Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First field report of iPhone X

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 277 posts

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#21

Post by notheguyouthink »

dbbk wrote: post #10
finchisko wrote: post #8

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.

Please do explain why you don't view Face ID as an innovation over existing technology.

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 :)

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#22

Post by sqlcook »

bane wrote: post #11
dbbk wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do explain why you don't view Face ID as an innovation over existing technology.

Unlocking your phone with your face has been a regular feature of many smartphones for at least 5 years.

You mean with a picture of your face....

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#23

Post by zimpenfish »

skc wrote: post #12
ddorian43 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he doesn't buy a $800 Android ? And doesn't buy every new release ? There are new $200+ Android phones.

I often wonder what people do with these super expensive phones to be honest. I have a cheap Xiaomi phone and it runs the same apps everyone else does. My guess is that the expensive phones are bought primarily for their cameras. I'm not big into photography but I can see how that makes a stronger argument for the likes of the iPhone X and Note 8 etc.

I'm buying it primarily for the camera, yeah. I'm not 100% convinced that I'll get on with Face ID and the lack of a home button, mind.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#24

Post by pacala »

yequalsx wrote: post #14
finchisko wrote: post #8

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.

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.

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.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#25

Post by gehsty »

finchisko wrote: post #8

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.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#26

Post by isthisnagee »

finchisko wrote: post #16
dbbk wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do explain why you don't view Face ID as an innovation over existing technology.

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…

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.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#27

Post by pjc50 »

dbbk wrote: post #10
finchisko wrote: post #8

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.

Please do explain why you don't view Face ID as an innovation over existing technology.

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.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#28

Post by macintux »

waytogo wrote: post #13

Slightly OT: I am most impressed by Apple‘s bold move to drop the iPhone‘s decade old, iconic symmetric design while establishing a new iconic asymmetric design almost over night. As odd as the new design feels, Apple already owns this design, this buckle, this asymmetry. Edit: Why the downvotes (just wondering)?

Indeed.

https://twitter.com/neilcybart/status/908154535054643202

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#29

Post by yequalsx »

pacala wrote: post #24
yequalsx wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

EDIT: I understand your response now. Thank you for providing such an example.

Re: First field report of iPhone X

#30

Post by notheguyouthink »

skc wrote: post #12
ddorian43 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he doesn't buy a $800 Android ? And doesn't buy every new release ? There are new $200+ Android phones.

I often wonder what people do with these super expensive phones to be honest. I have a cheap Xiaomi phone and it runs the same apps everyone else does. My guess is that the expensive phones are bought primarily for their cameras. I'm not big into photography but I can see how that makes a stronger argument for the likes of the iPhone X and Note 8 etc.

I do nothing with my expensive phone (Pixel 1 XL atm, soon to be iPhone X). Nothing to justify the price, at least. I buy them because I enjoy the quality feeling, which is partially real and partially self enforced.

With that said though, I've been with Android since the G1 (literally all of the Nexus lines), and few cheap phones compare to the high end phones for me.

My best phone of all time? The Nexus 4.. or was it 5... I honestly can't remember now. It was one of these $200 phone. It felt cheap as hell, but it was a very nice compromise on features vs price. Yet, that's going back to what I was saying above. Despite me loving that phone, and it being an amazing phone for $200, it was still a compromise of quality. If you show me a phone that has the OS and build feel of my Pixel 1 XL, I'd happily buy it. However, I've not ever seen this. Same goes for my Macbook Pro. It's far from perfect, and definitely feels overpriced, but the OS and Hardware combo has no competition from my perspective. Unfortunately.

So back to your original question, I definitely don't do anything with the phone to inherently justify the price.

Post reply on HN