Blog

You are currently viewing We’ve seen the guts of the iPhone 18 Pro and the foldable — and Apple quietly brings back Touch ID

We’ve seen the guts of the iPhone 18 Pro and the foldable — and Apple quietly brings back Touch ID

We’ve seen the guts of the iPhone 18 Pro and the foldable — and Apple quietly brings back Touch ID

A fresh wave of supply-chain leaks, translated insider posts and analyst readouts have painted a surprisingly coherent picture of Apple’s next big hardware moves. The flagship Pro models appear to be getting serious internal rework — new sensors moved under the display, refined structured-light components and revised mechanical designs — while the long-rumored foldable iPhone is shaping up to include a side-mounted fingerprint sensor (Touch ID) rather than a complex in-display reader. That combination — under-display Face ID for the Pro line and a resurrected Touch ID (in the foldable) — shows Apple balancing cutting-edge miniaturization with pragmatic choices for new form factors.

Below I unpack the leaks and their sources, explain the engineering trade-offs behind under-display biometrics and side-mounted fingerprint sensors, analyze the supply-chain signs that make these rumors plausible, and outline practical implications for users, developers and Apple’s product strategy. Wherever a factual claim benefits from a primary source, I link to industry reporting and analyst commentary so you can verify the evidence yourself.

Executive snapshot — the headline takeaways

  • Leaks indicate the Pro lineup will move significant Face ID components beneath the display, reducing the visible Dynamic Island and leaving a smaller front-camera cutout or punch-hole. Multiple analysts and outlets have reported consistent details pointing toward under-display sensor integration.
  • The foldable iPhone is now consistently described in leaks as including a fingerprint reader — probably integrated into the side power button — rather than relying on under-display fingerprint technology. That approach matches known engineering constraints for foldables and echoes credible analyst predictions.
  • Supply-chain clues (manufacturers and component sourcing reports) and staggered launch planning indicate Apple is managing yield risk carefully: complex under-display components could be reserved for Pro SKUs while the foldable adopts proven side-mounted biometric modules.

What the leaks actually say — source-by-source

A quick run through the most relevant reporting:

  • MacRumors collects and synthesizes community and supply-chain rumors into a living roundup covering under-display Face ID speculation and related design changes for the Pro models. It’s a good central reference for tracking corroborating leaks.
  • Gadgets360 published a detailed tip sheet asserting the new A20 Pro chipset will power the iPhone 18 Pro series and reported on display and biometric plans for both the Pro lineup and the foldable. That piece ties chip and display leaks together, which matters for battery and thermal calculations.
  • Tom’s Guide has recent coverage of the iPhone 18 Pro internals, including a summary of a leaked internal specification list and context on the likely mechanical design changes.
  • TechRadar and analyst reporting (derived from Ming-Chi Kuo-style supply-chain analysis) have suggested the foldable will adopt a side-mounted Touch ID module — a simpler, more robust approach for foldable mechanics than under-display fingerprint sensors. That expectation is shared by other credible outlets.
  • Notebookcheck and AppleInsider have also published corroborating pieces about under-display sensor research and the idea that Apple is shrinking the Dynamic Island footprint by shifting some components beneath the screen.

Taken together, these sources create a consistent narrative: Apple is pursuing under-display miniaturization for the Pro family while using the foldable introduction as an opportunity to reintroduce fingerprint biometrics in a pragmatic and hardware-friendly way.

Inside the “tripas” — what the iPhone 18 Pro teardown rumors reveal

Leaked component lists and supply-chain whispers (not internal Apple engineering documents, so treat them as high-quality rumors) point to several meaningful internal changes:

  1. Under-display movement of key Face ID elements.
    Reports indicate Apple engineers are relocating parts of the structured-light Face ID array beneath the OLED stack. The goal: shrink the visible Dynamic Island footprint and leave either a tiny hole for the selfie camera or a much smaller island outline. That requires careful optical routing and new display materials to preserve Face ID reliability.
  2. A new display stack and optical window design.
    The panel lamination and the area immediately above the front camera/sensor cluster appear to be redesigned to allow light passage without sacrificing brightness or color fidelity. This kind of “see-through” zone demands trade-offs between display uniformity and sensor transparency — Apple’s earlier patents and supply-chain moves imply they’ve prioritized this engineering route.
  3. Refined mechanical layout to support more sensors with less bulk.
    Moving sensors below the glass can free up surface area but complicates thermal routing and mechanical tolerances. Reports suggest Apple is rearranging internal shielding and heat spreaders to keep the A20 Pro chip cool while preserving structural rigidity. That maps to the rumor that Apple plans to use aluminum chassis choices similar to recent models, but with different internal reinforcements.
  4. Camera and optical subsystem tweaks.
    The Pro models are tipped to retain or enhance high-end camera features — improved periscope-like telephoto or refined sensor-shift stabilization — while also reshaping the front-facing module to play nice with the under-display environment. Expect software compensation (new ISP tuning) to correct any optical artifacts introduced by the under-display approach.

These “tripas” details explain why Apple could consider moving to under-display Face ID now: supplier maturity and Apple’s own silicon gains make the complex optics feasible without compromising face-recognition accuracy significantly. But because yields and tolerances are tight, Apple appears to be staging this across device tiers.

Why the foldable gets Touch ID (and why that’s smart)

A recurring theme in the leaks: Apple’s foldable prototype is likely to reintroduce Touch ID — not by putting a fingerprint scanner under the display, but by embedding it into the power/side button. Multiple good-faith analyst reports support this, and there are technical reasons it’s the pragmatic choice:

  • Mechanical complexity of foldables. Foldable displays introduce bending, variable layer separation and hinge tolerances. Under-display fingerprint sensors require consistent display optics across the touch area; the folding region’s mechanical stress and bend radius increase the probability of reading errors and reduce sensor yields. A side-mounted physical or capacitive module avoids that risk.
  • Proven, fast, and low-risk solution. Side-mounted sensors are easier to test and source at scale. Apple already has experience with side-button Touch ID in iPads and Macs; adapting that module for a premium foldable is an incremental, lower-risk engineering step. Suppliers like Luxshare have been mentioned as possible module providers, reinforcing the supply-chain plausibility.
  • Complementary biometrics. Relying on Touch ID for closed-profile unlocking (and Face ID or under-display Face ID for open mode) gives the foldable a robust dual-biometrics story and supports more use cases (e.g., masked or low-light unlock). It also helps with accessibility and faster one-handed unlocking when folded.

In short, bringing back Touch ID on the foldable is less a retrograde move than a pragmatic hardware decision to deliver reliable biometrics in a mechanically complex product.

Under-display Face ID for the Pro models — the engineering tightrope

Implementing Face ID beneath OLED requires solving three hard problems simultaneously:

  1. Optical transmission: Structured-light systems rely on precise infrared projection and dot-pattern capture. Putting those components under active pixels demands display materials that are sufficiently transparent (or that can provide local transparency) without introducing visible artifacts or reduced display contrast.
  2. Signal fidelity: The Face ID pipeline uses depth and IR data to build a secure 3D model. Under-display deployment reduces signal strength and can increase noise; robust denoising algorithms and sensor calibration are required to preserve false-accept rates within Apple’s strict thresholds. Expect significant software and ISP investment to offset hardware compromises.
  3. Production yields and testing: Even with prototypes working in labs, scaling to tens of millions of devices requires high yields. Staggered product launches (Pro models first) let Apple manage yield risk and avoid delaying the entire lineup if early production hiccups happen. That deployment pattern matches recent reporting about Apple staggering releases to accommodate the foldable roadmap.

If Apple pulls this off, the front of the phone will look cleaner and more immersive — a core part of Apple’s visual design playbook. If not, the company can fall back on existing Dynamic Island and camera stacks, which is why the rumored approach is staged and optional across SKUs.

Supply-chain signals that back up the claims

Leakers don’t operate in a vacuum; they aggregate clues from supplier orders, casing samples, and panel manufacturer chatter. Several supply-chain signals give credibility to the rumors:

  • Panel supplier capacity ramp for LTPO and under-display windows. Reports from panel suppliers and teardown-focused outlets indicate Apple has been ordering more advanced OLED stacks capable of localized transparency and higher brightness to compensate for sensor occlusion. That’s necessary for reliable under-display sensors.
  • Chip timeline matching new A-series expectations. Coverage that ties a forthcoming A20 Pro chip (or upgraded SoC) to the iPhone 18 Pro makes sense: more compute power helps with denoising, sensor fusion and low-power always-on operations required for background face scanning. That coupling between display innovation and compute upgrades is a predictable engineering pattern.
  • Foldable module suppliers flagged for side Touch ID parts. Analyst commentary and supply-chain leaks name potential vendors for button-based fingerprint modules — a practical indicator that Apple plans to source proven parts rather than chase bleeding-edge under-glass readers for the foldable.

Put simply, when displays, sensors and chips all show correlated signals in supplier chatter, the rumor’s plausibility rises. That’s what we’re seeing here.

UX implications: what will change for normal users

If these rumors turn out true, users will notice several real differences:

  • Cleaner front surface on Pro phones. Less visible sensor housing means more screen real estate and a subtly more immersive experience — good for media and AR use cases. But users could initially face minor recognition hiccups if under-display Face ID isn’t tuned perfectly; Apple will likely ship with careful software fallback behavior.
  • Foldable convenience with Touch ID. For people who open, close and stow foldables frequently, a hardware button fingerprint makes fast unlocking intuitive. It will likely be faster while folded than Face ID and more reliable in some lighting/angles.
  • Two-biometrics reality. Users will get the best of both worlds: under-display facial unlock where it works best; fingerprint unlock where mechanical constraints or user posture makes Face ID inconvenient. That could actually improve day-to-day unlock success rates overall.
  • Security and developer surfaces. Apple will likely keep its Secure Enclave protections for both modalities, so developer APIs and security expectations remain constant — what changes is mostly form-factor and convenience. Developers should validate biometric workflows across both systems during app testing.

Risk scenarios and failure modes

No hardware plan is risk-free. Key ways this could go wrong include:

  • High false-reject rates on under-display Face ID. Early implementations could struggle in certain lighting or with accessories (e.g., sunglasses) and trigger more frequent fallback to passcode entry. This would frustrate users used to near-seamless unlocking.
  • Yield or cost impacts. Yield problems increase per-unit costs and could push Apple to limit the feature to premium SKUs or delay broader rollouts. We’ve seen that staging behavior in previous Apple rollouts.
  • Foldable durability and sensor longevity. Side-mounted buttons on foldables must survive repeated stress across hinge cycles; Apple must validate durability to avoid early failures. Supplier vetting is vital here.
  • Privacy perception. Adding more biometric modes will invite scrutiny over how Apple stores and uses biometric templates — even if security is unchanged, perception matters and Apple must be clear about on-device storage and Surface-level privacy.

Strategic implications for Apple’s roadmap

These leaks suggest Apple is doing three strategic things at once:

  1. Refining flagship look and feel (reduce island, cleaner front display) to keep phones visually modern and competitive with bezel-minimizing Android rivals.
  2. Managing launch risk by staggering advances across SKUs. Pro models get riskier tech first; the foldable adopts more reliable approaches for mechanical constraints. That lets Apple push innovation without overcommitting across the whole lineup.
  3. Reintroducing Touch ID selectively to expand biometrics coverage and make the foldable a more practical device in the real world — prioritizing reliability for a form factor where under-display tech remains hard.

The result is a pragmatic product strategy: innovate where it matters, and choose proven modules where the hardware physics makes bleeding-edge approaches fragile.

Mini case study — how Apple used staged rollouts before (and why it matters)

Apple has used staged hardware rollouts before: high-end features landed on Pro models first (e.g., ProMotion displays, certain camera hardware). That approach allows the company to:

  • absorb initial yield problems in a smaller pool,
  • collect telemetry and user feedback from early adopters, and
  • scale production as supplier yields improve.

If under-display Face ID follows this pattern — Pro-first, then broader adoption — Apple can avoid a mass-market hardware recall or a delayed global launch. The same logic explains why a foldable’s Touch ID would be a low-risk complement rather than a full on-display fingerprint gamble.

Practical advice for buyers, developers, and accessory makers

Buyers:

  • If you value the cleanest screen and early access to new cosmetics, consider Pro models — but realize early adopter hardware might have minor edge-case quirks initially.
  • If you plan to buy a foldable primarily for pocket convenience or one-handed use, the side-mounted Touch ID is a practical feature worth waiting for: it’s likely to be fast and durable.

Developers:

  • Test authentication flows for both biometrics; ensure your app gracefully handles face and fingerprint failures and supports alternate authentication paths.
  • Expect Apple to keep Secure Enclave protections unchanged; your server- or API-side authentication logic doesn’t need to change but your UX should adapt to dual-biometrics.

Accessory makers:

  • Screen protectors and cases will be under scrutiny; ensure compatibility with possible under-display optics (for front glass) and respect button sensor tolerances for side-mounted scanners. Early samples and developer kits will be crucial.

Where to watch next — indicators that will confirm or contradict the rumors

  • Regulatory or certification filings (FCC, EU declarations) that show new module part numbers or external antenna placements. These often leak before product launches and provide hard technical evidence.
  • Supply-chain footprints: visible orders or public statements from panel manufacturers and fingerprint module suppliers. Increased inquiries from suppliers about under-display components would be a strong signal.
  • Developer beta firmware that hints at reduced Dynamic Island or new biometric APIs — early OS releases can reveal hardware intent months ahead of product announcements.
  • Independent teardowns and verified CAD renders — the final proof will come when reliable teardown teams and regulators release hardware evidence.

Below are the most relevant, unique, and reputable articles to cite or read for further verification. Each offers a different piece of the puzzle — leaks, analyst context, or supply-chain perspective.

Bookmark and monitor these sources for the next incremental confirmations and teardowns.

Final verdict — is Apple really resurrecting Touch ID, and does it matter?

Short answer: Yes — in a pragmatic, form-factor-specific way. The evidence points to Apple reintroducing fingerprint authentication for the foldable device via a side-mounted sensor, not necessarily across the entire iPhone family. Meanwhile, the Pro models are likely to see under-display Face ID components move the Dynamic Island toward minimalism. The two moves are complementary: one is an aesthetic and optical innovation for slabs, the other is a mechanical and usability optimization for a folding form factor.

For users, this means better unlock options for different contexts (folded vs open, low light vs bright sunlight). For Apple, it’s a sign of thoughtful engineering — balancing bleeding-edge design with practical solutions that meet real-world constraints and manufacturing realities. For the industry, it’s another example of how hardware design must co-evolve with supply chains and software to bring reliable features to market.