For fanbois only? Face ID is turning punters off picking up an iPhone X As Apple bloggers anxiously try to be positive about Apple's Face ID, a poll suggests potential customers may actually be repelled by the face-scanning technology. 20 per cent of respondents in a poll of over 2,000 Britons said they were less likely to upgrade to an iPhone X because of concerns with Apple's new face …
It's a great solution for Law Enforcement, at least in the States.
The courts have ruled very consistently that police can compel you to unlock a phone or computer if it's locked using biometrics. And of course, with biometrics like face recognition, they need your cooperation even less than with a fingerprint scanner, not that the bar there is very high either.
This is just Apple's way of putting in a backdoor for Law Enforcement without having to call it one.
This post has been deleted by its author
" And of course, with biometrics like face recognition, they need your cooperation even less than with a fingerprint scanner, not that the bar there is very high either."
Except that you have to look at the phone ("attention detection") to unlock it. If you close or avert your eyes it won't unlock. This is better than fingerprint detection, which can be accomplished with a bit of physical coercion. You can't force somebody to look forwards, and even forcing their eyes open without blocking the recognition system would be a significant challenge.
Maybe actually do a very slight amount of reading before engaging in armchair criticism? Oh wait, I forgot, this is the Internet...
This post has been deleted by its author
Well, you sorta disproved your own point right there. Both a "mugger" and a "law enforcement official" (to take your example and the Reg's together) would have no trouble applying your finger to a fingerprint scanner. So I'm frankly not buying this argument at all.
Now, the argument that it's less convenient and reliable than touch id was, that seems to be a goer.
This post has been deleted by its author
The courts have ruled very consistently that police can compel you to unlock a phone or computer if it's locked using biometrics. [...] This is just Apple's way of putting in a backdoor for Law Enforcement without having to call it one.
How is this argument specific to Apple? Samsung, Google, Moto, and many other devices also have fingerprint scanners, and/or more easily fooled facial recognition.
It has been well established that biometrics are defeatable through a variety of techniques. Ditto for other convenience unlocks such as pattern match, 4-digit PINs, etc.
No one is forcing you to use biometrics, or any other convenience login. Delete the training and turn off the feature. Problem solved.
Lots of jokes when FaceID was first launched about your partner being able to unlock your phone by holding it in front of your sleeping face etc. I've no doubt the unfamiliarity will be a barrier (TouchID was similarly a bit scary when it first launched).
I don't have plans to get an X, and I'm not saying the system's good, however I don't think it is surprising that people are wary.
I'll stick with an alphanumeric password I keep in my head. Though I can still be held in contempt of court for refusing to unlock the device, that's a bridge I can afford to worry about crossing some other time. This way makes it very expensive for others to unlock my phone without my help.
Seems to me that fingerprints and facial recognition are not good ways to secure a device that is carried with the keys in plain view and easily accessed.
"You're perfectly free to do that. The iPhone X offers Face ID, it doesn't require its use."
You're right - and as such (despite what the headline says), it's not the Face ID that's turning this punter off picking up a p-p-p-p-p-penguin an iPhone X.
It's the fact that it's an iPhone.
(Obvious troll is obvious)
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
on Android in 2014. Decided it wasn't really solving anything, so lost interest.
3 years on, I really can't see anything has changed.
With the nod to Henry Fords dismissal of customers desires, I'd wager that if Apple asked their customers what they really wanted in the next-gen iPhone, a better removable battery, and SD slot would have been way above "FaceID".
But they didn't, and here we are.
I'm willing to bet money Apple customers do NOT want an SD slot.
Even the Android lot have gone away from it.
It's just another form of media that can go bad / be lost anytime and take your data with it.
Much better / simpler to send that data to a cloud provider - either vendor provided or third-party.
Expandable memory iis very very sensible. Not essential. But sensible.
It means the base price of the phone doesn't need to accomodate the memory requirements of all users. I for example carry 100Gb of music around on my phone. So I stick a big SD card in to hold that music. My girlfriend who has the same model doesn't so she doesn't.
As for holding that stufff in the cloud. Not much good if you are on a train in the UK and can't listen to anything because theres no mobile connectivity for at least 50% of your journey (and don't f'ing get me started on the supposedly wonderful train WiFi).
I'm sure that part of the reason why phone makers stopped allowing expandable storage is that it allows them to do market segmentation. Two different models of the phone with different amounts of storage and a price differential that's noticeably bigger than could be justified by the cost of the storage.
Packet,
are you having a laugh or just not terribly bright???
I mean, having quite a few GB of music stored (inaccessibly) in the cloud out here in the countryside just makes so much more sense than HAVING IT IN THE F'ING PHONE, doesn't it now?
Has it ever occurred to you that some folk may have different reqs to you, e.g. I f'ing hate touchscreens, so guess what - my phone has a keyboard!?
Cheers,
Jay
The entire setup was better than any device I've ever seen - seriously. Attention to detail and simplicity set a new bar.
FaceIDs brilliant and haven't *yet* had an issue with it and by default, it doesn't unlock if you're not awake/attentive unless you deliberately disable it.
queue morons who disable it and then lament about partners/"friends"/criminals stealing their details
Since it was asking potential customers whether Face ID would impact their purchasing decision I'm guessing that they don't have the phone yet. /s
I won't be buying it, or any phone, that has Face ID. Not because of the stuff that has been mentioned about the police and other people making you unlock your phone. I live in a place where a third of the year it's cold enough that my face needs to be protected from the cold when I go out. Unless I'm staying in a store for a while I stay wrapped up even on the bus. With using my fingerprint I can easily unlock my phone in the cold with just taking my glove off. I'll be damned if I have to uncover my face for anything that needs an ID.
I know that I can enter the password but then what's the use of having something of to save me from entering the password when I can't use it all of the time like I could with the fingerprint ID?
I know that I can enter the password but then what's the use of having something of to save me from entering the password when I can't use it all of the time like I could with the fingerprint ID?
But the face ID doesn't require extra hardware to work like fingerprint ID. It's all just done in software.
Apple's stance seems to be "if it can be done in software, screw the hardware! Hardware costs real money! Not just in the costs of the parts, but the costs to design, test and implement.
It's why they've ditched the keyboard, buttons, ports and jacks.
it's also why the battery is sealed in, one less part to design and integrate. (The battery cover)
Just think of how much money they save per year on the phones ditching every conceivable part they can do away with!
It's why every other phone maker emulates Apple, "How much can we save this year copying them?"
Apple's genius here is spinning cost saving measures as "trendy and hip" features to the consumer.
Well, Captain DaFt; FaceID requires an infrared camera and a dot projector that projects 30000 dots onto your face to create a 3D model (even in the dark) which is the handed over to a dual-core Neural engine and the authenticating secure enclave hardware that ensures the biometric data itself isn't leaked to the cloud, only authenticating tokens.
So, it does require extra hardware. Quite a lot.
Does it work well? I don't know, I haven't tried one, probably never will, let's see what people say after a few months. There was plenty of uproar when it was discovered by the chaos computer club that Touch ID could be bypassed using a time demanding process and sophisticated equipment.
I would suggest using bio-metrics for the average use case, just like we use key for our front door, but stick with a complex passphrase if afraid of the NSA/FBI/KGB/etc.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
