{"id":18585,"date":"2022-03-03T22:13:58","date_gmt":"2022-03-03T22:13:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/03\/03\/why-the-samsung-galaxy-s22s-fingerprint-reader-puts-the-pixel-6-to-shame-review-geek\/"},"modified":"2022-03-03T22:13:58","modified_gmt":"2022-03-03T22:13:58","slug":"why-the-samsung-galaxy-s22s-fingerprint-reader-puts-the-pixel-6-to-shame-review-geek","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/03\/03\/why-the-samsung-galaxy-s22s-fingerprint-reader-puts-the-pixel-6-to-shame-review-geek\/","title":{"rendered":"Why the Samsung Galaxy S22\u2019s Fingerprint Reader Puts the Pixel 6 to Shame \u2013 Review Geek"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n
\"The
Justin Duino<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Despite the Pixel 6\u2019s weird bugs and unreliable software updates<\/a>, it\u2019s arguably one of the best Android devices of all time. Customers have just one big complaint; the fingerprint reader sucks. In fact, it left such a bad taste in critics\u2019 mouths that they\u2019re now pointing to the Samsung Galaxy S22\u2019s fingerprint reader as its Pixel-beating feature.<\/p>\n

At a glance, this may seem like an unfair comparison. The Pixel 6 is a revolutionary new phone with a custom-made Tensor processor, so we can\u2019t expect perfection.\u00a0But if Google wants to nail its upcoming Pixel 7 release<\/a>, it needs to learn from Samsung\u2014a company that once found itself in this very predicament.<\/p>\n

Yeah, the Pixel 6 Fingerprint Reader Stinks<\/h2>\n
\"Close-up
Justin Duino<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Within days of the Pixel 6 launch, customers began complaining that the phone\u2019s fingerprint sensor was unreliable or non-working. Some people theorized that a bug was responsible for the problem, while others claimed that certain screen protectors confused the phone\u2019s biometrics system.<\/p>\n

Google took a different stance\u2014basically, it told customers \u201cyou\u2019re using the phone wrong.\u201d The company drafted a Support page<\/a>\u00a0explaining that you need to firmly press your finger against the phone\u2019s sensor, and that pulling your finger from the phone too quickly will confuse its \u201cenhanced security algorithms.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now, Google did give customers some<\/em> useful tips. The company advised that customers keep their hands moisturized, which absolutely improves fingerprint reader accuracy (and your chances of scoring a hot date). But overall, Google\u2019s advice wasn\u2019t all that helpful\u2014the Pixel 6 fingerprint sensor stinks<\/a>, and no amount of moisturizer will solve\u00a0that<\/em> problem.<\/p>\n

A few weeks after teaching people to moisturize, Google pushed a\u00a0software update<\/a>\u00a0to improve the Pixel 6\u2019s biometrics. Anecdotally speaking, we believe that this update was helpful. But\u00a0customers complain about the Pixel 6 fingerprint sensor just as much as they did in November of 2021, so the update clearly didn\u2019t do enough.<\/p>\n

Maybe Google will use future updates to further improve the Pixel 6 biometrics, but these updates will never\u00a0resolve<\/em> the problems that customers are complaining about. I can say that confidently, as software isn\u2019t the only thing that can make a fingerprint sensor slow or inaccurate.<\/p>\n

Optical Vs. Ultrasonic: It\u2019s All In the Hardware<\/h2>\n
\"Samsung
Justin Duino<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Most smartphones with in-display fingerprint readers, including the Pixel 6, use \u201coptical\u201d sensors<\/a> to verify your identity. These optical sensors are basically just cameras\u2014they illuminate your finger, snap a quick photo, and compare that photo to all the fingers in your biometrics settings.<\/p>\n

There are some serious drawbacks to optical scanning technology. If your fingers are dirty, dry, or wet, then they may not look like \u201cyour\u201d fingers anymore. Not to mention, the optical scanning process can be a bit slow, and your fingerprint may look different depending on how hard it\u2019s pressed against your screen.<\/p>\n

Samsung gets around these hurdles with unique \u201cultrasonic\u201d fingerprint sensors<\/a>, which use sound waves to create 3D maps of your fingerprints. As you might expect, these 3D maps provide a lot more detail than simple 2D images.<\/p>\n

That extra detail leads to an increase in accuracy. If your fingers are dry, for instance, the ultrasonic 3D map will still contain enough data for identification. Plus, pressure sensors in Samsung phones can tell how hard you squish your fingers against the screen and compensate for their change in shape. (Still, optical fingerprint sensors are still a bit faster than ultrasonic options, as they perform less detailed work.)<\/p>\n

I should note that ultrasonic sensors are\u00a0technically<\/em> more secure than their optical cousins. Simply put, a 3D map of your fingerprint is harder to duplicate than a 2D image. But I don\u2019t really consider this an area of concern\u2014if someone wants to break into your phone\u00a0that<\/em> badly, they\u2019ll eventually find a way around any biometric systems.<\/p>\n

Google can only pull so much out of its optical fingerprint sensors. Software updates can improve the technology, for sure, but substantial change requires new hardware \u2026 right?<\/p>\n

There\u2019s Still Hope for Google\u2019s Optical Fingerprint Sensor<\/h2>\n
\"Google
Justin Duino<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The first in-display fingerprint sensors were terrible. Still, many manufacturers considered the technology a necessity\u2014-the iPhone ditched its Home button<\/a>, which doubled as a capacitive fingerprint sensor, and other brands had to do the same.<\/p>\n

Do you know which brand had the best in-display fingerprint sensor? Well, I\u2019m not sure either, but it wasn\u2019t Samsung.<\/p>\n

After a few years of sticking capacitive fingerprint sensors on the backsides of its phones, Samsung decided to debut the ultrasonic in-display sensor. The result was an overwhelming disappointment. Samsung\u2019s Galaxy S10 lineup was widely criticized<\/a> for its use of the ultrasonic sensor, which was slow, inaccurate, and unable to function with some screen protectors<\/a>.<\/p>\n

At that time, optical sensors were noticeably faster than Samsung\u2019s ultrasonic alternative (they\u2019re now just slightly faster). But they were still pretty darn slow, unreliable, and unpopular among many critics and customers.<\/p>\n

Phone manufacturers, especially Samsung, have effectively resolved most of these problems.\u00a0And this increase in quality isn\u2019t the result of crazy, groundbreaking changes. Companies have simply stayed the course and made incremental improvements to hardware and software.<\/p>\n

Google hasn\u2019t had the chance to make such improvements\u2014the Pixel 6 is its first phone with an in-display fingerprint sensor. And like Samsung, it will bounce back.<\/p>\n

While many people are now encouraging Google to use an ultrasonic fingerprint sensor in future Pixel devices, I\u2019d be surprised if the company makes such a dramatic change. Optical hardware isn\u2019t the problem here; Google made a bad fingerprint sensor, and it needs to improve both software and hardware to make a good fingerprint sensor.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n