Any discussion of biometrics without discussing the crossover rate (or Equal Error Rate) is woefully incomplete. see this explanation: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/57589/determining-the-accuracy-of-a-biometric-system
The crossover rate is that point in the sensitivity settings of the system that yield minimum errors, where the False Acceptance Rate = the False Rejection Rate. In layman's terms, you're letting in unauthorized bad guys at the same rate you're keeping authorized good guys out. Any biometric system that doesn't list their crossover rate is pure snakeoil. Run away.
Another data point few consider. A Large Theme Park used biometrics a few years back for their annual ticket holders. It soon became known as the "identical twins two-for-one sale". Can your biometrics discern identical twins? Few can.

A friend of mine used to work there until yesterday. He said they closed the place down, more like 95% layoffs. It's gone.

Could somebody post the original article that this post summarizes? e.g. Where can we get further information?

One of my business partners took this stuff about two years ago and completely lost her sense of smell within 30 minutes. Yes, it's dangerous. Yes, it needs to be off the market. Yes, the manufacturer has known of the dangers for years, having been sued numerous times. Yes, they should be held accountable.

I did a presentation at the Atlanta Unix Users' Group this month that is a more up-to-date comparison. It's available in Open Office format. You can also get to it from my home page. I did a similar talk almost four years ago. My conclusion is that MySQL has closed the feature gap with PostgreSQL in recent years. I still give PostgreSQL the edge in features, and MySQL the edge in out-of-the-box untuned performance. I also discuss replication and clustering.