Kuo: If Face ID is 'Well Received,' It's Likely 2018 iPhones Will Fully Adopt TrueDepth Camera

[antonis]

Apple stated themselves Touch ID was plan B, and face ID plan A. So unless you have actual proof of the opposite...

I don't think there is any proof for the one or the other, only the rumors. TouchID under the screen is a cutting-edge tech as well. If apple couldn't make it on time, it would make it plan B of course. Projects like these have very strict deadlines, and I get it that they have to make sacrifices sometimes.

 

[HEK]

You can read it as you wish but it comes across as projection. Steve would have recognized that Face ID is inelegant as compared with Touch ID.

Touch ID is a one step process. Scan the finger and it takes you to the home screen. According to Apple's own demo as well as the media demos Face ID is a two step process. Wait for the phone to scan your face and unlock and then slide to get to the home screen.

Face ID seems like something they were forced to come up with to cope with the issue of not being able to engineer Touch ID into the display. And yes, Touch ID under the display would have had much more of an impact given no one has done that yet. Facial recognition has been around on Android devices (even if poorly implemented) for a few years now. So when Apple introduced their version the impact of innovation is muted. All Apple did here was miniaturize PixelSense's technology.

And know everyone already scrambling to copy it, such a muted attempt. LOL

 

[Jimrod]

Slightly off topic but if Apple's aim was as above (which I have no reason to disbelieve) then, regarding embedding sensors under the display, I wonder whether, if TouchID is history, Apple will start looking very hard at embedding other sensors under the display to reduce the size of the notch in future iPhones.

The main front camera can probably never go anywhere because it needs a big lens to collect enough light but I wonder how many of the other sensors might be able to be re-engineered to not need the notch.

But if the membrane is a specially engineered more flexible portion of the screen, around where the notch area is now, then that membrane needs no hole because it is already directly coupled to the air in the outside world. I suspect this sort of technology actually exists already, maybe not using an OLED screen as a vibrating membrane but possibly other non-conventional items.

To give one slightly odd example of an unconventional microphone, at a gig I saw and heard Elvis Costello sing into his guitar as a little novelty trick and it was surprising how well it picked up his voice. The gain was obviously set very high and the breath from his voice over the guitar strings caused enough vibration in them to be picked up by the pickups and was well defined enough to be heard as his voice in reasonable fidelity.

This was actually already done by Sharp about 3-4 years ago, quality said to not be amazing but usable, I'm sure it could be improved upon. NXT panels use the same principle.

 

[0lf]

You can read it as you wish but it comes across as projection. Steve would have recognized that Face ID is inelegant as compared with Touch ID.

Who gave you the right to speech in his name ? To me it feels like a lack of respect.

Touch ID is a one step process. Scan the finger and it takes you to the home screen. According to Apple's own demo as well as the media demos Face ID is a two step process. Wait for the phone to scan your face and unlock and then slide to get to the home screen.

No, Touch ID is a two steps process. It is obvious with gen1 hardware. Only the speed of gen2 make it feels like one step. For now, nothing show you will have to wait longer with face ID. If it is transparent then unlocking still feel like a one step process.

Face ID seems like something they were forced to come up with to cope with the issue of not being able to engineer Touch ID into the display.

Again, it is debunked by Apple itself. There is a lot of misunderstanding possible into the rumor chain, making rumor unreliable. In the contrary, Apple knows, so the only explanation for them to spread false information is to lie. And you can't say someone lie without a proof.
[doublepost=1505925689][/doublepost]

I don't think there is any proof for the one or the other, only the rumors. TouchID under the screen is a cutting-edge tech as well. If apple couldn't make it on time, it would make it plan B of course. Projects like these have very strict deadlines, and I get it that they have to make sacrifices sometimes.

If you have no proof for any ways, then it is the more reliable source which is to believe. A rumor can easily be wrong. Here Apple can't because they obviously know, so if what they said is inaccurate then they must have lied, which need to be proven to be stated.

 

[nylon]

Who gave you the right to speech in his name ? To me it feels like a lack of respect.

Frankly the only disrespect here is your intervening; before you jump into someone else's conversation you should read the whole thing. It was actually PickUrPoison who had made baseless inferences into my original comment.

No, Touch ID is a two steps process. It is obvious with gen1 hardware. Only the speed of gen2 make it feels like one step. For now, nothing show you will have to wait longer with face ID. If it is transparent then unlocking still feel like a one step process.

Please elaborate your position. Face ID requires you to 1. unlock with your face and then 2. slide to go to the home screen. Moreover it requires you to position the phone appropriately. Touch ID does not require a second interaction with the phone after the unlock process nor does it require you to position the phone.

Again, it is debunked by Apple itself. There is a lot of misunderstanding possible into the rumor chain, making rumor unreliable. In the contrary, Apple knows, so the only explanation for them to spread false information is to lie. And you can't say someone lie without a proof.

It was widely reported by credible analysts who have their research based on supply chain information that Apple was attempting this tech but was having difficulty with design and yield. Apple has been granted patents for this technology already. (http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...ay-touch-id-under-the-display-3d-scanner.html) I would suggest you do your own research before speculating but I think you know that already.

 

[mrklaw]

"Speakers and microphones are basically vibrating membranes" yes but they have push air out into the world, hence holes

Sonys current flagship OLED TV does this - it uses the surface of the TV as the vibrating speaker which.. pushes air out into the world

 

[WatchFromAfar]

Sonys current flagship OLED TV does this - it uses the surface of the TV as the vibrating speaker which.. pushes air out into the world

How is that optimal, the screen you are looking at has to vibrate, which is movement, so you can hear the sound of what you are watching?

 

[mrklaw]

How is that optimal, the screen you are looking at has to vibrate, which is movement, so you can hear the sound of what you are watching?

It's supposed to sound great, and a lot better than the usual tiny speakers you find in thin TVs

 

[WatchFromAfar]

It's supposed to sound great, and a lot better than the usual tiny speakers you find in thin TVs

But the screen you're watching is pulsating in and out to create sound, thats a noticeable thing that spoisl the image in front of your eyes.

 

[rGiskard]

Upcoming Kuo report: Apple will introduce the A12 in 2018 and it will be faster than the A11.

 

[nylon]

Sonys current flagship OLED TV does this - it uses the surface of the TV as the vibrating speaker which.. pushes air out into the world

How is that optimal, the screen you are looking at has to vibrate, which is movement, so you can hear the sound of what you are watching?

I have the Sony A1E OLED. The sound from the TV speakers is far superior to regular TV built in speakers. The actuators create an amazing soundstage, better bass response and more accurate sound sourcing but I think it depends on the size of the screen. Not sure how this would work on a small screen.

 

[0lf]

Frankly the only disrespect here is your intervening; before you jump into someone else's conversation you should read the whole thing. It was actually PickUrPoison who had made baseless inferences into my original comment.

The start of the thread seems to come from you, stating what SJ would have done :

Steve would have moved heaven and earth to make sure that Touch ID below display panel was implemented in iPhone X. That would have been more of a wow factor.

Plus, it is not someone else conversation. It is a public discussion.

Please elaborate your position. Face ID requires you to 1. unlock with your face and then 2. slide to go to the home screen. Moreover it requires you to position the phone appropriately. Touch ID does not require a second interaction with the phone after the unlock process nor does it require you to position the phone.

Touch ID require you to wait with your finger on the home button, then, once unlock, you press it. On gen 1, if you press before unlock it does not work. So 2 steps that fell like one if unlock is quick enough.
With face ID, if the time you slide your finger is enough for your phone to unlock then it is transparent and feels like a one step process too.

It was widely reported by credible analysts who have their research based on supply chain information that Apple was attempting this tech but was having difficulty with design and yield. Apple has been granted patents for this technology already. (http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...ay-touch-id-under-the-display-3d-scanner.html) I would suggest you do your own research before speculating but I think you know that already.

Widely reported because they all feed from each others and share some sources. But as credible they can be, rumor are still based on partial, indirect and potentially outdated informations. They are still way less reliable than Apple themselve.

I am not telling Apple did not try, or was not interested in under-screen touch ID. But as reported by Apple themselves, they did not pursue this way in favor of face ID more than one year ago and because they thought face ID is better and has more potential.

 

[extrachrispy]

I'll be quite impressed if FaceID works for my oddball use-case: phone is in a quart-size ziploc bag (though the iPhone X might fit into a snack bag) to protect it from sweat as it rides in my bicycle jersey pocket. If FaceID can work through the bag, that's a huge win. TouchID works about half the time through the bag, surprisingly enough.

 

[antonis]

If you have no proof for any ways, then it is the more reliable source which is to believe. A rumor can easily be wrong. Here Apple can't because they obviously know, so if what they said is inaccurate then they must have lied, which need to be proven to be stated.

I don’t see any source to be more reliable than the other, so I guess it comes down to a personal preference. Would you seriously expect a multi-billion company to tell us they failed to reach goal #1 so instead they are presenting to us a plan B device ?

I’d love to see shareholders’ faces if they’d done that.

 

[HEK]

I'll be quite impressed if FaceID works for my oddball use-case: phone is in a quart-size ziploc bag (though the iPhone X might fit into a snack bag) to protect it from sweat as it rides in my bicycle jersey pocket. If FaceID can work through the bag, that's a huge win. TouchID works about half the time through the bag, surprisingly enough.

Does it depend on how greasy the sandwich was, that was in the bag before the phone?

 

[eyeseeyou]

Cool, just dump the notch.

 

[nylon]

The start of the thread seems to come from you, stating what SJ would have done

And how is that disrespectful exactly, as you said. Steve Jobs was well known for pushing the boundaries of what could be accomplished. That sounds like a complement to me. And I'm not speaking for him. Others can attest to his ability.

Plus, it is not someone else conversation. It is a public discussion.

I'm sorry to say but given your syntax is not quite clear and the fact that you interjected; how you broached the issue was actually quite rude even if it is a public forum.

Touch ID require you to wait with your finger on the home button, then, once unlock, you press it. On gen 1, if you press before unlock it does not work. So 2 steps that fell like one if unlock is quick enough.
With face ID, if the time you slide your finger is enough for your phone to unlock then it is transparent and feels like a one step process too.

On my phone I do not need to push the button. I simply position my finger on the Touch ID and it unlocks and goes to the home screen. It is one action. No need to push the button. Your point about Gen 1 is irrelevant since we are talking about the current state of technology. There is no way that Face ID has the same seamless quality of user interaction that Touch ID does at the moment. I'm sure they can improve on it but whichever way you try and cut it it will never be as seamless as Touch ID given the positioning requirement for Face ID.

Widely reported because they all feed from each others and share some sources. But as credible they can be, rumor are still based on partial, indirect and potentially outdated informations. They are still way less reliable than Apple themselve.

I am not telling Apple did not try, or was not interested in under-screen touch ID. But as reported by Apple themselves, they did not pursue this way in favor of face ID more than one year ago and because they thought face ID is better and has more potential.

Widely reported by analysts, not by rumour websites. For example analysts such as Kuo and reputable journalists from WSJ etc. Funnily enough, almost all of what was considered to be rumour for iPhone X was proved to be correct. You just seem to be arguing for the sake of argument. Your point about only Apple knowing the real truth is absurd given how obvious that is.

Apple obviously wants to push Face ID because they have not achieved the success of Touch ID under the screen that they wanted to. They are obviously not going to say that publicly. I would be surprised if they abandon Touch ID in favour of Face ID. It will depend on how well Face ID is received by the public. Apple's success usually boils down to the fact that they can make the technology disappear in the background and make the experience seamless. Face ID is not there yet. Touch ID is.

 

[0lf]

And how is that disrespectful exactly, as you said. Steve Jobs was well known for pushing the boundaries of what could be accomplished. That sounds like a complement to me. And I'm not speaking for him. Others can attest to his ability.

He was also known to left behind technologies he thought were obscolete... But it is not the question. Obviously your comment was not intended to be a compliment to SJ, but you use SJ as an authority argument to push your point.

I'm sorry to say but given your syntax is not quite clear and the fact that you interjected; how you broached the issue was actually quite rude even if it is a public forum.

IMHO it is OK to be rude as long as there is respect.

On my phone I do not need to push the button. I simply position my finger on the Touch ID and it unlocks and goes to the home screen. It is one action. No need to push the button. Your point about Gen 1 is irrelevant since we are talking about the current state of technology. There is no way that Face ID has the same seamless quality of user interaction that Touch ID does at the moment. I'm sure they can improve on it but whichever way you try and cut it it will never be as seamless as Touch ID given the positioning requirement for Face ID.

What you describe is not the default behavior of Touch ID. I don't know if the option will be available with face ID.
You find my point about gen1 irrelevant because you fail to understant it. I said that, because it is slow enough, gen1 touch ID shows that by default, touch ID unlocking is a 2 step process. Gen2 is quick enough so it feels like 1 step process, but only the speed have change, it is still by default a 2 step process.
About face ID, from what I have seen it is quite quick. May be it is quick enough it is transparent to the user, who will have the impression its phone is always unlocked. Then, getting to the home screen will look like one step process too. But unless I see it in person it is only an hypothesis which has not more, not less value than suggesting it will get in my way.

Widely reported by analysts, not by rumour websites. For example analysts such as Kuo and reputable journalists from WSJ etc. Funnily enough, almost all of what was considered to be rumour for iPhone X was proved to be correct. You just seem to be arguing for the sake of argument. Your point about only Apple knowing the real truth is absurd given how obvious that is.

Apple obviously wants to push Face ID because they have not achieved the success of Touch ID under the screen that they wanted to. They are obviously not going to say that publicly. I would be surprised if they abandon Touch ID in favour of Face ID. It will depend on how well Face ID is received by the public.

Neither you or me can prove its one way or the other. But IMHO, when neither knowledge or logic help, ethic can sometimes. You think my point about Apple knowing the truth is absurd and obvious, but again you fail to understant it. It implies Apple must lie if they are not telling the truth. And ethic (mine, at least) command me to have proof before accusing someone to lie.

Apple's success usually boils down to the fact that they can make the technology disappear in the background and make the experience seamless. Face ID is not there yet. Touch ID is.

How do you know ? Just an hypothesis for now.
Touch ID can be in my way too. For example I have a text notification on my lockscreen. I have set the phone so I need to unlock to answer. So, I slide the notification, then I have to move to the home button to identify myself. Not a seamless experience. With face ID, the phone will behave like unlocked. It will be much better.

 

[wikiverse]

I read all of it. The context didn't change the fact that your examples were poor.

Then you mustn't have read the original comment. Because every single example given related directly to the claim made by the person that I was responding to. Spcifically - Apple won't release products that the public won't like, and that apple won't backtrack and put back hardware/functionality that they removed.

Apple has a history of releasing products the public don't like because of price or functionality - and they have removed features from flagship product lines (iPod) that they then reintroduced in the next generation.

It is one thing to have an opinion that Apple will stick with FaceID no matter what, but it is not correct to say that they don't release products people don't like, or that they won't backtrack on hardware changes when people don't like them. In both cases, they have.

 

[hans1972]

I seriously can’t think of a situation where Face ID is more convenient then Touch ID. I can think of a dozen ways Touch ID would be, though.

if you are a black knight in a Monty Python movie.

 

[nylon]

He was also known to left behind technologies he thought were obscolete... But it is not the question. Obviously your comment was not intended to be a compliment to SJ, but you use SJ as an authority argument to push your point.

This is known as a strawman argument. My comment stands on its own. It is only you and the other commenter who are projecting your own feelings with regards to what the comment is or means. It's quite hilarious. It is a simple comment that Touch ID under the display is the kind of technology that SJ would have "moved heaven and earth" for. And I have qualified that later by indicating how inelegant Face ID is from a usability perspective as compared to Touch ID.

IMHO it is OK to be rude as long as there is respect.

LOL. If you are rude by definition you are being discourteous and if you are being discourteous intentionally it means you lack respect. You're only showcasing your own hypocrisy.

What you describe is not the default behavior of Touch ID. I don't know if the option will be available with face ID. You find my point about gen1 irrelevant because you fail to understant it. I said that, because it is slow enough, gen1 touch ID shows that by default, touch ID unlocking is a 2 step process. Gen2 is quick enough so it feels like 1 step process, but only the speed have change, it is still by default a 2 step process.
About face ID, from what I have seen it is quite quick. May be it is quick enough it is transparent to the user, who will have the impression its phone is always unlocked. Then, getting to the home screen will look like one step process too. But unless I see it in person it is only an hypothesis which has not more, not less value than suggesting it will get in my way.

Sorry but you are incorrect. There is no requirement to push the button in Gen 1 or Gen 2 either. You can set it up so that you simply need to place your finger on the Touch ID area and the phone will unlock to home screen. There is no requirement of physically triggering the button at any point. One step. It seems to me like you don't know that this feature exists.

My issue with Face ID is as a comparative with Touch ID. You ignored my point about positioning completely. But It is obvious that you would ignore that because it highlights a usability flaw. Face ID cannot be a one step process because there is a chance of accidentally triggering it when not intended (for example you just want to check notifications). With Touch ID you have to deliberately position your finger indicating intention.

Neither you or me can prove its one way or the other. But IMHO, when neither knowledge or logic help, ethic can sometimes. You think my point about Apple knowing the truth is absurd and obvious, but again you fail to understant it. It implies Apple must lie if they are not telling the truth. And ethic (mine, at least) command me to have proof before accusing someone to lie.

I'm not trying to prove anything. This is another strawman argument of yours and you seem to be full of arguments that begin with logical fallacies. Apple not revealing that they have not perfected a technology is their right. It is not lying and has nothing to do with ethics. They have every right to push their own agenda. Sorry but you sound like you are very immature.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Then you mustn't have read the original comment. Because every single example given related directly to the claim made by the person that I was responding to. Spcifically - Apple won't release products that the public won't like, and that apple won't backtrack and put back hardware/functionality that they removed.

Apple has a history of releasing products the public don't like because of price or functionality - and they have removed features from flagship product lines (iPod) that they then reintroduced in the next generation.

It is one thing to have an opinion that Apple will stick with FaceID no matter what, but it is not correct to say that they don't release products people don't like, or that they won't backtrack on hardware changes when people don't like them. In both cases, they have.

I didn't read the original comment? Kind of impossible, since I wrote the original comment, and that wasn't my claim at all.

 

[anoobis]

Is it slower? And the FaceID R&D costs are now sunk—time to crank up the volume and amortize them.

Also, the depth imaging hardware allows for more capabilities than just FaceID.

Yes, swiping up alone would be at least as long as pressing a home button

 

[PickUrPoison]

You can read it as you wish but it comes across as projection. Steve would have recognized that Face ID is inelegant as compared with Touch ID.

Touch ID is a one step process. Scan the finger and it takes you to the home screen. According to Apple's own demo as well as the media demos Face ID is a two step process. Wait for the phone to scan your face and unlock and then slide to get to the home screen.

Face ID seems like something they were forced to come up with to cope with the issue of not being able to engineer Touch ID into the display. And yes, Touch ID under the display would have had much more of an impact given no one has done that yet. Facial recognition has been around on Android devices (even if poorly implemented) for a few years now. So when Apple introduced their version the impact of innovation is muted. All Apple did here was miniaturize PixelSense's technology.

So you’re saying Steve would have made under screen Touch ID work and Steve would realize FaceID is inelegant, and this is a Tim Cook win. Gotcha.

Own your words. When you say Steve could have done it (but Tim Cook failed to), I’m not the one “projecting” a failure by Tim Cook in your statement.

 

[anoobis]

I really don't see why this is still being discussed. The laws are quite specific, using a hand held device while driving is an offense. The key word is hand held.

If you're a professional driver or someone who relies on GPS and a screen, you'll have your iPhone mounted so you don't have to hold it.

If it's mounted where is it facing? Yes that's right it's pointed at your face all the time. Tap the screen to wake, let Face ID do its work then swipe up and do what you need. You should never hold the device while driving.

It’s being discussed because some people have thinking issues.

1) There are other parts of the world outside of NYC that don’t require hands-free. I’m not the one who meandered and brought up NYC because I was not able to win the argument. Forget about NYC, it’s a red herring.

2) even with hands-free, you have to take your eyes off the road to unlock with FaceID. With TouchID I do not have to take my eyes off the road to unlock or to open apps. I can use Siri once unlocked. With FaceID you have to look at the phone to unlock it in order to open most apps - Siri won’t open every app when locked. You don’t have to hold a phone to use TouchID just like you don’t have to hold a phone to swipe up if mounted in both situations.

smh so f’ing much