The revelation that the iPhone X, or at least its technologies, were meant to appear in 2018, has answered loads of questions, or maybe raised a few more. In a sense, it also confirms rumors dating from 2016 that Apple was working full bore on a special iPhone to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Apple’s best-selling smartphone.

Yes, I said best-selling. True, such companies as Samsung will sell more handsets overall, but those numbers are spread over a number of different models. With its limited product lineup, the iPhone blows away the competition. Sales of the Samsung Galaxy series don’t even come close.

Now before I cover what Dan Riccio, head of hardware engineering at Apple, disclosed in a Mashable interview with editor Lance Ulanoff, it’s important to point out that the iPhone X isn’t being referred to as a 2018 model, although it seems Apple could follow the auto industry routine and do precisely that.

So many customers buy a motor vehicle that’s technically the following year’s model. 2018 sales began as early as August or September of this year. Sometimes a car will be introduced in the spring but that’s so late in the year, it must be identified for the following year.

It means that if you buy a 2017 model in the middle of that year, it’s already destined to be a closeout model, and should thus be heavily discounted. I say that as someone who has purchased new cars over the years well into the model year, and not felt that I was somehow being gypped, except, of course, when the next year’s model is expected to sport major changes. But that often means you can save even more when you make a deal on an older vehicle.

In any case, in that Mashable interview, Riccio says such features as an OLED display and Face ID were meant for 2018, but Apple decided to accelerate development, which meant they had to make some hard choices really fast. That included settling on OLED and Face ID, and never considering Touch ID, or the Home button. “We actually locked the design, to let you know, in November [2016]. We had to lock it early.”

The use of an edge-to-edge display was, according to marketing head Philip Schiller, something that Apple has wanted to do since the very first iPhone.

Does this all come across to you as corporate hype? A decision to accelerate development to go all in on new technologies, and to work overtime to get it right? It has such dramatic elements, it’s a little difficult to believe, but I’ll grant that Apple is giving us what’s essentially the truth, perhaps somewhat sanitized for marketing reasons, or maybe not

What is surprising in this story is the admission that the OLED display was being built by Samsung, and that the two companies worked together to perfect the design. This all happens as Apple is still fighting with Samsung in the courts the latter’s alleged theft of iPhone design elements.

Then again, Apple and Microsoft were embroiled in a series of legal entanglements in the 1990s over the Mac OS interface while, at the same time Microsoft was developing Mac software. But Apple’s tight cooperation with Samsung ought to mean that the two companies are meant to settle the case eventually.

While other smartphones have sported OLED displays in recent years, Apple’s concerns were reportedly about ensuring color accuracy consistent with its other products, and to solve the burn-in problem. The symptom is a remnant of a static image that may or may not be noticeable.

Burn-in was a known problem with CRT and plasma TVs, and there were software fixes for the latter that were designed to somehow massage the retained image away. Supposedly it’s less of an issue with OLED, but still a potential problem. I’ve owned exactly one plasma TV, from Panasonic. There were settings to subtly move a static image around to avoid retention, with the suggestion that a cleaning operation of rapidly flashing images be run periodically. I had the set for six years and never noticed any burn-in effects, even when watching stations, for hours on hand, containing static banners at the bottom of the screen.

Apple being Apple, it had to be prevented somehow. Supposedly that, and color accuracy, were the reasons why there have been no iPhones with OLED displays up until now. It seems credible enough, because nothing otherwise prevented them from using this technology before, except, of course, the ongoing supply problem. Apple is often late with some features until they are perfected. Consider the LTE iPhone. Earlier baseband chips were notoriously power hungry, and Apple didn’t want to reduce battery life on products where it was already regarded by some as too brief.

The story about the development of the iPhone X has the right amount of dramatic flair to be enjoyable and all. As early adopters await the arrival of their merchandise, it also helps, for the time being at least, to drown out the constant fear-mongering about the product that polluted tech sites for well over a year, even before the iPhone 7 arrived.

Apple’s publicity machine is in full force now. If the 4Q 2017 financials are positive, Apple’s guidance for the current quarter is favorable, and supplies of the iPhone X are decent, it’s shaping up as a great holiday season for our favorite fruit company.

So would I buy an iPhone X, assuming I had the extra cash around? It’s a tempting prospect. Maybe I should start saving pennies and give up on such “luxuries” as a cup of coffee. Or maybe I should wait until the real 2018 models arrive.

More preliminary reviews are in. The iPhone X pretty much fulfills its promise with a great display, terrific performance, and all that fear mongering about Face ID was clearly wrongheaded. For the most part, it is as fast or faster than Touch ID, and as accurate in real world use. Not perfect, of course, but neither is Touch ID, although some media reports want to make a big deal of such imperfections.

Sure, the first group of reviewers have only had their units for a few days, but it’s pretty clear where this is all heading, for the most part.

Now as I said in yesterday’s column, there’s some relearning to do due to the loss of a Home button, but it does appear that users can adapt. The exception is when they have other iOS gear, and have to consciously adjust their digits as they switch back and forth. I’m reminded of the benefit of Apple’s decision to provide desktop and notebook keyboards with a similar feel, so you don’t have to spend a few moments getting accustomed to different levels of key travel and such. Before the keyboard designs became more closely aligned, I remember often bringing my desktop Mac’s keyboard with me on the road — or a similar one — so I didn’t have to manage the one on the notebook. I also brought a mouse, because I’ve never liked trackpads.

I still don’t, but at least it’s better than the trackball. But the keyboard stays home.

Now when it comes to Face ID, there’s an important limitation that may impact some of you.

It’s designed for a single user.

Now that puts it at a disadvantage compared to Touch ID. With Touch ID, you can store up to five separate profiles, or five separate fingers. With my iPhone, I store my left and right thumb, to gives me more flexibility depending on where I am and what I’m doing. That leaves three profiles that can be configured for other people, such as my wife.

It’s not that she uses my iPhone all that often, if at all. A smartphone tends to be a personal device that’s meant to be used by one person. But the option is there for those who need it.

However, Face ID is a single user setup. It may well be about the fact that it’s storing lots more data to recognize your face, and that’s understandable. I suppose it’s possible for a future iteration of Face ID to manage more profiles, or perhaps Apple made the decision that the need for a second profile was very limited, and that the second user can just stick with a passcode.

That said, I was curious to see how it would fare with identical twins, and early tests from different publications show a mixed bag. In some cases, it will unlock with either twin, and it other cases it doesn’t. Apple originally promised it wouldn’t work, but I suppose that depends on how identical the sibling is. Maybe Face ID just needs a little fine-tuning, and a future iOS update will improve accuracy. But if the twins are friendly with one another, and there are no trust issues, it shouldn’t be such a big deal.

Otherwise, it’s important to realize that none of these biometric features are presented as 100% secure. Besides, if someone pulls a weapon on you and demands that you unlock your iPhone or iPad with face or finger, you will, of course, make the safe decision. I know I would, just as I would hand over my car’s key fob should the occasion arise.

Except in an action movie or TV show of course.

But anyone who suggests that iPhone X or any other iPhone isn’t as secure as it might be ought to consider the competition. It’s doubtful Samsung’s rear-mounted fingerprint sensor on the Galaxy S8 is more reliable than Touch ID. It’s certainly less intuitive to reach. Worse, Samsung’s facial and iris recognition features are fooled by digital photographs.

So far, at least, attempts to fool Face ID with bogus photos or even a mask won’t succeed. So even the fictional face masks used on Mission Impossible won’t fool such a device. Or maybe it will since we are, of course, talking about a fiction story with sci-fi overtones.

Besides, if you buy an iPhone X and don’t want to trust Face ID, stick with the passcode and be done with it. You aren’t forced to use any other feature if you prefer not to. Indeed, you aren’t forced to even set a passcode if you are absolutely certain nobody else will ever have access to your device. Or you don’t care of they do since there’s little personal data on it.

In the real world, the critics have been temporarily silenced, but they’ll be at it again soon, complaining about every little fault they discover, or imagine, with the iPhone X. At the end of the day, it’s just a piece of electronics designed by humans and is thus imperfect. What else did you expect?

Unlike some reporters who write about things they know nothing about as if the opposite were true, I freely admit that I never never touched an iPhone X. I have read a number of articles on the product from people whom I trust, so I think I have a reasonable handle on what to expect, at least until I have some hands-on experience to report.

So far, aside from what Apple presents on its site, the only direct experiences comes from the journalists who showed up at Apple’s iPhone media event in September. They had, at best, a few minutes to spend with late prototypes of the iPhone X, or maybe the first true production units. For the most part, the reaction was positive enough, although some wondered about the reasoning behind the “notch” at the top of the smartphone.

However, tech pundit Steven Levy, who was one of the first reviewers of the original iPhone X in 2007, was also one of the very few to receive an iPhone X for testing. He offers his early observations in a piece at Wired magazine.

While it’s somewhat short of a full review, there is enough information to get a sense of what it offers, particularly the changes to which you’ll have to become accustomed.

I can believe the OLED display is marvelous, and having a big screen in a smaller case may be a revelation to anyone who finds an iPhone 8 Plus, or a similarly sized handset, a bit daunting. I’ll also avoid the challenge of a price that starts at $999, although the media has made a big deal of Apple’s decision to charge more for a product that costs more to build, not to mention development costs. Besides, monthly payments won’t increase all that much if you opt to purchase one.

Levy makes a huge deal about its “Animojis,” or animated emojis, and the powerful technology that powers them, but I’ll pass.

I’m more interested in the possibilities of day-to-day use, and here’s where Apple no doubt faced some challenges, particularly due to the fact that a key feature of the iPhone, the Home button, is no longer there. Apple has already removed a mechanical button, choosing one that only clicks because of an adjustable Taptic Engine. That was no doubt one of the changes made to make them water resistant; also the loss of the headphone jack that never became the nasty issue the critics ranted about.

As any longtime Apple watcher can testify, the company is not shy about throwing out features when new designs call for a change. So in addition to the lack of a Home button, Touch ID is gone as well. This may be the result of the reports that Apple wasn’t able to successfully embed one beneath the OLED display, or maybe it was destined to depart anyway. A big deal is being made of the Face ID sensor as a more robust replacement.

Together, they mean you have to unlearn a few things. It brings to mind Apple’s decision to offer the iPhone scrolling scheme on Macs, including hiding the scroll bars unless you’re scrolling. I opted to choose the “Always” option, but I grant that Apple felt customers are probably more comfortable for things to work the same on both platforms.

But what about the things that require you to learn some new tricks?

So, without the Home button you have to swipe upwards to accomplish the same result. Doesn’t sound so bad, but, according to Levy, “A little trickier is the swipe-and-stop required to get to the carousel of open apps; it took me awhile to get the hang of pressing down on one of the little cards representing an app in order to evoke a minus sign that allowed me to close it.”

All right, not so bad. The maneuvers aren’t altogether complicated, but what if you have an older or “traditional” iPhone around, or an iPad? Suddenly you may find yourself, as Levy did, using the new actions on your other devices. Instead of placing your finger on the Home button, you expect the unit to unlock by recognizing your face.

Ouch!

Obviously, this situation isn’t a forever thing. You can expect that other iOS gear will, over time, lose their Home buttons and Touch ID. What you master on the iPhone X, you’ll be able to take to your other devices, at least once they are similarly upgraded.

For now, you can expect to have to think twice before acting, unless an iPhone X is your only Apple mobile device. In that case, it won’t matter so much once the moves become natural parts of your muscle memory. In the meantime, the critics will attack Apple for its foolish decision to make changes that, in fact, are necessarily in light of the changed hardware. But to Apple nothing is forever.

This is not an argument not to buy an iPhone X. Levy appears to love the new device, but is making it clear what the tradeoffs are. If you’re uncertain, I suppose you can wait till Apple has sufficient stock at hand to have demo units at their stores — or at third-party shops — so you can try it out for yourself and see what you want to do.

But remember that you are seeing a harbinger of the future at Apple. Things are going to change, and it’s up to the user to decide whether or not those changes are for the better. Apple will get the memo from ongoing sales figures after the initial demand is satisfied.

So let’s look at what’s going on. Apple claims that demand for the iPhone X, due to ship on Friday, November 3rd, as “off the charts.” But that is typical corporate speak from Apple. True, stocks ran out for preorders within minutes, but just how many units did Apple have on hand to ship?

CEO Tim Cook says there will be stocks at Apple Stores if you get there early, but how many? A few dozen for each store? It’s hard to tell, and Apple is not making promises about having sufficient supplies; the question isn’t being answered except by the critics who have cited chapter and verse about alleged production hiccups. That Apple couldn’t ship the iPhone X until weeks after the iPhone 8 series arrived does seem to confirm that it is taking longer for production to ramp up.

After that, there have been confirmed rumors that Apple deliberately reduced accuracy of the iPhone’s Face ID feature due to production limitations. Apple denies the story, originating at Bloomberg, which may actually be contrary to common sense. Developing any new tech gadget, especially one at the cutting edge, is going to entail tradeoffs and compromises. Consider the sacrifices Samsung made with the Galaxy S8 and its facial and iris recognition features that can be defeated with digital photographs. That’s the sort of tradeoff that Apple’s critics won’t mention since it’s not about Apple.

Continue Reading…