I had two Samsung flagship phones, one (S20FE) had an optical fingerprint reader and the other (S22) had an ultrasonic one. Both of them somewhat regularly failed to read my finger, were slower than a fingerprint reader on the power button and are more expensive/complex to build. They won’t work with cheap 3rd party screen replacements and some screen protectors as well.
Meanwhile my $90 Android phone has a fingerprint reader on the power button. It never fails and I never have to perfectly place my finger on the sensor area to get it to work. It just seems like the perfect place to put a fingerprint sensor, so why do phone manufacturers keep using in-display fingerprint readers over the cheaper alternative?
I don’t know but I prefer fp sensors on the back of the phone because my fingerprint is also up there naturally.
Yes! I’m so sad they’ve moved away from this. I could pull out my phone AND unlock it in the same grab.
I can’t find a decent screen protector for my Galaxy S23, no matter how I try, and it’s all due to the damned in-display fingerprint reader. Any adhesive-style screen protector has an open area for the fingerprint reader, and it’s either a different material or a different thickness; they all look like shit. I’ve tried the screen protectors that use a UV-cured adhesive, and they’re messy, difficult to apply properly, and generally a pain in the ass.
I’ve relegated myself to not using a screen protector at all, but considering my pocket lint scratches my screen, it sucks.