1. mogelijk's Avatar
    Sorry I'm confused. Is there a public statement from Apple saying they will never again introduce a product with touch ID?
    I'm not aware of any comment to that effect -- and as pointed out the 6th Gen iPad was just announced/released with the an FPS. I do hesitate to call the 6th Gen iPad a new product though, instead they appear merely to have added Pencil support and updated the processor a generation (from the A9 to the A10), but otherwise it seems to be exactly the same (chassis, display, cameras, speakers, etc).

    There have been interviews with Apple executives where they basically say FaceID (and the iPhone X generally) are what Apple plans for the future, but they never say it outright. Additionally, Apple bought RealFace, an Israeli company specializing in facial recognition, and made a $390 million investment in Finisar in December, the company which makes the scanner chips for FaceID.

    Apple wouldn't be making these types of investments, even after the iPhone X launch, if they didn't plan on FaceID being the future. Also, Apple tends to just "cut off" technologies they feel are becoming obsolete, such as the headphone jack, and not bring them back on future models despite customer complaints.

    Because of this, I doubt you'll see an FPS on a future Apple flagship device. You might see it again on a phone, if Apple announces a low cost iPhone SE2, and the low cost iPads will likely keep an FPS until the cost of FaceID comes down to a similar price as the TouchID sensor. At the same time, even the "low cost" (but still rumored to be $699) iPhone rumored for this Fall, the 6.1" LCD model, is rumored to only have FaceID.
    03-30-2018 03:30 PM
  2. anony_mouse's Avatar
    I'm not aware of any comment to that effect -- and as pointed out the 6th Gen iPad was just announced/released with the an FPS. I do hesitate to call the 6th Gen iPad a new product though, instead they appear merely to have added Pencil support and updated the processor a generation (from the A9 to the A10), but otherwise it seems to be exactly the same (chassis, display, cameras, speakers, etc).

    There have been interviews with Apple executives where they basically say FaceID (and the iPhone X generally) are what Apple plans for the future, but they never say it outright. Additionally, Apple bought RealFace, an Israeli company specializing in facial recognition, and made a $390 million investment in Finisar in December, the company which makes the scanner chips for FaceID.

    Apple wouldn't be making these types of investments, even after the iPhone X launch, if they didn't plan on FaceID being the future. Also, Apple tends to just "cut off" technologies they feel are becoming obsolete, such as the headphone jack, and not bring them back on future models despite customer complaints.

    Because of this, I doubt you'll see an FPS on a future Apple flagship device. You might see it again on a phone, if Apple announces a low cost iPhone SE2, and the low cost iPads will likely keep an FPS until the cost of FaceID comes down to a similar price as the TouchID sensor. At the same time, even the "low cost" (but still rumored to be $699) iPhone rumored for this Fall, the 6.1" LCD model, is rumored to only have FaceID.
    Thanks for the comprehensive reply. :-)
    I thought there wasn't any official announcement, but I suspect you are right about the future direction. I wonder if Apple will think twice, though, after the lower than expected sales of the iPhone 10. All the competition will have fingerprint sensors (down to Android phones costing EUR 120), and whether it's fair or not, face ID has not had the best reception in the market. If it's not possible to put the sensor on the front of the phone, the back or one of the sides are also possible and just as good.
    03-31-2018 03:55 AM
  3. Rob Phillips's Avatar
    Thanks for the comprehensive reply. :-)
    I thought there wasn't any official announcement, but I suspect you are right about the future direction. I wonder if Apple will think twice, though, after the lower than expected sales of the iPhone 10. All the competition will have fingerprint sensors (down to Android phones costing EUR 120), and whether it's fair or not, face ID has not had the best reception in the market. If it's not possible to put the sensor on the front of the phone, the back or one of the sides are also possible and just as good.
    I’m really torn when it comes to Face ID. I think it’s cool, especially little things like how it hides details on the lock screen until it knows I’m looking at it. As far as convenience, I just can’t see where Face ID wins. I used Touch ID since inception and nothing was more convenient than the 2nd gen Touch ID sensor.
    I would venture to think price and the iPhone 8/8+ being released slightly ahead of the iPhone X hurt sales more than anything else. Sure, there are those that didn’t buy due to Face ID but I’ve heard from way more that didn’t buy because it’s too expensive or they bought an 8/8+ instead.
    Will Apple reverse course? Very doubtful unless they can figure out how to put Touch ID under the display. Even then I don’t see Face ID going away as an option. When Apple commits to something they really, really commit. coughheadphonejackcough
    03-31-2018 06:00 AM
  4. msm0511's Avatar
    I think this is where most folks are getting that Apple has abandoned Touch ID for flagship devices.

    From SVP of Hardware Engineering Dan Riccio to techcrunch:

    “Arguably the toughest challenge that we had is to replace Touch ID,” Apple’s Dan Riccio says. “It was very, very hard. If we were going to replace it we wanted to replace it with something that was at the end of the day both better and more natural.”

    Riccio also flatly counters the narrative that Apple was still trying to use Touch ID in the iPhone X this year.

    “I heard some rumor [that] we couldn’t get Touch ID to work through the glass so we had to remove that,” Riccio says, answering a question about whether there were late design changes. “When we hit early line of sight on getting Face ID to be [as] good as it was, we knew that if we could be successful we could enable the product that we wanted to go off and do and if that’s true it could be something that we could burn the bridges and be all in with. This is assuming it was a better solution. And that’s what we did. So we spent no time looking at fingerprints on the back or through the glass or on the side because if we did those things, which would be a last-minute change, they would be a distraction relative to enabling the more important thing that we were trying to achieve, which was Face ID done in a high-quality way.”

    It doesn't necessarily say they won't add an additional touch based biometric in the future, but alludes to that.
    03-31-2018 08:31 AM
  5. anony_mouse's Avatar
    Thanks @Rob Phillips and @msm0511, very informative posts! We will have to wait and see what Apple chooses to do. In the mean time, I can think of a couple of reasons why touch ID might reappear...

    1. I have no evidence to support this, but I suspect that people use Apple Pay less on the iPhone X than on models with touch ID. This is one situation where face ID is clearly less convenient. This removes Apple from a potentially profitable and controlling position in the payment chain, and one where they can see all your purchases (that data is valuable!). It may be that Apple don't care that much about Apple Pay any more, given that we all have contactless bank cards and most people probably mostly use them now, but if they do, that may be a good reason to keep touch ID.

    2. As I mentioned before, the fingerprint sensor can be mounted on the back of the phone (or even the side). It doesn't have to be placed below the glass. I have used phones with fingerprint sensors on the front and on the back of the phone. I actually found that the back is easier to use, but it does have a disadvantage - you can't use it when the phone is flat on a desk or mounted in a holder. However, both of these cases are well addressed by face ID.

    Together, these two points allow Apple to retain touch ID and save face (pun intended). They can announce "rear touch ID" as an enhancement to Apple Pay, and still have a reason for people to set up and use face ID.
    03-31-2018 12:46 PM
  6. mogelijk's Avatar
    Thanks @Rob Phillips and @msm0511, very informative posts! We will have to wait and see what Apple chooses to do. In the mean time, I can think of a couple of reasons why touch ID might reappear...

    1. I have no evidence to support this, but I suspect that people use Apple Pay less on the iPhone X than on models with touch ID. This is one situation where face ID is clearly less convenient. This removes Apple from a potentially profitable and controlling position in the payment chain, and one where they can see all your purchases (that data is valuable!). It may be that Apple don't care that much about Apple Pay any more, given that we all have contactless bank cards and most people probably mostly use them now, but if they do, that may be a good reason to keep touch ID.

    2. As I mentioned before, the fingerprint sensor can be mounted on the back of the phone (or even the side). It doesn't have to be placed below the glass. I have used phones with fingerprint sensors on the front and on the back of the phone. I actually found that the back is easier to use, but it does have a disadvantage - you can't use it when the phone is flat on a desk or mounted in a holder. However, both of these cases are well addressed by face ID.

    Together, these two points allow Apple to retain touch ID and save face (pun intended). They can announce "rear touch ID" as an enhancement to Apple Pay, and still have a reason for people to set up and use face ID.
    I can't agree about Apple Pay, it seems far easier to use, at least to me, than having to use a fingerprint. I think if Apple had any concerns about FaceID they would have added the fingerprint sensor on the back of the iPhone X. I can't see them going back to it now, particularly as many would see it as an "admission" that Apple agrees FaceID is not as good or ready to compete with TouchID.
    03-31-2018 01:23 PM
  7. doogald's Avatar
    1. I have no evidence to support this, but I suspect that people use Apple Pay less on the iPhone X than on models with touch ID.
    If you have no evidence, then you are just guessing. FWIW, I prefer Touch ID with Apple Pay - just lay your finger on the home button and lift the phone to the terminal, rather than having to look at the phone first - but I use Apple Pay just as much (basically as often as I can) with the iPhone X as I did with iPhone 6s. It's no different; if I can use Apple Pay, I'll use it, whether it's with the X or would have been the 6s or the 8, if that was the phone I bought instead.

    2. As I mentioned before, the fingerprint sensor can be mounted on the back of the phone (or even the side). It doesn't have to be placed below the glass.
    I sincerely doubt that Apple will ever use both. I think it's going to be Face ID for their high end, premium models and Touch ID for their more affordable, down-market products, and not both together. Remember that Touch ID got loads better with the iPhone 6s. There will be a future version of Face ID that is faster, too. It's only going to get better.
    03-31-2018 03:14 PM
  8. robertk328's Avatar
    I’m really torn when it comes to Face ID. I think it’s cool, especially little things like how it hides details on the lock screen until it knows I’m looking at it.
    Touch ID will do this but you also need to disable the “rest finger to open” option. Touch ID will show the details. Definitely more convenience with FaceID tho.

    As far as convenience, I just can’t see where Face ID wins. I used Touch ID since inception and nothing was more convenient than the 2nd gen Touch ID sensor.
    We are still on 1st gen of FaceID so let’s compare it to 1st gen TouchID. I bet it gets faster with the next model and goes ahead. But it’s not fair to compare 1st gen tech to 2nd gen.
    03-31-2018 06:44 PM
  9. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    I've adjusted well to FaceID and, for me, it works 99.9% of the time. Using it with Pay and various 3rd-party apps is a breeze. In my opinion, Apple did well with it.
    03-31-2018 06:57 PM
  10. Rob Phillips's Avatar
    We are still on 1st gen of FaceID so let’s compare it to 1st gen TouchID. I bet it gets faster with the next model and goes ahead. But it’s not fair to compare 1st gen tech to 2nd gen.
    Sure it’s fair. I spent $1,150 on this phone. I would expect any new features to be an improvement even if it’s a “1st gen” change to how we get into our phones.
    BreakingKayfabe and wenrob like this.
    03-31-2018 07:12 PM
  11. robertk328's Avatar
    Sure it’s fair. I spent $1,150 on this phone. I would expect any new features to be an improvement even if it’s a “1st gen” change to how we get into our phones.
    New to tech, huh?
    Tartarus likes this.
    03-31-2018 07:16 PM
  12. anony_mouse's Avatar
    If you have no evidence, then you are just guessing. FWIW, I prefer Touch ID with Apple Pay - just lay your finger on the home button and lift the phone to the terminal, rather than having to look at the phone first - but I use Apple Pay just as much (basically as often as I can) with the iPhone X as I did with iPhone 6s. It's no different; if I can use Apple Pay, I'll use it, whether it's with the X or would have been the 6s or the 8, if that was the phone I bought instead.
    Yes I am just guessing (as are you). But Apple and Android Pay are already less convenient than using a contactless bank card, and with face ID it gets even less convenient. Remember that a major use for contactless payments is public transport - don't stop in the crowd at a London tube station to wave your phone at your face!

    Genuine question - are contactless bank cards widely available in the US? Where I am, they are fairly universal. I have several. This is the real competition to Apple and Android Pay, and in my experience the bank cards are winning by a wide margin. It's very common here for people to keep a bank card in their iPhone case. To pay they still wave their phone at a terminal but they don't give a cut to the middle man (Apple or Google).

    I sincerely doubt that Apple will ever use both. I think it's going to be Face ID for their high end, premium models and Touch ID for their more affordable, down-market products, and not both together. Remember that Touch ID got loads better with the iPhone 6s. There will be a future version of Face ID that is faster, too. It's only going to get better.
    The issue is not how fast face ID is. It's whether it is convenient to use in a contactless payment situation.
    04-02-2018 03:03 AM
  13. Rob Phillips's Avatar
    Yes I am just guessing (as are you). But Apple and Android Pay are already less convenient than using a contactless bank card, and with face ID it gets even less convenient. Remember that a major use for contactless payments is public transport - don't stop in the crowd at a London tube station to wave your phone at your face!

    Genuine question - are contactless bank cards widely available in the US? Where I am, they are fairly universal. I have several. This is the real competition to Apple and Android Pay, and in my experience the bank cards are winning by a wide margin. It's very common here for people to keep a bank card in their iPhone case. To pay they still wave their phone at a terminal but they don't give a cut to the middle man (Apple or Google).



    The issue is not how fast face ID is. It's whether it is convenient to use in a contactless payment situation.
    Contactless cards aren’t unheard of in the US but they’re definitely less widely used than in other parts of the world. Some years back they started getting popular but then several of the largest credit card companies pulled out of contactless citing security issues with the chips inside of the cards.
    I will say this...Apple Pay on Apple Watch is super convenient. A double tap of the large button and it’s ready. It’s alright sitting on my wrist and authenticated the moment I put my watch on and unlock it in the morning. I’d say it’s more convenient than getting my wallet, removing the card, inserting the card, going through all of the steps, removing the card, returning it to my wallet...you get where I’m going. Apple Pay using my iPhone X inevitably takes longer but it makes me feel like MacGyver so I do it anyway.
    04-02-2018 03:21 AM
  14. anony_mouse's Avatar
    Contactless cards aren’t unheard of in the US but they’re definitely less widely used than in other parts of the world. Some years back they started getting popular but then several of the largest credit card companies pulled out of contactless citing security issues with the chips inside of the cards.
    I will say this...Apple Pay on Apple Watch is super convenient. A double tap of the large button and it’s ready. It’s alright sitting on my wrist and authenticated the moment I put my watch on and unlock it in the morning. I’d say it’s more convenient than getting my wallet, removing the card, inserting the card, going through all of the steps, removing the card, returning it to my wallet...you get where I’m going. Apple Pay using my iPhone X inevitably takes longer but it makes me feel like MacGyver so I do it anyway.
    Just to confirm we are talking about the same thing - when I use a contactless bank card, there is no inserting the card anywhere and there are no other steps. I just touch the card on the reader. That's it. It's easier than using a phone with all this tapping and authenticating and so on. Are you talking about "chip and PIN"?

    I will never understand how the US banks consider a magnetic strip that can be copied with a $2 reader to be more secure than even a poorly implemented chip and PIN system. The losses from fraud must be staggering. I've always assumed there is something more behind this. But that's a discussion for another day. :-)
    Last edited by anony_mouse; 04-02-2018 at 04:36 AM.
    04-02-2018 03:30 AM
  15. Rob Phillips's Avatar
    Just to confirm we are talking about the same thing - when I use a contactless bank card, there is no inserting the card anywhere and there are no other steps. I just touch the card on the reader. That's it. It's easier than using a phone with all this tapping and authenticating and so on. Are you talking about "chip and PIN"?

    I will never understand how the US banks consider a magnetic strip that can be copied with a $2 reader to be more secure than even a poorly implemented chip and PIN system. The losses from fraud must be staggering. I've always assumed there is something more behind this. But that's a discussion for another day. :-)
    Yes, I was talking about contactless. Chip and PIN is not accepted in the US but chip and signature is.
    The US has been very reactive when it comes to combating fraud. They’ve taken the “wait til something terrible happens, blame someone else, then push out legislation so they look like heroes” approach. It was only recently that banks have been able to hold merchants who only accept magnetic strip payments liable for fraudulent transactions done on their behalf.
    04-02-2018 04:57 AM
  16. doogald's Avatar
    I've had several tap and pay cards for. years; they are slowly being added. However, an advantage to Apple Pay (and Android Pay) and the reason I will always use it over my card is that Apple Pay uses a virtual card number, so the retailer never gets the real one. If the retailer's pay systems are hacked and details are recovered, they won't get my card's real number.

    Chip and signature (and even chip and PIN) is nowhere near as fast as tap and pay and slower than swiping. However, it is not true that all cards in the US are chip and signature - Target, for example, issues a Mastercard that is chip and PIN.

    I still find Touch ID with the iPhone better than Apple Watch for tap and pay. Nothing to tap and it's a one handed operation; just hold the phone with my thumb on the home button. And some terminals are rather high so lifting my wrist is awkward compared with lifting the end of my phone. Still, complaining about that one extra Face ID step is like complaining the extra two digits Apple started suggesting for unlock PINs (yes, I know that you can change the options back to 4 digit, but I ma sure that more than 90% of people don't even know or bother making the switch.)

    Another minor issue with Face ID I didn't mention is that with Touch ID I could add my wife's thumb as an unlock, so she could use my phone if there was some reason to. We definitely cannot do that (at least not yet) with Face ID.
    04-02-2018 05:51 AM
  17. msm0511's Avatar
    Genuine question - are contactless bank cards widely available in the US? Where I am, they are fairly universal. I have several. This is the real competition to Apple and Android Pay, and in my experience the bank cards are winning by a wide margin. It's very common here for people to keep a bank card in their iPhone case. To pay they still wave their phone at a terminal but they don't give a cut to the middle man (Apple or Google).



    The issue is not how fast face ID is. It's whether it is convenient to use in a contactless payment situation.
    I have 8 credit cards and a debit card, but none of them are contactless. They all require either to insert the chip or swipe the magnetic strip. They all have chips, and I've noticed more and more places in the US are finally activating their chip systems.

    I honestly can't wait until the day all I need is my Apple Watch for payment. I haven't regularly carried cash in more years than I can remember, and I'd rather not carry cards either.
    04-02-2018 08:27 AM
  18. anony_mouse's Avatar
    To quickly reply to some points above...
    - It's not only Apple Pay that uses virtual card numbers. Some contactless and chip card deployments use them too. I can't comment on the US situation, but anything is better than a magnetic strip. :-)
    - Chip and PIN is growing in the US. I am increasingly asked to put my non-US chip and PIN cards directly in the terminal and enter a PIN - in fact I usually try to do this myself rather than handing over my card to be swiped. What is the point of chip and signature? It does exist elsewhere in the world, but only for people who can't use a PIN for some reason. Although they exist, I don't think I have any seen such a card in use.
    - The face ID issue is a real one for Apple Pay. It is less convenient than touch ID or using a contactless bank card. Maybe the usage scenarios are different to the US. Where I live, contactless payments tend to be used for short transactions such a buying a coffee or entering or leaving a public transport system. Pausing to use face ID in these crowded situations is really not a good option.
    - I can't speak for the US, but in general I remain sceptical about mobile phone payments. I spend time in countries where contactless payments are so widespread as to be the normal way to pay for small transactions. Apple and Android Pay are widely available, and I know they work because I've tried them. But I literally never see them used on a day to day basis - people always use contactless bank cards. Including me - they are simply easier.
    04-02-2018 12:07 PM
  19. Rob Phillips's Avatar
    To quickly reply to some points above...
    - It's not only Apple Pay that uses virtual card numbers. Some contactless and chip card deployments use them too. I can't comment on the US situation, but anything is better than a magnetic strip. :-)
    - Chip and PIN is growing in the US. I am increasingly asked to put my non-US chip and PIN cards directly in the terminal and enter a PIN - in fact I usually try to do this myself rather than handing over my card to be swiped. What is the point of chip and signature? It does exist elsewhere in the world, but only for people who can't use a PIN for some reason. Although they exist, I don't think I have any seen such a card in use.
    - The face ID issue is a real one for Apple Pay. It is less convenient than touch ID or using a contactless bank card. Maybe the usage scenarios are different to the US. Where I live, contactless payments tend to be used for short transactions such a buying a coffee or entering or leaving a public transport system. Pausing to use face ID in these crowded situations is really not a good option.
    - I can't speak for the US, but in general I remain sceptical about mobile phone payments. I spend time in countries where contactless payments are so widespread as to be the normal way to pay for small transactions. Apple and Android Pay are widely available, and I know they work because I've tried them. But I literally never see them used on a day to day basis - people always use contactless bank cards. Including me - they are simply easier.
    Many merchant terminals are compatible with chip and PIN but its nearly impossible to find a credit card issuer that offers chip and PIN in the US. So it’s not a hard “no” when it comes to chip and PIN in the US but it might as well be.
    The benefit of chip and signature over the magnetic strip is additional security in case the merchant is hacked. Obviously that offers no value if your credit card is lost or stolen.
    04-02-2018 12:21 PM
  20. doogald's Avatar
    - I can't speak for the US, but in general I remain sceptical about mobile phone payments. I spend time in countries where contactless payments are so widespread as to be the normal way to pay for small transactions. Apple and Android Pay are widely available, and I know they work because I've tried them. But I literally never see them used on a day to day basis - people always use contactless bank cards. Including me - they are simply easier.
    Another clear advantage of mobile-based tap to pay over cards: a lost/stolen card can still be used as tap to pay until the card is reported stolen. Not a lost/stolen phone; not a lost/stolen watch. I don't find tap to pay cards any easier; I have to remove my wallet, open it, take out the card, tap it, out it back in my wallet, put my wallet back in my pocket. That's exactly the same effort to me as take out my phone, double-tap the button, look at my phone, tap it, put it back in my pocket. And the watch, if you use it, is arguably easier - double tap without even looking and raise your arm. Nothing to take out of your pocket.

    I have no idea if mobile device payments will grow, but they are surely being used enough to be here to stay.


    What is the point of chip and signature?


    I have never read a single good explanation. The good news is that signature is going away for good. (I did notice when I was in Europe last fall that retailers were annoyed when I used my chip and signature card; one more piece of paper that they had to deal with, one more thing to slow down the transaction.)
    04-02-2018 12:24 PM
  21. Chuck_IV's Avatar
    Personally, I think face ID is a nice thing, but it is not more natural than the prior fingerprint id.

    With the fingerprint ID, as I pick up the phone, I have my thumb on the scanner. By the time it gets to my face, it's already unlocked. With the face ID, when it gets to my face I have to wait a second or so if it works right, longer and more maneuvering if it doesn't.

    Plus with the figerprinter scanner, I can reach over, touch the scanner and unlock my screen without having to even pick up the phone.

    Same goes for Apple pay. With the fingerprint scanner, as I pull the phone out of my pocket, I'd have my thumb on the reader holding the button and by the time it's out of my pocket, its ready for payment. With the face unlock, I have to pull it out, then stare at it and then it was finally ready.

    No way is face ID more convenient than the fingerprint reader was.
    04-02-2018 02:00 PM
  22. mogelijk's Avatar
    - The face ID issue is a real one for Apple Pay. It is less convenient than touch ID or using a contactless bank card. Maybe the usage scenarios are different to the US. Where I live, contactless payments tend to be used for short transactions such a buying a coffee or entering or leaving a public transport system. Pausing to use face ID in these crowded situations is really not a good option.
    I don't understand why you need to pause before using Apple Pay with FaceID. Personally, I've found it quicker and easier with FaceID than I ever did with TouchID -- and I've been using Apple/Android Pay for around 5 years with an FPS, before Apple came out with Apple Pay. Personally, I tap the power button twice to pull up Apple Pay, then glance at the phone and it is unlocked, and I do that prior to when I need to put the phone up to the reader. I always found myself needing to adjust my grip on my phone, or use my other hand, to hit the FPS on my iPhone (always had Plus sized phones). I can now much more easily do it one handed and without having to try to adjust my grip on my phone.
    04-02-2018 10:24 PM
  23. anony_mouse's Avatar
    I don't understand why you need to pause before using Apple Pay with FaceID. Personally, I've found it quicker and easier with FaceID than I ever did with TouchID -- and I've been using Apple/Android Pay for around 5 years with an FPS, before Apple came out with Apple Pay. Personally, I tap the power button twice to pull up Apple Pay, then glance at the phone and it is unlocked, and I do that prior to when I need to put the phone up to the reader. I always found myself needing to adjust my grip on my phone, or use my other hand, to hit the FPS on my iPhone (always had Plus sized phones). I can now much more easily do it one handed and without having to try to adjust my grip on my phone.
    It's hard to comment on how individual people use touch ID and face ID. But it's also irrelevant for payments in most of the world. The competition for payments is not between touch ID and face ID, or between Apple and Android. The fight is against contactless bank cards, which are now more or less universal in many countries, and which are hugely more convenient to use than phones because they don't require any authorisation. You can argue about the security implications of this, but in reality it doesn't seem to be a problem (and in the theoretical worst case, losses are limited to around EUR 20-30).

    From what I see, phone payments are hardly used in countries with contactless bank cards. This is all about convenience, so if Apple and Google want to be in the contactless payments game they have to make their solutions as convenient as a bank card.

    BTW, for those who say that it's more effort to get a card out of a wallet than to switch on an authenticate with a phone - a very common solution here is to put a contactless card in your phone's case (cases with suitable slots are widely available), and then touch the phone on the reader. :-)
    04-04-2018 02:51 AM
  24. Raptor007's Avatar
    The X has been fine, but I do miss the larger sized device when using it, my wife still has a 6S Plus and won't upgrade due to the lack of headphone jack and the fake home button. Eventually she will have to upgrade to a version with no touch ID but I am likely going to prod her to an 8 Plus in the fall.
    04-05-2018 07:47 PM
  25. Wildo6882's Avatar
    The X has been fine, but I do miss the larger sized device when using it, my wife still has a 6S Plus and won't upgrade due to the lack of headphone jack and the fake home button. Eventually she will have to upgrade to a version with no touch ID but I am likely going to prod her to an 8 Plus in the fall.
    While I've liked my X, I actually plan on selling it and seeing if I can hunt down an 8 Plus to last me for about the next year. I miss the larger size (came from a 6s Plus) and some of the information in the status bar. I also am not 110% sold on FID. I know it's the future, but there are some quirks and annoyances that I have with it that I didn't have with TID on my 6s Plus.
    04-06-2018 02:52 PM
50 12

Similar Threads

  1. How to run RetroArch on iOS 10?
    By The Power Player in forum iOS 10
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-17-2018, 05:07 PM
  2. "update not available on this apple id."
    By Chalice Weichman in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-15-2018, 05:28 PM
  3. PUBG Mobile is coming to iOS in North America very soon!
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-15-2018, 03:20 PM
  4. Diablo 3 for Nintendo Switch: Everything you need to know!
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-15-2018, 02:10 PM
  5. Google's Android Wear is changing its name to Wear OS
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-15-2018, 01:17 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD