Why Win mobile OS doesn't add 'Pattern lock' feature?

[ads13]

We everyone knows that, Smartphone users are increasing day by day.
Most of users use AndroidOS smartphones among iOS and w10m OS.
Aside this, why only android offers Pattern lock as optional feature to keep our data safe.
The question arises here these why MS(& iOS) still doesn't add Pattern lock feature?
Isn't it safer than pin-code?

Share your views....

 

[PerfectReign]

I'm guessing it isn't. On my Nexus tablet and SGS 6, I'm not allowed to use pattern if I encrypt the device. I always encrypt.

As it is, I use fingerprint unlock on my X3 and Iphone 7. Way faster.


Sent from mTalk

 

[milkyway]

Because Google owns the patent to the pattern unlock

 

[ads13]

.. So why they didn't patent 'keypad lock'?

 

[dov1978]

I've personally zero interest in it. I've never bothered using it on all my Android phones and a fingerprint sensor or iris scanner is way faster these days anyway

 

[ads13]

Those features are already in expensive phablets. Adding that feature is not a bad idea.

 

[Zachary Boddy]

Pattern lock has been "proven" to be unsafe compared to more traditional methods of security.

 

[nate0]

Agreed. It is less secure of the 3. Finger and Pin lock are the most. Password lock I think Microsoft should offer. They have 3 right now. Iris, FP, and pin. That is enough for me. Pattern is cool I guess. Wonder if it is possible to create a lock screen app to do that?

 

[xandros9]

Probably a matter of priorities. Windows 10 Mobile is still lacking in what are probably more pressing areas and I imagine adding another login method is low on the list of priorities especially when Windows Hello would supercede it.

 

[shmsnh]

Pattern unlock is less secure than PIN or other methods. It's literally says so right where you are given an option to pick your phone unlocking method.

 

[derrieger]

Aside this, why only android offers Pattern lock as optional feature to keep our data safe.

Reason #1 : The 'S' in 'pattern' stands for 'safe'.

Reason #2 : Android offers everything. Which is its Curse and Blessing at the same time. You can have a plethora of everything in every way, and personally I find it more confusing and annoying than helpful.
So just because it's there doesn't mean it's necessary or useful. We call that "Featuritis", the mania of having long feature lists to impress customers with.

 

[ads13]

Reason #2 : Android offers everything. Which is its Curse and Blessing at the same time. You can have a plethora of everything in every way, and personally I find it more confusing and annoying than helpful.
So just because it's there doesn't mean it's necessary or useful. We call that "Featuritis", the mania of having long feature lists to impress customers with.

That's why it's(Android) an Open-Source OS and more famous in mobile market.

 

[derrieger]

I would never argue against Android being famous which is also irrelevant to the topic.

Just because something can be implemented doesn't mean it adds to the product. Like the "wallpaper unlock pattern" where one has to draw lines and circles on a picture. If you think for a while you might be able to come up with even more possibilities to unlock a computer or phone.
And then look at idevices, for example. Fingerprint and/ or PIN. It's quite secure, it's sufficient and any method below that level of security wouldn't add to it. It would just be there for the sake of being there. Bloat.