I find that has not been my experience with Apple products. They tend to offer you only one way of getting things done, but it’s a darn optimised one, and I find myself better off for it comparing to using an alternative which comes with 4-5 different ways of doing the same thing, none of which work as well.
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's 2019 iPhones Won't Adopt Fingerprint on Display Technology
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I find that has not been my experience with Apple products. They tend to offer you only one way of getting things done, but it’s a darn optimised one, and I find myself better off for it comparing to using an alternative which comes with 4-5 different ways of doing the same thing, none of which work as well.
The same weird anecdote that doesn't prove anything.
Which is an exception. So you are confirming that I'm right but you want to insinuate that I'm wrong because you can give an example of an exception and your personal subjective experience. LoL
Last edited:
Well this is hardly surprising. Apple said they were done with the FPS.
[doublepost=1536315564][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1536315564][/doublepost]
I don’t think it was a matter of security. Touch ID is secure enough. I think Apple didn’t want to make an ergonomic compromise by putting a FPS on the back.
Face id is even more convenient with Apple Pay as you don't have to futz with gloves.
Except when it comes to your digital life. Less is more. Getting things accomplished more quickly is always better than more slowly.
Yeah people wear gloves all the time, I forgot.
Oh so now we are changing the meaning. Executing a task faster and better is the thing computers in general strive to improve which each new iteration. But you clearly said sometimes less is more so you were obviously referring to something else(taking in consideration what I wrote before that).
You should just write the same thing you wrote the last time you had an argument with me and be done with it:
That's how it looks in my mind, my opinion can't be wrong.
Last edited:
I guess you must live in a tropical climate. Here in the east coast people have been known to wear gloves. Don’t know why you just don’t admit that a Face ID tech will be standard in most android phones in a few years.
So expounding in YOUR thoughts is changing the meaning? That comment seems like a deflection.
[doublepost=1536324666][/doublepost]
But 10x more convenient.Face ID is like 5x slower than Touch id.
So net ahead for Face ID.I live in moderate climate like most of the people in this world. So at most 2 months of winter/ year and maybe I have to wear gloves for 2 weeks tops(and only outside).
If most people would live at North Pole, Alaska or Siberia etc. maybe you would have a point.
Facial Unlock+Under display fingerprint sensor will be standard on Android.
No changing the meaning means changing the meaning.
I said the best solution is to have 2 fingerprint sensors(one on the front, the other on the back) plus facial unlock and your answer to that was: sometimes less is more.
Imagine an iphone x that had all those 3(and they would all work like anybody would expect).
How would just having facial unlock be faster, or better or "less is more"?
@mib1800
Still more convient because one can keep their gloves on, hands dirty etc. Your statement is just more hyperbole.
[doublepost=1536326460][/doublepost]
Still more convient because one can keep their gloves on, hands dirty etc. Your statement is just more hyperbole.
[doublepost=1536326460][/doublepost]
Point is a valid irrespective of your opinion. Last year gloves were needed at least 4 months and when my associate bought me coffee by paying the outside DD with Face ID was a breeze. No need to take gloves off.
Will be or is?
I said less is more and that is my viewpoint. Agree or disagree but don’t start this “you moved the goalposts” stuff. Android could have 10 authentication methods, but Face ID is the gold standard. (Even if you don’t agree)
So you wanted to say that when it comes to Apple Pay FaceID is more convenient ONLY and specifically ONLY when you wear gloves?
OK, than the fingerprint sensor is faster and more convenient in general.
Oh right, I already told you to spell it out: That's how it looks in my mind, because that's all you have anyway.
I see Android phones adopting fingerprint sensors under the display, not necessarily because it's the better option, but because they will need something to sufficiently differentiate their products from the iPhone, and Face ID is simply not a feasible option at this point.
Before you compare Face ID with facial unlock, do also note that Face ID is essentially a miniaturised Kinect in your iPhone, which has ramifications for additional features down the road besides unlocking your phone.
Because it sounds needlessly redundant and excessive?
Let's run through the various permutations to be had from an iPhone hypothetically sporting Face ID and 2 Touch-ID sensors.
Scenario 1: User uses only Face ID and disables Touch ID. Why even bother with Touch ID then in this scenario? I would just be paying extra at no benefit to myself.
Scenario 2: User uses only Touch ID and disables Face ID. If we take Apple's word that Face ID is more secure than Touch ID, then including this option would actually weaken the security of the device for this subset of users, because they are not using the more secure option.
Scenario 3: User uses both Face ID and Touch ID. I guess it could make for better security, but again, I believe that part of the purpose of adopting Face ID is so that you don't even have to think about unlocking your device. Simply look at it and it's unlocked (which works wonders with that feature which auto-hides notification previews on your lock screen). It's an extra layer of interaction that gets removed, which in turn makes your device more personal to interact with.
So "less is more" in this context. For one, the user doesn't need to make a "pros vs cons" decision flowchart as to whether to use Face ID or Touch ID or both. If it's the 8 or 8+, use Touch ID, and if you have the iphone X, then just use Face ID, because those are the only options available.
Second, sticking solely with one form of authentication (Face ID here) results in the greatest good for the greatest number of users.
If you ask me, I don't need 4-5 different ways of unlocking my device like what Android offers. Just give me one optimised solution and I am good to go.
You can say whatever you want and have any opinion you want. But if you are going to debate this in a public anonymous Internet forum, it is my opinion Face ID is the most convenient of authentication methods. Throwing in some bolded hyperbole doesn’t really help.
Seems we have covered this ad-nauseum.
Even if faceID is secure to you guys..its not secure to twins. Some form of facial recognition like the old android way and windows hello has been here for years while you guys believe face ID is the second coming of you know who....glad in-display readers or coming. I prefer fingerprint technology over facial scanning......don't wanna feel like im living in China and being watched all day.
The latter would require sensing eyes and their relative orientation which is 2 more computations in addition to 40 million.
We may be asking too much (...)
[doublepost=1546638866][/doublepost]
If 1 method offers 1/10millionth security and the other something alike, it is still very, very secure. Usability may however increase significantly in some use cases.
Do some elementary statistics before posting
Last edited:
whoa. replying to a super old post.
the new iPad Pro that recently came out has landscape faceid detection.
If I could wave a magic wand I would like the option of touch id as well as face id. But Apple doesn't seem to back track on technology and is moving forward with face id.
Perhaps, but security against other people handling the phone is just one concern. There may be others, such as having a sinister internet-connected facial recognition system pointed at their face, which the user considers to be more of a concern to them.
You just don’t have same luster as you used to have, Rick James. Keep trying though. Do you have the same user name on android sites? I’d like to follow.
Don't expect everybody to have the same opinions on all of this tech. Seems mostly a great divide on opinions of things android and apple.
However, don't want to use face id, don't. As I said above the option to use touch id with face id would be nice But not a deal breaker in any sense.
I have no problem with different opinions. I find that members posts amusing and fun, almost satire.
In this case it would be rather expensive to move to a phone that's less convenient to use, which might well put people off.
The iphone x proved there is a market for these devices. Touch id definitely wasn't for everybody, there were complaints about that as well. As well as a case where a kid unlocked sleeping mom's phone by pressing the phone against her fingers.
My point was that for someone who is happy with touch ID but not face ID then purchasing a new iPhone with only the latter and turning it off would probably not be an attractive option.