Apple's Craig Federighi: Uncertainty About Face ID Will 'Melt Away' Once People Get iPhone X

[Piggie]

Some people like to feel smart, I guess coming up with silly examples of why something they never used won't work make them feel smart. All they have to do is ignore the fact the 99% of their criticism is silly and the remaining 1% has already been solved by professional that have worked on the thing for years.

I think it's because some people, and I include myself in this, have to deal in the real world, with real people as part of a real job.
I need to totally think thru potential issues and try my best to come up with fix's that will stop errors occurring.
Same with programming a game.
What happens when someone enters an area in the game or does something they are not supposed to do.

You can't have the game crash, you need to find and fix such things.

So when something is presented to people who HAVE to think like this, the instant reaction is to think of the potential weak links, and wish to see them tested.

Just "doing as you are supposed to" is pointless, you need to test out all the things you are not supposed to, and see if the system? still works, or does not fail in some way.

Even with a road bridge.
You don't make it, so it's fine with a expected load in nice weather.
You need to design it, so it takes a crazy loading, and the worst weather x 10 you can ever think of.
THEN it's safe.

 

[johngordon]

I think it all comes down to how fast it is, and how directly in front of your face it needs to be.

On the face of it, it seems intuitive to think that putting a finger on the home button will be more consistently accurate than putting your face in front of your phone.

One interesting titbit from the interview was that attention awareness can be disabled, so you don’t have to actually look at it.

Basically, if it can unlock in the time you are picking it up, and it’s unlicked by the time it’s in a natural position to use, then it’s a big win.

 

[ani4ani]

Yes, technically that's true. Oh apart from there isn't an Apple device that lets you use touchID and faceID togeteher on the same device. Well those stats suddenly get reduced to 0 out of any number you can imagine now.

That wasn't the discussion, but if you want to play semantics, there isn't a device yet that has FaceID thar can be used

 

[Roller]

It's a bit disappointing that even on a technology forum, a place where you would expect the readers and members to at least be capable of giving something the benefit of the doubt, that you see so much negative absolutism concerning the failure of FaceID. Apple may make mistakes in terms of daft design occasionally, but they take security very seriously.

Maybe wait a few months for tests and reviews instead of giving your unfounded opinions.

It may be disappointing, but it's hardly unexpected. It's just the way it always is.

If Face ID works as seamlessly as Craig Federighi claims, it'll be fine for most use cases. Actually using the X before purchase will prove difficult, though, since there may be few opportunities to try it in stores. Anyone who wants to get one of the few that'll be available for pre-order next month will probably have to trust reviews. I don't think that'll take months, though, as Apple will have seeded tech writers with the new iPhone by then. I realize that some people don't believe reviewers, but there are some who aren't afraid to be critical.

 

[johngordon]

I think it's because some people, and I include myself in this, have to deal in the real world, with real people as part of a real job.
I need to totally think thru potential issues and try my best to come up with fix's that will stop errors occurring.
Same with programming a game.
What happens when someone enters an area in the game or does something they are not supposed to do.

You can't have the game crash, you need to find and fix such things.

So when something is presented to people who HAVE to think like this, the instant reaction is to think of the potential weak links, and wish to see them tested.

Just "doing as you are supposed to" is pointless, you need to test out all the things you are not supposed to, and see if the system? still works, or does not fail in some way.

Even with a road bridge.
You don't make it, so it's fine with a expected load in nice weather.
You need to design it, so it takes a crazy loading, and the worst weather x 10 you can ever think of.
THEN it's safe.

I get your point to a certain degree, but think at some point common sense needs to kick in.

All sorts of everyday products could have hazards or imperfections, but if the chance of something happening is tiny, then you don’t dismiss them out of hand.

With a bridge that could have a catastrophic failure resulting in loss of life, then it’s paramount. But something like FaceID where you might on occasion have to enter your passcode instead is hardly comparable.

 

[McTool]

Don’t think your math is correct on this.

Touch ID:

1. Pick up phone
2. Place Thumb on Home Button
3. Press Home Button

Face ID:

1. Pick up phone
2. Smile
3. Swipe up

You don’t have to press the home to unlock. Just let your finger rest on it.

 

[Delgibbons]

So was Gruber told he could only talk about Face ID? His comments about the notch on his website are quite harsh so why didn’t he ask Craig the reasoning behind that? Afraid he’d never get another interview if he says ‘I’m not a fan of the notch, what we’re you thinking’?

Gruber who mercilessly slagged off motorola for the flat tyre notch on the circular Moto 360 watch. Oh how the chickens have deliciously come home to roost.

 

[TroyBoy30]

i'd agree, but it is not new tech, it is apple playing catch up.

While it appears to be 'playing catch up'. It's more the way they wait for a tech to mature a bit before they perfect it. Yes others have 'it' first but it never really works till apple does it.

 

[ascender]

It's a bit disappointing that even on a technology forum, a place where you would expect the readers and members to at least be capable of giving something the benefit of the doubt, that you see so much negative absolutism concerning the failure of FaceID. Apple may make mistakes in terms of daft design occasionally, but they take security very seriously.

Maybe wait a few months for tests and reviews instead of giving your unfounded opinions.

It's not just here though, whether it's lazy journalism or people with their own agenda, do a quick google news search for FaceID. Have a read of some of the articles which are written by supposed tech journalists and it's incredible the amount of rumours and opinion about the new phone and technology which are passed off as fact.

It's natural that a lot of this stuff the gets regurgitated without any questioning, but it means a lot of the threads in here can be frustrating at best.

 

[thekeyring]

Don't expect Apple haters to get the actual device to actually experience the things they complain about. They have a narrative, they won't change their minds about the hate they have.

I'm still shocked that people make the argument "Samsung had this first".

How can anyone support Android when they hold "being first" as a core value? The entire smartphone industry is based on what Apple introduced in 2007.

 

[WatchFromAfar]

That wasn't the discussion, but if you want to play semantics, there isn't a device yet that has FaceID thar can be used

Are you saying the devise that was demoed on stage in front of millions doesn't exist?

 

[ascender]

As others have said, Apple often won't release a technology until it works really well. So today there's articles about how facial recognition has been around for ages on Android phones. Yet we've all seen the articles about how easily it's fooled and how it often just doesn't work.

On the flip side, there's lots of articles now discussing the security and privacy concerns of FaceID specifically, as if it's something new which has just been invented and wondering what Apple are going to do to address them.

I can't believe just how poor much of the tech industry reporting is these days, it's terrible.

 

[SeaFox]

"Peoples faces will melt away once they see the iPhone X"

You forgot this:

 

[576316]

Has Apple ever claimed to introduce anything that's not "perfect" or "magical"?

Sometimes I wonder if they ever get sick of just regurgitating their own marketing spiel. It must be difficult working for Apple, in that your words are seldom your own.
[doublepost=1505560169][/doublepost]

“Combinations of biometrics”
My prediction: they’re still working on under-glass TouchID. Users will have the choice of being authenticated with TouchID, FaceID, or both. With the option of both, they can tout having biometric security that only 1 in 50 billion could fool. (1 in 50,000 for TouchID times 1 in 1,000,000 for FaceID)

Wake me up when they’ve got under-screen TouchID and cameras.

 

[TrueBlou]

i trust you craig

I trust in God. God made Craig, Tim, Phil and the rest of the Apple team, ergo I trust them to have done it right

 

[SoundJudgment]

I guess Retina Eye-Scanners aren't good enough any more. Sorry, Captain Kirk. Apple's got you beat!

 

[iapplelove]

I don’t understand why they would make the key shortcut to disable Face ID the same as the screenshot shortcut... why not make it press and hold the buttons at the same time for disable and set the screenshot to side button + volume up button? Or just have the SOS feature with clicking the side button five times disable Face ID (which it does already)?

To take a screen shot it is side button plus volume up button.

 

[ani4ani]

While it appears to be 'playing catch up'. It's more the way they wait for a tech to mature a bit before they perfect it. Yes others have 'it' first but it never really works till apple does it.

If I am honest, that is my issue with Apple, they stand on the shoulders of giants in virtually everything they do. They mop up the plaudits when in a lot of cases the risky, really innovative hard work has been done by others.

 

[amolediphone]

"Federighi reiterated that most sunglasses work with Face ID, aside from some that have coatings that block infrared. One way around that, he says, is to turn off the "attention aware" feature that requires eye contact for Face ID to unlock."

"Hey Siri, enable Casey Neistat mode."

 

[Rogifan]

Gruber who mercilessly slagged off motorola for the flat tyre notch on the circular Moto 360 watch. Oh how the chickens have deliciously come home to roost.

Did you read what he wrote about the notch?

 

[amolediphone]

If I am honest, that is my issue with Apple, they stand on the shoulders of giants in virtually everything they do. They mop up the plaudits when in a lot of cases the risky, really innovative hard work has been done by others.

They ARE the giants. Where have you been for the last decade? As for letting other (often greedy/attention seeking) companies kick the tyres of a certain technology by rushing a half-hearted idea to market, and seeing if it sticks, well that's WISDOM. Why would you waste billions of dollars on something that could flop - something you care deeply about and that you want to use fo make your customers lives easier, when arrogant, less intelligent companies are willing to do large amounts of the legwork in R&D and adoption/feasibility studies for the fundamentals, just for the vanity and fleeting reward of being "first"?

Apple are extremely canny. It's amazing how you've appeared to completely miss the irony of your "standing on the shoulders of giants" statement.

 

[samcraig]

When did people doubt Touch ID as viable given that there has been fingerprint technology on phones and computers for years. Oh Craig...

 

[linkgx1]

While it appears to be 'playing catch up'. It's more the way they wait for a tech to mature a bit before they perfect it. Yes others have 'it' first but it never really works till apple does it.

You mean wait for the cost to go down significantly before they 'perfect' it. And the 'it never really works' doesn't hold true. People certainly liked bigger screens, metal phones and tons of other stuff before apple even added it to their device. People are just kidding themselves if that's the case.

 

[EdT]

People's faces will (literally) melt away when the iPhone X "sees" them (by shooting a million IR dots directly on to their skin and into their retina).

You do know that almost every single remote uses IR light to function, and has for 30 plus years. Not to mention that the sun also puts out IR and at an intensity thousands of times what any phone could hope to produce? And that your body also produces IR waves. That's how night vision goggles work, they detect the heat coming objects in the infrared (IR) wavelength. If Night Vision had to first shoot a beam of IR light then that gives away the existence of the people using it. Anything that generates heat generates IR.

 

[linkgx1]

They ARE the giants. Where have you been for the last decade? As for letting other (often greedy/attention seeking) companies kick the tyres of a certain technology by rushing a half-hearted idea to market, and seeing if it sticks, well that's WISDOM. Why would you waste billions of dollars on something that could flop - something you care deeply about and that you want to use fo make your customers lives easier, when arrogant, less intelligent companies are willing to do large amounts of the legwork in R&D and adoption/feasibility studies for the fundamentals, just for the vanity and fleeting reward of being "first"?

Apple are extremely canny. It's amazing how you've appeared to completely miss the irony of your "standing on the shoulders of giants" statement.

How the heck is it arrogant if you try a new technology? You're sipping too much Apple juice. Seeing your username, if Samsung didn't put AMOLED in every single Galaxy S since inception, you wouldn't be having the iPhone X. R&D is a huge part of companies. The reason why Apple buys a lot of smaller companies is because they eliminate a lot of the threats from the ''arrogant companies''. Samsung kick-started the phablet category and ate into the iPad's market share. Waiting for other people to complete their own R&D is risky and plain stupid. You run the risk of eventually being outclassed, especially in today's ubiquitous smartphone market.