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.
Other Straight Poll - Face ID or Ultrasonic ID
- Thread starter HolyGrail
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope.......doesn't look like you're spamming at all.
I would have liked to explain it to you, but the sad truth is that you wouldn't understand me.
LOL...i feel bad for you...you started this thread to indirectly make FaceID look bad...and now, facts are just slapping back at you...thanks to me! You welcome.
I have added Android Police damning of Samsung Ultrasonic FPS to first page of this thread so that everyone can see its glory!
Except, as I sit here with my Ipad pro with Face ID, your ignorance shows. Face ID isn't a issue. This thread was in response to having options and choice, which you can't grasp with all your internet warrior spamming.
A quick search of your past posts tell otherwise....
I bring facts to your misguided attempt.
You welcome.
Ideally, this would be the best situation to have both options for the user who may have a specific preference, but Apple has a stronger belief that Face ID is the primary, where no other biometric form would be necessary. They did consider using touch ID under the display, but scrapped that in favor of face ID once it was working operably. (At least that was according to Craig Federighi.) I think Face ID works really well for what it’s worth, but still has plenty of room for improvements and future advancements.
My past posts show i'm a champion of choice and options.
I bring logic to your misguided attempt.
And it's you're welcome. (not you welcome)
What logic is that? That you’re wrong repeatedly? Choice? You’ve made some poor ones indeed.
Sorry, facts show that FaceID is superior to ANY under display fingerprint scanner.
Thanks momma for correcting me.
There is no reason Apple could not provide both finger and face IDs. Perhaps it's time for Apple to start providing choice given their falling sales. Choice is inclusive, face ID only further fragments iPhone users. Given this poll even with it's small sample size, it seems clear people are split.
If we're being corrective then your full stop goes at the end of the sentence(after the brackets).
Google smartlock that keeps the phone all day as long as it is proximity to my watch. Then a 6 digit pass code, and everything else turned off.
If someone ever steals my phone it will be locked down Tightly
If someone ever steals my phone it will be locked down Tightly
Both works fine. Some people prefers UFPS and some prefers Face ID.
Apple can stick with face ID and the notch and the rest with UFPS and no notch.
Everyone's happy
This won't apply to everyone but I have my phone mounted on a vent above the radio in my car and my phone unlocks without me really having to do anything when I'm driving.
[doublepost=1552208554][/doublepost]
Faceid does unlock for me often with the phone flat on the table but not 100% of the time. No idea how it does it. Having said this, I'd like to see an under screen fingerprint scanner just for the times like that. All other times I really prefer faceid.
I mentioned this in a few post above yours. The reason I think Apple doesn’t offer both, is traditionally they just want ‘full control’ over what they offer the consumer [or] what they believe is the ‘best thing’ for everyone. That’s usually how Apple has been with not just their products, but even with their software over the years. That’s the downside to Apple, is they make a great product, their iOS/ecosystem is very well unified, but they are very limited in terms if you prefer a certain way of something, they don’t offer very many alternatives or adjustments. And this is why some android users won’t convert to iOS, strictly because of those reasons mentioned.
Some people have mentioned this, and it is a good solution to the issue, but not ideal for some people and/or situations.
It would be nice if the CarPlay bugs were fixed, so there would be less of a need to unlock the iPhone while connected.
Maybe this is it.
If you want to believe the rumors, Apple failed get the under-glass Touch ID to work in time for iPhone X production, which was why they went with Face ID.
But I guess they could have continued to work on it, and offered both.
I agree with your summary of Apples position. I just think it might be time for them to go back and evaluate if that position can be softened in certain areas. It's that rigidness that has been the downfall of other companies. Yes, Apple today is very strong, but as technology and competition advances, and even with Apples focus on services, they need a strong device base to provide services to.
Increasing customer satisfaction through reasonable choices is a good thing. It's clear in the area of face versus touch there is a split. I don't see how limiting themselves helps their bottom line.
Sure more choice is good...but at what cost? Please note that Samsung removed Iris scanner for the S10...maybe due to lack of space or cost constraint?
Samsung S10 has ultrasound FPS....but no IRIS scanner.....and what is left is a joke of facial recognition: https://www.androidpolice.com/2019/...-fooled-by-a-photo-video-or-even-your-sister/
IF Apple could fit TouchID under front display, then are people willing to pay even MORE??!! Are you willing to have a smaller battery? Or are you willing to get rid of the wireless charger?
LG G8 has FaceID....but no fingerprint under display.
There is a common theme here....
For both to even be considered (and I'm not saying Apple is considering it), it not only needs to go under the screen, but it must be brought up to the same 1-in-1,000,000 odds of a false positive that FaceID has today. In other words, it needs to be as secure as FaceID. If it's not, they would be adding a weaker security method into the phone thereby lowering its overall security. After bragging about how much more secure FaceID was over TouchID, they really couldn't get away with weakening that security. The media would rip them apart for that. So not only does it need to move to under the screen, it need to be considerably better than what they're putting in devices today.
I understand what you are saying, but I disagree that a under-glass Touch ID solution needs to be as secure as Face ID.
Now, if Apple switched to only under-glass Touch ID, then it would be a step backwards in security.
But if Apple utilized both solutions in one phone or just had some models with only an under-glass Touch ID, then there would still be that high-security option for people that want it.
I am not saying Apple would do this, just saying that it could be done without taking a hit on security.
We buy Apple products, we’re always willing to pay more!
I’m not sure why the battery would be smaller or you have to get rid of wireless charging though to have underscreen Touch ID.
I prefer a capacitive reader and that my phone automatically unlocks (and stays unlocked( when connected to my bluetooth system in my car.