Akinaro, 13 Sep 2020if few years they will be less than 1000. Right now average person buy phone that cost between... more"Right now average person buy phone that cost between 500-800(iPhones, samsung, Huawei etc etc)."
Those are the statistics in your head maybe.
Just a quick google search and you will see that the most smartphones models sold in the last few years (number wise), are the ones that I said (200-400EUR price range). At least in Android, because Apple hadn't a smartphone in that price range until iphone SE 2020 model.
And do not worry, I do not like or play games with micro transactions. I am not a FIFA, Fortnite, PUBG, etc. gamer. lol. And I am kindly enough to call those people gamers.
Boggy-Stefy, 12 Sep 2020How affordable do you think they will be?
The average person doesn't want to pay 1000+E... moreif few years they will be less than 1000. Right now average person buy phone that cost between 500-800(iPhones, samsung, Huawei etc etc).
Right now companies charge so much because its new technology and they want to pay for R&D and fabrication lines they created for it.
If you complain that phones are too expensive... dont buy them. Its the same with micro-transactions in games, you complain about it but still use it... So dont use it.
Company will see that its not selling and they lower the price. Its simple as that.
Anonymous, 12 Sep 2020Why are decent BT headphones or buds still so expensive then?not really, I have really amazing cheap BT headphones that last more than 5h and have the same quality as my koss or sony wired headphones.
You just probably focus on brands that bump prices of their products just because of name, you dont bother to check internals of headphones and actual quality
MrPing, 13 Sep 2020Don't think iPhone 12 will have Touch ID because of the lack of rumours, despite using Sa... moreMaybe, maybe not, hard to tell, maybe Apple keep it as a big reveal for a big occasion as many "leaks" are in fact totally planed ways of building controlled hype and totally not accidental or stealthy shots made by an employee, so if they really want to keep something secret until a certain time, they can.
As many peoples liked Touch ID and want it back, and with the current implementation of Face ID that doesn't mix well with masks, it would be logic.
And the Y-OCTA isn't what is used for fingerprint, as underdisplay either use optical or (only Samsung for now in the S10, S20, Note10 and Note20) ultrasonic, which is a Qualcomm tech, that Apple isn't in competition against.
I personally hope it does, as peoples need to realize that fingerprint isn't a replacement for face recognition nor the opposite, it is like saying that we don't need seat belts in our cars because we have airbags (or the opposite), also ultrasonic FPS are clearly the best fingerprint tech and the way of the futur, but because Samsung failed its initial implementation on the tech, peoples think the tech itself is bad, despite being now totally patched and working really well.
AnonD-909757, 12 Sep 2020Thanks you, I love tech so it is quite easy as I have a lot of free time, it gave me opportuni... moreDon't think iPhone 12 will have Touch ID because of the lack of rumours, despite using Samsung's Y-OCTA technology (touch sensors are directly installed on display)
Really liked surface phone fan concept, though displays were separate, inside bezels were bended 180 degrees going further to opposite side, thats just patent though, may be the next gen.
Apple may do something similar, as its cheaper and more durable than bending right now, but if their design is way better, what it might be with duo look, they will sell a lot.
Annas, 12 Sep 2020You really had nothing else to do in weekendActually I am at home the whole week, and indeed I haven't much to do, I am mainly planning stuff and procrastinating, so...Yeah 😁
LG Superfan, 12 Sep 2020Wow impressive how you manage to gather so much infoThanks you, I love tech so it is quite easy as I have a lot of free time, it gave me opportunity to figure out things that peoples don't realize, and I find it fascinating.
For instance, many believe the the first notch appeared with the Essential PH-1 and that Apple copied or got inspired by it for the iPhone X :
It is a common belief that it is the "true first", but actually, this is only based on the release data which is indeed earlier of the iPhone X release date :
But there are many articles well older than the PH-1 that were talking about the iPhone Notch, back when it was still believed it would been called iPhone 9, but none about the PH-1, and considering that the iPhone X complex Face ID system require quite a lot of R&D compared to the notch of the PH-1, they either both had a somewhat similar idea at the same time (the same happened with the Jet Engine) or it is the PH-1 who copied the earlier rumors about the iPhone X notch.
And considering that the iPhone X came the same year as the Samsung Galaxy S8 :
And that Samsung was and still is (now that Huawei is out of the competition) arguably the biggest Apple rival, after the software implementation of Iris Scanner of the Galaxy S7 and prior and the upcoming hardware solution for the S8 (then the S9) that Apple probably got some info about quite early, it seem quite logical that Apple did the notch and Face ID to compete against Samsung while trying to get back its huge delay in term of big display to body ratio.
Then I guess they thought about how to do better and simply made the bezels near inexistant and put "ears" on the top Bezel, transforming it into the Notch we know, probably both to give off a "fulldisplay" effect while putting the status bar outside of the main display, along with the big increase of display height, it was clear they wanted to have a phone made for the new format that the tall smartphones of the time adopted.
I could be wrong as it is only deductions based on no evidences, but I am quite confident that this is close to what happened, the real story of the notch.
I've never seen anyone before who pointed out that the iPhone X notch appeared in drafts and leaks picture and other renders well before any mention of the PH-1.
And I guess, it make me feel a bit "off" as because of that, I found things that peoples don't know, so I have a different view on smartphone techs.
Its like, the big possibility for the iPhone 12 to actually have an ultrasonic indisplay FPS, the Qualcomm 3D Sonic Max, because many peoples totally forgot that back when the Snapdragon 865 was revealed, so was the 3D Sonic Max, that was supposed to be on the next Samsung, but never were, and I did read that Samsung asked for the exclusivity on that sensor but Qualcomm refused, which may be why, but since they haven't done any ads for this sensor despite its amazing capabilities, they probably already had secured a sell for a smartphone model, and back then, indeed, Apple talked with Qualcomm about taking the 3D Sonic Max for its next iPhone (the iPhone 2020).
Now, not long ago, we found a patent of Apple, fulldisplay FPS, which ultrasonic one being way easier to scale up than optical, could allow, that plus BOE and Qualcomm partnering for making flexible display with integrated ultrasonic FPS, and Apple who might use BOE display for some model of its iPhone.
So either the iPhone 12 or the next model (maybe a foldable one) have chances to get Touch ID back, maybe Touch ID 3D, or Touch 3D ID, or better, just Touch 3D, but along with Face ID as the iPhone 12 is confirmed to still have the notch.
And there are articles agreeing :
There are so many "secrets" to be found, things that just got forgotten in old news articles.
Anonymous, 12 Sep 2020The current pandemic has shown that the faceID is useless when you're wearing a mask. I&... moreExcept that all the time you are at home, and you don't use Smart Lock (who never worked for me), you don't wear a mask and 3D Facial recognition, with its high convenience is popular and desired.
And I literally said that the dedicated security chip give a security token (based on a security score) rather than the biometric itself, meaning that as long as you don't do things too sensitive (accessing a folder you set to higher security requirement, open bank or insurance apps, etc), a partial face will work without any issues.
A partial 3D face set of data is still way more secure than a full 2D face image.
And based on how UV camera would look at you, it is mandatory to allow for partial data, as UV skin marks are quite difficult to fake on top of the 3D face shape + skin detection, but if you wear make up or sunscreen, the UV camera can't see those anymore, it isn't a reason to not implement that as it give a great boost on security and low frequency UV are harmless, mainly in the little quantity needed for that, this mean that, the worse case scenario is to have a mask + sunscreen + glasses, but even there it will work.
And that's also why I talked about the importance of having more than one biometric system, not only because some will prefer fingerprint over face recognition, other will prefer face recognition over fingerprint, some will prefer other methods, some will use randomly one or another, some will want to have the other one "just in case", and considering the security advantage, some will use both combined.
If you unlock your phone, chances are you are gonna put at least one finger on the display and you'll look at it, meaning using both is quite logical.
And it still isn't a reason to ditch 3D Facial recognition, the pandemic won't last a decade and even during this pandemic, many peoples use face recognition, except that they use the inferior 2D one, where partial face images would be disastrously bad in term of security.
There are multiple non-notch possible implementations, from bezel to pop up or all sensors and cameras on the back along with a second display. or a Asus Zenfone Flip like solution, etc.
AnonD-909757, 12 Sep 2020Yeah, sure, because 2D facial recognition is SOOOOO secured, can't at all be fooled by pi... moreThe current pandemic has shown that the faceID is useless when you're wearing a mask. I'm not sure if the spread of the virus is due to iPhone users who won't wear a mask because they don't want to have to enter their code every time they need to unlock their phone, but if that's the case, that's just sad. TouchID or fingerprint unlock still works, but the new iPhones don't have it.
AnonD-955101, 12 Sep 2020Dont be fooled. Everything is intentional.
Its not that apple doesn't have the money or ... moreOr wait till tech is cheaper then use it so it costs them less and they can push profit margins higher and advertise like they the only phone who can do it.
Apple is a good marketing company
Android.Master, 12 Sep 2020Exactly, no need for ugly notch.
Besides, 3d facial recognition isn't that secure compar... moreYeah, sure, because 2D facial recognition is SOOOOO secured, can't at all be fooled by pictures 🤣
3D facial recognition using 2 IR camera on a ToF Flash LiDAR + Structured light + UV floodlight & camera is the way to go, if properly implemented, in addition with the skin detection algorithm from Qualcomm and Trinamix, you ain't gonna find ANYTHING that come even close to it, at once exception :
Full display and continuous in-display ultrasonic FPS with software to do veins, blood flow, skin and blood density and distal phalanx density and presence verification.
In which case, both would be actually quite similarity secure as they would require a full lab and extremely accurate data to even hope to maybe have a slight chance at potentially being in the possibility to hopefully, dream about forcing it.
In all cases, any SHOULDN'T replace the other, some peoples prefer face recognition, some prefer fingerprint scanner, other prefer the pin, other the pattern, other the password, some don't even use any security and simply have "swipe to unlock".
And regardless which one the user prefer, you have no right to decide which one we should put on a smartphone and decide for all those who prefer facial recognition that it should be removed just because "you don't like it".
What should be done instead is to focus on giving the best version of each so users and have an effective security.
This mean including a security dedicated chip for :
1) Improving speed and accuracy with dedicated hardware and instruction set for this task.
2) Allowing privacy by not allowing anything else on the phone to access those sensors (except through a physical killswitch) and not send any biometric data to the OS, but rather send a token corresponding on the level of authentification the methods gave, allowing to automatically render any app compatible with any security method and allow for more strict (with user control over what he consider the most secured method) order of selection, for data sensitive apps, like bank for example.
3 ) Allow improved security with combinaison of multiple methods (which exponentially increase, not just double, making the result way more secure than ANY other existing methods), with, for example, 3D facial recognition + Fingerprint, or Fingerprint + Pattern, or even up to 3D facial recognition + facial expression + Fingerprint + Pattern.
It can also allow for regular check, and dangerous behavior detection, meaning of someone force unlock by shoving the phone on your face, since the person is running away, the phone will just block itself again, checking periodically that the person using the phone is either the owner or any of the authorized peoples the user did set.
It can also allow for enhanced protection, like avoiding law enforcement agents to forcefully unlock your phone, by setting a specific combo of security method that are the only way, for X period of time, or while in/out of some specific areas, to unlock the phone.
It can also include a newer pattern where you can add variations, rotate it 90° or 180°, and much more.
THAT is how you make a phone secure, we already have all the hardware and those feature aren't that complex compared to what is already done, it wouldn't be that hard, and those would make a phone way better.
Not "ReMoVe ThIs BeCaUsE, Me, KiNg Of My ThOuGhT, cOnSiDeR tHaT iT iS bAd, ThReFoR, nO OnE sHoUlD hAvE iT" or "It IsN't As SeCuRe As OtHeR mEtHoDs, So DeSpItE pEoPlEs LiNkInG It, We ShOuLd ScRaP iT", which by the way isn't true, in real life scenario, it is a quite robust security method that require complex ways to fool.
Apple 2020: we are working on a foldable smartphone
Price leak: $9999
Apple 2021: we are introducing "i-pen" and "apple- dex" to new iPhone
Price tag: $9999999
(Samsung is killing it right now)
LG Superfan, 12 Sep 2020You know Huawei did came up with a better solution, they reduced the giant notch to a smaller ... moreWell actually there are two issues with this.
Now, as usual, it will be a long comment as I'll go into the details if you are curious on the matter.
First reason, regardless what size or shape you make it, on Android this is a really bad idea to put anything in the way up there, as while on Apple and iOS the top of the display is only used for status icons, which already take up some space, it isn't that much of a nuisance, even though the notch cause already missing icons as it greatly reduce the maximum number of available ones, as you can see in this picture :
Which is why they should have implemented the notification area into two lines rather than one and only displaying them around the notch, even in landscape orientation (just rotating the icons), as in the uniform ecosystem of Apple, the Notch allowed to have a larger display area available on the iPhone X while having a smaller body thanks to the bezelless compared to iPhone 8 Pro who had smaller display area but was bigger as seen in the previous picture and in this representation :
While maintaining the ability to have a lot of sensors in the front.
Here is an exemple of how the single line + the notch affect status icons space :
There are more than enough space for implementing two lines of status icons on the "ears" of the notch :
Here is what the previous iPhones were able to display :
Now on Android, the space up there is both used for status icons and notifications, which need an even larger amount of space, and even the single punch hole actually have quite a negative influence, removing a minimum of 2 notification/status icon spot, except in the case of the smart Meizu 17 which integrate the punch hole within the battery icon, which is the only smart implementation I've seen of the punch hole.
I made some screenshots showing how, even the teardrop notch on my OnePlus 6t (which is the smallest implementation shape of a notch) make Android top bar loose a lot of icons :
And this is a true issue, even though the punch hole seem like not taking much space, it already take quite a lot, notice how far the punch hole push the status icons area :
The smaller but centered punch hole isn't better, it is even worse as it cut the space that either of the two could have used :
Which is clearly visibly preventing this type of scenario of many status icons :
That's why the punch hole shouldn't be THE solution despite being the almost only available tech along with teardrop notch, the pillshape hole is even worse in term of footprint.
Now the second reason is the type of face biometric used, as you can see here, the iPhone notch :
And an equivalent is the Huawei Mate 30 Pro own notch :
Or the even better Huawei Mate 20 Pro notch who had a front flash :
The 3D Facial recognition technology is comparable to the one used on the Pixel 4 and 4XL (Soli chip aside) :
All of those Vs the Huawei P40 Pro implementation :
More details here :
What you have to understand is the difference of technology used, and for that you have to understand the naming :
LiDAR, ToF and Depth sensor.
*Basically a LiDAR is anything that use light to obtain depth information of a scene, the final result make it a LiDAR.
*ToF or Time of Flight is one method of using any "in air" traveling thing (Light, but also sound or really any emissions as if we had the technology we could use gravitational waves too) to measure the distance between the sensor and an object, though in Smartphone it is almost always only IR light.
*Depth sensor basically is any sensor that give depth data, but directly that is, meaning unlike the LiDAR it is the implementation that count, not the result.
*Exemples of LiDAR are the laser scanners used for topographic mapping, they aren't Depth sensor, as the "sensor" itself is just a laser rangefinder, but since it scan an entire place it get complete depth data.
*ToF, like laser rangefinder (which laser autofocus are) is just the method used to measure distances, a LiDAR can work without being a ToF, and by not using Light, like the Soli Chip which is a radar, so working on radio/microwaves rather than visible/IR/UV :
A ToF can work without being a LiDAR.
*And a depth sensor can be both a ToF and a LiDAR
Here are the 3 main different methods used to gather depth data :
*Time of Flight, which can be either a bunch of laser (either multiple diodes, or the same one diffracted into many lasers) or even a single cone of light, either something called a Flash LiDAR which is a LED or a Laser but defocussed (unzoomed) to cover a large area.
**It is either pulsating in which case the distance between each dots (multiple Lasers) by detecting their position when they light up groups of pixels, or by pixels (Flash LiDAR), is measured by calculating the time between the initial pulse and the return.
**Or it can be constantly illuminated and modulated (the frequency is changing) and the shift difference between the currently emitted frequency and the received one.
*Stereoscopy, where software and/or AI (AI basically being a software where its calculation aren't hard coded, but often learned) gather depth data by comparing the difference between two images taken with enough separation, it basically is how typical 3D camera and human eye work.
*Structured light, where a bunch of dots or lines (or a mix of both) are projected and a camera capturing them feed into a software which will see how they are deformed, which give distance informations, not to be confused with the dots pattern a ToF use which give depth data in a "per point" by measuring time rather than deformation.
Here is a basic comparison of the 3 and in their characteristics :
All iPhone with Face ID, the Huawei Mate 20 Pro, Mate 30 Pro and Google Pixel 4 and 4 XL (among few other like the Oppo Find X) use the structured light approach for measuring depth informations on the user's face, the advantage of this is the highly precise measurement that can be made as slight deformations of the dots/lines can easily be spotted, it is the most accurate and therefor the most secure for facial recognition.
The Huawei P40 Pro on the other hand use a ToF sensor, which have the advantage of not requiring a dot projector, but is less precise and therefor less secure.
The advantage of ToF over structured light is that the RAW data don't need computing (only in-sensor analog rectifications) as each pixels/group of pixels already have a time (easily convertible into distance or even usable as such without conversion) data while structured light require some active computation to find and figure out the deformation for each dots.
While ToF have for limitation that you require extremely fast hardware (the sensor itself is analog, so already as fast as it can, it is more about the electronic) to measure the extremely short time for light to travel in short distances, which, for close range, can quickly become ultra expensive if you try to crank up the precision too high.
Other popular implementations of structured light is the Kinect, here are some exemples :
Kinect, structured light but using two camera (stereoscopy) to detect the distance of each dots : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIkscN6nXcE
Smartphone Dot Projector, structured light (the blinking have nothing to do with ToF which is way faster) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4m6StzUcOw
And there isn't any good exemple of ToF in action where we can see it though.
AnonD-909757, 12 Sep 2020So, maybe a great news as Apple may be smart enough to get rid of the useless front camera by ... moreThe problem is that people who were laughing at those foldables were Apple fanboys. There were saying Samsung, Huawei or Microsoft are only making gimmicks or blah blah.
mod, 12 Sep 2020looking ugly, so booring designer Actually as a android user i think this new design is somehow refreshing.
Not a noticeable difference from the old generation but still.a right new colors can do miracles for the customer's eyes when chosing a new device.