7 ms·

Fingerprint sensors are so convenient that they have become must-have features on my phones. Removing it from the Pixel 4 is an unfortunate step backward in ter

by dhd415 7y ago

Fingerprint sensors are so convenient that they have become must-have features on my phones. Removing it from the Pixel 4 is an unfortunate step backward in terms of everyday usability.

fetus8 7y ago
How is the removal of a fingerprint sensor a step back in usability? The facial unlock is less intrusive and requires the user to do less to interface securely (minus any privacy concerns) with the phone.
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  Because it's easier to just put your finger on a sensor to unlock it.
  - dhd415 7y ago
    Yep, plus works in the dark, works when you're not able to look at the phone, generally works faster than facial unlock.
    - kmlx 7y ago
      "plus works in the dark" the iphone has no problems in the dark
      - angry_octet 7y ago
        Fingerprint also works with a mask on. Think cold places and big polluted cities. Almost everyone wears a mask in Shanghai if they can.
        krzyk 7y ago
        Face unlock works with gloves on, think winter :) Oh, and it works when your hands a slightly wet, or when they are very dry.
    - gravypod 7y ago
      Some of the higher quality face unlock uses a dot matrix of IR projected onto the face. Should be visible in dark. Might be hard in areas that are bright in the IR spectrum though.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago
    That is arguable. Stop saying that as if it's an objective fact.
    - heavyset_go 7y ago
      My fingers are already on the phone when I'm unlocking it.
- KZeillmann 7y ago
  Fingerprint sensors work in the dark. Facial unlock doesn't. Edit: looks like I'm probably wrong on this one
  - fetus8 7y ago
    Facial Unlock does work in the dark because it uses IR, and not just a camera.
    - angry_octet 7y ago
      Which tells you it can be tricked with just the IR picture.
      - fetus8 7y ago
        Mind explaining what an IR picture is? Facial Unlocking isn't just using image recognition. Face ID, specifically, using point mapping across a face, creating a 3D map of the face and reference points to unlock the device. I don't think a flat 2D image, even with IR photography, could trick a system like this. A Hollywood grade prop mask of someone's face might be able to trick it, but that seems like a huge outlier.
        dkonofalski 7y ago
        Even a hollywood mask wouldn't trick it unless it had some way to simulate the temperatures across the face. IR determines the points and the relative temperature to make sure the face is live.
        angry_octet 7y ago
        I mean that it is not including features from the visible spectrum when making its decision, only IR & time of flight (depth). IR makes it easy to track the eyes (basically all eye tracking systems use IR) but misses skin tone cues. A prop mask is one approach, but adversarial machine learning techniques might be even more effective, especially if you can study the adaption to a particular face.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  I can unlock my phone with my fingerprint while pulling it out of my pocket, so that it's ready to use as soon as my gaze falls upon it. It takes two seconds longer with face unlock - one second to get it up to my face (and make sure it's aimed in just the right spot), and another second waiting for it to actually recognize me and unlock. Easier, faster, and, hence, more usable.
  - fatnoah 7y ago
    >I can unlock my phone with my fingerprint while pulling it out of my pocket This, I can do it without thinking.
  - chooseaname 7y ago
    This is exactly why I bought an iPhone 8 earlier this year. The fingerprint reader combined with rest to open means my phone is ready to go before my eyes/face are anywhere near the screen. There simply is no competition (against face id) as far as speed is concerned.
  - jakebellacera 7y ago
    The iPhone 11 has the second generation FaceID sensors which is much faster and has lower error rates (to the point that it's not very noticeable anymore). Also, while you do "lose" the TouchID sensor, all FaceID-equipped iPhones have tap to wake and raise to wake functionality which is much more useful than being able to unlock my phone in my pocket, IMO.
    - chooseaname 7y ago
      > ... than being able to unlock my phone in my pocket... I see what you did there. But that's not what OP said.
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      Raise to wake is available on older non-FaceID phones. I think this feature was enabled by the M7 motion coprocessor chip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_motion_coprocessors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_motion_coprocessors which first showed up in the iPhone 6.
- jwilliams 7y ago
  The Pixel had (*had) the fingerprint reader on the back. For me that worked perfectly ergonomically-speaking. Plus, since it's on the back, I'd have thought it wouldn't be too difficult to have both face/fingerprint.
  - dleslie 7y ago
    I have a Pixel 2 and a BlackBerry Key2; I much prefer the thumb reader on the Key2's space bar.
  - dhd415 7y ago
    I used to have a Sony Xperia that had the fingerprint sensor integrated into the power button on the side of the phone. IMO, that was perfect because it could be unlocked either when held in one hand or when sitting on a flat surface. I think a single smartphone manufacturer managed to patent that idea in the US so it's not more widely used.
- AimForTheBushes 7y ago
  Try unlocking your phone when it is flat on the table.
- Slenth 7y ago
  It's not usable for some people because of those privacy concerns.
- thrill 7y ago
  While I keep reading of the ease of fingerprint compromise, I too would have liked leaving the sensor, unless Google simply said it was not securable - my finger naturally falls on the sensor in the Pixel 2 design. However, I'm sure it'll take all of 5 minutes to get used to the face unlock.
- jedimastert 7y ago
  > interface securely...with the phone. That remains to be seen. I've seen several implementations of face unlock that can be unlocked with a video playing on a phone.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago
    Not the implementation on the iPhone or Pixel.
- pacala 7y ago
  The facial unlock is more intrusive specifically because of privacy concerns. If you meant "easier to use", maybe. Though I never had any difficulty in finding the fingerprint sensor on my phone, usually in blind mode as I pull it out from the pocket.
  - dmix 7y ago
    Face detection doesn't need remote access... especially with every phone having an AI chip built in.
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      Your phone still has a complete recognition model of your face, and we're required to trust the vendor when they say it doesn't leave your phone.
- missosoup 7y ago
  > The facial unlock is less intrusive and requires the user to do less Errr? I just pick up my samsung phone and my finger naturally rests on the fingerprint sensor as I'm pulling it out, which instantly unlocks it in any conditions and the phone is ready to go by the time I'm looking at it. Vs. I have to tilt my iPhone up so it can see my face and make sure it's not blinded by the sun and then wait 500ms for it to think about whether I'm me or not. Vs. I get stopped at the border and they want warantless access to my iPhone. I say no. They just point it at me and unlock it. Fingerprint ID is superior in every way.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago
    You need to have your eyes opened and pointed at the phone in order to do that and you can easily disable FaceID in the event that were to ever happen to you by just clicking the side button. I won't comment on the other statements as they're a matter of preference that I simply disagree with.
    - ASalazarMX 7y ago
      Face unlock is utterly insecure. Grab the phone and tell the owner "hey, what's this?". It will unlock before they remember not to look at it. You can be forced to put your finger on the device to unlock it, but at least that has no plausible deniability. the most secure option is still a long PIN/passphrase, but that's too inconvenient.
      - dkonofalski 7y ago
        What's your point? If someone is looking to compromise you and they have physical access to your phone, it's already over. The only situation where this matters is with law enforcement and you can click the power button to disable Face ID or Touch ID.
        ASalazarMX 7y ago
        My point is FaceID trades security for convenience. Seems like you love it, but that doesn't change the trade off. To temporarily disable FaceID and TouchID, you "just press and hold the side button, and either one of the volume buttons". Good luck remembering the procedure and having the time to do that in an emergency or mugging.
- russell_h 7y ago
  Having just switched from a Pixel 3 to and iPhone 11 I’m inclined to agree that FaceID is a step backward. It has a great high tech feel, but: 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. 2. It’s much slower. With the placement of fingerprint sensors on Pixel phones it is totally natural to have the phone unlocked and open by the time the screen comes into view. With FaceID I don’t even start that process until then, and it’s a several step process: assuming the screen is already on (this works well) I have to look at the phone, wait a moment... then swipe up to actually unlock the phone. Facial recognition aside, the act of swiping up alone is way more work than fingerprinting into a Pixel phone. 3. The thing I like most about FaceID is checking notifications - I can simply look at the screen and Signal messages unlock, etc. I’m convinced that most of the hate iPhone users have for fingerprint unlock relates to the placement of the sensor, and (never having used an iPhone fingerprint reader this is speculation) maybe it’s speed or reliability. The implementation on Pixel phones was really great and I’ll be sad to see it go.
  - melling 7y ago
    I’’ve found that I just need to move my phone several inches farther from my face for it to work properly in bed.
  - CobrastanJorji 7y ago
    > 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. This is a tangent, but oncall roles where seconds count but you need to sleep during your shift are an idea as bad as it is ubiquitous.
  - krzyk 7y ago
    > 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. Not sure, my fingerprint sensor in Pixel 3 is unreliable during cold season (in Poland it is about 7 months) - my fingers are dry then (a side affect of allergy) and I basically have to teach it my fingerprint every week because it stops recognizing it. And when it does it takes too much time in my opinion, so I plan to buy Pixel 4 solely because of Face Unlock (but I hope my ever changing beard won't be an issue). Pixel 3 is my first phone with fingerprint sensor and I was really looking forward to it, but after almost a year of having it I basically hate it.
- signal11 7y ago
  There are a few scenarios, some more pressing than others: 1) Triggering the fingerprint sensor requires an active action, 'touch this sensor', versus Face ID (even with attention-detection enabled). This is important for law-enforcement. It is easier for law enforcement to get you to look at something that it is to compel you to unlock something. See for instance https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-legal-rights/ https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg... Note that some courts have ruled that Face ID should have similar protections as Touch ID, but the issue is far from settled and is likely to end up in court in the future. 2) It's easier in mass-transit and POS scenarios to tap your phone while touching the fingerprint sensor. The flow for Face ID is much more convoluted -- bring the phone near the reader (which may be away from your face) to bring up the payment UI, then bring your phone to your face if the reader is faced away, double-click the home button... 3) During meetings, it's easy to sneak a glance at notifications (if your notifications are set to show only when authenticated) by touching your fingerprint sensor -- there's no need to bring your phone to your face and make it obvious you're checking your phone. I don't mind Face ID, to be clear. But I always felt Touch ID was more unobtrusive.
  - yladiz 7y ago
    To be fair, on your second point, some transit systems that are not paid for with contactless, like Suica in Japan, do not require biometric authentication to be used, if it is set up in a specific configuration.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago
    >Face ID should have similar protections as Touch ID It already does. Biometrics of any kind are not protected if the police have a warrant which is what happened in the story you linked.
    - signal11 7y ago
      > Biometrics of any kind are not protected if the police have a warrant It is not as black-and-white as you make it out to be (which was my point -- this will likely end up in the Supreme Court at some point). Specifically, some courts disagree with your position, and hold that even with a warrant, you have a fifth-amendment right not to incriminate yourself. See for instance https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/01/14/feds-cant-force-you-to-unlock-your-iphone-with-finger-or-face-judge-rules/#7ebb776a42b7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/01/14/feds-... > But in a more significant part of the ruling, Judge Westmore declared that the government did not have the right, even with a warrant, to force suspects to incriminate themselves by unlocking their devices with their biological features. The issue is, of course, in the meantime, it's far easier for law enforcement to execute a fait accompli and get a suspect to look at their phone to unlock it.
- nozzlegear 7y ago
  Lots of people have given their opinion regarding fingerprint vs facial unlock. But for me, personally, the reason I would be loathe to give up the fingerprint sensor on my Pixel 3 is the fact that I can swipe up or down on it to pull down the notifications on the phone. Since I've got the 3XL, it's just a nice little usability thing that makes it slightly easier to use such a large phone with just one hand. I'd miss it a lot, and it's one of the reasons I think I'll keep my 3XL for another year instead of upgrading to the Pixel 4.
- DanTheManPR 7y ago
  A major issue I run into that it doesn't work reliably with a lot of PPE headgear (welding gear, face shields, etc). At work, I'm often in a situation where I can't take off my headgear, but I do need to use the phone to take pictures or check my messages. It also is pretty flakey in the winter when I'm wearing scarves and a cap that cover almost all of my face. In both cases, I have to take my gloves off to use the phone anyhow, and so I can just unlock it with the fingerprint reader. On my Galaxy S9, I use both the face unlock and fingerprint reader all the time. I was just thinking this morning that face unlock is proving very useful in the autumn chill, as I can actually use my phone's touchscreen with thin gloves, but don't have to take them off to use the fingerprint reader. Relying on the front camera to replace fingerprint readers is a compromise, and it makes the phone less valuable to me for a lot of every day use cases. I'm glad some other manufacturers make phones with fewer of those kinds compromises.
- bilalq 7y ago
  The fingerprint sensor did more than just unlock. I frequently used it to pull down the notifications view. It made one-handed usage of today's giant phones so much easier.
untog 7y ago
It's disappointing to see the industry blindly copy Apple for no reason other than it being what Apple did. I am also a big fan of the fingerprint sensor, and think that some Android phones bettered the iPhone by putting on the back of the phone. Shame to say goodbye to all that.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  >blindly copy Apple What makes you think that's what's going on here? You don't think Google did their own market and user research before making this thing?
  - lern_too_spel 7y ago
    > You don't think Google did their own market and user research before making this thing? Yes. I have even heard that they get market research on features after they had launched instead of early enough to use in decision-making. Google's product team is incompetent.
josefresco 7y ago
I have sweaty hands, the fingerprint sensor on my iPhone 6 worked maybe 50% of the time. Since upgrading to an iPhone 11, I've found Face ID to be a huge improvement.
dmix 7y ago
Face ID kinda beat the fingerprint sensors a while ago, the only problem was false positive rates were a bit too high which Apple apparently addressed in new iPhones.
- TrueDuality 7y ago
  I'm curious why you think Face ID beat fingerprint sensors and in what context? Maybe convenience but at a trivial level. Definitely not security, its much easier to hold a phone in front of a person to unlock the device than it is to use a fingerprint. Even cops can use it to unlock your phone without permission legally[1], but they can't compel you to use your fingerprint on the device. Of course if you really care about security you won't use either. Historically single factor biometric sensors have historically proven to be weak indicators of identity. [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-legal-rights/ https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg...
  - Hamuko 7y ago
    >but they can't compel you to use your fingerprint on the device. Are you sure? Because I've read the completely opposite and that the only thing that the cops can't force you to do is enter your password.
  - dmix 7y ago
    If you have reason to be concerned about security or police for any reason then all biometric stuff should be disabled. The answer is neither when it comes to privacy. In the real world typing your password a million times is a pain in the ass.
  - dkonofalski 7y ago
    This is just flat-out wrong. Police can absolutely compel you to use your fingerprint on the device if they have a warrant which is exactly what happened in the Face ID context in that article. Any type of biometric identification can be compelled via warrant. Passcodes, on the other hand, cannot because that would violate the search and seizure clause of the Constitution. And, in either case, that doesn't really matter as Face ID/Touch ID can both be disabled by tapping the power button on every iPhone. In terms of security for that specific case, they're both equally secure. Face ID, however, has a much lower rate of false positives than Touch ID (with the notable exception being twins).
merpnderp 7y ago
One thing holding me back from upgrading is how fast my 8's fingerprint sensor is. Sometimes it's too fast for me to use Apple Pay, as it unlocks faster than I can double click. It is so fast, it feels like I'm simply clicking the button to unlock, instead of clicking to wake, read my fingerprint, then unlock.
viklove 7y ago
First the headphone jack, then the fingerprint sensor. Smartphones are getting dumber by the year.
grrrtttt 7y ago
Agree, they should have kept the fingerprint sensor. Even by implementing the two together, it may have offered a compelling and unique 2FA combination.

by dhd415 7y ago

Fingerprint sensors are so convenient that they have become must-have features on my phones. Removing it from the Pixel 4 is an unfortunate step backward in terms of everyday usability.

fetus8 7y ago

How is the removal of a fingerprint sensor a step back in usability? The facial unlock is less intrusive and requires the user to do less to interface securely (minus any privacy concerns) with the phone.

heavyset_go 7y ago
Because it's easier to just put your finger on a sensor to unlock it.
- dhd415 7y ago
  Yep, plus works in the dark, works when you're not able to look at the phone, generally works faster than facial unlock.
  - kmlx 7y ago
    "plus works in the dark" the iphone has no problems in the dark
    - angry_octet 7y ago
      Fingerprint also works with a mask on. Think cold places and big polluted cities. Almost everyone wears a mask in Shanghai if they can.
      - krzyk 7y ago
        Face unlock works with gloves on, think winter :) Oh, and it works when your hands a slightly wet, or when they are very dry.
  - gravypod 7y ago
    Some of the higher quality face unlock uses a dot matrix of IR projected onto the face. Should be visible in dark. Might be hard in areas that are bright in the IR spectrum though.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  That is arguable. Stop saying that as if it's an objective fact.
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    My fingers are already on the phone when I'm unlocking it.
KZeillmann 7y ago
Fingerprint sensors work in the dark. Facial unlock doesn't. Edit: looks like I'm probably wrong on this one
- fetus8 7y ago
  Facial Unlock does work in the dark because it uses IR, and not just a camera.
  - angry_octet 7y ago
    Which tells you it can be tricked with just the IR picture.
    - fetus8 7y ago
      Mind explaining what an IR picture is? Facial Unlocking isn't just using image recognition. Face ID, specifically, using point mapping across a face, creating a 3D map of the face and reference points to unlock the device. I don't think a flat 2D image, even with IR photography, could trick a system like this. A Hollywood grade prop mask of someone's face might be able to trick it, but that seems like a huge outlier.
      - dkonofalski 7y ago
        Even a hollywood mask wouldn't trick it unless it had some way to simulate the temperatures across the face. IR determines the points and the relative temperature to make sure the face is live.
      - angry_octet 7y ago
        I mean that it is not including features from the visible spectrum when making its decision, only IR & time of flight (depth). IR makes it easy to track the eyes (basically all eye tracking systems use IR) but misses skin tone cues. A prop mask is one approach, but adversarial machine learning techniques might be even more effective, especially if you can study the adaption to a particular face.
stronglikedan 7y ago
I can unlock my phone with my fingerprint while pulling it out of my pocket, so that it's ready to use as soon as my gaze falls upon it. It takes two seconds longer with face unlock - one second to get it up to my face (and make sure it's aimed in just the right spot), and another second waiting for it to actually recognize me and unlock. Easier, faster, and, hence, more usable.
- fatnoah 7y ago
  >I can unlock my phone with my fingerprint while pulling it out of my pocket This, I can do it without thinking.
- chooseaname 7y ago
  This is exactly why I bought an iPhone 8 earlier this year. The fingerprint reader combined with rest to open means my phone is ready to go before my eyes/face are anywhere near the screen. There simply is no competition (against face id) as far as speed is concerned.
- jakebellacera 7y ago
  The iPhone 11 has the second generation FaceID sensors which is much faster and has lower error rates (to the point that it's not very noticeable anymore). Also, while you do "lose" the TouchID sensor, all FaceID-equipped iPhones have tap to wake and raise to wake functionality which is much more useful than being able to unlock my phone in my pocket, IMO.
  - chooseaname 7y ago
    > ... than being able to unlock my phone in my pocket... I see what you did there. But that's not what OP said.
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    Raise to wake is available on older non-FaceID phones. I think this feature was enabled by the M7 motion coprocessor chip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_motion_coprocessors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_motion_coprocessors which first showed up in the iPhone 6.
jwilliams 7y ago
The Pixel had (*had) the fingerprint reader on the back. For me that worked perfectly ergonomically-speaking. Plus, since it's on the back, I'd have thought it wouldn't be too difficult to have both face/fingerprint.
- dleslie 7y ago
  I have a Pixel 2 and a BlackBerry Key2; I much prefer the thumb reader on the Key2's space bar.
- dhd415 7y ago
  I used to have a Sony Xperia that had the fingerprint sensor integrated into the power button on the side of the phone. IMO, that was perfect because it could be unlocked either when held in one hand or when sitting on a flat surface. I think a single smartphone manufacturer managed to patent that idea in the US so it's not more widely used.
AimForTheBushes 7y ago
Try unlocking your phone when it is flat on the table.
Slenth 7y ago
It's not usable for some people because of those privacy concerns.
thrill 7y ago
While I keep reading of the ease of fingerprint compromise, I too would have liked leaving the sensor, unless Google simply said it was not securable - my finger naturally falls on the sensor in the Pixel 2 design. However, I'm sure it'll take all of 5 minutes to get used to the face unlock.
jedimastert 7y ago
> interface securely...with the phone. That remains to be seen. I've seen several implementations of face unlock that can be unlocked with a video playing on a phone.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  Not the implementation on the iPhone or Pixel.
pacala 7y ago
The facial unlock is more intrusive specifically because of privacy concerns. If you meant "easier to use", maybe. Though I never had any difficulty in finding the fingerprint sensor on my phone, usually in blind mode as I pull it out from the pocket.
- dmix 7y ago
  Face detection doesn't need remote access... especially with every phone having an AI chip built in.
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    Your phone still has a complete recognition model of your face, and we're required to trust the vendor when they say it doesn't leave your phone.
missosoup 7y ago
> The facial unlock is less intrusive and requires the user to do less Errr? I just pick up my samsung phone and my finger naturally rests on the fingerprint sensor as I'm pulling it out, which instantly unlocks it in any conditions and the phone is ready to go by the time I'm looking at it. Vs. I have to tilt my iPhone up so it can see my face and make sure it's not blinded by the sun and then wait 500ms for it to think about whether I'm me or not. Vs. I get stopped at the border and they want warantless access to my iPhone. I say no. They just point it at me and unlock it. Fingerprint ID is superior in every way.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  You need to have your eyes opened and pointed at the phone in order to do that and you can easily disable FaceID in the event that were to ever happen to you by just clicking the side button. I won't comment on the other statements as they're a matter of preference that I simply disagree with.
  - ASalazarMX 7y ago
    Face unlock is utterly insecure. Grab the phone and tell the owner "hey, what's this?". It will unlock before they remember not to look at it. You can be forced to put your finger on the device to unlock it, but at least that has no plausible deniability. the most secure option is still a long PIN/passphrase, but that's too inconvenient.
    - dkonofalski 7y ago
      What's your point? If someone is looking to compromise you and they have physical access to your phone, it's already over. The only situation where this matters is with law enforcement and you can click the power button to disable Face ID or Touch ID.
      - ASalazarMX 7y ago
        My point is FaceID trades security for convenience. Seems like you love it, but that doesn't change the trade off. To temporarily disable FaceID and TouchID, you "just press and hold the side button, and either one of the volume buttons". Good luck remembering the procedure and having the time to do that in an emergency or mugging.
russell_h 7y ago
Having just switched from a Pixel 3 to and iPhone 11 I’m inclined to agree that FaceID is a step backward. It has a great high tech feel, but: 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. 2. It’s much slower. With the placement of fingerprint sensors on Pixel phones it is totally natural to have the phone unlocked and open by the time the screen comes into view. With FaceID I don’t even start that process until then, and it’s a several step process: assuming the screen is already on (this works well) I have to look at the phone, wait a moment... then swipe up to actually unlock the phone. Facial recognition aside, the act of swiping up alone is way more work than fingerprinting into a Pixel phone. 3. The thing I like most about FaceID is checking notifications - I can simply look at the screen and Signal messages unlock, etc. I’m convinced that most of the hate iPhone users have for fingerprint unlock relates to the placement of the sensor, and (never having used an iPhone fingerprint reader this is speculation) maybe it’s speed or reliability. The implementation on Pixel phones was really great and I’ll be sad to see it go.
- melling 7y ago
  I’’ve found that I just need to move my phone several inches farther from my face for it to work properly in bed.
- CobrastanJorji 7y ago
  > 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. This is a tangent, but oncall roles where seconds count but you need to sleep during your shift are an idea as bad as it is ubiquitous.
- krzyk 7y ago
  > 1. It’s much less reliable. Especially in bed when I get paged at night I almost always have to revert to PIN auth, which is unfortunate when I’m disoriented and seconds count. Not sure, my fingerprint sensor in Pixel 3 is unreliable during cold season (in Poland it is about 7 months) - my fingers are dry then (a side affect of allergy) and I basically have to teach it my fingerprint every week because it stops recognizing it. And when it does it takes too much time in my opinion, so I plan to buy Pixel 4 solely because of Face Unlock (but I hope my ever changing beard won't be an issue). Pixel 3 is my first phone with fingerprint sensor and I was really looking forward to it, but after almost a year of having it I basically hate it.
signal11 7y ago
There are a few scenarios, some more pressing than others: 1) Triggering the fingerprint sensor requires an active action, 'touch this sensor', versus Face ID (even with attention-detection enabled). This is important for law-enforcement. It is easier for law enforcement to get you to look at something that it is to compel you to unlock something. See for instance https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-legal-rights/ https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg... Note that some courts have ruled that Face ID should have similar protections as Touch ID, but the issue is far from settled and is likely to end up in court in the future. 2) It's easier in mass-transit and POS scenarios to tap your phone while touching the fingerprint sensor. The flow for Face ID is much more convoluted -- bring the phone near the reader (which may be away from your face) to bring up the payment UI, then bring your phone to your face if the reader is faced away, double-click the home button... 3) During meetings, it's easy to sneak a glance at notifications (if your notifications are set to show only when authenticated) by touching your fingerprint sensor -- there's no need to bring your phone to your face and make it obvious you're checking your phone. I don't mind Face ID, to be clear. But I always felt Touch ID was more unobtrusive.
- yladiz 7y ago
  To be fair, on your second point, some transit systems that are not paid for with contactless, like Suica in Japan, do not require biometric authentication to be used, if it is set up in a specific configuration.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  >Face ID should have similar protections as Touch ID It already does. Biometrics of any kind are not protected if the police have a warrant which is what happened in the story you linked.
  - signal11 7y ago
    > Biometrics of any kind are not protected if the police have a warrant It is not as black-and-white as you make it out to be (which was my point -- this will likely end up in the Supreme Court at some point). Specifically, some courts disagree with your position, and hold that even with a warrant, you have a fifth-amendment right not to incriminate yourself. See for instance https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/01/14/feds-cant-force-you-to-unlock-your-iphone-with-finger-or-face-judge-rules/#7ebb776a42b7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/01/14/feds-... > But in a more significant part of the ruling, Judge Westmore declared that the government did not have the right, even with a warrant, to force suspects to incriminate themselves by unlocking their devices with their biological features. The issue is, of course, in the meantime, it's far easier for law enforcement to execute a fait accompli and get a suspect to look at their phone to unlock it.
nozzlegear 7y ago
Lots of people have given their opinion regarding fingerprint vs facial unlock. But for me, personally, the reason I would be loathe to give up the fingerprint sensor on my Pixel 3 is the fact that I can swipe up or down on it to pull down the notifications on the phone. Since I've got the 3XL, it's just a nice little usability thing that makes it slightly easier to use such a large phone with just one hand. I'd miss it a lot, and it's one of the reasons I think I'll keep my 3XL for another year instead of upgrading to the Pixel 4.
DanTheManPR 7y ago
A major issue I run into that it doesn't work reliably with a lot of PPE headgear (welding gear, face shields, etc). At work, I'm often in a situation where I can't take off my headgear, but I do need to use the phone to take pictures or check my messages. It also is pretty flakey in the winter when I'm wearing scarves and a cap that cover almost all of my face. In both cases, I have to take my gloves off to use the phone anyhow, and so I can just unlock it with the fingerprint reader. On my Galaxy S9, I use both the face unlock and fingerprint reader all the time. I was just thinking this morning that face unlock is proving very useful in the autumn chill, as I can actually use my phone's touchscreen with thin gloves, but don't have to take them off to use the fingerprint reader. Relying on the front camera to replace fingerprint readers is a compromise, and it makes the phone less valuable to me for a lot of every day use cases. I'm glad some other manufacturers make phones with fewer of those kinds compromises.
bilalq 7y ago
The fingerprint sensor did more than just unlock. I frequently used it to pull down the notifications view. It made one-handed usage of today's giant phones so much easier.

untog 7y ago

It's disappointing to see the industry blindly copy Apple for no reason other than it being what Apple did. I am also a big fan of the fingerprint sensor, and think that some Android phones bettered the iPhone by putting on the back of the phone. Shame to say goodbye to all that.

dkonofalski 7y ago
>blindly copy Apple What makes you think that's what's going on here? You don't think Google did their own market and user research before making this thing?
- lern_too_spel 7y ago
  > You don't think Google did their own market and user research before making this thing? Yes. I have even heard that they get market research on features after they had launched instead of early enough to use in decision-making. Google's product team is incompetent.

josefresco 7y ago

I have sweaty hands, the fingerprint sensor on my iPhone 6 worked maybe 50% of the time. Since upgrading to an iPhone 11, I've found Face ID to be a huge improvement.

dmix 7y ago

Face ID kinda beat the fingerprint sensors a while ago, the only problem was false positive rates were a bit too high which Apple apparently addressed in new iPhones.

TrueDuality 7y ago
I'm curious why you think Face ID beat fingerprint sensors and in what context? Maybe convenience but at a trivial level. Definitely not security, its much easier to hold a phone in front of a person to unlock the device than it is to use a fingerprint. Even cops can use it to unlock your phone without permission legally[1], but they can't compel you to use your fingerprint on the device. Of course if you really care about security you won't use either. Historically single factor biometric sensors have historically proven to be weak indicators of identity. [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-legal-rights/ https://www.wired.com/story/police-unlock-iphone-face-id-leg...
- Hamuko 7y ago
  >but they can't compel you to use your fingerprint on the device. Are you sure? Because I've read the completely opposite and that the only thing that the cops can't force you to do is enter your password.
- dmix 7y ago
  If you have reason to be concerned about security or police for any reason then all biometric stuff should be disabled. The answer is neither when it comes to privacy. In the real world typing your password a million times is a pain in the ass.
- dkonofalski 7y ago
  This is just flat-out wrong. Police can absolutely compel you to use your fingerprint on the device if they have a warrant which is exactly what happened in the Face ID context in that article. Any type of biometric identification can be compelled via warrant. Passcodes, on the other hand, cannot because that would violate the search and seizure clause of the Constitution. And, in either case, that doesn't really matter as Face ID/Touch ID can both be disabled by tapping the power button on every iPhone. In terms of security for that specific case, they're both equally secure. Face ID, however, has a much lower rate of false positives than Touch ID (with the notable exception being twins).

merpnderp 7y ago

One thing holding me back from upgrading is how fast my 8's fingerprint sensor is. Sometimes it's too fast for me to use Apple Pay, as it unlocks faster than I can double click. It is so fast, it feels like I'm simply clicking the button to unlock, instead of clicking to wake, read my fingerprint, then unlock.

viklove 7y ago

First the headphone jack, then the fingerprint sensor. Smartphones are getting dumber by the year.

grrrtttt 7y ago

Agree, they should have kept the fingerprint sensor. Even by implementing the two together, it may have offered a compelling and unique 2FA combination.