3 ms·

I remember reading some articles about the difficulty to have a fingerprint sensor under a screen, it might well have been easier to have FaceID (easier does no

I remember reading some articles about the difficulty to have a fingerprint sensor under a screen, it might well have been easier to have FaceID (easier does not mean easy)

dlubarov 9y ago
They could have put the fingerprint sensor on the back, as several Android phones do.
- X86BSD 9y ago
  And they could also install a hardware keyboard. Neither of which is going to happen. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
  - mtgx 9y ago
    Fingerprint reader on the back is unobtrusive and quite an intuitive way to unlock a phone. I can hardly find any issue or "major compromise" with it. A physical keyboard on the other hand makes a phone at least twice as thick, twice as heavy, and twice as ugly (although the last one is more subjective).
    - culturestate 9y ago
      If I had a dollar for every time I watched someone turn their Android phone around to look for the fingerprint sensor on the back, I would have a lot more free time to post on HN.
jacobolus 9y ago
Gruber: > Apple made this decision well over a year ago. Perhaps the fundamental goal of iPhone X was to get as close as they could to an edge-to-edge display. No chin whatsoever. There were, of course, early attempts to embed a Touch ID sensor under the display as a Plan B. But Apple became convinced that Face ID was the way to go over a year ago. I heard this yesterday from multiple people at Apple, including engineers who’ve been working on the iPhone X project for a very long time. They stopped pursuing Touch ID under the display not because they couldn’t do it, but because they decided they didn’t need it. I do believe it’s true that they never got Touch ID working, but that’s because they abandoned it in favor of Face ID early. > I don’t know why recent supply chain rumors suggest Apple was scrambling to get Touch ID working on iPhone X as late as this summer, and no one at Apple seems to know either. Disinformation campaign from competitors?

I remember reading some articles about the difficulty to have a fingerprint sensor under a screen, it might well have been easier to have FaceID (easier does not mean easy)

dlubarov 9y ago

They could have put the fingerprint sensor on the back, as several Android phones do.

X86BSD 9y ago
And they could also install a hardware keyboard. Neither of which is going to happen. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
- mtgx 9y ago
  Fingerprint reader on the back is unobtrusive and quite an intuitive way to unlock a phone. I can hardly find any issue or "major compromise" with it. A physical keyboard on the other hand makes a phone at least twice as thick, twice as heavy, and twice as ugly (although the last one is more subjective).
  - culturestate 9y ago
    If I had a dollar for every time I watched someone turn their Android phone around to look for the fingerprint sensor on the back, I would have a lot more free time to post on HN.

jacobolus 9y ago

Gruber: > Apple made this decision well over a year ago. Perhaps the fundamental goal of iPhone X was to get as close as they could to an edge-to-edge display. No chin whatsoever. There were, of course, early attempts to embed a Touch ID sensor under the display as a Plan B. But Apple became convinced that Face ID was the way to go over a year ago. I heard this yesterday from multiple people at Apple, including engineers who’ve been working on the iPhone X project for a very long time. They stopped pursuing Touch ID under the display not because they couldn’t do it, but because they decided they didn’t need it. I do believe it’s true that they never got Touch ID working, but that’s because they abandoned it in favor of Face ID early. > I don’t know why recent supply chain rumors suggest Apple was scrambling to get Touch ID working on iPhone X as late as this summer, and no one at Apple seems to know either. Disinformation campaign from competitors?