Underglass fingerprint sensor demoed at MWC Shanghai

[Jito463]

Just now, DildorTheDecent said:

You really don't have to use fingerprints. 

 

Tested on S7 Edge.

Congratulations, did you test on an S7 Active?  Are you saying I'm lying?  What possible reason would I have to do so?

[DildorTheDecent]

4 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Congratulations, did you test on an S7 Active?  Are you saying I'm lying?  What possible reason would I have to do so?

Well no since i don't have a S7 Active. Never even knew that existed. I'm not saying you're lying either, calm down child. 

 

Just sounds like you want to bash a really neat feature because "a Korean company have muh fingerprints". You're not forced to "hand" over your fingerprints. During setup and even in the later stages at no point are you "forced" to do anything with regards to fingerprints. 

 

Heck, maybe you are lying and get a kick out of bashing non-American companies. Especially when it comes to sensitive information. who knows. 

[Jito463]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Well no since i don't have a S7 Active. Never even knew that existed. I'm not saying you're lying either, calm down child. 

 

Just sounds like you want to bash a really neat feature because "a Korean company have muh fingerprints". You're not forced to "hand" over your fingerprints. During setup and even in the later stages at no point are you "forced" to do anything with regards to fingerprints. 

 

Heck, maybe you are lying and get a kick out of bashing non-American companies. Especially when it comes to sensitive information. who knows. 

Calm down?  Three times I've stated that I was required to create a fingerprint pattern to set a PIN, three times you've claimed that's not true (i.e. accused me of lying, albeit through inference).  Maybe you should just stop claiming I'm wrong when you have no proof either way (and, by your own admission, didn't even know about the phone I've repeatedly mentioned).  You can say you find it hard to believe without inferring that I'm a liar.  And so you can see the phone actually exists (in that you don't accuse me of making that up), here's a link to the product, which is an AT&T exclusive.

 

https://www.att.com/cellphones/samsung/galaxy-s7-active.html#sku=sku7920726

 

For the record, I'm not "bashing" the fingerprint scanner.  I actually use it and find it handy.  I would just prefer that it hadn't forced me to use it, simply to set a PIN code.

 

Also, not a child.  Though, based on your posts, I'm beginning to question if you are.

[dizmo]

Haha, there won't be any lawsuits. Qualcomm has had this tech in chips since the SD820, they just haven't found a way to implement it properly. 

 

I'm all for it. I think it'll really help new phone design. We'll see how many issues the first few generations have though. 

18 hours ago, WMGroomAK said:

I have to admit that not being able to put a screen protector over my highly priced phone is a concern for me...  While I've never had a scratched or cracked screen and all my phones have ended up in really good condition when I'm done with them, part of that is usually because I immediately get a plastic screen cover and something like a Pelican case or Otterbox on them as I know my lifestyle puts me in the back country for extended periods of time.

Plastic screen protector?! Gross. But really, shy do you think this would limit you? You think it won't be able to pass through it? Highly unlikely. Even if it did you can always use a PIN. 

17 hours ago, Commodus said:

What irks me is knowing that, if Apple unveils an iPhone with an under-the-screen fingerprint reader in September, people are still going to insist "Apple copied Qualcomm!" as if it could design and ship similar technology within a few months.  Folks: it's possible for companies to develop similar tech simultaneously without being explicitly aware of what their rivals are doing. 

Qualcomm has had this tech for years... 

36 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Congratulations, did you test on an S7 Active?  Are you saying I'm lying?  What possible reason would I have to do so?

He's saying it works for him. You don't have to be lying to be wrong about something, it's possible you just don't know how to accomplish the same result. 

[Jito463]

2 hours ago, dizmo said:

He's saying it works for him. You don't have to be lying to be wrong about something, it's possible you just don't know how to accomplish the same result. 

I love how everyone assumes I'm wrong and they're right, and tries to explain to me just how I'm wrong and they're right.  I give up.

[dizmo]

2 hours ago, Jito463 said:

I love how everyone assumes I'm wrong and they're right, and tries to explain to me just how I'm wrong and they're right.  I give up.

I didn't say that, did I. Stop taking everything so personally princess.

[Jito463]

4 hours ago, dizmo said:

You don't have to be lying to be wrong about something, it's possible you just don't know how to accomplish the same result. 

1 minute ago, dizmo said:

I didn't say that, did I. Stop taking everything so personally princess.

I'll let your own words speak for themselves.  And on that note, I'm out of this conversation.

 

[DildorTheDecent]

5 hours ago, Jito463 said:

Calm down?  Three times I've stated that I was required to create a fingerprint pattern to set a PIN, three times you've claimed that's not true (i.e. accused me of lying, albeit through inference).  Maybe you should just stop claiming I'm wrong when you have no proof either way (and, by your own admission, didn't even know about the phone I've repeatedly mentioned).  You can say you find it hard to believe without inferring that I'm a liar.  And so you can see the phone actually exists (in that you don't accuse me of making that up), here's a link to the product, which is an AT&T exclusive.

 

https://www.att.com/cellphones/samsung/galaxy-s7-active.html#sku=sku7920726

 

For the record, I'm not "bashing" the fingerprint scanner.  I actually use it and find it handy.  I would just prefer that it hadn't forced me to use it, simply to set a PIN code.

 

Also, not a child.  Though, based on your posts, I'm beginning to question if you are.

Calm down son. Didn't call you a liar it's just banter, Christ on a bike. Absolutely no craic with the Americans. 

 

Never knew about that phone since it's as you've mentioned an AT&T exclusive. Guess what? That means that the United Kingdom (use a map) doesn't receive that product. So yeah, maybe i don't know much about it but the hardware and software is near identical. 

 

Again, your never forced to use the fingerprint scanner, was never forced to use it during my device setup or even afterward. Entirely optional. Maybe the Koreans really want those American fingerprints. 

 

It's just the Internet dude, calm down. 

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Calm down son. Didn't call you a liar it's just banter, Christ on a bike. Absolutely no craic with the Americans. 

 

Never knew about that phone since it's as you've mentioned an AT&T exclusive. Guess what? That means that the United Kingdom (use a map) doesn't receive that product. So yeah, maybe i don't know much about it but the hardware and software is near identical. 

 

Again, your never forced to use the fingerprint scanner, was never forced to use it during my device setup or even afterward. Entirely optional. Maybe the Koreans really want those American fingerprints. 

 

It's just the Internet dude, calm down. 

The S7. S6, S6 Edge, S7 Edge, Note 5, Note 7, I have all personally setup, and there was NO requirement to use fingerprints in the setup. 

 

See the video below for the exact dialogue screen that shows up the first time you boot a samsung phone of that time-period.

(relevant screen at 0:51)

 

 

On ALL of these devices you are allowed to choose YOUR option for a lock setup (or even choose not to set one up.) 

 

It is completely unreasonable to believe that the S7 active is the only device in that stack that functions differently.

 

Also this is from the official carrier guide to set-up which directly implies you DO NOT need to use fingerprints. It is MUCH more likely @Jito463 simply missed the step to avoid setting it up than this "I was forced to" ancedote.

 

Quote

If you would like to set your screen lock now, select the desired option then select NEXT to follow the on-screen prompts for setup. To proceed without activating device protection features, select No, thank you, then select NEXT. 

Note: If proceeding without setting a screen lock, you will be prompted to select SKIP ANYWAY after you select SKIP.

https://www.att.com/devicehowto/tutorial.html#!/interactive/id/interactive_1500011159?make=Samsung&model=SamsungG891A

 

[DildorTheDecent]

1 hour ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

The S7. S6, S6 Edge, S7 Edge, Note 5, Note 7, I have all personally setup, and there was NO requirement to use fingerprints in the setup. 

ya i know. That's what i'm saying. It's a an option/you're never forced to do it. 

 

Although good job on the sauce. 

[RedRound2]

On 6/29/2017 at 0:13 AM, LAwLz said:

The only difference is that Apple would go around and sue companies based on that stupid idea.

 

No, they don't. If the competitors infringed on one of Apple's patents, they definitely would, but so would the other company if it was the other way. Apple brought fingerprint to the masses with 5s and pretty much every Android flagship had the same headlining feature within a year, but they didn't sue anyone. Same goes for stuff like 64-bit, Apple Pay, dual camera bokeh effect, etc

 

But however, I do believe Apple 10th Anniversary iPhone under glass fingerprint rumors that started last year October did have some effect on Qualcomm's roadmap as companies these days constantly try to one up Apple based on the inevitable leaks

[michaelocarroll007]

On 6/28/2017 at 7:40 PM, Trustadz said:

Side is not the way to go. it's way to small to make an accurate reading of the entire finger. You'll need to hold your phone the exact same way, all the time.

I know some old laptops who have a fingerprint sensor that was small, which you had to slide your finger across, well that's crap on a phone's side. Don't know if you meant those though.

As for the "Gimmicky" part. Having more screen real estate is not really gimmicky. It's basically what the next "smartphone battle" is all about. Or as Luke likes to call it, Aboat.

Galaxy S5 had a Smaller home button then the S6 and so on. Was the First Galaxy with finger print reader. You had to start touching the screen and swipe your finger over the home button. Was Garbage used it two weeks S6 they fixed this but no longer needing to touch the screen and or swipe with the bigger button 

[LAwLz]

On 2017-06-30 at 3:08 PM, RedRound2 said:

No, they don't. If the competitors infringed on one of Apple's patents, they definitely would

Yes, and a lot of the patents they have obtained got prior art, and yet they have sued for it.

You do know that you need to be the first to do something in order to get a patent, right? That is one of the fundamental requirements for getting a patent granted (except this does not work in practice because the patent office does not have the knowledge nor time to actually verify that prior art does not exist for everything submitted).

Apple has gotten a lot better since Jobs died though.

 

On 2017-06-30 at 3:08 PM, RedRound2 said:

but so would the other company if it was the other way.

Completely untrue. A lot of companies only use patents for defensive purposes, and quite a few actually makes their patents free for anyone to use.

Even if what you said was true (which it is totally not), it still would not make it OK in my eyes.

[MysticLTT]

On 6/28/2017 at 4:14 PM, tlink said:

so gimmicky. it causes more problems than it solves imo. i would rather see a sensor embedded in the side of the phone like those old laptops had. usable when screen down or up so nobody can complain about that. but maybe that has severe problems idk.

The full body display is a future, current scanner placement on a back is inconvenient.

[tlink]

1 hour ago, MysticLTT said:

The full body display is a future, current scanner placement on a back is inconvenient.

and i never opposed any of those as not gimmicky, only the solution... and i never advocated for scanners on the back... but for scanners on the side of the phone.

[vorticalbox]

On ‎28‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 6:34 PM, sof006 said:

Ooooh thats pretty cool, finally to do away with a under button sensor or worse one on the back of the phone dedicated to just your finger.

this is one thing to got me, OSs moved to ui only buttons yet manufacturers still put buttons. 

 

I'm hoping to have a fully ui input, excluding power which should be a touch button on the side. 

 

i just really want a phone with no buttons to get filled with dust. 

[Trustadz]

19 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Yes, and a lot of the patents they have obtained got prior art, and yet they have sued for it.

You do know that you need to be the first to do something in order to get a patent, right? That is one of the fundamental requirements for getting a patent granted (except this does not work in practice because the patent office does not have the knowledge nor time to actually verify that prior art does not exist for everything submitted).

Apple has gotten a lot better since Jobs died though.

 

Completely untrue. A lot of companies only use patents for defensive purposes, and quite a few actually makes their patents free for anyone to use.

Even if what you said was true (which it is totally not), it still would not make it OK in my eyes.

In order to get the patent you need to be the first to apply for the patent, that's how they see which one is the "first". But patents can only be granted if the commission believes it is a genuine advancement and not the natural evolution of the market. And patents don't have to be worldwide. You can have a patent in the US and someone else having the exact same patent, filed a couple of months later, in Germany. And China just doesn't care at all.

 

That all being said, I'm pro patents, they protect genuine inventors from getting their products, and thus income, stolen. But the system is broken and a patent for putting a fingerprint scanner under the glass should not be given. Even if the technology is very advanced, seeing that so many companies are trying to get to that part it looks like just the normal evolution of the market.

[Jito463]

4 hours ago, Trustadz said:

But the system is broken and a patent for putting a fingerprint scanner under the glass should not be given. Even if the technology is very advanced, seeing that so many companies are trying to get to that part it looks like just the normal evolution of the market.

Agreed, no one should get a patent for a concept, only for a specific implementation of the concept.

[Commodus]

On 6/28/2017 at 4:13 PM, LAwLz said:

What irks me even more is that if Apple unveils a phone with an under-the-screen fingerprint scanner in September, people are still going to insist that they were the first with it and Qualcomm/Samsung/HTC/whomever just copied Apple.

Both sides are guilty of the "only one person/company can think of something around the same time" mentality. The only difference is that Apple would go around and sue companies based on that stupid idea.

Pardon getting back to this so late.

 

Oh, you're right for the most part.  I like to think of Apple as more of the BASF of tech ("we don't make X, we make X better!") than anything.  It bugs me when people act as if Apple invented the PC, or the MP3 player, or the smartphone.  The truth is that there's a degree of back and forth, and that Apple's knack is really just 'fixing' categories that have fundamental interface or design problems.

 

As for lawsuits?  Well, it's hard to say that Apple is the same company it was when the patent lawsuits were flying years ago.  Cook's company is more interested in court battles over licensing disputes than anything.  I do think it had a point with the Samsung lawsuits, since those included a fight over trade dress, not just patents... but HTC and others?  Not so much.