iOS 27 Might Have Just Confirmed Apple’s First Foldable iPhone 74%

By Jake Peterson34%

7/20/2026, 8:29:20 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 22 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Overconfidence Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 32.4% saturation with 144 hits. Analysis detected 1,056 faulty-reasoning hits from 444 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66.4% and a BS Rank of 74% (5,519 of 21,202 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 74.00% of the article peer group.

We may earn a commission from links on this page. 
iOS 27 has been in beta testing since WWDC (though Apple only opened the public beta last week ), and testers have made new discoveries ever since. 
Usually, these are features that Apple didn't announce as part of these updates, like the new hidden Siri AI menu in macOS 27 . 
However, the latest iOS 27 beta might reveal a new product Apple hasn't announced yet: the company's rumored foldable " iPhone Ultra ." 
What do you think Apple is going to call its foldable iPhone? 
That's just one of five questions Lifehacker is asking readers for the second round of its Big Guessing Game . 
Enter for your chance to win the latest Apple Watch. 
iOS 27 developer beta four might have just revealed the iPhone Ultra 
After diving through the fourth developer beta for macOS 27, Macworld found something quite interesting : The outlet discovered "Battery Health" strings in the OS' code that make references to an iPhone with multiple internal batteries. 
They include things like, "The batteries in this iPhone are performing as expected," and "the health of the batteries in this iPhone has significantly degraded" as opposed to specifying "the battery in this iPhone." Macworld even found that one string notes that "one of the batteries" may not be genuine, anticipating a case where a customer only replaces one of their iPhone's batteries. 
Apple has been making iPhones for nearly 20 years, and all of them have shipped with one embedded battery. 
Multiple batteries in one iPhone would indeed be something new. 
While these strings make no sense for Apple's current iPhones, they'd track for a future foldable. 
We don't know the exact specs of this upcoming product, of course, but Apple could theoretically place a battery in each side of a foldable iPhone to power the extra screen real estate. 
This is how other foldable smartphones handle batteries, like the Galaxy Z Fold 7 . 
Samsung splits the batteries in two, effectively including two smaller batteries in each side of the device. 
Macworld says the first iOS 27 beta had references to "angle detection" and "fold states," which are even bigger flags that Apple is prepping this update for a foldable device as well. 
Will the company actually pull the trigger and release its own foldable smartphone in the fall? 
There are no guarantees, but the signs do seem to be pointing there. 
Personally, I'd rather see the company roll out an "iPhone Flip," but I'm curious to see Apple's take on a foldable smartphone (if it even happens). 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 32.4%Jake Peterson: 1.6%Lifehacker: 2.3%Confirmation Bias32.4%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 2.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 18.0%Jake Peterson: 3.0%Lifehacker: 3.0%Availability Heuristic18.0%This article: 12.4%Jake Peterson: 0.9%Lifehacker: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic12.4%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 0.2%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 19.6%Jake Peterson: 3.0%Lifehacker: 2.6%Overconfidence Bias19.6%This article: 6.3%Jake Peterson: 4.1%Lifehacker: 5.1%Framing Effect6.3%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 3.1%Lifehacker: 2.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.3%Jake Peterson: 0.5%Lifehacker: 0.9%Status Quo Bias4.3%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.2%Lifehacker: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 10.4%Jake Peterson: 4.2%Lifehacker: 4.3%Optimism Bias10.4%This article: 5.9%Jake Peterson: 1.8%Lifehacker: 1.2%Pessimism Bias5.9%This article: 2.3%Jake Peterson: 3.4%Lifehacker: 4.1%Negativity Bias2.3%This article: 5.9%Jake Peterson: 2.0%Lifehacker: 1.2%Self-Serving Bias5.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.3%Lifehacker: 0.3%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.1%Lifehacker: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.6%Lifehacker: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 1.9%Lifehacker: 4.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 2.7%Jake Peterson: 0.9%Lifehacker: 1.0%Recency Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 29.5%Jake Peterson: 2.8%Lifehacker: 3.7%Appeal to Authority29.5%This article: 9.9%Jake Peterson: 1.7%Lifehacker: 1.8%False Dilemma9.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 0.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.3%Lifehacker: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 13.1%Jake Peterson: 4.7%Lifehacker: 5.4%Hasty Generalization13.1%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.1%Lifehacker: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 4.5%Jake Peterson: 0.7%Lifehacker: 0.9%Bandwagon4.5%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 2.3%Lifehacker: 2.3%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 7.4%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 0.4%Begging the Question7.4%This article: 9.9%Jake Peterson: 1.5%Lifehacker: 1.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.9%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.4%Lifehacker: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.1%Lifehacker: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 3.8%Lifehacker: 3.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.1%Lifehacker: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 19.4%Jake Peterson: 2.3%Lifehacker: 2.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)19.4%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.2%Lifehacker: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.1%Lifehacker: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.2%Lifehacker: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 8.1%Jake Peterson: 1.0%Lifehacker: 1.0%Unattributed Quote8.1%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.2%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 5.2%Jake Peterson: 6.6%Lifehacker: 9.2%Biased Writer Voice5.2%This article: 6.3%Jake Peterson: 7.1%Lifehacker: 6.5%Indoctrination6.3%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jake Peterson: 0.0%Lifehacker: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Jake Peterson: 5.0%Lifehacker: 13.8%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.5%

444 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers34%attributed speech293writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageLifehacker • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageMacworld • 36 words • 100.0% coverageMacworld • 63 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 33 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMacworld • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Macworld

100%flagged-word coverage
131 attributed words87% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Unattributed Quote+27.5 ptsWriter: 0.0%Macworld: 27.5%27.5%Indoctrination-9.6 ptsWriter: 9.6%Macworld: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-7.8 ptsWriter: 7.8%Macworld: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -6.8 ptsWriter: 6.8%Macworld: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.