In a statement to CNBC, the company said, "Bloomberg's claim that Apple has reduced the accuracy spec for Face ID is completely false and we expect Face ID to be the new gold standard for facial authentication."
Quote from updated article at least on BBG terminal right now:
Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller said “Bloomberg’s claim that it reduced the accuracy spec for Face ID is completely false and we expect Face ID to be the new gold standard for facial authentication. The quality and accuracy of Face ID haven't changed; it continues to be one in a million probability of a random person unlocking your iPhone with Face ID.”
Apple likely built Face ID to be more accurate than claimed. This is similar to what they did with waterproofing the iPhones, where for one or two years they were built to a higher waterproofing level than they were marketed as.
Imagine Apple's suppliers were building to a 1:2,000,000 accuracy rate, and they were told they could drop the accuracy to 1:1,200,000 accuracy rate. Bloomberg is right that Apple has allowed the suppliers to reduced accuracy, while Apple's statement that there continues to be a one in a million probability of a random person unlocking your phone is also true.
This is an uncharitable reading of the situation though, and I'm mostly inclined to take Apple at their word on this.
What do you mean? Bloomberg News was founded in 1990 and has 2300 employees according to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_News
(irrespective of the overall quality decline in tech reporting)
So like 30 times a day...assuming 1 face unlock per device per day.
Also, phone requires passcode after X failed attempts, so even then you can could only try <10 other faces.
Apple admitted during the announcement event that is was quite a bit lessor odds for a biological relative, especially a twin.
> If reducing accuracy allows Apple to ship, this (if true) is a logical decision. It’s what businesses do. The key is to compromise without reducing quality to the point where it breaks. I think Apple would eat the delay before they shipped an iPhone X that didn’t meet their security standards.
So I don't think this is as big a deal as it sounds. The article makes it sound like they're allowing a half-assed product to make it to market, but it could just be reducing accuracy by a fraction that would be unnoticeable by the majority of uses.
Given that we all know next to nothing about actual performance of FaceID, I see no reason to assume that this will equate to a broken product. We’ll find out when it ships, just as we would if no change had been reported.
I mean how often will it be aimed at a wrong face compared to the right face?
I'm very curious about that. Generally measurements can be tuned in a way that exchanges false positives for false negatives (i.e. increasing sensitivity at the cost of specificity (or precision) meaning the phone can be made to be more sensitive to your face specifically (which is what they advertise with) at the cost of an increase in not detecting your face while it should.)
How do you know that's what it means? You have literally no idea if this report is even true, or what the implications of it would be if it were true.
People are drawing a lot of conclusions from an unsubstantiated report on a brand new unreleased feature for a phone that nobody has yet and has never used in the wild.
On the other hand, if I can't unlock my phone quickly and reliably, that's a pain in the ass. I know that, because my kid dropped my iPhone 6s just the right way, and TouchID hasn't worked for months.
My Google Pixel XL (it's a testing device) has the same issue it seems.
I'm hoping Face ID will be more reliable.
The ideal of course would simply be to have both (preferably with some user control about using one or the other or both). While some of the functional use space they cover overlaps (as would other methods like retina scanning), it's definitely true that they have use cases which are independent. There isn't any inherent need for it to be a zero-sum game.
However, Apple is already apparently having significant trouble getting the X produced, apparently getting both into it was an impossible reach for this year, and at the end of the day "real artists ship". Touch ID was not refined when it first shipped, it got more accurate and much, much faster over time, it was merely "good enough to get the ball rolling", but at some point that stage of things is needed. It's a tradeoff that's a challenge to get right and people can argue about where the balance is in any given instance, but I think Apple has been pretty consistent about being willing to bite the bullet and get the cycle of refinement going at a stage just before full refinement, and I'm not sure they're wrong, or that the level of refinement they've managed to reach with other products would be possible as quickly without getting it out there and in real world use.
Perhaps, but it's entirely reasonable for users to take a wait-and-see approach to anything security related. TouchID, for better or worse, has run the gauntlet. Security researchers have had their hands on it and tried to exploit it. And the vulnerabilities have been minimal. FaceID hasn't undergone any of that scrutiny and we won't know how safe it is until after it's been through that process.
For that reason, I'm advising all the people I know (who ask) to skip the iPhoneX. If it's proven to work well, then I'll change my recommendation for the second generation. First-gen Apple products have a history of unforeseen problems (holding it wrong and such) anyways, so it's pretty sage advice to avoid the first incarnation of any new Apple design, regardless of the security considerations.
Yet if you had a 5S you knew how awesome it was from day one.
I think the point is if you're preordering something with a new feature, you'd better have a lot of trust in the company you're preordering from to deliver on what they promise.
Many people have that trust with Apple, so they're fine with committing in advance. I don't see a big problem with that when they have a very solid track record.
> (holding it wrong and such)
I never met a single person who actually had this issue, and there were literally millions and millions of iPhone 4 devices in the wild. I owned one personally, never experienced it. Few things were as overblown as this.
Apple offered everyone the option of simply returning the device for a full refund, and nobody took them up on it. Why? Because the phone was great and the issue was pretty much non-existent.
Haha...you obviously don't have much of a memory about Apple first-generation products. There has been early adopter pain on many, many new Apple products, both with new software releases and hardware. Most of the time they've been able to fix problems with software releases, but there have been a few times where that hasn't been sufficient.
> I never met a single person who actually had this issue
Then I guess we've never met, because I experienced it personally. I could easily reproduce the issue--simply touching the wrong spot on the side to bridge the two antennae would make the call drop. Luckily for me, my natural way of holding the phone to my ear didn't involve touching that part of the phone, but it's easy to see how that wouldn't be the case for others. The iPhone 4 was my last straw that pushed me towards the wait-and-see strategy for Apple products. Since then, I've never bought their new hardware less than 3 months after release or installed their software less than 2 weeks after release. It's made life using Apple products so much more enjoyable.
BTW...I don't remember being offered a full refund, only a free case which deteriorated and became unusable long before my 2-year contract expired, so it really wasn't a fix. I eventually just learned to be wary of touching that part of the rim. Cue the joke about the guy who went to the doctor and said, "It hurts when I do this."
Actually, I do. I stand by my assertion. Most new features Apple introduces are actually fine. Outside of a couple token examples, the "1st generation Apple product" thing is BS.
> BTW...I don't remember being offered a full refund
Free bumper cases and refunds.
The rapid evolution of that antenna page via archive.org is really interesting.
If customers aren’t happy with the iPhone 4—“before or after you get a free case,” Jobs added—they can bring back the undamaged phone within 30 days for a full refund. Jobs said Apple won’t charge a restocking fee and that users would be able to get out of their contracts with AT&T.
“We want to make all of our customers happy,” Jobs said. “And if you don’t know that about Apple, you don’t know Apple.”
Then you weren’t affected by the issue. Just like most people.
Anyone could recreate it just by putting their finger in a certain spot. It was trivial to do. I could do it on my phone too.
But it never affected me for the same reason as you. There may be some people who had actual problems, but for most people it wasn’t actually a big deal. It was just a ‘ha ha Apple sucks too screw you king of the mountain’ story that got a ton of press. It was the first one, and right after the stolen prototype.
Subsequent ‘gates’, like bendgate, have gotten something much closer to the attention they actually deserved.
Besides. Is anyone going to preorder one without reading one of the reviews that will come out before preorders go live? If FaceID doesn’t work well we’ll know ahead of time.
According to their press conference their facial recognition algorithms work with changes such as hair and with glasses.
Only time will tell how well it works in actuality.
All of this including the 1:Mil number are up for grabs since nobody has really tried it, but the challenges of 3D structured light matching aren't rocket science.
With sunglasses I think it's kind of adorable that I might have to lift them to prove it's "really me" like I'm getting carded or something.
How does Face ID perform when you are wearing sunglasses?
He said most... so 50% of glassess would be sufficient to meet Feserighi's claim.
However that nice band also gets filtered by polycarbonate which is common in sun and protective glasses. It also gets heavily cut by other typical IR absorbers, and creating a pass window will cost more money.
You can use your phone with many gloves (the screen registers touch) you just can't use TouchID
What are those people going to do with their fingers once they unlock it? Use their voice to operate the phone? Sounds like a practice in frustration.
10⁻⁵ versus 10⁻⁶ false positive rates don't matter when it locks out after 10¹ fails.
I'm not saying that the 1/1M faceid false positive rate is wrong for the general population, I'm saying that the attack vectors to reduce that number by large factors are much easier and readily available than for touchid.
: Citation needed, I know.
Edit: Apparently I didn't make it clear that I don't think attack vector is to show it a 2D photo (if you had a photo of the owner why would facebook even come into this?), the attack vector is to find a lookalike using 2D photos and show the phone their face in person. Facebook's role is to find the lookalike. This should be trivial to socially engineer after you find the person.
If you’re the target of an attack by a sophisticated organization like an intelligence agency or a large industrial espionage operation, they might be able to pull this off. Common criminals will just break the phone up for parts. And either way, it’s better than fingerprints.
Actually this would be the easiest part. E.g. A courier knocks a random persons door and says please sign here and shoves a clipboard in their face (that happens to have a faceid-sized hole in the metal frame) then hands them a random package. Done. No convincing needed, worst case they're confused for a day about why they signed for whatever you put in the box and who sent it and then they forget about it altogether.
You're right about the 7000, except it's likely that a large fraction of that 7000 lives geographically close to you as most family does. I agree that this will take more sophistication than what a common criminal could pull off, but this opens up a wide range between that and state intelligence agency that could try compared to TouchId.
I would like to see a security review with more details about how common false positives are given that you only try lookalikes.
We'll see soon enough, it's a tempting target.
If we break it down what it really means is "If we take a sampling of the population only 1 in 1 million people will look like you so you're good".
As Schiller conceded in his keynote, any identical twins will need to "deeply consider how much they trust their sibling".
I wonder if 1 in 1 million is the lower number and originally it was 1 in 2.5 million or something.
Of corse you’re right if they went below the million number there is a lot of room before they get to TouchID accuracy levels.
No attacker trying to break into your iPhone's authentication will use random images. They'll build a profile off your existing online photos, and then try to fool the FaceID system that it's actually you authenticating.
Suddenly that number drops by about three or four orders of magnitude.
This is harder to do with fingerprints because you don't keep your fingerprints online.
(They also don’t leave them all over on the things they touch, like they do with finger prints.)
Also, I don’t know of your “lying with statistics” claim is fair. Of course, statistics are a great way to lie since you can have a mathematical certainly that what you are claiming is numerically accurate while at the same time give a false impression through selecting the numbers to present.
However, in this case, the implication is that FaceID is more precise and secure than Touch ID, which is probably true if it works the way they claim. (Well, we don’t really know that yet, but we don’t know the opposite yet, either.)
Edit: why “again”? What was the last time?
Of course we won't know how much things will change from Apple, but I assume it's not a 50% drop (and even if it was, it's still apparently 10x better than TouchID).
Feels like a strategic mistake by Apple - the iPhone 8 is pretty underwhelming (should be called 7S) and they were so caught up in the mystique of the ten year anniversary that they had to have something else.
The 8 might well be a 7s, in all but name, but is hardly underwhelming as compared other incremental iPhone releases in my view.
For me, it's a bigger improvement to my everyday use of the device by a mile than:
6: larger screen (maybe an exception for this reason)
6s: 3d touch; 2nd gen touch ID
7: jack-less; splash proof; shiny option
8: Heavier/premium feel, wireless charging, much bigger performance bump than usual
The 8 is the first phone where the phone can pretty much keep up with my thoughts, which makes it an incredibly different experience. The rhythm of using the device is just an order of magnitude different.
The 8 is forgettably underwhelming on its spec sheet (except speed), a marvel and delight in person. Bottom line for me is that the spec sheet is increasingly irrelevant to my satisfaction with a device.
I also have zero desire to be the guinea pig for all the new stuff on trial in the X.
edited: fixed touch id introduction -- thanks
The 8 Plus camera is also noticeably better even for someone who doesn't pay much attention to photo quality. People have remarked how I've learned to take better pictures. I haven't.
I think (but this might be my rose-tinted glasses) that every iPhone since the 3GS ran everything at 60 FPS, and that app launches were mostly limited by the launch animation, until each phone got its first major update. The one obvious outlier is the iPad Pro 10.5 with its 120 Hz display, where everything is smoother than it could possibly be on older devices.
I'd love to see data on this that's more accurate than sketchy YouTube comparisons.
I'm sure iOS 12 will slow it down, but for now I feel like my productivity is finally getting back to Blackberry days. My nostalgia for the instant response of those devices has grown over the past few years as phone os's and apps have become increasingly bloated. I really think there'd be a market for an email / messaging only device intended to be carried along side a phone if it did that one thing very well.
I'm really excited for the screen (not the notch). True blacks are where Apple has really suffered. I love reading at night on my iPad but it's a much worse experience than my Samsung tablet with an OLED screen. The move to OLED by Apple is really the biggest thing here that people aren't paying much attention too.
It's the biggest change to the most popular smartphone ever.
The X obviously fixes that. There are rumors a big percentage of the supply will be going to China, more than even distribution.
Really? How so? I already know I do not want to have to look at my phone to unlock it.
But then surely you're 100% not the target market for any devices which contain Face ID and the accuracy is wholly irrelevant to your life?
It’s no different from the ‘I want a Pixel 2 XL but I want a headphone jack’ problem. The company is only offering you one choice. Go without the headphone jack (or with FaceID) or don’t get the phone and hope for next year.
I've used Touch ID since inception, and I can honestly say that I'm excited to explore the different set of tradeoffs that Face ID will bring. What I will grant you is that we don't actually know how well it works yet, but we will soon.
The fact that the phone only allows one face is a deal-breaker for me. My wife needs access to my phone (and vice versa). I'd prefer we don't have to memorize each others long/complex passcodes. With TouchId, this scenario is handled. With a single FaceId, it's a loss of functionality.
For the most part, there's no reason for my wife and I to interchange phones at any time. Functionality can be replicated easily between devices to the point where there are zero essential situations where she needs access to my device, or the other way around. Would you be willing to share the use case where your
> wife needs access to my phone (and vice versa)
1. I'm driving, I've started Waze on my phone, and she needs to adjust destination/settings. Same for Pandora or anything else while I'm driving.
2. We're in Europe, and only using a single phone to avoid massive data fees. Verizon is $10/day/phone to use existing data plan, which works well for long weekend trips (longer trips, I'd buy a local SIM and deal with using a different phone number).
3. One of our phones is unusable (forgot it, battery dead, etc), so need to use the other.
We don’t know if that means ‘until a software update next year’ or ‘for this hardware recision’.
I’m hoping for the former. For that use case it is certainly a step down from TouchID.
She could get the black one and use the glass back.
That's only if the "Raise to Wake" option is turned on under Display settings.
It's much more common not to be able to pay with it because of the £30 limit (again inherited from contactless) than because it's not available.
Either way Apple Pay works much better in the Apple Watch than the phones and I doubt FaceID would change that either way (better or worse).
I'm also very interested if they introduce TouchID into the next generation's screen. Would be an admission of guilt that the combo of both is the sweet-spot, and is sure to annoy X-gen1 users.
It just doesn't feel ready to me at all.
My assumption is that it will always take longer than just using a button. If it doesn't take longer, then it will be unlocking at incorrect times.
That's why I think it will be an epic failure.
I fully expect to be proven correct when this POS is released.
That touchid on back is a huge fail from UX perspective. Samsung did it only because they could not do it from front side
Besides, the convenience of TouchID is largely due to it being integrated in the home button, you’d lose that too.
You can still unlock a phone via its PIN if you don't want to pick it up. (Edit: I have not owned an iPhone since the original. Does the iPhone not provide a PIN option when Touch ID is enabled?)
I'm not an UX designer, but I would optimize for the nominal case, rather than choosing a solution that is sub-optimal 90% of the time, but works better for the remaining 10%.
Fingerprint on the back is a major UX issue. I hope FaceID would work fine at an angle.
Seems like a perfectly normal use-case to me. I have it lying on my desk when I'm at work, which is 40 hours a week. I don't want to have to pick up my phone or enter a PIN every time I want to check an incoming iMessage, news alert, etc.
How so? My wife's phone has a fingerprint sensor on the back and it works great. My phone has a retina scanner on the front, and it works less well. Sure, we'll eventually see scanning through the display , but until that happens the fingerprint sensor on the back works really well for me.
*citation needed, but I sincerely doubt this is hard to believe.
Really? When I'm holding my phone (right hand), my fingers wrap around the left edge and my thumb rests along the right edge. Moving my thumb to the TouchId is easy. Moving my index finder to the center of the back panel is awkward.
For me, for 3 years, yes. For you, clearly the answer is no. Everyone is different and that is great.
> That touchid on back is a huge fail from UX perspective.
This is a matter of opinion that was stated as fact. I've used both styles of phone (simultaneously) where the fingerprint sensor is on the thumb/home button v. on the back for a few years now. I prefer the sensor on the back. I am not alone in this opinion. Therefore, it is not a "huge UX fail". That is the point I was trying to make.
Source: owned both phones.
One more reason why the iPhone X isn't "the iPhone" this year. Apple knows this, it's the most fundamental shift in how you use the device since the original iPhone.
Those that feel confused and annoyed can always return the phone and buy the iPhone 8 for less money. Many already have opted to just buy the iPhone 8 rather than wait.
I don't think it's a mistake at all, it's a carefully calculated move to ensure that the vast majority of their customer base isn't alienated by pricing this phone out of reach and making it very clear that this is a glimpse into the future of the iPhone, not the iPhone you know and love.
It's a huge improvement if you're wearing gloves or have wet fingers.
>an ergonomic button on the back
This requires you to hold your phone a certain way (at least initially).
If past performance is an indicator, and given the amount of new technology coming in iPhone X, I expect a multitude of problem with the first devices.
Despite its high price, this is the only thing that holding me back from upgrading on day-1.
Why? If you don't like it, you have 14 days to return it.
If it’s a problem with something like face ID or a hideous screen you’ll know fast. It’s not like the FaceID sensor will ‘wear out’ after a few weeks of usage.
If a significant hardware issue presents on the iPhone X, Apple will most likely try to delay or deny any fixes or replacements, especially because they are under a struggle to meet the demand as it is.
Moreover, it brings into question what "Designed by Apple in California" means.
Is Apple the misunderstood savant, yearning for perfection, requiring their latest work of art not being shipped/produced without it 100% matching the dreams of the designer?
Or, is Apple trying to sell as many units of a functional, brilliant, working product as possible? If they see themselves as the former (and by Job's tone, they do) _why undercut FaceID accuracy_?
Is an iPhone X an iPhone X without the FaceID?
My purchase of this device (compared to the iPhone 8) solely lies on the ability to use an iPhone X without the FaceID. I don't want it and I certainly don't need it. There are also far too many situational "what-ifs" Apple doesn't seem interested in addressing. I've asked a few people and haven't gotten a solid answer if its a requirement on setup of a new iPhone X.
I don't know why you would assume this. I think it's very obvious that it isn't. TouchID is also not a requirement for any previous iPhone.
There is nothing about the iPhone X that would require FaceID. If you're happy just using a passcode, then that's your choice. They've given no indicators otherwise.
FWIW, a "Genius" at an Apple storefront yesterday told me that FaceID will be required. I brought up the exact same objection that TouchID was not required, but clearly the APIs are different.
The crux of my point remains, however. Apple chose to make FaceID a dealkiller for supply of this product.
There is absolutely no way FaceID is required, I would bet my life on it. It flies directly in the face of the whole "Apple cares about your privacy" thing they've been pushing as of late.
"If you choose to enroll in Face ID, you can control how it's used or disable it at any time. For example, if you don’t want to use Face ID to unlock your iPhone, open Settings > Face ID & Passcode > Use Face ID, and disable iPhone Unlock. To disable Face ID, open Settings > Face ID & Passcode, and tap Reset Face ID. Doing so will delete Face ID data, including mathematical representations of your face, from your device. If you choose to erase or reset your device using Find My iPhone or erasing all content and settings, all Face ID data will be deleted."
Well yes, since the FaceID component is small, and yield issues happen at assembly stage i can see this is easily fixable.
But OLED? There is one, and precisely one manufacturer making it, with limited capacity from the start and no quick fix to it. This manufacture also happens to be making OLED for their own phone.
If the demand of iPhone X is anywhere near as close as other new iPhone, we are easily looking at shortage of phones well past Xmas.
Like what? Genuinely curios.
I'm waiting with bated breath for the "quickly press the home button 5 times to disable it" objection, because thats not how real life situations work.
With attention enabled, how is it any easier for police to force you to look at your phone to unlock it than it would be to grab your finger and force you to unlock your device with your fingerprint? Or beat you until you give up your passcode?
They all require restraining you and applying force, or threatening you until you comply. This is honestly the most ridiculous point.
All biometrics trade a little security for convenience. This is a known fact, it's not new, and it's no different with FaceID than it is with any other biometrics solution ever made.