Apple’s latest budget iPhone model, the iPhone 16e, which started shipping on Feb. 28, 2025.
Apple
With the release of its new iPhone 16e, which started shipping on Friday, Apple is taking a break from fingerprint technology as a biometric security feature in its smartphone line-up. But the separation may only be temporary.
In a move that underscores the tech giant’s ongoing commitment to facial authentication technology, Apple’s new phone for more budget-conscious consumers will offer Face ID instead of fingerprint scanning technology, dubbed Touch ID.
“It’s the most effortless way of authenticating,” said Joe Palmer, chief innovation officer at iProov, a global technology company focused on biometric verification and authentication. If you think about how many times you unlock a phone in a day, even if it takes you a second and you’re unlocking the phone 100 times a day, it adds up, he said. “I don’t think we’re going to see an evolution beyond face anytime soon,” he added.
Still, technology and cybersecurity professionals say fingerprint scanning technology has plenty of life left — and Apple itself is likely to offer the option in future device releases, including smartphones.
Here’s what consumers need to understand about the latest biometric trends in smartphones, and what’s likely to come next:
Why fingerprints could still make a comeback
Apple’s Touch ID continues to be available in certain iPad models, and the company is likely to reintroduce the technology in subsequent versions of its smartphones, according to experts consulted by CNBC. One sign they point to that makes this likely: The company was granted a patent several years ago for under-display fingerprint reading technology and continues to work on improvements, according to several published reports. As a result, the company is likely to bring back Touch ID to smartphones once it perfects its version of under-the-screen technology.
Apple declined to comment.
Consumers like choices, Palmer said, offering the example of a colleague who uses facial authentication to unlock an Android phone and fingerprint technology to authorize payments. Once Apple introduces fingerprint technology under the screen, it will likely be available in flagship phones again and work its way down through the models, he said.
Why Apple is focusing on facial authentication for now
Apple’s near-term move away from fingerprint technology in its smartphones makes sense for several reasons. For one, the company has always had a larger facial recognition culture, in part because its technology is solid and easy to use, said Roger Grimes, an analyst at KnowBe4, a security platform provider.
It’s designed to automatically adapt to changes in user appearance, such as wearing cosmetic makeup or growing facial hair. It’s also designed to work with hats, scarves, glasses, contact lenses and many sunglasses. The company designed the technology to work indoors, outdoors, and even in total darkness. With iPhone 12 or later, Face ID also works with face masks.
The move away from Touch ID on smartphones is also an attempt to appeal to customers who want more screen space on their devices, technology professionals said. In past phone versions, Apple’s Touch ID fingerprint sensor was integrated into a phone’s home or power button. Whereas the iPhone 16e — similar to the iPhone 10 — has a notch, a physical area on its display for sensors. This design element has been used in smartphones for several years to accommodate front-facing cameras and microphones while meeting consumer demand for larger edge-to-edge screens. “Apple has been slowly trying to remove the home button from phones for many years to get the edge-to-edge experience where the entire phone is a screen and there’s no wasted space,” Palmer said.
Thumb tech is cost-effective
Fingerprint technology continues to be available on Android devices, and that’s not likely to change anytime soon, even as newer phones offer facial authentication as an option, said Jean Fang, senior consultant for biometrics and authentication at Fime, which offers consulting and testing services to the payments industry.
Face Unlock is available on Pixel 4 and Pixel 7 or later Pixel phones, including Pixel Fold, according to Google’s website. On Pixel 8 and later, consumers can use Face Unlock to verify their identity when they sign into apps or approve a purchase. The face recognition feature can be used on Galaxy phones or tablets to unlock the device and verify the user’s identity in certain apps, according to Samsung’s website.
Even as more devices adopt facial authentication, fingerprint technology will remain a solid option for many phone users, technology professionals said. For one thing, fingerprint scanning is more cost-effective than other options such as iris or palm scans. “It’s a very good technology and it’s very mature and we have fingerprint sensors that are affordable everywhere,” said D. J. Lee, a professor in the department of electrical and computer engineering at Brigham Young University.
“It works the way we need it to work most of the time,” said Grimes.
Biometric security limitations
To be sure, there are downsides to popular biometric options. Fingerprint authentication doesn’t always work properly, if, for example, a person’s finger is wet or chapped, or the sensor can’t detect an exact match for another reason. But facial authentication technology also has drawbacks, especially as deepfake technology advances, said Fang, who is also a member of the Secure Technology Alliance, a not-for-profit, multi-industry association focused on identity, access and payments. There can also be limitations on how well facial authentication works depending on factors such as lighting and whether the person had facial surgery such as a nose job or eyebrow lift, she said.
“It can be a good feature for some lower-risk cases, but not all cases,” Fang said.
Despite the limitations of existing biometric modules, fingerprint and face authentication technology are expected to be the go-to biometric methods for the foreseeable future. That’s not for lack of testing of other methods, but for more practical reasons. About 15 years ago, Grimes participated in a product test that tried to identify users by smell, which seemed to work well until the test subjects ate a lot of garlic or drank alcohol. “It turned out a lot of people really liked garlic and that would overwhelm their scent and you have a lot of people that drink a lot,” he said.
While it’s possible to authenticate users through other biometric methods, like iris or palm scans — Amazon Whole Foods’ stores palm payments tech being a recent example — in many cases these may cost more and add more friction for users, making widespread adoption less likely. “It’s the balance between security, the convenience and the cost,” Lee said.
Olly Curtis | Future Publishing | via Getty Images
LONDON — Google is being sued for over £5 billion ($6.6 billion) in potential damages in the U.K. over allegations that the U.S. tech giant abused its “near-total dominance” in the online search market to drive up prices.
A class action lawsuit filed Wednesday in the U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal claims that Google abused its position to restrict competing search engines and, in turn, bolster its dominant position in the market and make itself the only viable destination for online search advertising.
It is being brought by competition law academic Or Brook on behalf of hundreds of thousands of U.K.-based organizations that used Google’s search advertising services from Jan. 1, 2011, up until when the claim was filed. She is being represented by law firm Geradin Partners.
“Today, UK businesses and organisations, big or small, have almost no choice but to use Google ads to advertise their products and services,” Brook said in a statement Tuesday. “Regulators around the world have described Google as a monopoly and securing a spot on Google’s top pages is essential for visibility.
“Google has been leveraging its dominance in the general search and search advertising market to overcharge advertisers,” she added. “This class action is about holding Google accountable for its unlawful practices and seeking compensation on behalf of UK advertisers who have been overcharged.”
Google was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC.
A 2020 market study from the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) — the U.K.’s competition regulator — found that 90% of all revenue in the search advertising market was earned by Google.
The lawsuit claims that Google has taken a number of steps to restrict competition in search, including entering into deals with smartphone makers to pre-install Google Search and Chrome on Android devices and paying Apple billions to ensure Google is the default search engine on its Safari browser.
It also alleges Google ensures its search management tool Search Ads 360 offers better functionality and more features with its own advertising products than that of competitors.
Big Tech under fire
It is the latest legal challenge for the American technology giant. U.S. Big Tech firms ranging from Google to Meta have been hit with a multitude of lawsuits, regulatory investigations and fines over concerns surrounding their sheer power and influence.
In 2018, Google was fined 4.3 billion euros ($4.9 billion) by the European Union for abusing the dominance of its Android mobile operating system by forcing smartphone makers to pre-install Chrome and Search in a bundle with its Play app store. Seven years on, Google is still appealing the antitrust penalty.
This week, an antitrust lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission against Meta officially entered the courtroom in a landmark trial that could ultimately force the social media giant to sell its Instagram and WhatsApp platforms.
That came after a class action lawsuit filed in December 2024 accused Microsoft of unfairly overcharging customers of rival cloud companies. The claimant in the case, competition lawyer Maria Luisa Stasi, is seeking more than £1 billion in compensation for firms affected.
Dutch semiconductor equipment firm ASML on Wednesday missed on net bookings expectations, suggesting a potential slowdown in demand for its critical chipmaking machines.
ASML reported net bookings of 3.94 billion euros ($4.47 billion) for the first three months of 2025, versus a Reuters reported forecast of 4.89 billion euros.
Here’s how ASML did versus LSEG consensus estimates for the first quarter:
Net sales: 7.74 billion, against 7.8 billion euros expected
Net profit: 2.36 billion, versus 2.3 billion euros expected
In comments accompanying the results, ASML CEO Christophe Fouquet said that the demand outlook “remains strong” with artificial intelligence staying as a key driver. However, he added that “uncertainty with some of our customers” could take the company into the lower end of its full-year revenue guidance.
ASML is estimating 2025 revenue of between of 30 billion euros to 35 billion euros.
Fouquet said that tariffs are “creating a new uncertainty” both on a macroeconomic level and with respect to “our potential market demands.”
“So this is a dynamic I think we have to watch very carefully,” Fouquet said. “Now this being said, where we are today, we still see basically our revenue range for 2025 being between basically €30 and €35 billion.”
Global chip stocks have been fragile over the last two weeks amid worries about how U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariff plans will affect the semiconductor supply chain.
Last week, the U.S. administration announced smartphones, computers and semiconductors would be temporarily exempted from his so-called “reciprocal” duties on counterparties. But on Sunday, Trump and his top trade officials created confusion with comments that there would be no tariff “exception” for the electronics industry, and that these goods were instead moving to a different “bucket.”
On Tuesday, a federal government notice announced that the U.S. Commerce Department was conducting a national security investigation into imports of semiconductor technology and related downstream products. The probe will examine whether additional trade measures, including tariffs, are “necessary to protect national security.”
The Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) on Tuesday issued a cease and desist order against Google for unfair trade practices regarding search services on Android devices— a move that aligns with similar crackdowns on firms in the UK and the U.S.
In a statement, the Commission said the American tech giant violated Japan’s anti-monopoly law by requiring Android device manufacturers to prioritize its own search apps and services through licensing agreements.
While Google develops the Android operating system, separate manufacturing companies like Samsung and Lenovo produce handheld Android products, such as smartphones and tablets. Thus, licensing agreements are necessary to grant these manufacturers permission to preinstall Google apps, including its Play Store, onto devices.
However, JFTC said Google also used licenses to require manufacturers to preinstall and prominently feature Google Search and Chrome on devices, with at least six such agreements in effect with Android makers as of December 2024.
The Commission added that the company required manufacturers to exclude rival search services as a condition of its advertising revenue-sharing model.
Under Japan’s anti-monopoly law, businesses are prohibited from carrying out trade on restrictive terms that unjustly impede transaction partners’ business activities.
JFTC first published the commencement of its probe into Google on October 23, 2023, and in April 2024, it approved a commitment plan from Google that addressed some of its anti-competitive concerns.
The cease and desist order demonstrates a harder stance taken by the Japanese government as well as its first such action against a U.S. tech giant.
The move also comes amid a trend of anti-competitive actions against Google globally. According to JFTC, it coordinated its probe with other overseas competition watchdogs that had experience investigating Google.
In a landmark case last year, a federal U.S. judge ruled that Google held an illegal monopoly in the search market, saying that its exclusive search arrangements on Android and Apple’s iPhone had helped to cement its dominance in the space.
Meanwhile, Britain’s competition watchdog opened an investigation into Google’s search services in January following the country’s implementation of new competition rules.
JFTC’s cease and desist orders that Google stop mandating that its own services be installed and featured prominently on smartphones.
Additionally, the company should relax its restrictive conditions for the distribution of advertising revenue, allowing manufacturers to choose from a variety of options.
Google has also been asked to appoint an independent third party that will report to the JFTC on its compliance with the cease and desist order over the next five years.