Guy at work doesn’t use touchID because his hands are sweaty and it doesn’t work on him.
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.
Kuo: If Face ID is 'Well Received,' It's Likely 2018 iPhones Will Fully Adopt TrueDepth Camera
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Last I read this is a place for people to comment, think you're in the wrong place.
I still have my Newton. Still works. I chuckled when I brought it out and played with it. Amazing how far we have come. “A stylus, who want a stylus, yuck”It baffles me that common sense doesn't make people understand this.
To use FACE ID, you have to take your eyes off the road or block your view of the road!
To use Touch ID, you can feel for the phone without even looking and unlock it, and continue to get driving instructions by voice without looking. If you have a question, you can pull over and look at it.
But unlocking it alone is far more dangerous if not more illegal on the road with FACE ID.
And you'll definitely be more easily pulled over by a cop doing it too.
How is this not obvious to people? Does anyone have common sense anymore?
And finally, Carplay does and will not have FACE ID anytime soon, possibly years if EVER, so don't even go down that road. The car manufacturers would NEVER take on that legal liability at this point.
Apple Newton sold out initially too. Maybe iPhone X won't fall far from that tree?
I ain't missing out on anything. Who the hell texts in the shower? I don't get much text messages let alone email or using Telegram from an old friend living in the southwest now. This 'cult like' elitist mindset saying ' you're missing out' is BS. This is why Apple brainwashes people with that line of thinking. So, you're saying I should text and drive, too? Is that an 'Apple' thing too? I would never, ever do that. I only use data and no voice plan on it which allows me to have unlimited text and data. And if I wanted to talk to someone on Skype, I'll use my special adapter hooked to the 3.5 jack and hook it to my hearing aid in telecoil mode. No need for the AirPod BS ( next year I'll be eligible for a bluetooth hearing aid ).
If I wanted to be notified of incoming messages away from the phone, I'd use a smartwatch or activity tracker to alert me. If I'm at an arcade bar (21 and over only. No punks or kids allowed ) having a beer or mead while playing a classic cabinet game, I'm not gonna pull out my phone with one hand using Face ID while playing the game. The watch/activity band will alert me of that. It's common sense due to the fact it can get loud in there and I can't hear the phone go off.
Do you think I'm going to miss out on spending $1,000 on a phone that uses Face ID, animojis, AR, same sterile OS, 3D cameras, bla bla blah? Of course not. I'm fine with the SE and as an artist myself, I couldn't give a crap how high quality the camera is, unless one is a photographer then that's a different story. If I wanted to take photos for professional work, it'd be strictly for reference image collecting.
Do you know that EVERY time you take a photo from the iPhone, it's always at 72 DPI, shot in large resolution file size? I see this every time I open them on Photoshop or Pixelmator ( on iPad Pro ) manually. I find it shocking that Apple has NEVER added an option to allow the user to 'amp' up the DPI size of the photograph, at the risk of using up storage space.
I've never seen that in the last ten years. TEN years. I have a portable Nikon camera and it had an option built in that allows me to change up the resolution size of the photo from low res to high res ( 300 dpi ). iPhone could NOT even do it.
72 dpi is not something you can use for print based work or art. You can't even increase the DPI from the photo or it'll look glitchy. As an artist, I start out with 150-300 DPI with my images and downscale them when I want to put them on the web for viewing.
Anyways, I ain't missing out on anything.
Is it though? Let's assume Apple's claims are true and that TouchID has a failure rate of 1:50,000 and that FaceID is 1:1,000,000. If this is true then adding TouchID in addition to FaceID decreases the total security of the phone 20x. You are only as secure as the weakest link. If TouchID is weaker, then adding it to the phone diminishes the added security of FaceID.
if you follow your conversation back, it started with someone saying
"there's nothing you can do with faceID that you can't do with touchID"
someone replied: "gloves or wet hands can be done with faceID and not touchID"
you replied: "i have these fancy gloves that....."
and no, those gloves do not work with touchID..
and realistically, those gloves will be great for faceID.. take them off for touchID.
The capacitive gloves have your fingerprint on the outside?? Cool beans dude. Where can I get a pair?
hmm.
i think there's been a misunderstanding.. i thought since i was talking about watching cat videos and smoking cigs in the shower... those things were enough to signify "please don't take this post seriously".
I'm sorry for heating things up and having you type all those words.
Last edited:
The only time that Apple has go back on a design/feature is when they totally screwed it up so badly (looking at the iPod shuffle 3rd gen)
Yours must be magical. You know, to let your fingerprint patterns be transmitted through the glove material to the TouchID sensor to unlock your phone.
Maybe you can share the brand name with a link?
[doublepost=1505878971][/doublepost]
I know. Pretty funny. He actually thinks there are capacitance touch gloves that will unlock a TouchID phone with your fingerprint.
Last edited:
Im hoping that Face id would be a big failure and a disaster so that Apple would be forced to work on the under display Touch ID, I've always wanted a finger print scanner since my first iPhone, and i bought the 5s as soon as it came out because of the finger print scanner, i don't care how much better the face id is, i will always love touch id more.
Except the touchbar has been a bust. For good reason they don’t presume to know how people will actually respond. Apple can’t know.
That’s not what Craig Federighi said. He said Touch ID embedded in the display was plan B not plan A.
They did not make a numerical claim. That was the point of the statement if the twins are exactly identical, zero variation, then of course they can unlock each other’s phone. Now if one twin got a broken nose, then it would be less likely. Exactly how much less would depend on severity of change. Same with swelling, or any number of physical effects brought on by environment.
The point they made was that the one in a million would not hold out for identical twins. Ones derived from same zygote. Sorta being a bit obtuse looking for an actual statistical claim, in my opinion.
What I find interesting is how detractors are so all fired sure of failure for something they have yet to try out and live with. Jumping from 1 in 50,000 to one in 1,000,000 is fairly significant. Twenty fold increase in security. When did people become so picky? In other areas something twice as good would be applauded.
With hundreds, if not thousands of Apple employees using the iPhone X for last three to six months, I feel fairly confident if the experience was as bad as some predict on here. There would not have been a launch. I feel it’s reasonable based on past performance, to give the new technology a chance. Does anything work perfect in all circumstances and conditions? There are so many straw men being built on this forum I feel like I am in OZ.
not if it's two-factor authentication.
like-- requires both touchID and faceID to pass prior to unlocking.
then the strength multiplies.
With gloves on even if you manage to unlock it using Face ID, you still cannot use your iPhone.
Sure you can. With the right kind of gloves (capacitance touch). Mine work pretty well, though not as good as an ungloved finger tip.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
the following is a joke.
but at the same time, i think it's true..
your dog could probably, fairly accurately, identify you by your fart.
