13 ms·

Apple’s Struggle to Get the iPhone X to Market on Time

119 points by runesoerensen 9y ago

runesoerensen 9y ago
"It quietly told suppliers they could reduce the accuracy of the face-recognition technology to make it easier to manufacture, according to people familiar with the situation."
- smn1234 9y ago
  Official statement ?!!?
  - eli 9y ago
    Reporting from "people familiar with the situation" is the opposite of an official statement
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
jordache 9y ago
swipe up is much more of an effort than a simple tap on the screen.
untog 9y ago
This feels like an entirely unnecessary risk. Yes, it would be good to having plenty of iPhone Xs available for the holidays, but they're a year-round seller, and they'll sell a ton whenever they come out. 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.
- datawarrior 9y ago
  I'm not so sure they will sell a ton. Most of the talk I've heard has been "meh" regarding it. I'm personally holding off until I see more hands on reviews and feel comfortable that I wont be a beta tester for Apple. 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.
  - bpicolo 9y ago
    They're going to sell a metric crapload of them, there's really no question given the general sentiment out there. It's the biggest change to the most popular smartphone ever.
  - seanmcdirmid 9y ago
    They will sell well, especially in china where the fashionistas want a new iPhone that is noticeably different from the 6/7/8.
    - tooltalk 9y ago
      From what I remember, the overall smartphone sales in China is stagnating and Apple's marketshare is shrinking.
      - MBCook 9y ago
        That’s thought to be one of the reasons why. There are 3 years of phones that are effectively identical looking so if want to show off you have the ‘new shiny’ you really can’t because without close inspection no one can tell. The X obviously fixes that. There are rumors a big percentage of the supply will be going to China, more than even distribution. We’ll see.
        seanmcdirmid 9y ago
tatrajim 9y ago
All the hallmarks of classic Bloomberg FUD.
Xophmeister 9y ago
> While a less accurate Face ID will still be far better than the existing Touch ID Really?
- 1_2__4 9y ago
  Amusingly that’s where I pulled the ripcord on this article too.
- mikeash 9y ago
  Apple claims that Touch ID has a false positive rate of 1 in 50,000, and Face ID has a rate of 1 in 1,000,000. So yes, there’s a lot of room for Face ID to become worse and still be better than Touch ID.
  - valine 9y ago
    There's more to it than that. Touch ID was already secure enough for most people. With Face ID you lose the convenience of unlocking your phone as you take it out of your pocket and the ability to discreetly unlock your phone without entering a passcode.
    - xoa 9y ago
      But you gain the convenience of unlocking your phone while wearing gloves, having dirty/wet hands, for people with callouses/scarring/other finger issues that have prevented Touch ID from ever functioning reliably (or at all), using a heavier duty cases, etc. Certainly there are tradeoffs here, but arguments to the effect that Touch ID is already the be-all end-all of biometric authentication have a strong odor of argument-from-familiarity. I remember many debates when Touch ID was first introduced that were topologically similar to debates now happening around Face ID. It's not as if Touch ID doesn't have friction points, we've just gotten used to working around them and/or living with them. But that doesn't mean authentication tech is "done". 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.
throw7 9y ago
"While a less accurate Face ID will still be far better than the existing Touch ID..." Really? How so? I already know I do not want to have to look at my phone to unlock it.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > 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?
  - FilterSweep 9y ago
    What if every single other feature of the iPhone X is appealing to you?
    - MBCook 9y ago
      Still doesn’t matter. There is only one way to get those other features and that’s accept FaceID. 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.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  You know you probably look at your phone whenever you use it right?
oddevan 9y ago
Via Dave Mark http://www.loopinsight.com/2017/10/25/bloomberg-apple-told-suppliers-they-could-reduce-face-recognition-accuracy-to-ease-manufacturing/ http://www.loopinsight.com/2017/10/25/bloomberg-apple-told-s... : > 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.
- sschueller 9y ago
  After the password being displayed in the password recovery phrase in osx and many other lapses in quality control I am no longer sure about that.
  - jsjohnst 9y ago
    I really wish I could mentally dismiss your comment as being from a troll, but truth is, you’re right.
  - alsetmusic 9y ago
    Though I also hold concern for Apple’s QA decline, the difference between a deliberate modification to alter the resilience of a tent pole feature and a software bug in a massive codebase are significant. 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.
  - kylec 9y ago
    Don't forget about the 1+2+3 issue with the calculator in iOS 11. It's like a QA didn't use the software at all.
yladiz 9y ago
The big question is, did Apple state the 1 in 1 million number knowing that they were having supply issues, meaning that the original component was more accurate? This must have been known in some way before the keynote, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is "old news" as in Apple told supplies to do this around or before the keynote. 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).
hodder 9y ago
It seems like FaceID is an epic pain compared Touch. Most consumers do not care about the 1/50K vs 1/1000k stats. They care about having to put an internet square to their face for access. To me this seems like a huge mistake for Apple. Lack of a home button also seems like a mistake. Both will likely confuse and annoy long time customers and should've been solved with an ergonomic button on the back.
- mandeepj 9y ago
  > ergonomic button on the back. That touchid on back is a huge fail from UX perspective. Samsung did it only because they could not do it from front side
  - dpark 9y ago
    Why is that design a failure? My index finger is generally very near the Apple logo on my phone when I’m using it. It would be entirely convenient if the TouchID were there. It would actually be more comfortable than the current location that requires an awkward grip and thumb reach.
    - Aaargh20318 9y ago
      I use my phone a lot when it’s lying on a desk, can’t unlock it when the fingerprint sensor is on the back. Besides, the convenience of TouchID is largely due to it being integrated in the home button, you’d lose that too.
      - bhauer 9y ago
        > I use my phone a lot when it’s lying on a desk, can’t unlock it when the fingerprint sensor is on the back. 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?)
        9y ago
FilterSweep 9y ago
FaceID really is the feature that is ruining the new iPhone for me. And the fact that its (currently) the sole reason why interested customers can't get one come November is another major dealbreaker (IIRC OLED was a problem too). 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. :ed: grammar
- shinratdr 9y ago
  > 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.
  - FilterSweep 9y ago
    > 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.
    - shinratdr 9y ago
      Regardless of what you call them, Geniuses are just CSRs, and I think we've all gotten ill-informed information about products and services from CSRs regardless of the company. I would stick to official press releases and copy about the device for accurate information. 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.
whatok 9y ago
Apple response: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/25/apple-reduced-iphone-x-faceid-accuracy-to-boost-production-report.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/25/apple-reduced-iphone-x-facei... 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.”
- ksec 9y ago
  Bloomberg has turned into a Apple rumors site ever since the arrival of Mark Gurman. I have no idea why they are doing it and why the need of doing it. After all Bloomberg is straightly not in the news or publishing business.
  - radicaldreamer 9y ago
    Mark Gurman's track record is pretty good though.
  - runesoerensen 9y ago
    > After all Bloomberg is straightly not in the news or publishing business. What do you mean? Bloomberg News was founded in 1990 and has 2300 employees according to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_News
    - philbot1008 9y ago
      I believe that was an attempt at sarcasm ;)
  - bound008 9y ago
    This kind of information is relevant to the public markets, so it is relevant to Bloomberg. (irrespective of the overall quality decline in tech reporting)
mmmBacon 9y ago
This is likely a spec relaxation of certain components that has limited to no impact on the accuracy of the assembly. This is really common in optics where early design decisions get made and carried forward due to schedule concerns because making changes impacts a ton of things further down like reliability, assembly, etc... I don't see this as a big deal it's just making decisions that improve manufacturability and yield while not having much impact on the overall device.
noncoml 9y ago
I think buying the iPhone X as soon as it is released is a huge gamble, no matter the struggles Apple is going through with FaceID. 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.
- raldi 9y ago
  > I think buying the iPhone X as soon as it is released is a huge gamble Why? If you don't like it, you have 14 days to return it.
  - ngokevin 9y ago
    Or flip it.
  - noncoml 9y ago
    Assuming that the problems will manifest in the first 14 days
    - MBCook 9y ago
      If they don’t then you’re covered under warranty for any defects. 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.
      - rvshchwl 9y ago
        That is not always true. When the iPhone 6 started to "bend" unexpectedly, Apple denied the problem completely and refused replacements until they started to receive bad press for it. Even after that, they didn't acknowledge the problem at all, and claimed that only a handful of devices were affected when in-fact a substantial percentage were. Same thing kind of happened this year with the phone casings expanding. 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.
_ph_ 9y ago
The more likely story is, that Apple set some initial specs for the face ID module early in the development. This was probably a very strict spec, which is of course difficult to match. Fast forward, some months later, as the production devices are coming together and real production devices can be evaluated, the specs can be relaxed somewhat, as Apple now has a clear idea about the specs they need to have a functioning face ID device. Also, the software might be a bit more tolerant to variations in the device. Of course, the revised specs will increase yield too. But that is all what engineering is about -finding out how far you can relax specs and still have a robust working device.
mattbarrie 9y ago
Of course apples problems are all supply related, not demand

119 points by runesoerensen 9y ago

"It quietly told suppliers they could reduce the accuracy of the face-recognition technology to make it easier to manufacture, according to people familiar with the situation."

smn1234 9y ago
Official statement ?!!?
- eli 9y ago
  Reporting from "people familiar with the situation" is the opposite of an official statement
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

jordache 9y ago

swipe up is much more of an effort than a simple tap on the screen.

untog 9y ago

This feels like an entirely unnecessary risk. Yes, it would be good to having plenty of iPhone Xs available for the holidays, but they're a year-round seller, and they'll sell a ton whenever they come out. 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.

datawarrior 9y ago
I'm not so sure they will sell a ton. Most of the talk I've heard has been "meh" regarding it. I'm personally holding off until I see more hands on reviews and feel comfortable that I wont be a beta tester for Apple. 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.
- bpicolo 9y ago
  They're going to sell a metric crapload of them, there's really no question given the general sentiment out there. It's the biggest change to the most popular smartphone ever.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  They will sell well, especially in china where the fashionistas want a new iPhone that is noticeably different from the 6/7/8.
  - tooltalk 9y ago
    From what I remember, the overall smartphone sales in China is stagnating and Apple's marketshare is shrinking.
    - MBCook 9y ago
      That’s thought to be one of the reasons why. There are 3 years of phones that are effectively identical looking so if want to show off you have the ‘new shiny’ you really can’t because without close inspection no one can tell. The X obviously fixes that. There are rumors a big percentage of the supply will be going to China, more than even distribution. We’ll see.
      - seanmcdirmid 9y ago

tatrajim 9y ago

All the hallmarks of classic Bloomberg FUD.

Xophmeister 9y ago

> While a less accurate Face ID will still be far better than the existing Touch ID Really?

1_2__4 9y ago
Amusingly that’s where I pulled the ripcord on this article too.
mikeash 9y ago
Apple claims that Touch ID has a false positive rate of 1 in 50,000, and Face ID has a rate of 1 in 1,000,000. So yes, there’s a lot of room for Face ID to become worse and still be better than Touch ID.
- valine 9y ago
  There's more to it than that. Touch ID was already secure enough for most people. With Face ID you lose the convenience of unlocking your phone as you take it out of your pocket and the ability to discreetly unlock your phone without entering a passcode.
  - xoa 9y ago
    But you gain the convenience of unlocking your phone while wearing gloves, having dirty/wet hands, for people with callouses/scarring/other finger issues that have prevented Touch ID from ever functioning reliably (or at all), using a heavier duty cases, etc. Certainly there are tradeoffs here, but arguments to the effect that Touch ID is already the be-all end-all of biometric authentication have a strong odor of argument-from-familiarity. I remember many debates when Touch ID was first introduced that were topologically similar to debates now happening around Face ID. It's not as if Touch ID doesn't have friction points, we've just gotten used to working around them and/or living with them. But that doesn't mean authentication tech is "done". 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.

throw7 9y ago

"While a less accurate Face ID will still be far better than the existing Touch ID..." Really? How so? I already know I do not want to have to look at my phone to unlock it.

zimpenfish 9y ago
> 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?
- FilterSweep 9y ago
  What if every single other feature of the iPhone X is appealing to you?
  - MBCook 9y ago
    Still doesn’t matter. There is only one way to get those other features and that’s accept FaceID. 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.
seanmcdirmid 9y ago
You know you probably look at your phone whenever you use it right?

oddevan 9y ago

Via Dave Mark http://www.loopinsight.com/2017/10/25/bloomberg-apple-told-suppliers-they-could-reduce-face-recognition-accuracy-to-ease-manufacturing/ http://www.loopinsight.com/2017/10/25/bloomberg-apple-told-s... : > 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.

sschueller 9y ago
After the password being displayed in the password recovery phrase in osx and many other lapses in quality control I am no longer sure about that.
- jsjohnst 9y ago
  I really wish I could mentally dismiss your comment as being from a troll, but truth is, you’re right.
- alsetmusic 9y ago
  Though I also hold concern for Apple’s QA decline, the difference between a deliberate modification to alter the resilience of a tent pole feature and a software bug in a massive codebase are significant. 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.
- kylec 9y ago
  Don't forget about the 1+2+3 issue with the calculator in iOS 11. It's like a QA didn't use the software at all.

yladiz 9y ago

The big question is, did Apple state the 1 in 1 million number knowing that they were having supply issues, meaning that the original component was more accurate? This must have been known in some way before the keynote, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is "old news" as in Apple told supplies to do this around or before the keynote. 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).

hodder 9y ago

It seems like FaceID is an epic pain compared Touch. Most consumers do not care about the 1/50K vs 1/1000k stats. They care about having to put an internet square to their face for access. To me this seems like a huge mistake for Apple. Lack of a home button also seems like a mistake. Both will likely confuse and annoy long time customers and should've been solved with an ergonomic button on the back.

mandeepj 9y ago
> ergonomic button on the back. That touchid on back is a huge fail from UX perspective. Samsung did it only because they could not do it from front side
- dpark 9y ago
  Why is that design a failure? My index finger is generally very near the Apple logo on my phone when I’m using it. It would be entirely convenient if the TouchID were there. It would actually be more comfortable than the current location that requires an awkward grip and thumb reach.
  - Aaargh20318 9y ago
    I use my phone a lot when it’s lying on a desk, can’t unlock it when the fingerprint sensor is on the back. Besides, the convenience of TouchID is largely due to it being integrated in the home button, you’d lose that too.
    - bhauer 9y ago
      > I use my phone a lot when it’s lying on a desk, can’t unlock it when the fingerprint sensor is on the back. 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?)
      - 9y ago

FilterSweep 9y ago

FaceID really is the feature that is ruining the new iPhone for me. And the fact that its (currently) the sole reason why interested customers can't get one come November is another major dealbreaker (IIRC OLED was a problem too). 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. :ed: grammar

shinratdr 9y ago
> 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.
- FilterSweep 9y ago
  > 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.
  - shinratdr 9y ago
    Regardless of what you call them, Geniuses are just CSRs, and I think we've all gotten ill-informed information about products and services from CSRs regardless of the company. I would stick to official press releases and copy about the device for accurate information. 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.

whatok 9y ago

Apple response: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/25/apple-reduced-iphone-x-faceid-accuracy-to-boost-production-report.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/25/apple-reduced-iphone-x-facei... 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.”

ksec 9y ago
Bloomberg has turned into a Apple rumors site ever since the arrival of Mark Gurman. I have no idea why they are doing it and why the need of doing it. After all Bloomberg is straightly not in the news or publishing business.
- radicaldreamer 9y ago
  Mark Gurman's track record is pretty good though.
- runesoerensen 9y ago
  > After all Bloomberg is straightly not in the news or publishing business. What do you mean? Bloomberg News was founded in 1990 and has 2300 employees according to Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_News https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_News
  - philbot1008 9y ago
    I believe that was an attempt at sarcasm ;)
- bound008 9y ago
  This kind of information is relevant to the public markets, so it is relevant to Bloomberg. (irrespective of the overall quality decline in tech reporting)

mmmBacon 9y ago

This is likely a spec relaxation of certain components that has limited to no impact on the accuracy of the assembly. This is really common in optics where early design decisions get made and carried forward due to schedule concerns because making changes impacts a ton of things further down like reliability, assembly, etc... I don't see this as a big deal it's just making decisions that improve manufacturability and yield while not having much impact on the overall device.

noncoml 9y ago

I think buying the iPhone X as soon as it is released is a huge gamble, no matter the struggles Apple is going through with FaceID. 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.

raldi 9y ago
> I think buying the iPhone X as soon as it is released is a huge gamble Why? If you don't like it, you have 14 days to return it.
- ngokevin 9y ago
  Or flip it.
- noncoml 9y ago
  Assuming that the problems will manifest in the first 14 days
  - MBCook 9y ago
    If they don’t then you’re covered under warranty for any defects. 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.
    - rvshchwl 9y ago
      That is not always true. When the iPhone 6 started to "bend" unexpectedly, Apple denied the problem completely and refused replacements until they started to receive bad press for it. Even after that, they didn't acknowledge the problem at all, and claimed that only a handful of devices were affected when in-fact a substantial percentage were. Same thing kind of happened this year with the phone casings expanding. 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.

_ph_ 9y ago

The more likely story is, that Apple set some initial specs for the face ID module early in the development. This was probably a very strict spec, which is of course difficult to match. Fast forward, some months later, as the production devices are coming together and real production devices can be evaluated, the specs can be relaxed somewhat, as Apple now has a clear idea about the specs they need to have a functioning face ID device. Also, the software might be a bit more tolerant to variations in the device. Of course, the revised specs will increase yield too. But that is all what engineering is about -finding out how far you can relax specs and still have a robust working device.

mattbarrie 9y ago

Of course apples problems are all supply related, not demand