Maybe I’m just out of touch, but I don’t understand who this is for, and I think it’s going to flop.

First of all…who is asking for thinner phones?

Secondly, the price. This is not an Air SE. This thing is only $100 less than a full-fat iPhone Pro, and $200 more than iPhone base (which is a particularly good value this year).

And what do you get for that price?

  • 2 fewer lenses than the pro, and 1 fewer than the base
  • Titanium frame, I guess?
  • Less powerful processor than the base
  • Inherently more fragile frame
  • Less battery life than even the base model (this was often cited as the shortcoming of the iphone Mini)
  • Slower charging speed than both models
  • no cinematic video mode

Are people really clamoring for thinner phones so badly that they’ll spend more money for less features?

https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/?modelList=iphone-17-pro%2Ciphone-air%2Ciphone-17

Edit: 1 week later and the Air underperforms the base model as well (as expected)

Also someone pointed out below that the 16e is only 2 grams heavier and is $400 cheaper.

  • blitzen@lemmy.ca
    6·
    11 days ago

    And technically one fewer GPU core than the Pro phones. But you said compared to the base; while you’re right that the Air won’t match the Pro (owing in part to thermals), it’s not going to underperform the base 17.

    • Ulrich@feddit.orgOPEnglish
      2·
      11 days ago

      it’s not going to underperform the base 17

      Disagree. Why wouldn’t it? They put a more powerful processor and then removed more of its capacity to dissipate heat.

      Can’t say anything for certain but it sure seems unlikely.