Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Technologies

Apple Watch Without Touch ID: Company Chose Battery Over Biometrics on the Wrist

Apple deliberately abandons fingerprint scanner on smartwatch — and this reveals the real priority: health features and battery life matter more than unlock convenience.

Oleg Bazylewicz

By Oleg Bazylewicz

May 11, 2026 · 2 min read

Apple Watch Without Touch ID: Company Chose Battery Over Biometrics on the Wrist
Apple Watch (Фото: Apple)

Apple Watch still cannot unlock without an iPhone nearby. For millions of users who exercise or simply leave their phone at home, this means the watch turns into an expensive pedometer — without access to payments, apps, and settings that require authentication.

Why Touch ID doesn't fit in the case

According to insider Instant Digital, integrating a fingerprint scanner physically competes with the battery: the sensor requires space inside the case that Apple is not willing to take away from the accumulator. Instead, the company is focused on increasing battery life and expanding medical functions — sleep monitoring, heart rate tracking, blood oxygen levels.

This is not a new dilemma. Apple has been balancing for years between the minimalism of the Apple Watch case and the appetite for new features. Each generation receives either a more powerful chip, a larger display, or new sensors — but not all at once, because the physics of a case less than 12 mm thick leaves no room for maneuvering.

What's really at stake

The absence of Touch ID is not just an inconvenience when unlocking. It's a limitation for scenarios where an iPhone is unavailable: Apple Pay on a run, authorization in medical apps, access to corporate systems. As long as the watch relies on Bluetooth connection to the phone or a PIN code, it remains a peripheral device — despite Apple positioning it as a standalone health gadget.

A watch that measures your heart rate around the clock but cannot verify your identity without a phone — this is an architectural contradiction that Apple is currently resolving not in favor of the user.

RazomUA

The alternative to Touch ID — authentication via Face ID on iPhone or entering a code — remains the standard, despite competitors (including some Android smartwatches) already offering built-in biometrics on the wrist.

Apple's priorities: medicine beats convenience

The choice in favor of battery and health sensors is a bet on the regulatory medical market. Apple actively promotes Apple Watch as a medical device: ECG, atrial fibrillation detection, body temperature sensor. Each new sensor requires space, energy, and certification. Touch ID in this hierarchy is a convenience, not a medical necessity.

  • Autonomy — the key complaint from Apple Watch users across all generations
  • Health API — the foundation for partnerships with clinics and insurance companies
  • Touch ID — improves UX, but doesn't open new markets

If Apple truly launches an Apple Watch with battery life exceeding two days and a new medical sensor in 2025–2026, the question of Touch ID will most likely remain open for one more generation. But if competitors offer reliable wrist biometrics along with comparable health features — Apple will have to reconsider what it's willing to sacrifice for a case the thickness of a coin.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026