Google Reveals Android 4.0 ( Ice Cream sandwich)... in short is slick...

[mewmartigan]

Originally Posted by vaughnmr

Here's my EVO with light usage, 4 days, 3 hours, 46% battery left....

I'm pretty sure there is an issue with HTC phones and Gingerbread. My HTC phone also shows "Dialer" as the second biggest battery drain even if I haven't made a single phone call.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by mewmartigan

I'm not sure I get the point of lock screens at all....I understand security ones (maybe face unlock, password unlock, tracing a pattern, etc) but the ones that just slide to unlock? What's the point?

It stops buttons getting randomly pressed if the device gets turned on in your pocket, etc...

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by mewmartigan

Here is a video that shows it working much better than it did on stage. Seems fast too...although I probably still won't use it, haha.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/19/i...ck-demo-video/


I'm not sure I get the point of lock screens at all....I understand security ones (maybe face unlock, password unlock, tracing a pattern, etc) but the ones that just slide to unlock? What's the point?

Just to prevent inadvertent phone calls, etc.

[mewmartigan]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It stops buttons getting randomly pressed if the device gets turned on in your pocket, etc...

Yeah, I guess that could be but as you said....its got to get turned on in your pocket first. On most of the phones I've had, the wake up button (turn on screen button/power button/whatever) is rather hard to hit accidentally.

I do appreciate Ice Cream Sandwich (and other apps) making the lockscreen more useable though. In ICS, you can unlock directly into different apps such as the camera, screen brightness, etc.

[wannabee]

Originally Posted by kennyc

or their dead head?

MacBeth unlocks MacDuff's phone: The News International phone-hacking scandal continues in gruesome way!

hahahahaha hahahahaha

Originally Posted by kennyc

Just to prevent inadvertent phone calls, etc.

Did you here the story of the bloke who inadvertently hit redial and phoned his wife while he was having dinner with his mistress. The wife overheard the whole conversation.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by wannabee

...
Did you here the story of the bloke who inadvertently hit redial and phoned his wife while he was having dinner with his mistress. The wife overheard the whole conversation.

[Nexutix]

Originally Posted by SCION

Perhaps by this time next year there'll be a tablet with this that interests me. Trying to get at least 9-10 months out of my Sony.

Now I have doubt whether to buy iPad 3 or not. I won't if Android 4.0 Tablet releases with HD screen.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by wannabee

Couldn't you hold up a life size photograph of the owner's face?

Interestingly, it looks like a photo on a smartphone fools it:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-57...ce-based-lock/

A video demonstration created by mobile blog SoyaCincau shows that the Face Unlock feature can be fooled by showing it a mere image of the face used to set up the locking mechanism.


Given the video demo, it's unclear why a Googler would have suggested recently that using a photo would not open up a device protected with Face Unlock. Last month, Koushik Dutta, a developer of the Android after-market firmware replacement CyanogenMod, tweeted: "The face recognition unlock thing is really easily hackable. Show it a photo."

In response, Tim Bray, who is on the Android team, tweeted: "Nope. Give us some credit."

But you still need a photo of the owner's face-something that a casual thief probably won't have.

[mewmartigan]

It is funny that it worked with a picture of someone's face. However, I really think that face unlock is just a neat convenience feature. I'd be surprised if Google tried to advertise it as a security feature. "slide to unlock" isn't exactly security either and you can see the fingerprint pattern of many "grid unlock" if you angle the phone right.
Passwords will probably be the most secure for a while to come.

The Motorola Atrix had a fingerprint scanner....and the Atrix 2 does not. So I guess either nobody cared or it didn't work well enough.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by mewmartigan

It is funny that it worked with a picture of someone's face. However, I really think that face unlock is just a neat convenience feature. I'd be surprised if Google tried to advertise it as a security feature. "slide to unlock" isn't exactly security either and you can see the fingerprint pattern of many "grid unlock" if you angle the phone right.
Passwords will probably be the most secure for a while to come.

The Motorola Atrix had a fingerprint scanner....and the Atrix 2 does not. So I guess either nobody cared or it didn't work well enough.

I think the idea is pretty cool-it is tedious to type in security codes all the time, just to respond to a text. But phones have so much personal data now, it would be insane to leave them unprotected.

I think the biometric approach is still in its infancy-I hope Google and "Moto-oogle" keep exploring it.

[Andrew H.]

I have a couple of "real" locks on my front door, and a little twist lock on my bathroom door. The lock on the bathroom door isn't really "secure," but I'm glad it's there, as it does provides some protection for my privacy, even if it provides no protection from a determined burglar.

I think face recognition is like the bathroom lock, and I think that's okay. It would stop random coworkers/family members/etc. from just looking at what's on my phone, while being much more convenient than constantly typing in a 4 digit (or more) code.

[Barty]

Can't tell how this is cooler than the previous versions, since I don't have any android devices.

But I'm curious: why does all android marketing look like it's aimed at PG13 crowd? It's always sone kind of fighting robot with freaking laser, transformer, or in this case, tron ripoff. I've seen ads that show no human, not even a hand model, opting instead for a robot arm.

I know android phones outsell everything else, so apparently it works. Or the product succeeds despite the marketing.

[Care]

Originally Posted by Barty

Can't tell how this is cooler than the previous versions, since I don't have any android devices.

But I'm curious: why does all android marketing look like it's aimed at PG13 crowd? It's always sone kind of fighting robot with freaking laser, transformer, or in this case, tron ripoff. I've seen ads that show no human, not even a hand model, opting instead for a robot arm.

I know android phones outsell everything else, so apparently it works. Or the product succeeds despite the marketing.

I assumed it's because of the name, Android. You know, droid... I really liked the Droid commercials.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by Barty

Can't tell how this is cooler than the previous versions, since I don't have any android devices.

But I'm curious: why does all android marketing look like it's aimed at PG13 crowd? It's always sone kind of fighting robot with freaking laser, transformer, or in this case, tron ripoff. I've seen ads that show no human, not even a hand model, opting instead for a robot arm.

I know android phones outsell everything else, so apparently it works. Or the product succeeds despite the marketing.

The robotic commercial are part of Verizon's DROID campaign. These are Verizon exclusive high end phones. Verizon sells Android phones and their trademarked DROID(tm) phones. Both are Android devices.

HTC, Samsung, etc... do air regular commercials but their spin is on the phone not the platform. They probably just don't catch you eye like the DROID commercials, kind of shows you the marketing genius of Verizon.




The samsung spider commercial is one of my favorite ones, I still laugh every time I see it.
=X=

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by =X=

(***SPIDER VIDEO***)
The samsung spider commercial is one of my favorite ones, I still laugh every time I see it.
=X=

If someone takes a shoe to my phone like that, I'm going to beat them into unconsciousness with a cactus.