Because Face ID is far inferior to Touch ID (the reasons have been mentioned many times in this thread so I won't list them again) and that's very unlike Apple. Killing off MagSafe on the MacBook was baffling enough but at least there's a few third party options to fill the gap.
The notch looks bad, but most people get used to it after a while, just like people got used to the ugly camera bump that iPhones have been marred with since the iPhone 6 (most people use a case anyway). Besides, the notch is another workaround that will go away as soon as Apple has figured out a way to integrate its sensors and other components in a more practical design.
The headphone jack isn't coming back either -as shown by other manufacturers getting rid of it in their handsets as well- but similarly to the notch it's a temporary annoyance (until most headphones are wireless?) that can be "fixed" by third party dongles.
Face ID on the other hand is a downgrade that leaves users with the option of going back to the pre-Touch ID days of the passcode (or worse, no passcode at all) or to go find an Android phone that'll work for them.
Apple doesn’t think FaceID is inferior to TouchID. If they had thought FaceID was worse, they didn’t have to add it and could have just put TouchID on the back. They also wouldn’t have killed the R&D program to develop underscreen TouchID, unless you think they’re just going to use Synaptics. I guess we’ll see in September.
And Apple likes the notch. Otherwise they wouldn’t have added the ears, since they obviously had the option to use a full width bezel. They prototyped both, and chose a partial bezel over full width.
Also, realize the need for the notch isn’t due to FaceID. The notch area houses eight sensors/transducers. Without FaceID there still would be five there, iirc.
Apple, like all consumer electronics companies, implements their vision of what they think will make the best product. These decisions always involve cost and engineering (and other) trade offs. To the extent they get these decisions right, users will be satisfied to a greater degree.
Apple wants to make a product that will offer the best experience most of the time, to the highest number of users. When Apple chooses option A, there will always be those who would have preferred option B. For example, there are those who would prefer much longer battery life, even if the phone were twice as thick and twice as heavy. They’ll complain endlessly about Apple’s or Ive’s “thinness obsession”.
But it’s not personal; there’s no conspiracy to deprive these people of their ideal iPhone. Apple’s just done what 95% of the potential market wants: make a thin and light phone, with decent battery capacity.
And no matter how much or how loudly those people complain, they’ll never get that twice as thick/twice as heavy iPhone that will give them the all-day gaming or all-day GPS usage they want.
