switched to the back up unit. Listen to the latest Talk Show podcast and he describes exactly what happened.

He tries two times,which is max before it enters passcode mode.

This means that the explenation that someone else fiddled with it backstage is B.S. Since if that was true it would either ask for passcode before first attempt or after first attempt,but it did not until after 2nd attempt which is the max limit for tries with face id = he used the two tries available.

He tried twice, it failed twice and required pin
Third attempt on phone nr 2 it worked.

See for yourself =)

 

[jonppa]

He tried twice, it failed twice and required pin
Third attempt on phone nr 2 it worked.

Probably right. Also his immediate act to rush to second device and clearly not worrying about unlocking seems that the second phone was a clear backup for this case (they knew it could fail) and the secondary phone was programmed to unlock on all faces. That's atleast how I would have prepared for this demo.

 

[Bacillus]

I don't defend all of Apple's decisions: for example, I think that their desktop and laptop offerings are tired, and their foray into autonomous cars seems ill-conceived to me. But it would be difficult for them to do what you suggest in the mobile space by releasing other, possibly risky products in limited markets and still satisfy their shareholders, given the importance of the iPhone to their bottom line.

This is an interesting transition for the iPhone. Some of the technology in the X (e.g., OLED display) isn't new per se, though based on what I've read they've implemented it very well. Other advances, like 3D facial mapping, will bear more fruit over time. I'd be surprised if Apple reinstates Touch ID in the X's successor next year, even if they can, if John Gruber is to be believed on this point. As for the infamous notch, there are ways to hide it in software unless Apple can put everything under the screen.

I also think that because of the X, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus are getting short shrift. In most years, features like Qi charging, improved camera functions, A11 chip, and a better display would make for a pretty compelling upgrade, especially for people on two-year cycles, as I've been for years.

Some of that innovation (removed home button, Face ID, OLED) is a real gamble and carries too much production/acceptance risk for a mainstream device.
Hence iPhone X should have been given the same experimental status as the 40s anniversary Mac. It could be the start of a separate more innovative line of products

 

[Absrnd]

I still wonder why so many have trouble giving Apple the benefit of the doubt ?
did everybody forget the introduction of the first iPhone, they had backups for the backups, to showcase every single app, they did not have one iPhone that could run all the apps without crashing.

But at time of release it was all resolved and nobody noticed

 

[symphara]

Some of that innovation (removed home button, Face ID, OLED) is a real gamble and carries too much production/acceptance risk for a mainstream device.
Hence iPhone X should have been given the same experimental status as the 40s anniversary Mac. It could be the start of a separate more innovative line of products

I don't know, the removal of the physical home button seems fine to me, it was a blast from the past anyway.

Gestures are fine, they've been done on other platforms long before (with the caveat of the delay for the new task switcher which I think is both unintuitive and generally bad design), and OLED is plenty well proven by now. We had many OLED phones over the years and I have no complaints - moving to LCD always makes me miss the blacks, no matter how good they are.

I agree on Face ID, it is a gamble. There's simply no way it will be as good as the fingerprint reader. Even if what happened during their presentation was a fluke, the requirement to lift the phone to your face is in itself annoying, not very user friendly, and a step back compared to the fingerprint reader.

And speaking in general, if phones ever get so competent at face detection that they no longer need to be lifted and looked at to unlock, but simply unlock when you're around, that's also annoying. I want the unlocking to be decided by me, not by the device. The fingerprint sensor did exactly that.

 

[Bacillus]

I don't know, the removal of the physical home button seems fine to me, it was a blast from the past anyway.

Gestures are fine, they've been done on other platforms long before (with the caveat of the delay for the new task switcher which I think is both unintuitive and generally bad design), and OLED is plenty well proven by now. We had many OLED phones over the years and I have no complaints - moving to LCD always makes me miss the blacks, no matter how good they are.

I agree on Face ID, it is a gamble. There's simply no way it will be as good as the fingerprint reader. Even if what happened during their presentation was a fluke, the requirement to lift the phone to your face is in itself annoying, not very user friendly, and a step back compared to the fingerprint reader.

And speaking in general, if phones ever get so competent at face detection that they no longer need to be lifted and looked at to unlock, but simply unlock when you're around, that's also annoying. I want the unlocking to be decided by me, not by the device. The fingerprint sensor did exactly that.

Well stated about the device initiative. Face Mapping could be used to recognize your mood (anger, panic, sickness...) and then there are endless possibilities. However, that is very experimental and hardly accomodates the idea of bringing everything asap to the b/millions.
Also, 3Dtouch & gestures inspired by the other platform or not, are now fragmenting the UI. That should be avoided. Hence my suggestion of a second, experimental device line.

 

[BigBadBoogie]

Some of that innovation (removed home button, Face ID, OLED) is a real gamble and carries too much production/acceptance risk for a mainstream device.
Hence iPhone X should have been given the same experimental status as the 40s anniversary Mac. It could be the start of a separate more innovative line of products

More innovative?
You mean copying more "old features" from android and windows phone?

IPhone is not innovative, they takes other company's ideas and reproduce them as "their own"/industry first's. Then they sell it to the community with sponsored reviews and murdering commercials.
Apple is swimming in cash and can afford to go all in on sell-speech since the margin on their phones is insane. And as long as there is an easy to fool fan boys audience, prices will continue to climb and apple will defend it by saying things like "iphone x is actually not expensive, if you divide it on average life time, carrier subsidies, and that you have your life in the phone..blablabla. Then we have apple centers, where kids learn to program (Apple) apps. Really smart to teach kids which brand to choose as grown ups. Commercial for kids-definitely. Still legal..yes..incredibly enough.

This year a brand that I have favored before due to extreme build quality, innovation and the largest patent portfolio in mobile in the world is back. I will definitely give them a go since I can currently get two flag ship devices for the price of one iPhone x here in Europe.

On top of that I get the freedom of android..supreme apps for free from github, no more iTunes, I can copy paste files as I wish between pc and phone WITHOUT proprietary drivers, rapid updates to Oreo due to a very pure kernel, extremely safe os, all settings for each app directly in the app (no need to open settings "app" and navigate to settings for that app as on iPhone) and so on.
if you dont know which brand I am talking about, you are probably to young or stuck in the claws of apple. Sorry in that case.

First iPhone was not really the same, it was a mix of features from other phone makers. The innovation there, was more the mix of the copies from other phone makers. There is a goos expkaining image on the subject (or was) but it is very hard to find nowadays, that describes where each part of original iPhone came from which competitor. Things like screen, single front button (idiotic to copy that though), rounded shape, multi touch, metal chassis, full glass front and so on.

Needless to say I have an iphone 7+ and have had window phone, android, symbian, good old handhelds and so on...I know now which os is the best and it is not IOS, thus I am leaving it.