It's a slow reader, so do have to make it better than that, so yeah they'd have an excuse... But they'll do a better one anyway, as always.
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.
Vivo Unveils Screen-Embedded Fingerprint Sensor Technology at MWC2017 Shanghai
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's a slow reader, so do have to make it better than that, so yeah they'd have an excuse... But they'll do a better one anyway, as always.
I am not really sure where your head is with this, but the announcement here has nothing to do with Apple. They have been working on their own implementation for a couple years now and have been granted patents for under the screen touch ID. See the link below if you need more info, or google.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...ay-touch-id-under-the-display-3d-scanner.html
Although I agree that debuting prototype hardware can be annoying, let's not 'misremember' history and forget this particular item was debuted as a prototype that didn't really work and had a scripted operation that made it look as if it worked.
And this particular item that was debuted before it was ready for prime time. I'd even argue this particular item still isn't ready for mass production.
Then you get to the brand new (and I am excited about) modular Mac Pro which we won't see for a long time. Point being, all companies are guilty of this, including Apple.
The only example you gave that has any relevance is the Mac Pro.
The iPhone was nearly finished... Apple didn't show us multitouch until iPhone, even though they had it in the lab.
AirPods hit a manufacturing problem, but were still available before Christmas. They were not proof of concept.
Actually, it rarely matters unless you got IP or a huge surge of users to create a barrier to entry.
Most of the big companies now weren't the first, not even close.
Google wasn't first, it wasn't even the first doing it in the way it was doing it; it just was better at it.
Facebook, not close to first.
Amazon? Not the first.
Apple was one of the first, but considering how far it was down in the late 1990s, nobody can say that provided at distinct advantage.
Microsoft? Not the first.
What you mean is when a company becomes entrenched in mindshare/marketshare in their market segment, its very very hard to unseat them. Not impossible mind you, but very hard.
The way those entrenched companies lose usually is because the market slides sideways and their original market dies right under them.
An example, if most people move to the FB ecosystem and never go out of it, then Google will lose big and its search advantage will be lost.
Intel lost its way because of the rise of mobile, same with microsoft.
No company, not even the biggest are eternal.
The thing is that Apple is not just selling to new clients, they're selling a lot of stuff to existing clients that have expectations about the quality and ethos behind Apple product. Those people are ready to spend good money for this; their loyalty is precious.
Producing something half baked to get to market quick, would be very detrimental to their standing with such users. The brand would be damaged.
Also, what's important when getting out a near luxury product (what I consider Apple products to be) is making sure your provide both a great product, but also a product that has a distinct differentiating advantage over the competition that you sustain over time.
Getting a product out that the competition can mostly copy gets you a product like the Apple TV, which is the least inspired and most aimless product Apple makes. Apple should avoid this kind of thing and in the last few years they have. With time, the Watch and Airpods will suck all oxygen out of the top of the market making anyone that's not Samsung not Apple to compete at all there.
So the iPhone was nearly finished. Okay, but doesn't that still mean it wasn't finished? That debut was full on smoke and mirrors. So that I'm clear, I'm not knocking what Apple did. That took guts. There aren't many who would have had the courage (or foolishness depending on your bent) to do what they did. What I am questioning is your ability to simultaneously justify one company doing something and criticize another for doing essentially the same thing. Hyping a product that is clearly not market ready.
As for the AirPod, I'd question your use of the past tense in "had a manufacturing problem" since there still seems to be production delays. What's the relevance of the very limited number of AirPods being available before Christmas? Weren't they supposed to be available in October? At least that's what was said when they debuted... in September.
Apple can't buy Qualcomm (it's their sensor tech that Vivo is using). Antitrust issues.
There was never a confirmation from Apple that there was indeed a manufacturing defect. They were announced in September and expected to launch late October 2016 originally. When They did launch in December, IFixit completed a tear down and speculated the charging case was the reason for the delay. Gruber also speculated manufacturing issues were a cause for the delay as well, even though Apple never acknowledged any reports.
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/12/20/airpods-teardown-charging-case/amp/
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/12/09/airpods-delay-reasoning-wsj/amp/
As someone who uses the fingerprint reader every time they pick up their phone to unlock it, I would not want to live without that feature.
I also don't want to have to perform some kind of finger origami to reach the sensor on the back.
[doublepost=1498674113][/doublepost]
If you're an 80's kid, we are now in the future!
BLOWN YOUR MIND . . .
I remember that. I was about to say that iFixit issue couldn't be the cause of the continued shortage, but *specu- pause - lation* it could potentially cause a yield issue. Who knows. It was just a prop in my point of contention with thekeyrings assertion. No biggie.
Last edited:
In my many years of interest (and involvement) in technology - when the entire tech press and vast majority of business analysts are reporting the same thing over a sustained period of time, there is often "no smoke without fire".
Having said that, that appears to be the situation now.
With the extreme cash resources that Apple have, they could just throw a lot of money at inhouse R&D and Production resources to solve the problem before launch date, I'm sure.
Even if that date does slip by a few weeks/couple of months.
[doublepost=1498674760][/doublepost]
Earphone speaker cutout . . .
You are correct, it's all speculation. I was just indicating Apple never acknowledged the issue at hand, even though it was likely A yield or manufacturing issue.
Some websites are echoing a report that it's slow, but videos show it's not bad.
Plus other reports say that the version of the sensor behind metal starts a camera app instantly, so a vital piece of info that we're missing, is how much delay is normal for the screen starting up on this phone anyway.
Plus other reports say that the version of the sensor behind metal starts a camera app instantly, so a vital piece of info that we're missing, is how much delay is normal for the screen starting up on this phone anyway.
Great demo video - thanks for posting.
If that's an accurate representation of how it will be implemented, we are talking literally fractions of a second of delay in comparison to existing systems.
I can definitely live with that for first generation technology.
I think you may have hit it on the head when you said, "reporting the same thing." You also correctly note that these rumors are all phrased as such that they can't be wrong- kind of like replacing "global warming" with "climate change," is ingenious because you can't be wrong no matter what happens.
the iPhone 8 might have this, if its not a total disaster. but in 2018 not this year. to give Apple. time to see if its a disaster or not. its their favorite tactic
I don’t think so, look at the straight on shot at 0:56. It’s got a google search bar,but that Settings icon though. Maybe meant to be a mashup to keep it vague?
As someone who uses the fingerprint reader every time they pick up their phone to unlock it, I would not want to live without that feature.
I also don't want to have to perform some kind of finger origami to reach the sensor on the back.
[doublepost=1498674113][/doublepost]
If you're an 80's kid, we are now in the future!
BLOWN YOUR MIND . . .
iPhones already have fingerprint sensors. I'm referring to the them being mounted under a solid-pane screen as being incremental and not vital. Sure, it might help the phone be more dust/water resistant but people have survived just fine without water/dust proof phones. For goodness sake, if you're going scuba diving secure your iPhone.
And of course, it's almost infinitely faster than other sensors if your finger is recently scarred or sweaty or covered in food grease, since it works right through that stuff
Not to mention that it supposedly can't be fooled by fake prints made using surface photos or print captures, like capacitive sensors can.
Having not heard of them, doesn't negate the evidence of them marketing a product before Apple, and Qualcomm using that as an argument that their patents and inventions indeed do help innovate / propel cell phone technology, in their ongoing suit with Apple. Vivo doesn't matter in this scenario, they are a blip on most people's radar. Qualcomm is the one that did it first, not Vivo.
I agree with most of what you wrote, except for the rarely part. For every example of a big company you give, I can give at least two small companies or events where being first did matter. That would be a 66% comparison in favor of timeliness. However, that would be splitting hairs, when there is merit to the rest of what you said.
No. But I think they are still first on many things, their privacy just prevents them from marketing that. *sighs*