From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

*Apple will reportedly bring back Touch ID on a foldable iPhone*
<https://www.engadget.com/mobile/apple-will-reportedly-bring-back-touch-id-on-a-foldable-iphone-135831748.html>
"Bloomberg reports that it will come with a throwback feature: Touch ID.
Why it's reverting to Touch ID from Face ID is unclear
as the last use was on the third-generation iPhone SE."

Personally, I find it's indicative of how poorly designed the iPhone is
that it needs to be so securely locked down to the point that it is.

It's as if Apple knows iOS is the most exploited mobile OS in the world.
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>


"According to Bloomberg, Apple was initially going to give the new
iPhone on-cell touch sensors, but pivoted to an in-cell option,
similar to the current iPhone. An in-cell screen builds the touch
sensors directly into the display, while an on-cell adds a layer on top, creating a thicker end product, which can be more noticeable
in folding phones where its display creases."
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:

*Apple will reportedly bring back Touch ID on a foldable iPhone*
<https://www.engadget.com/mobile/apple-will-reportedly-bring-back-touch-id-on-a-foldable-iphone-135831748.html>
"Bloomberg reports that it will come with a throwback feature: Touch ID.
Why it's reverting to Touch ID from Face ID is unclear
as the last use was on the third-generation iPhone SE."

Personally, I find it's indicative of how poorly designed the iPhone is
that it needs to be so securely locked down to the point that it is.

It's as if Apple knows iOS is the most exploited mobile OS in the world.
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>

"According to Bloomberg, Apple was initially going to give the new
iPhone on-cell touch sensors, but pivoted to an in-cell option,
similar to the current iPhone. An in-cell screen builds the touch
sensors directly into the display, while an on-cell adds a layer on top, creating a thicker end product, which can be more noticeable
in folding phones where its display creases."

For years we were told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID. Why would they
equip a modern phone with a technically flawed security feature?

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 2025-08-26 05:08, badgolferman wrote:

Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:

*Apple will reportedly bring back Touch ID on a foldable iPhone*
<https://www.engadget.com/mobile/apple-will-reportedly-bring-back-touch-id-on-a-foldable-iphone-135831748.html>
"Bloomberg reports that it will come with a throwback feature: Touch ID. >> Why it's reverting to Touch ID from Face ID is unclear
as the last use was on the third-generation iPhone SE."

Personally, I find it's indicative of how poorly designed the iPhone is
that it needs to be so securely locked down to the point that it is.

It's as if Apple knows iOS is the most exploited mobile OS in the world.
<https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>


"According to Bloomberg, Apple was initially going to give the new
iPhone on-cell touch sensors, but pivoted to an in-cell option,
similar to the current iPhone. An in-cell screen builds the touch
sensors directly into the display, while an on-cell adds a layer on top,
creating a thicker end product, which can be more noticeable
in folding phones where its display creases."

For years we were told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID. Why would they
equip a modern phone with a technically flawed security feature?

1. Where were you ever "told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID". Let's
see the quotes.

2. "inferior" doesn't mean "TECHNICALLY flawed". Face ID could be
considered superior merely for an increase in ease of use.

You're becoming as inherently dishonest as Arlen.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 08/26/2025 09:22, Alan wrote:

On 2025-08-26 05:08, badgolferman wrote:

Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:

-a *Apple will reportedly bring back Touch ID on a foldable iPhone*
-a <https://www.engadget.com/mobile/apple-will-reportedly-bring-back-
touch-id-on-a-foldable-iphone-135831748.html>
-a-a "Bloomberg reports that it will come with a throwback feature:
Touch ID.
-a-a-a Why it's reverting to Touch ID from Face ID is unclear
-a-a-a as the last use was on the third-generation iPhone SE."

Personally, I find it's indicative of how poorly designed the iPhone is
that it needs to be so securely locked down to the point that it is.

It's as if Apple knows iOS is the most exploited mobile OS in the world. >>> -a <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>


"According to Bloomberg, Apple was initially going to give the new
iPhone on-cell touch sensors, but pivoted to an in-cell option,
similar to the current iPhone. An in-cell screen builds the touch
sensors directly into the display, while an on-cell adds a layer on top, >>> creating a thicker end product, which can be more noticeable
in folding phones where its display creases."

For years we were told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID. Why would they
equip a modern phone with a technically flawed security feature?

1. Where were you ever "told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID". Let's
see the quotes.

2. "inferior" doesn't mean "TECHNICALLY flawed". Face ID could be
considered superior merely for an increase in ease of use.

You're becoming as inherently dishonest as Arlen.

No, you're being dishonest as usual. We had many conversations about
this and people like the "expert" nospam told us repeatedly Touch ID was inferior because it could be duplicated. I don't even remember you then
so I don't know what you said.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 2025-08-26 10:30, badgolferman wrote:

On 08/26/2025 09:22, Alan wrote:

On 2025-08-26 05:08, badgolferman wrote:

Marion <marion@facts.com> wrote:

-a *Apple will reportedly bring back Touch ID on a foldable iPhone*
-a <https://www.engadget.com/mobile/apple-will-reportedly-bring-back- >>>> touch-id-on-a-foldable-iphone-135831748.html>
-a-a "Bloomberg reports that it will come with a throwback feature:
Touch ID.
-a-a-a Why it's reverting to Touch ID from Face ID is unclear
-a-a-a as the last use was on the third-generation iPhone SE."

Personally, I find it's indicative of how poorly designed the iPhone is >>>> that it needs to be so securely locked down to the point that it is.

It's as if Apple knows iOS is the most exploited mobile OS in the world. >>>> -a <https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog>


"According to Bloomberg, Apple was initially going to give the new
iPhone on-cell touch sensors, but pivoted to an in-cell option,
similar to the current iPhone. An in-cell screen builds the touch
sensors directly into the display, while an on-cell adds a layer on top, >>>> creating a thicker end product, which can be more noticeable
in folding phones where its display creases."

For years we were told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID. Why would they
equip a modern phone with a technically flawed security feature?

1. Where were you ever "told Touch ID was inferior to Face ID". Let's
see the quotes.

2. "inferior" doesn't mean "TECHNICALLY flawed". Face ID could be
considered superior merely for an increase in ease of use.

You're becoming as inherently dishonest as Arlen.

No, you're being dishonest as usual. We had many conversations about
this and people like the "expert" nospam told us repeatedly Touch ID was inferior because it could be duplicated. I don't even remember you then
so I don't know what you said.

There's a difference between inferior and "technically flawed".

It isn't a "technical flaw" that a fingerprint can be duplicated more
easily that a face that will fool Apple's FaceID system.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 10:30:19 -0400, badgolferman wrote :

We had many conversations about
this and people like the "expert" nospam told us repeatedly Touch ID was inferior because it could be duplicated. I don't even remember you then
so I don't know what you said.

Hi badgolferman,

As you know, I study these strange abnormally low-IQ Apple trolls.
The Apple trolls are strange people who make no sense save to themselves.

In the case of Alan Baker, he'll always forget everything he has talked
about if it doesn't fit his defense-of-everything-Apple agenda.

So it doesn't matter one iota that you've discussed this a billion times
with people like Alan Baker because either he's so incredibly low IQ that
he can't remember/understand any facts about Apple, or, he's conveniently "forgetting" that he's discussed this with you a thousand times.

It's hard to tell since he's so incredibly stupid anyway.

I've never in my life met someone as dumb as Alan Baker, who doesn't even
know the first thing about anything - not even the cars he says he owns nor
the 'racing' he says he teaches (yet he has no clue what a curve is).

What's DIFFERENT about nospam though, is nospam actually knew stuff.
It was just that nospam lied all the time to defend Apple to the death.

While the end result is the same, the overarching difference is that Alan
Baker actually is incredibly stupid while nospam just brazenly lied.

What's the same is both defended Apple to the death, no matter what.

What's also VERY MUCH TRHE SAME is they both are not intelligent in how
they did it because (and this is important) they NEVER kept the same
argument twice.

What I mean by that is you'll see all my arguments are consistent, e.g., privacy or security or strategy, etc., but all the arguments of the Apple trolls are ad hoc manufactured on the spot - to fit their defense of Apple.

SO if Apple does "A" to accomplish "B", both trolls will claim it's for
reason "C"; but if Apple then does "X" to accomplish "Y", then they'll conveniently claim "Z" was the reason.

There is no consistency to the arguments of the Apple trolls.
That's because they have low IQ (all of them).

They simply defend using the first argument that comes to their mind.

Hence, nospam would have said ANYTHING to defend Apple's touch-id changes.
So would Alan Baker. As do all the low-IQ ignorant uneducated Apple trolls.

None are consistent.
Which is how I know that they all have substandard IQs.

They can't keep track of their own arguments. They're that stupid.

If you're trying to have an intelligent conversation with me, for example,
I can keep track of all my arguments because they all make logical sense.

Theirs don't.
Not only that, they don't even REMEMBER their own arguments.

Because they just make up their excuses for Apple on the fly.
Today their excuse for Touch-ID going away is reason X.
Tomorrow it's reason Y.

It's simply the first thing that comes to their mind to defend Apple.
Tomorrow, they'll think of a different excuse & forget the one from today.

Just watch.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 2025-08-27 19:14, Marion wrote:

On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 10:30:19 -0400, badgolferman wrote :

We had many conversations about
this and people like the "expert" nospam told us repeatedly Touch ID was
inferior because it could be duplicated. I don't even remember you then
so I don't know what you said.

Hi badgolferman,

As you know, I study these strange abnormally low-IQ Apple trolls.
The Apple trolls are strange people who make no sense save to themselves.

In the case of Alan Baker, he'll always forget everything he has talked
about if it doesn't fit his defense-of-everything-Apple agenda.

For the record, Arlen/Marion/(now maybe Symon) is the one who claimed
that every road racing driver knows about the catenary curve and its importance to racing...

...but then could only find a reference to using it in wooden model
gravity ramp racing.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2