Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Rear touch ID to complement Face ID?

B

balaplus

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 23, 2017
384
277
Granted it is not elegant but why did Apple decide against a rear touch id to complement face id (Atleast until face id becomes reliable)?

Samsung have managed it on a thinner phone.

Is it the confidence in face id?

Or is it because they cannot improve face id if people continue to have the touch id option?
 
I think having both options would have been great. Would have been cool to see the TouchID integrated seamlessly into the rear Apple Logo.

That said, the only use-case for me where FaceID might be annoying is apple pay... soon to be solved by getting an Apple Watch
 
My guess is the next version of the iPhone X (or whatever they call it) will offer up bigger screens and/or the return of TouchID and a notch-less screen.

If I were a betting man, I'd say at least 2 out of those 3 will happen.
 
I would hate that in all honesty. I never like the idea of the finger print scanner on the back like many android phones have it. I'm sure its functional, but tbh, I hate the look - just my personal preference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knowimagination
maflynn said:
I would hate that in all honesty. I never like the idea of the finger print scanner on the back like many android phones have it. I'm sure its functional, but tbh, I hate the look - just my personal preference.
Click to expand...
But it would have quashed any early doubts about reliability of face id
And then review it like the headphone jack!!
 
Because by most accounts, Touch ID on the rear of the device is awkward and takes away from the user experience. Apple strives to make their devices a natural extension of the body. They want the iPhone to be a seamless integration and fluid second nature with minimal disruption to natural flow. Unobtrusive.
 
Jjayf said:
Because by most accounts, Touch ID on the rear of the device is awkward and takes away from the user experience. Apple strives to make their devices a natural extension of the body. They want the iPhone to be a seamless integration and fluid second nature with minimal disruption to natural flow. Unobtrusive.
Click to expand...
I agree with the concept. But if there is a bunch of people not sure about face id, retaining the touch id as a secondary option would have been a winner!

I suspect Apple figured that they can't make sufficient iphone Xs for 'believers' so didn't bother with complimentary touch id
 
balaplus said:
I agree with the concept. But if there is a bunch of people not sure about face id, retaining the touch id as a secondary option would have been a winner!

I suspect Apple figured that they can't make sufficient iphone Xs for 'believers' so didn't bother with complimentary touch id
Click to expand...
A bunch of people who haven’t even tried it yet. Not sure that kind of opinion carries much weight. Meanwhile, it’s getting glowing reviews from those who have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knowimagination
Since I will have a case on my phone, I'd rather not have it on the back.

I will miss touch ID, but I am sure I will get over it. What would be cool is if they found a way to integrate it into the display, without affecting the display.
 
I can't speak to exactly why -- I wasn't in the room during that conversion -- or any -- but I can think of a couple:

* It would give the impression Face ID was not reliable or a band-aid solution
* Extra, unnecessary cost if Face ID is reliable and more secure than Touch ID
 
Well...let's hope

My fallback option is a single digit/character alphanumeric passcode :)
[doublepost=1509456686][/doublepost]
Chupa Chupa said:
* Extra, unnecessary cost if Face ID is reliable and more secure than Touch ID
Click to expand...
This i agree
you won't even get an extra gb of RAM from Apple that easily :)
 
there was a rumor back in January by MingChi Kuo stating Apple was considering FaceID along with touchID at some point.. with the reason being, they weren't sure if they could get FaceID to be secure enough for financial transactions (banking/ApplePay) so a two-step process for these types of transactions may need to be used...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/01/21/apple-touch-id-facial-recognition-iphone-8/
Notably, Kuo believes the fingerprint recognition system will "ultimately be replaced by a facial recognition system" for enhanced security. "However, if the technical challenges cannot be overcome, we believe a combination of fingerprint and facial recognition is another possible solution."

----
Judging by the bio-recognition patents that Apple has applied for, we believe it is leaning toward facial recognition technology rather than iris recognition. However, we note that the technical challenges of facial recognition include: (1) algorithms; (2) hardware design; and (3) the build-out of a database for verification and authentication, which could be time consuming. As such, before Apple can fully replace the fingerprint system with facial recognition, a combination of the two steps of bio-recognition could be a valid solution for enhancing transactions security.
​
so if that rumor is/was true, apparently they succeeding in making faceID strong enough which is why there's no touchID on iPhone X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: balaplus
Touch ID on the back would be a downgrade from the Touch ID that apple has already had for years. No way apple would consider it and I honestly wouldn't have bought an X if it had Touch ID on the back because I would have felt like I was paying for a crap feature.

Touch ID is dead, embrace Face ID.
 
I just read TechCrunch's review and it looks like Apple has abandoned Touch ID. The reviewer interviewed Apple's Dan Riccio and it sounds like they have placed all their eggs into the Face ID basket. Here's a little excerpt.

From TechCrunch:

Riccio also flatly counters the narrative that Apple was still trying to use Touch ID in the iPhone X this year.

“I heard some rumor [that] we couldn’t get Touch ID to work through the glass so we had to remove that,” Riccio says, answering a question about whether there were late design changes. “When we hit early line of sight on getting Face ID to be [as] good as it was, we knew that if we could be successful we could enable the product that we wanted to go off and do and if that’s true it could be something that we could burn the bridges and be all in with. This is assuming it was a better solution. And that’s what we did. So we spent no time looking at fingerprints on the back or through the glass or on the side because if we did those things, which would be a last-minute change, they would be a distraction relative to enabling the more important thing that we were trying to achieve, which was Face ID done in a high-quality way.”
 
Kjung7 said:
“When we hit early line of sight on getting Face ID to be [as] good as it was, we knew that if we could be successful we could enable the product that we wanted to go off and do and if that’s true it could be something that we could burn the bridges and be all in with. This is assuming it was a better solution. And that’s what we did. So we spent no time looking at fingerprints on the back or through the glass or on the side because if we did those things, which would be a last-minute change, they would be a distraction relative to enabling the more important thing that we were trying to achieve, which was Face ID done in a high-quality way.”
Click to expand...
Well that effectively answers it, doesn't it?
I guess it has been Apple's mantra that 'People don't know what they want until you show it to them' and they clearly believe in this solution!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back