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

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-25/inside-apple-s-struggle-to-get-the-iphone-x-to-market-on-time

by runesoerensen • 9 years ago

119 171 9 years 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• 9 years ago

Official statement ?!!?

eli• 9 years ago

Reporting from "people familiar with the situation" is the opposite of an official statement

untog• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years 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.

seanmcdirmid3• 9 years ago

They will sell well, especially in china where the fashionistas want a new iPhone that is noticeably different from the 6/7/8.

ballenf2• 9 years ago

the iPhone 8 is pretty underwhelming

The 8 might well be a 7s, in all but name, but is hardly underwhelming as compared other incremental iPhone releases in my view.

For me, it's a bigger improvement to my everyday use of the device by a mile than:

6: larger screen (maybe an exception for this reason)

6s: 3d touch; 2nd gen touch ID

7: jack-less; splash proof; shiny option

8: Heavier/premium feel, wireless charging, much bigger performance bump than usual

The 8 is the first phone where the phone can pretty much keep up with my thoughts, which makes it an incredibly different experience. The rhythm of using the device is just an order of magnitude different.

The 8 is forgettably underwhelming on its spec sheet (except speed), a marvel and delight in person. Bottom line for me is that the spec sheet is increasingly irrelevant to my satisfaction with a device.

I also have zero desire to be the guinea pig for all the new stuff on trial in the X.

edited: fixed touch id introduction -- thanks

pbh101• 9 years ago

Small nitpick: Touch ID was introduced in the 5s.

gurkendoktor• 9 years ago

Is the iPhone 8 on iOS 11 merely faster than other phones running iOS 11, or faster than, for example, an iPhone 5s running iOS 7?

I think (but this might be my rose-tinted glasses) that every iPhone since the 3GS ran everything at 60 FPS, and that app launches were mostly limited by the launch animation, until each phone got its first major update. The one obvious outlier is the iPad Pro 10.5 with its 120 Hz display, where everything is smoother than it could possibly be on older devices.

I'd love to see data on this that's more accurate than sketchy YouTube comparisons.

randallsquared2• 9 years ago

I had a 6 Plus (which has Touch ID) for the last couple years, bought just before the 6S launched, and my main complaint with it was that I had to build in a slight pause to every non-keyboard touch to ensure that the phone had caught up. This didn't even always work, if it was slightly slower that day. I bought the 8 Plus, as I had no desire to lose Touch ID, and I've been quite impressed with the speed improvement. The pauses are almost always unnecessary, now, and I would say that the phone keeps up with what I want more than 50% of the time, which with the 6 Plus was "almost never".

The 8 Plus camera is also noticeably better even for someone who doesn't pay much attention to photo quality. People have remarked how I've learned to take better pictures. I haven't.

tatrajim• 9 years ago

All the hallmarks of classic Bloomberg FUD.

Xophmeister• 9 years ago

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

Really?

1_2__4• 9 years ago

Amusingly that’s where I pulled the ripcord on this article too.

mikeash10• 9 years 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• 9 years 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.

jws• 9 years ago

I believe what a user really cares about is the false negative rate.

10⁻⁵ versus 10⁻⁶ false positive rates don't matter when it locks out after 10¹ fails.

teekert2• 9 years ago

But it will be the false negatives that will by far be the most annoying and noticeable.

I mean how often will it be aimed at a wrong face compared to the right face?

I'm very curious about that. Generally measurements can be tuned in a way that exchanges false positives for false negatives (i.e. increasing sensitivity at the cost of specificity (or precision) meaning the phone can be made to be more sensitive to your face specifically (which is what they advertise with) at the cost of an increase in not detecting your face while it should.)

mtgx• 9 years ago

Again, that number is very misleading. Apple is "lying with statistics" basically.

No attacker trying to break into your iPhone's authentication will use random images. They'll build a profile off your existing online photos, and then try to fool the FaceID system that it's actually you authenticating.

Suddenly that number drops by about three or four orders of magnitude.

This is harder to do with fingerprints because you don't keep your fingerprints online.

MBCook9• 9 years ago

By the time Apple held their event they would have probably already known this (or the possibility of it).

I wonder if 1 in 1 million is the lower number and originally it was 1 in 2.5 million or something.

Of corse you’re right if they went below the million number there is a lot of room before they get to TouchID accuracy levels.

pentae• 9 years ago

This number they throw around is such marketing bs.

If we break it down what it really means is "If we take a sampling of the population only 1 in 1 million people will look like you so you're good".

As Schiller conceded in his keynote, any identical twins will need to "deeply consider how much they trust their sibling".

infogulch3• 9 years ago

Here's the thing. Fingerprints are uniformly random [1]. Faces aren't. Your average Joe can't use a global online database of fingerprints to find ones that might be "close" to the owners to try to fool it, and that's only after you have the owners fingerprint, not a straightforward task. For faces that database is literally called FACEbook, and getting a picture of the owners face is trivial. And faces aren't random at all: sometimes even distant relatives look alike.

I'm not saying that the 1/1M faceid false positive rate is wrong for the general population, I'm saying that the attack vectors to reduce that number by large factors are much easier and readily available than for touchid.

[1]: Citation needed, I know.

Edit: Apparently I didn't make it clear that I don't think attack vector is to show it a 2D photo (if you had a photo of the owner why would facebook even come into this?), the attack vector is to find a lookalike using 2D photos and show the phone their face in person. Facebook's role is to find the lookalike. This should be trivial to socially engineer after you find the person.

throw7• 9 years 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• 9 years 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?

FilterSweep4• 9 years ago

What if every single other feature of the iPhone X is appealing to you?

seanmcdirmid3• 9 years ago

You know you probably look at your phone whenever you use it right?

oddevan• 9 years ago

Via Dave Mark 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• 9 years 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• 9 years ago

I really wish I could mentally dismiss your comment as being from a troll, but truth is, you’re right.

alsetmusic• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years 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.

tonfa• 9 years ago

Out of curiosity, why do you think so? I've used fingerprint sensor from both front and back, and I find back more natural (my fingers usually rest on the back of the phone).

bhauer2• 9 years ago

That touchid on back is a huge fail from UX perspective.

How so? My wife's phone has a fingerprint sensor on the back and it works great. My phone has a retina scanner on the front, and it works less well. Sure, we'll eventually see scanning through the display [1], but until that happens the fingerprint sensor on the back works really well for me.

[1] http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2017/0257534.html

somebehemoth2• 9 years ago

I have both an S7 Edge (fingerprint reader on home button) and I've had 2 Nexus devices (6P and Pixel) with reader on back. I find the fingerprint sensor on the back to be far more user friendly than the awkward thumb button option. As others have said it is a natural location for your finger when holding the phone. Your use case is valid (phone is on flat surface), but the vast majority of people hold their phones during use rather than lay on flat surface.*

*citation needed, but I sincerely doubt this is hard to believe.

xeromal• 9 years ago

Give the Pixel 2's touch scanner a try. It's incredibly fast. I'm amazed every time I use it.

sfifs• 9 years ago

Not correct. Galaxy S7 has it in the front and it's a pain to use compared to Galaxy S8 which has the touch sensor much more ergonomically positioned at the back.

Source: owned both phones.

huebnerob2• 9 years ago

I don't see how Face ID is inherently an "epic pain" unless you're building in the assumption that it doesn't work well. If you instead assume that it works fairly well and your device is unlocked when you look at it, it seems that it could be much more convenient in many scenarios than Touch ID. Like when you're wearing gloves, when your finger might be dirty/wet, etc..

I've used Touch ID since inception, and I can honestly say that I'm excited to explore the different set of tradeoffs that Face ID will bring. What I will grant you is that we don't actually know how well it works yet, but we will soon.

a012• 9 years ago

My GF who usually use her phone as mirror won't buy iPhone X because it'll unlock automatically every time she holds it to check makeup.

sarreph• 9 years ago

Interesting you mention the gloves / 'soiled'-fingers scenarios — as those do indeed make it pain to use TouchID! However, they usually also restrict your usage of the entire touch display as well (unless you have ultra-snazzy touch-gloves)... So it might be more of an edge-case, but a good one nonetheless.

I'm also very interested if they introduce TouchID into the next generation's screen. Would be an admission of guilt that the combo of both is the sweet-spot, and is sure to annoy X-gen1 users.

It just doesn't feel ready to me at all.

hungerstrike4• 9 years ago

I don't see how Face ID is inherently an "epic pain" unless you're building in the assumption that it doesn't work well.

My assumption is that it will always take longer than just using a button. If it doesn't take longer, then it will be unlocking at incorrect times.

That's why I think it will be an epic failure.

alistairSH4• 9 years ago

I don't see how Face ID is inherently an "epic pain"

The fact that the phone only allows one face is a deal-breaker for me. My wife needs access to my phone (and vice versa). I'd prefer we don't have to memorize each others long/complex passcodes. With TouchId, this scenario is handled. With a single FaceId, it's a loss of functionality.

mcintyre19942• 9 years ago

I don't see how the Apple Pay use case is going to be anything but awkward - I don't think many payment terminals are at the right angle to do face unlock and NFC at the same time. So I guess there'll be some way to authenticate, then NFC tap to pay or something.. but it'll surely be more fiddly. Apple Pay with TouchID is a perfect UX.

shinratdr7• 9 years ago

Both will likely confuse and annoy long time customers and should've been solved with an ergonomic button on the back.

One more reason why the iPhone X isn't "the iPhone" this year. Apple knows this, it's the most fundamental shift in how you use the device since the original iPhone.

Those that feel confused and annoyed can always return the phone and buy the iPhone 8 for less money. Many already have opted to just buy the iPhone 8 rather than wait.

I don't think it's a mistake at all, it's a carefully calculated move to ensure that the vast majority of their customer base isn't alienated by pricing this phone out of reach and making it very clear that this is a glimpse into the future of the iPhone, not the iPhone you know and love.

toasterlovin3• 9 years ago

Just a friendly reminder that nobody outside of Apple has actually used FaceID. So maybe we should all shelve the hysterics over hypotheticals until we can base our opinions on actuals.

MBCook9• 9 years ago

And given preorders are Friday morning the reviews should be out today or tomorrow. We don’t need to argue about this anymore we’re hours away from people with hands on experience telling us if it works.

tinus_hn• 9 years ago

Surely the iPhone X will be that magical Heisenphone that nobody wants to buy and Apple can’t manufacture enough of!

Apocryphon• 9 years ago

Well, it is considerably more expensive.

bluthru• 9 years ago

It seems like FaceID is an epic pain compared Touch.

It's a huge improvement if you're wearing gloves or have wet fingers.

an ergonomic button on the back

This requires you to hold your phone a certain way (at least initially).

enra• 9 years ago

FaceID actually works well and the missing home button doesn't bother. Its actually easier to get to the home screen since you don't have to move your finger from screen to button and back.

jordache• 9 years ago

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

FilterSweep4• 9 years 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

shinratdr7• 9 years 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.

FilterSweep4• 9 years 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.

__abc• 9 years ago

Apple doesn't seem interested in addressing

Like what? Genuinely curios.

FilterSweep4• 9 years ago

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/09/12/the_iphon...

I'm waiting with bated breath for the "quickly press the home button 5 times to disable it" objection, because thats not how real life situations work.

ksec2• 9 years ago

(IIRC OLED was a problem too)

Well yes, since the FaceID component is small, and yield issues happen at assembly stage i can see this is easily fixable.

But OLED? There is one, and precisely one manufacturer making it, with limited capacity from the start and no quick fix to it. This manufacture also happens to be making OLED for their own phone.

If the demand of iPhone X is anywhere near as close as other new iPhone, we are easily looking at shortage of phones well past Xmas.

whatok2• 9 years ago

Apple response:

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.”

ksec2• 9 years 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• 9 years ago

Mark Gurman's track record is pretty good though.

runesoerensen2• 9 years 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

bound008• 9 years 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)

IBM2• 9 years ago

Giving a rival publication the statement instead of Bloomberg is classic Apple. The spirit of Katie Cotton lives on in Apple PR.

whatok2• 9 years ago

They gave virtually the exact same statement to Bloomberg as well.

mox1• 9 years ago

So a 1 in a million probability, with potentially 30 million phones in use within the next few months....

So like 30 times a day...assuming 1 face unlock per device per day.

hjnilsson• 9 years ago

The probability of 1 in a million is for a different face to be similar enough to yours to unlock. Unless there are 999 999 other people picking up your phone every day (which would be over 10 people per second), it will essentially never happen.

Also, phone requires passcode after X failed attempts, so even then you can could only try <10 other faces.

dantiberian• 9 years ago

There is a way to read this where both companies are right, depending on which accuracy spec is being referred to.

Apple likely built Face ID to be more accurate than claimed. This is similar to what they did with waterproofing the iPhones, where for one or two years they were built to a higher waterproofing level than they were marketed as.

Imagine Apple's suppliers were building to a 1:2,000,000 accuracy rate, and they were told they could drop the accuracy to 1:1,200,000 accuracy rate. Bloomberg is right that Apple has allowed the suppliers to reduced accuracy, while Apple's statement that there continues to be a one in a million probability of a random person unlocking your phone is also true.

This is an uncharitable reading of the situation though, and I'm mostly inclined to take Apple at their word on this.

mmmBacon• 9 years 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.

noncoml2• 9 years 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• 9 years 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• 9 years ago

Or flip it.

noncoml2• 9 years ago

Assuming that the problems will manifest in the first 14 days

_ph_• 9 years 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• 9 years ago

Of course apples problems are all supply related, not demand

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

Related Stories