The ievo multi-spectral sensor has been reviewed in May’s edition of the independent test publication Benchmark Magazine, the only product test assessment relating to security systems on the market at the moment. The ievo Ultimate reader was previously called by Benchmark’s editor Pete Conway to be tested alongside three other globally leading biometric manufacturers for their special ‘fingerprint reader’ feature in both the March and April issues.
ievo Managing Director Shaun Oakes submitted Ultimate into the test after deliberation saying, “Not so long ago, Pete Conway expressed interest in testing a multi-spectral imaging fingerprint sensor, yet nobody came forward. We were aware of Benchmark’s rigorous testing methods, and respected them as an independent reviewer. Therefore, when we were invited to submit Ultimate™for their fingerprint reader feature we decided to take the plunge.”
With the first half of the review published in the March issue, Ultimate was already ahead of its peers for the features and functions categories. The three other competitors scoring less than the UK produced Ultimate.
The review congratulated the fact that the Ultimate fingerprint reader itself doesn’t require dual entry for data as well as holds no connections or relays which has been a magnificent advantage to the product. Many competitive biometric readers out there can be easily compromised because relays can be crossed or removed which could potentially open the ‘secured’ door from the reader itself outside. ievo overcame this issue by listening to security providers, integrators and installers at the beginning of the design process. They made it clear from the outset that they were worried about unwanted intruders if the relays became compromised. ievo solved this problem by housing the relays five metres away on the inside of the door.
Part two divulged a little deeper, focusing on performance. Ultimate scored 90% in the category.
It was duly noted that the actual physical install ‘isn’t an issue’ as seamless integration is offered simultaneously with; Paxton, Nortech, ACT, BSB, CDVI, PLAN and Inner-Range. It also performed ‘fastest during busy periods due to its accuracy’. Breaking this down a little further, Ultimate recorded no false accepts and whilst pushing the product to its maximum it was ‘difficult to make the unit deliver false reject because of poor finger placement.’
Commenting further on the publication of the review, Shaun Oakes added, “Of course, as with anything, there are limitations, and being the customer and user driven business that we are, we took time out to speak with Pete to ask him how we could improve our product. Backed up by the review, Pete told us he would like to see printed manuals and perhaps spend more time clarifying technical terminology in the manual. We have listened to this critique and are presently working on the suggestions Pete made.”
Because Ultimate was able to ‘cope with much more than the test required’ Pete Conway took up the opportunity to stifle the Benchmark panels curiosity of how the multi-spectral imaging sensor fared when used in much more difficult scenarios. This additional review was featured in the May edition published late last week.
The feature began by differentiating between ievo using a multi-spectral imaging sensor and other fingerprint readers also using the technology. The algorithm combined with the scanner create a durable and robust fingerprint system that ‘stands apart from its peers’
The Benchmark team really pushed Ultimate to its limit going as far as turning the reader on its back and filling the sensor cavity with water to see if it could still scan a fingerprint, which it could! They repeated this rigorous test with dirt, oil and powder and found that the sensor was still able to register their prints.
Finally Shaun Oakes adds, “When we launched Ultimate almost two years ago we produced a test video to show all of our customers and users exactly what it could do. Ultimate being subjected to these conditions is all shown in the video. If anyone was ever sceptical that the video was invalid then all they have to do is read Benchmark’s independent and trusted review as it was even deemed ‘the best they’d seen’”