My X works well with recognizing me...even in the dark and at weird angles. The only problem I encounter is it trying to see me when the sun is bright and to my side....then it does not work.
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.
Samsung's Galaxy S10 Rumored to Feature 3D Facial Recognition Like Face ID on iPhone X
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The beauty of this comment is you don’t realise that everyone gets a face full of IR every time they step outside during the day.
I'll never understand you market share people. Why should Apple care about having the most marketshare when they take the vast majority of the industry profits at the lesser marketshare?
Say what? Iris uses infrared. But instead of projecting dots it blasts your ENTIRE face with IR light CONTINUOUSLY. Much worse than Apples method of projecting dots.
Samsung even has warnings in their owners manual about eye strain that might be caused by using iris scan. A few are:
- Do not use iris recognition with infants. Doing so may damage eyesight.
- Some people may have dizziness, seizures, epileptic seizures or blackouts triggered by light flashes or patterns, even if they have never had a seizure or blackout before. Anyone who has had a seizure, loss of awareness, or other symptom linked to an epileptic condition, or has a family history of such symptoms or conditions, should see a doctor before using the Iris Scanner.
- DO NOT stare directly into the infrared iris recognition LED as prolonged use can cause eye-strain. Do not stare at the iris recognition LED light when your eyes are less than 20 cm (~8 inches) away from the device, for best results keep your eyes between 25-35 cm (~10-14 inches) away for optimum recognition.
- If you look at the iris recognition LED for more than 10 seconds or you are too close to it, the device will automatically stop iris recognition.
I never understood it either. Who cares if you have a ton of junk phones out there that bring in no profit. Congratulations. I'd rather have the profits.
Not everyone has the intellect to understand that, but they have big mouths for sure.
Only with the help of the Israelis. Samsung has begun tapping Apple's long standing Israeli Well of Knowledge. This could get interesting very quickly.
Only with the help of the Israelis. Samsung has begun tapping Apple's long standing Israeli Well of Knowledge. This could get interesting very quickly.
Nothing wrong with that. Every company uses appropriate resources to achieve their end goal. It's business.
Never said there was anything wrong with it. Simply said "Things may get interesting."
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Because there's more to it than just how much Apple makes on the sale of an iPhone. Apple also generally makes the most profit-per-computer (unit) sold but how much software is available for Windows that is not available for Macs (still... in 2018).
Conceptually, Android could swallow up all but a single (phone) unit. Apple could make that 1 unit and price it at $150B for a $149.99B profit). And then we could all gush: "...but who makes the most profitable smart phone(s)?" to which Apple would surely win. But then you have app developers thinking about developing apps to try to make a living... for that one spectacularly profitable iPhone sold or for the other 99.9% of the market in that scenario?
Somewhere out there in the world there is probably still a Palm smart phone for sale. Maybe a Nokia smart phone leaning on symbian too? Those dead/near dead smart phone OS's might even own .000001% of all smart phone market share even today. Now, put yourself in developer's shoes: do you want to go to the trouble of writing your app for those phones?
Yes, of course, the bulk of profits for developers is apparently still based in the iPhone ecosystem too. But as share shrinks, the attraction to code for broader distribution must rise... much as a developer wanting to make money should code a Windows version before (or at least with) a macOS version, rather than coding for macOS first... or exclusively. Sure, Apple likely makes more profit per computer sold too, but the developer needs to sell a LOT of copies of their apps so that they can make their money too.
Even if we can make some argument about dev profitability, how about accessory makers too? Make your accessory for a shrinking market share or make it for a growing share? Are the accessory makers still doing the engineering to make accessories for Windows phones? (the old) Blackberry? Palm? Etc. Again, profitably may be healthy now but growing market share always begs for first consideration.
And so on. Granted Apple's relative tiny share is tens of millions of units, so the marketplace is not dead/doomed/etc. but anyone able to step back and look at a situation objectively should have at least some concern in shrinking market share... NOT because that spells doom for Apple Inc. or AAPL but how it can impact secondary sales such as apps & accessories that makes Apple products so useful.
To this day, I have to keep a Windows partition on my Macs because I need a fully compatible version of Quickbooks, and clients inevitably have Windows software that do not have macOS versions (or need complete MS Office and similar compatibility instead of just partial compatibility). Such clients don't give a hoot about how much profit Apple made on the sale of my computers to me... only if my tools can do the job they need done.
Last edited:
My first and only thought is that Apple better get their act together and churn out high-quality products faster than they have been, because Samsung is now a significant threat.
Never said there was anything wrong with it. Simply said "Things may get interesting."
Well you said "only with the help of the Israelis" regarding Apple's ability to innovate. Certainly sounds negative to me. How will things get interesting?
[doublepost=1521134703][/doublepost]
To what?
Not only do those gazillion phones not bring any profit, but they don't contribute to Android in any meaningful way (except to brag about market share or maybe give Google more data). Those users don't spend money and don't buy Apps. So they're not contributing to the Android ecosystem at all.
Apple is not that supportive either:
• You can't buy AppleCare for a longer period than offered, or extend it.
• Some products are discontinued before 5 years have passed after being launched
(i.e.: iPad first generation, and probably the Apple Watch first generation)
They actually benefit Google in the only way that matters to them, advertising. The sole reason Android exists is to gather their users' data to use for advertising. Well, and machine learning, for targeted advertising. 95% of Google's profits are directly tied to advertising.
How much software is available for iOS that isn't on Android? Hint: all the good high-end software.
Please. iPhone market share shrinking means absolutely nothing when the iPhone user base is increasing every year. You know, it is possible to have market share decline while still seeing sales increase. The average iOS user generates 4X the revenue as the average Android user. Accounting for market share, iOS still generates 2x the revenue for developers compared to Android.
Eric Schmidt was asked about developers favoring iOS over Android back in Dec 2011. His reply? "Six months from now you’ll say the opposite. Because ultimately applications vendors are driven by volume. And the volume is favored by the open approach that Google is taking." To which many in the audience laughed out loud.
Well, Eric, here we are 6 years later and your prediction still hasn't come true. Because developers go where the revenue is, not where the market share is.
There is no "argument" about dev profitability. It's cold, hard, fact. iOS is way ahead of Android.
Accessory makers? This is another area where the iPhone/iPad are way ahead of Android. In the same way having most of iOS devices on the latest version of iOS makes it easier for developers (without having to target umpteen versions) the consistency in hardware also makes it easy for accessory manufacturers to make accessories for iOS devices.
There is no single phone/tablet in the entire Android world that even come close to having a fraction of the sales of the iPhone/iPad. You think accessory makers are going to tool up for every single variation of Android device out there to make things like cases/docks (for example)?
Say what? Tens of millions of units? Try closer to a billion.
There is absolutely no concern at all over Apples supposed market share decline. Wildly increasing sales of $50 Android phones that make the overall pie bigger don't have any impact on Apple, the developers that favor iOS over Android or the accessory makers that favor iPhone/iPad over all others.
That's about a ridiculous as saying increasing sales of Toyota Corollas will cause problems for makers of semi trucks, because their market share is shrinking by comparison.
Or you could get on your knees and thank Samsung for making iPhone components; could someone else do it? maybe, could Apple themselves do it? again maybe. But they don't and Samsung does.
[doublepost=1521137050][/doublepost]
Because the profits only benefit Apple. If you're an app developer and Android is in the hands and eyes of 90% of the World; that's where you want to be.
[doublepost=1521137372][/doublepost]
You do know you can use Android and not use any Google services?
Both companies need each other to some degree, so we'll leave it at that, but I think the need for Samsung on Apple's end is dwindling. It's really just a matter of time. I think the loss of Apple's component orders will have a much higher financial impact on Samsung in the long run. While market share certainly belongs to Android, developing for iOS is where the money is. The millions of junk Android phones running software from 4-5 years ago are not in a prime position to spend money on apps. The only benefit to Google for those phones is advertising data.
Sorry, can't elaborate. Start with the RealFace acquisition and dig. I think it will be interesting to see who poaches the most talent. No disrespect, however FaceID was all brought in from out of house. Apple acquired over 72 small to medium companies in 2017. Those companies innovations were assimilated into Apple. They were the innovators. The only in-house innovation credit I'm willing to give is their EE in house Design Team led first by Bob Mansfield, and now Dan Riccio.
The entire A Series ARM is being designed by Jony Seriugi, and his team. Apple recruited him from Israel. Apple stopped innovating on 10-5-2011.
Sorry, can't elaborate. Start with the RealFace acquisition and dig. I think it will be interesting to see who poaches the most talent. No disrespect, however FaceID was all brought in from out of house. Apple acquired over 72 small to medium companies in 2017. Those companies innovations were assimilated into Apple. They were the innovators. The only in-house innovation credit I'm willing to give is their EE in house Design Team led first by Bob Mansfield, and now Dan Riccio.
The entire A Series ARM is being designed by Jony Seriugi, and his team. Apple recruited him from Israel. Apple stopped innovating on 10-5-2011.
That's cool, good for the Israeli's then. Definitely some talented people. I guess the original iPhone wasn't innovation then, because all of the components were sourced from outside Apple and the majority of people brought in came from other companies either.
That's a well put argument; but I disagree, the "millions of junk Android phones running software from 4-5 years ago" are still going to want apps and the app developers are going to cater for these people. They don't give a damn how much profit the handset maker has made.