Executive says Apple never tried to embed Touch ID on the back, front or side of iPhone X

Executive says Apple never tried to embed Touch ID on the back, front or side of iPhone X
During the winter, spring and summer, back in the days when everyone called the tenth anniversary version of the iPhone the Apple iPhone 8, there was a serious question about where Apple was going to put the Touch ID button. After all, the edge-to-edge screen was expected to leave no room for a front-facing  button for the fingerprint scanner. Quickly, rumors spread that Apple wanted to embed Touch ID under the display. And plan B was rumored to be a rear-facing Touch ID button.

The public really was hoping for a Touch ID button that would be placed under the display. Every time a render would show a cut out for a rear facing button, moans and groans were heard from the Apple faithful. Some even criticized Apple for being unable to develop the technology to embed Touch ID under the phone's display. Ironically, information released today by a high level Apple executive revealed that Apple never ever thought of putting Touch ID under the display, on the back, or even on the side of what was eventually called the iPhone X.

Apple's senior vice president of Hardware Engineering Dan Riccio, said in an interview today that all of those rumors about Touch ID being placed in various spots on the handset were simply not true. He said that early on in the process of designing the iPhone X, it was discovered that Face ID worked so well. Instead of being distracted by looking for a place to embed Touch ID, Apple focused on making Face ID the best that it could be.


Ironically, KGI analyst Ming-Chi Kuo had already revealed exactly what Apple was thinking back in February when he told clients that Apple would use a "revolutionary" front-facing camera to power a face-recognition system that would unlock the phone. Remember, this was a little shy of seven months before the device was unveiled as the Apple iPhone X. Heck, the analyst even correctly called for two variants of the premium model, one with 64GB of native storage, and the other with 256GB of the stuff. And he also nailed the 5.8-inch size of the OLED panel.

source: TechCrunch

Related phones

iPhone X
  • Display 5.8" 1125 x 2436 pixels
  • Camera 12 MP / 7 MP front
  • Processor Apple A11 Bionic, Hexa-core, 2390 MHz
  • Storage 256 GB
  • Battery 2716 mAh(21h 3G talk time)

FEATURED VIDEO

98 Comments

1. MrShazam

Posts: 987; Member since: Jun 22, 2017

In other news, Face ID can't distinguish between identical twins unlike Touch ID: https://mspoweruser.com/turns-tim-cook-not-joking-evil-spock-iphone-x-attack/ So much for the "it's more secure than touch ID" RDF...

4. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

Well, it doesn't work under daylight or fluorescent lights either, as stated by the verge review.

63. janis

Posts: 397; Member since: Mar 10, 2014

try to unlock phone in meeting or driving...

64. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Why the hell are you looking at your phones while you're driving?

66. uncle_gadget

Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017

Because a lot of people do! So either you don't drive and or you would be lying if you claim you never used a phone while driving. Assuming you're old enough to drive to begin with. Why are their laws against using phone while driving. Because people do it obviously. Am sure you know this. That was a completely stupid @$$ question. It's like asking, why do you eat or sleep.

94. sgodsell

Posts: 7215; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

I think you guys are getting away from this article. I certainly don't believe Apple said okay let's drop TouchID altogether, especially when there is something called Sense ID from Qualcomm. This does a 3D scan of your finger print instead of the traditional 2D scan. This new Sense ID uses ultrasound to scan a users finger print, and it can be wet or have a thin glove. Something that traditional 2D finger print scanners cannot do. I believe Apple was looking into that, but since Apple is feuding with Qualcomm. Then that option was out. This is where I hope some other smartphone OEMs will pick up and use this new finger print sensor.

104. uncle_gadget

Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017

I've unlocked my phone with thin latex gloves on many times.

7. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Ehhh... not a big deal if you think about it. FaceID is still 20x more secure than TouchID. Plus Apple themselves did specify this could be an issue, and its not like I have an evil doppelganger shop lifting in San Antonio. *Phone rings *Private number... who dis? Scratch my previous statement... his name is Chad (f**king Chad). He apparently stole a Letterman out of a Dillard's; calling my attorney now.

9. androidwindows

Posts: 216; Member since: Oct 04, 2014

If it can't distinguish identical twins and doesn't work properly in the daylight, then that means it's not 20 times more accurate than TouchID. If anything, it's LESS accurate than TouchID.

10. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

Are we REALLY already hopping on the "doesn't work in daylight" train? Only one publication has even hinted at that being a problem, and even then you can clearly see him holding the phone at waist level likely causing mapping issues. And to be clear, the reviewer in question is apparently farsighted, so I'm not blaming him for that particular aliment. However, you really cannot blame Apple for you holding the phone 20 something inches below the recommended level. As far as twins go... do you have an identical twin? Do any of you have am identical twin? Statistically speaking, I'm gonna guess the answer is no, because the chances of even being born with an identical sibling are 1 in 350 at base, and the chances of both twins making it past five are 1 in 1050. I think you're really stretching potential security risks here.

12. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Several reviews have called it hit or miss. It's not necessarily insecure, but if might not work as well as it should.

15. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

These "reviews" haven't even come out yet lol. These are literally "hands-on" entries, and the majority of which describe it as really fast with occasional misses due to off axis scans. Trust me, I've seen basically every one of them the last two days... I know.

17. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

And in those hands on, they tested it, and it was hit or miss. Why does it have to be a full review to report the face id didn't work all the time. More importantly, why does it bother you so much that they found it didn't?

19. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

It bothers me because every time a new feature on Android is released with a flagship there's always considerably more patience than vice versa. Each publication has their piece regarding Apple's implementation thus far and I'm fully aware its not perfect off jump. However, the readiness to automatically dismiss it as less secure STAGGERINGLY hasty. Like Jesus... you dudes gonna wait til these sites get a unit for longer than a damn day to test? We just gonna pretend like 90% of these outlets didn't report that it worked great for them? Is it too much to ask to hold off on presumptuous claims?

24. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

And your propensity to simply accept and claim by Apple is reasonable? You parrot the 20X more secure line with nothing more than their word. 90% is an extreme exaggeration from what I've seen. About half of what I've read said things like, "it mostly works." Hardly a ringing endorsement. And, let's face it, there are certain outlets (BGR) that will proclaim it works better than any other, no matter what.

33. kiko007

Posts: 7493; Member since: Feb 17, 2016

"And your propensity to simply accept and claim by Apple is reasonable?" I'm parroting it because if it was a false statement out of Apple's gullet, we'd know by now. There are plenty of sites who do biometric research who could easily prove they did in fact lie to the general masses, and its not like they've ever lied about their other biometric scanners in a live event. I have no reason not to believe them there. "90% is an extreme exaggeration from what I've seen. About half of what I've read said things like, "it mostly works." Considering this is a brand new set of sensors that are way more secure than the ones offered by non-MSFT competition... I'd say that's an endorsement. Maybe not a ringing variant, but still an endorsement. Nobody said it had to be perfect at launch, just that it had to WORK PROPERLY. Guess what... it does for the most part... yay!

43. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

No, we wouldn't know by now. No one has had nearly enough time to do the type of testing needed to determine this. The only thing we have is Apple's statement. I'm sorry, but "mostly works" is not an endorsement. They've stated it needs to be angled right in orientation to the face, and it's finicky. It's not a denunciation, but it's certainly not an endorsement.

98. AxelFoley unregistered

Oh yeah. Remember the patience for Bixby. Everyone said let's give it time. s/

62. midan

Posts: 2720; Member since: Oct 09, 2017

And i read lot of hands on reviews where people say it works great, so funny and typical that Android boy only see the negative. Overall people say it works very well.

74. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

So funny any typical that an Apple fanboy only accepts the positive. Yes that's you.

79. uncle_gadget

Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017

Why would anyone be surprised it doesn't work 100% of the time. Its not gonna work 100% of the time. I am guessing based on experience with Samsung devices, it will work maybe 75% of the times you really need it too. Why doesn't it go to tthe home screen automatically like other unlock methods. You have to face unlock and then swipe to see home screen. FPS, Iris and Face on my Galaxy takes me right to the home screen. Only password unlock require me to swipe to see home-screen afterwards Example. You are rushing to get on a plane. Your ticket is on your phone. You rush to the attendant to show the ticket and you raise the phone in a hurry and it doesn't unlock. You are driving trying to watch the road. You raise the phone to look at the map and you are trying to look at the road at the same time, and it won't unlock because you are looking up and down to quickly. You are at the store, ready to use Apple Pay and you hold the phone up to your face and it simply doesn't unlock at all and you didn't bring the physical card with you. There are COUNTLESS situations where you will use this and it will fail at the least expected time. Your finger will work 99.9% of the time. Samsung didn't tie face unlock to Samsung Pay. Smart move. You must use a Passcode or FPS. If you told Kiko and his sheep, booboo stinks, he will find someone who says it doesn't. As long as someone feels the same as him, he is OK with it. Any information that goes against his narrative, then you will be wrong. You may as well be talking to Donald Trump. The Kikosheepocrites are never gonna listen to any voice of reasoning. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8-yupM-6Oc Face ID fails after shaving a beard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2xHowG4lkc It did work after a few tries. But it did fail.

58. Jimrod

Posts: 1605; Member since: Sep 22, 2014

I don't really care about the twins thing, it maps face structure so obviously that'll be an issue but not relevant for most. I'd recommend that identical twins who don't trust their twin simply don't buy it. The daylight thing - did anyone watch the video? He's holding it at waist height, I can't even read text on a phone that far away! It doesn't look like a flaw to me, but simply that it's really far away from his face! I don't like the change to FaceID, I'm not buying an iPhone X, I think it's like a first gen trying to find solutions to self-created problems, but I think the daylight thing based on that review is a stretch due to how he's using it.

76. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

So, you're saying he's holding it wrong? Funny, Apple said something similar to the first reviewer who found it was hit or miss. I think they might have said something like that in the past, too. Let's think... Seriously though, the claim was it works from almost any angle, yet we're hearing that people are needing to line their face up and look in a certain spot. That doesn't make it any more convenient than iris scanning. Less convenient than FPS (unless the sensor is placed in a totally stupid position - I'm looking at you, Samsung).

96. Jimrod

Posts: 1605; Member since: Sep 22, 2014

I agree the front fingerprint scanner was the best compromise (until under screen FPS can be done). That's one of the reasons I'm not interested in the X. But that reviewer actually looked like he was awkwardly holding it as far away as possible. I don't think any current phones are really nailing it, all seem to have pros and cons, I think the S8 is winning the design war but I'm not as impressed when I've tried to use one - should it really take 5+ seconds to rotate screen when you change orientation?? :D But the iPhone 8 is just another "s" and the X a bit of a guinea pig kinda device. Pixel 2 is a little oldschool screen-wise and the larger version seems to have issues.

99. tedkord

Posts: 17312; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Try the Note 8. Also, you can look to smaller brands. I had an Axon 7 for a month after I had to return the Note 7, and it was really impressive. It was better than the S7 Edge I eventually got, but because Verizon refused to officially support it, it had too many issues with their network (despite supporting all their bands). I'd have stuck with it until the Note 8 if Verizon would have supported it.

102. omnitech

Posts: 1131; Member since: Sep 28, 2016

Dude, the guy that said it didn’t work in daylight was bankz or your level. That moron said the iPhone 8 has the best display ever or something retarded like that. If he said it doesn’t work in daylight, then it doesn’t. He would never say anything bad about his god Apple unless he had to. Lol

42. androapplephone

Posts: 42; Member since: Oct 04, 2011

If anything really...if anything sounds like your saying maybe. Look into how they got those numbers. It’s accurate. Show proof not just say an assumption.

51. trojan_horse

Posts: 5868; Member since: May 06, 2016

Face ID maybe more secure than Touch ID, but it's also less convenient that Touch ID, since Face ID won't work in all lighting conditions and scenarios.

72. uncle_gadget

Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017

Its simple math. A fingerprint reader has 4 points of failure. Dirt, moisture, dryness, improper touching of sensor. Face ID has at least 10 points of failure. Lighting (to much or too little), skin tone, shadows, expressions, hold it wrong and more. The more secure somethign is, the slower it is. Iris Scanner is slow. Sure it unlocks preety fast, as long as you hold it up properly the very first time. If you dopn't it will fail. The same with face recognition. Apple added infrared and a light to try to elimiante fail points. Infrared so it works in the dark. It has a LED light to shine a light on your face to reduce shadows. The problem is, if the light in the room is brighter than the light it shines at you, it can and will cause failure.

71. uncle_gadget

Posts: 1050; Member since: Sep 20, 2017

All forms of biometrics are less accurate than a fingerprint reader. This is a fact that I showed already. https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/authentication/biometric-scanning-technologies-finger-facial-retinal-scanning-1177 This document (NOT FROM APPLE) from SANS Institute explains all the diffeence forms of biometrics. It talks about Retina Scanning, Iris Scanning, Face Scanning and FIngerprint Scanning. It talks about the flaws and facts of all of them. I read all 15 pages every single word. The document itself confirms that all of Apple claims of face recognition are simply exaggerated, based on twisting some real facts. You never have to listen to bad taglines and false marketing claims. Just like Retina Display was all BS. https://mostly-tech.com/2013/11/08/debunking-the-retina-display-myth/ https://www.cultofmac.com/173702/why-retina-isnt-enough-feature/ Steve Jobs said some facts about retina, but he exaggerated it for marketign hype. An every ifan loser bought into it like flies on booboo. When any tech company makes any claim, every real tech person would just google and see who much is truth and how much is marketing. Apple is all about marketing, because the so-call most educated who buy their phones are as dumb as a box of rocks and believes everything Apple claims. Appel accuracy claim is made from the fact that face recognition has a higher security rate, in that out of billions of people, there is 1 in 20 chance that the device will fial and unlock. That is their claim. The facts show this claim is BS. The biggest issue is, face recognition have other factors which can make the accuracy lower. Those are the points of failure. Complexion, bad lighting, to much lighting, shadows, sleepy eye, wrinkles, expressions and more all can cause a failure. That failure means, someone could literally make an expression that matches your face and the phone can unlock. No one on the planet can match your finger or iris and both iris are not identical even in your own face.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.