One thing to Apple PR credit is faceid. For me it's hot needle replacement for failed attempt to integrate touchid into display, but for most people it is innovation.
Why is TouchID superior to FaceID? I just want to understand why you think FaceID is a failure?
If FaceID lives up to Apples claims it will have less friction and higher security, so win win, and I'm sure Apple are aware of how popular TouchID is, I don't see them replacing it with a dud.
There are edge use cases, I think 99% of the time your interaction will have less friction and more security.
For the edge cases generally a pass code will work (under the table / multiple users). I'm not sure what you do with your phone unlocked in your pocket...
TouchID being quicker is your opinion, and as neither of us (I assume) have used it, we'll see if it is quicker.
I just think there were lots of negativity about TouchID when it was announced, and look how successful that is, would Apple risk that success? I don't think so...
Edge cases are not the least used interactions, and even if they are it's not what makes them edge cases.
Edge cases are defined as what happens at the edge of operating parameters the classic example of a speaker that is played at the bottom or top 10% of it's output, edge cases do not have an intrinsic definition of occurrence rarity. It might not relevant to you, but if you like blowing up your house with all that bass or you have very thin walls and you have to listen to music very quietly then these are still edge cases but they are not rare cases for you.
In reality and in practice edge cases are pretty much anything that goes out of the (pretty narrow) definition of how a device or a service should be used (the classical remark of "you are holding the iphone wrong" comes to mind).
On your daily usability the edge cases are also much more important for the general satisfaction and subjective usability values of the device.
When you are in a perfect position/condition to use your phone the environmental conditions overcome any design flaws, and you experience pretty normal usability.
When you say hold the phone on the floor by your bed to avoid the light creeping all over the room, under the table during a meeting, or as close to the floor when possible at a theater is when the flaws in usability start being apparent.
That's when things like the placement of the fingerprint reader (or lack there of), weight, size, screen readability at low brightness and odd angles start to become more and more relevant.
Same goes for other things, you don't care about how much leg room there is in the back of your car until you need to fit 5 people over the weekend, despite you using it more times solo during the work week.
Sure. TouchID can't be used if your fingers are wet or wrinkly. Since I found out about FaceID I've noticed a bunch of scenarios where TouchID falls short and I have to drastically change how I'm using the phone or what I'm doing to accomodate unlocking using a specific finger.
> Because one can use TouchID for Apple Pay much quicker and more reliably in a crowded/rushed situation such as paying for public transport.
Since moving to the UK I was keen to give Apple Pay a try on the tube and I was disgusted at how slow it is. I think mobile-based contactless options are always going to be slower than passive card-based contactless.
> Since moving to the UK I was keen to give Apple Pay a try on the tube and I was disgusted at how slow it is.
I noticed this as well. Android pay is rock solid, Apple Pay required a few tries to work right.
It could just be an implementation detail of the Tube's readers. Or it could be the case on the phone, or it could actually be the phone, but there was a difference.
SOS functionality is baked in by pressing combinations of the side buttons. Way more realizable than pocket texting.
You’re not fooling anyone in meetings or at restaurants by using your phone under the table. We know you’re doing stuff with your phone. Everyone knows. Still, if you want to pretend to be slick, use the passcode.
You have no idea if faceid will be slower than Touch ID. You have no idea if faceid will limit the phone to just one user.
You’re out on some pretty weak limbs with this list of nothingburgers that goes on.
If you can send a text reliably from your pocket (something I've never even heard of anybody attempting), you can unlock it with the 6-digit passcode reliably.
You appear to be assuming that integrating Touch ID into the display was Apple's first choice. If face ID works as promised I can’t see why anyone would prefer Touch ID over Face ID. Even if your assumption is correct Face ID is still innovative.
Depending on the performance, when I use TouchID from my pocket, the device is unlocked by the time I get it in front of me to use (because I pick it up and hold my thumb over the fingerprint sensor)
TouchID requires me to touch the device. I _know_ when I'm identified. FaceID works at a distance, data could easily leak to any number of surveillance programs, corporate or governmental.
There are fairly plentiful leaks from Apple indicating that they attempted to get an "under display" fingerprint sensor to work.
I don't know that "Apple" had a first choice at all, and I suspect that there was diversity of opinion within Apple about which authentication method would be superior if both were technically feasible.
People might reasonably prefer fingerprint to facial recognition for speed reasons, allowing the phone to be unlocked by the time you look at it.
If it’s done right then I would expect Face ID to be as fast, fewer false positives, fewer fails. I don’t know if Apple has accomplished these goals but if they did then I'd consider their implementation innovative and would not assume it was done due merely to an inability to integrate Touch ID into the display.
It's impossible to be as fast as "already unlocked by the time you see the screen." It could perhaps be "only imperceptibly slower," but it can't be as fast.
This review suggests that it's not "only imperceptibly slower," with its talk of the De Niro look.
For me Touch ID has been only slightly better than using a code for unlocking the phone. It can be as fast as Touch ID in the sense that by the time you can physically get the phone in position to do something it’s unlocked. You can’t unlock it when it’s in your pocket like you can with Touch ID but with Touch ID you still have to look at the phone to verify whether or not it has been unlocked. And most things you do with the phone require looking at it.
Well, unless you're taking your phone out of your pocket.
Seriously, the "back of phone" placement for the fingerprint sensor has downsides when it comes to "phone on the table," but it's awesome for the pocket. I just got a Pixel 2 XL, which has a more reliable fingerprint reader than any other one I've used (comparison points: Nexus 5x, iPhone 6+, 2017 Macbook Pro touchbar), and it's amazing. My phone is utterly reliably unlocked by the time I clear it from my pocket.
And a back fingerprint reader + the FaceID system would be great in combination. The FaceID system could compensate for the back-of-phone fingerprint reader's weakness when it's on your desk (or when wearing gloves/hands wet).
My 7+ also unlocks fast and reliably every time. I sometimes purposely use a different finger to make sure it still works.
I've tried the back of phone ones and they just do not work for me. For me, back of phone is a downgrade. I guess having both FaceId and back of phone would not impact me, but only going back of phone would have me sticking with the older phones as long as possible.
I think driving is a good example -- if your phone is mounted on a holder on the dashboard, you can easily and reasonably safely unlock it with your thumb, but face ID will be fiddly and dangerous.
They probably figure that people should be using CarPlay, though.
It's innovation -- but it's also at the expense of taking away a feature I regularly use.
I frequently unlock a phone that's flat on a desk that's at an arm's length. Now, to unlock, I suspect I'll need to lift and point that device towards my face in order to authenticate. Since I haven't tried the iPhone X yet, I'm not sure how liberal they are with the angle required to capture your face, but it seems unlikely this can be done with the device flat on a desk.
To me, that's unfortunate ... and it's a feature change that having TouchID integrated into the display, as was rumored to be their original intention, would have avoided.
Miserable? I don't think that's likely to happen. It's only a phone. I'm speaking about convenience.
I'm not certain I'm getting the phone. But if I do, it'll be for the camera. It's my number one use case of my phone, and it seems like it's got a great camera. I know there are good alternatives from Android, but I'm largely married to the Apple ecosystem.
If you're an Apple user, you don't really get a choice over whether to adopt this new stuff. You'll either buy it now, or you'll have to buy it anyway the next time you upgrade because there won't be any other options. Or you switch to Android.
Often this is fine because the new stuff is unambiguously great. Sometimes it's miserable. That's life as an Apple customer.
Microsoft SP4 have had that for 2 years (unlocking with 3D scanning of the face), so I'd not call it innovation. But regardless, a sensor on the back would be better IMO.
…which would not help in that gentleman's case. How good is a fingerprint scanner in the back of a phone when it's lying flat on a desk and the user doesn't want to lift up the phone?
I'm kind of surprised on this because it's been around on various Android and Windows devices for a while. I understand that it might be more reliable and faster, but that's incremental rather than revolutionary.
"Reliable and fast" is exactly why TouchID was so great when they introduced it. They aren't just nice-to-have features, they're the bare minimum requirements for this kind of thing -- a feature that you use constantly, and which gates your access to all other features.
“Once you’ve added a fingerprint, subsequent scans of that finger are nearly instantaneous. Touch ID is way faster than “fast enough”. I’d call it “I can’t believe it works this quickly” fast. It’s also very accurate — only a handful of times over the past week have I had to try a second time, and each of those times, I hadn’t really squared up my finger with the sensor.”
I know many people regard DF as overly biased, but as I recall, the general reception for Touch ID was very positive. Let me know if you find a review that says otherwise.
The innovation is in implementing it well. I have no idea if Apple has implemented this feature well but if they did then it’s innovative. The innovation is not in being first it’s in doing it well first.
EDIT: It is innovative to do things well for the first time.
No wonder Android people do not understand why people pay good money for very locked down iPhone, to them crappy implementation for hardware and software is good enough.
Why the troll comment? There are good and bad points to both ecosystems. For instance the Fingerprint reader on my Pixel is faster and more accurate than the TouchID on my iPhone 7. That doesn't make me go, iPhone sucks. The implementation on Facial Recognition may not be as great on the android phones that support it, but that doesn't mean you should bash a whole ecosystem and community of people.
Not OP - but it's not innovation for me personally. Not technically, I mean it's not a feature that I expect to make an impact in my life, and if the iPhone 12 (or w/e) has support for Display TouchID then I'd never use FaceID again.
This is all speculation of course - and likely outside of the scope of this conversation, hopefully I'm not detracting too much though :)
I'm asking same question. How is faceid innovation over touchid? But to answer your question. With touchid you can unlock your phone immediately you bring it out of pocket. I don't see any additional value over touchid. For me it's actually inferior, because I have to grab the phone even for simple tasks, like reading new message. So why should I accept this? Because of larger screen, which is not even bezel to bezel? Also don't act as face recognition is apple thing. They didn't invent it or weren't first to use it. Innovation is when you bring something new and unique to the table. PS: I'm apple fan, but not sheep to accept anything they bring blindly.
It was raining a bit yesterday and that made the fingerprint sensor on my phone basically useless. I forgot how much it was used (unlock, banking apps, payments).
You make a good point, but to counter, can modern touchscreen phones be used without looking at them? Volume buttons and power off / on can be used without looking, but you can also use those without unlocking your phone.
I don't speak for others, but yes I can navigate from locked phone to messages and type a full message to my wife without looking at the screen, thanks to qwerty knowledge and GBoard's "swipe" typing.
How do you deal with your phone being in different states before unlocking?
For example, if you have an app open in a folder, you'll have to press the home button 3 times: once to exit the app, another to exit the folder, and a third to go home (unless the messages app is on the dock, then you can press twice to reach it).
I'd be worried about messaging the wrong person, and I also have fat fingers so that's no help :(
If FaceID lives up to Apples claims it will have less friction and higher security, so win win, and I'm sure Apple are aware of how popular TouchID is, I don't see them replacing it with a dud.