if it has zero impact on your user experience, then the point is just a mental construct, no?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'iPhone 17 Air' Features Revealed in New Report: As Thin as 5mm, Single Speaker, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if it has zero impact on your user experience, then the point is just a mental construct, no?
Who has been asking for thin phones? It’s like when the first iPad Air was released and most of the keynote was about how thin it was (because there wasn’t really anything else to talk about). Of course it sucked as a device. Limited ram caused constant refreshes, especially in Safari, and it vibrated in your hands when playing audio or video. This phone wreaks of Apple not having any new ideas so make a really thin phone and let everyone focus on that. It’s skinner than a #2 pencil. Oooh! Meanwhile everyone else is saying who asked for that?
This device sounds like such a mess that I’m almost certain there’s probably a software component to it that makes it make sense somehow, kinda like the Dynamic Island which was first rumored to be to be two punchholes and didn’t make much sense either.
I hope it has the fastest processor and max ram. Promotion is a must have. I don’t care about the cameras. Bring it on!
Excited about all the cases that make it a regular sized phone...
Same. Although a gimped phone like that is not for me, mmWave is not something that would be a deal breaker. All the carriers are ***** in my area, I’d be happy with reliable LTE.
They need to try harder on one compromise; give it at least 2 speakers, earpiece and bottom. A super thin Air with excellent sound is where it’s at, baby.
4 mm is better than 5 mm. 5 mm is much better than 6 mm.
4 mm is better than 5 mm. 5 mm is much better than 6 mm.
Who is this for? Especially with all those compromises.
The average person doesn't care about thinness. They're just going to put a bulky case on it anyways.
The average person doesn't care about thinness. They're just going to put a bulky case on it anyways.
That’s a lot of compromises for thinness.
The deciding factor will be the price. If it’s not right, it won’t be a success, just like the mini and Plus iPhones.
The deciding factor will be the price. If it’s not right, it won’t be a success, just like the mini and Plus iPhones.
The reactionary responses are largely why Apple keep things so secret in the first place. We're seeing rumours of an in-development product, not a final design. People hear certain phrases and imagine the worst rather than expecting the best.
If Apple can squash an M4-esque processor into a thinner body it brings beauty and utility to the device, with software used to eek out more battery life. Single lens camera? This could be many things, including a variable aperture mechanism, a working telephoto instead of a fixed zoom or a combination thereof. Imagine a single lens camera capable of better portraits and a, say 35-105 zoom range.
Who would buy one? If you're questioning the market for better looking Apple products, where have you been for the last 25 years?!
What the 3nm process has let Apple do, starting with the M4 iPad Pro and Mac Mini is finally realise their dream of creating exciting products that combine thinner, sexier designs with no loss of utility. If you're an Apple user then thats the dream. The butterfly Macbook might have been an engineering disaster but it was also the sexiest damn laptop ever made.
If Apple can squash an M4-esque processor into a thinner body it brings beauty and utility to the device, with software used to eek out more battery life. Single lens camera? This could be many things, including a variable aperture mechanism, a working telephoto instead of a fixed zoom or a combination thereof. Imagine a single lens camera capable of better portraits and a, say 35-105 zoom range.
Who would buy one? If you're questioning the market for better looking Apple products, where have you been for the last 25 years?!
What the 3nm process has let Apple do, starting with the M4 iPad Pro and Mac Mini is finally realise their dream of creating exciting products that combine thinner, sexier designs with no loss of utility. If you're an Apple user then thats the dream. The butterfly Macbook might have been an engineering disaster but it was also the sexiest damn laptop ever made.
I don’t want a super thin iPhone. I want an iPhone that’s not as slippery as **** without a case so I can carry an iPhone around without the added bulk of a case.
Except there is loss to utility, as these are not for the 17 Pro, but a less spec’d thin model. Your line of thinking uses iPads and Macs as examples, but those chassis-upgrading designs were used for the flagship products, such as the iPad Pro. This is not for the 17 Pro, but rather a different device that won’t be objectively the best on all accounts, which is where the discourse comes from. There will be trade offs. It’s not like there is a thicker but more powerful M4 iPad. There is 1 singular best option.
If you start by assuming the target consumer is someone that currently buys a Pro Max or a Plus but wants a thinner, lighter phone you then have to look at the compromises
From a notional iPhone 17 Plus
Add on to all that, it sounds like Apple hasn't actually figured out how to cram all the hardware into a case that thin and retain a usable phone I think there is a decent chance this never sees the light of day and some of the technology is rolled over to make slightly thinner regular iPhones in future years.
From a notional iPhone 17 Plus
- Smaller screen
- Lower battery life (thinner battery)
- Slower, less capably 5G modem (that is unproven)
- Single camera (software-only portrait mode like the SE)
- Mono speaker
Add on to all that, it sounds like Apple hasn't actually figured out how to cram all the hardware into a case that thin and retain a usable phone I think there is a decent chance this never sees the light of day and some of the technology is rolled over to make slightly thinner regular iPhones in future years.
This is the most baffling product I've seen Apple working on in a long time. I don't think the Vision Pro is a particularly good idea but I understand what Apple was going for. This phone on the other hand, who is the audience for this? Who is clamoring specifically for a thinner phone, as opposed to a smaller screen size, lighter, or longer battery life? On top of it, this looks like it would be a downgrade from the base iPhone 17, with fewer cameras and speakers and smaller battery but Apple has historically charged more for thinness as a feature. And the reason to tout thinness is because the device is too unwieldy when it's thicker, like a MacBook or an iPad. iPhones are already handheld and portable and thinness isn't the issue, it's weight and/or too large of a screen size.
So either Apple is going to position this as a lower cost alternative to the base iPhone, which would jive with the features rumored to be missing, but isn't that what the SE is for? This would be a poor replacement for the Plus model, again because of all the features you'd be missing. Maybe there's something that's not being leaked to the rumor mill that would make this product more attractive or make more sense because based on what we currently know this looks like a disaster.
So either Apple is going to position this as a lower cost alternative to the base iPhone, which would jive with the features rumored to be missing, but isn't that what the SE is for? This would be a poor replacement for the Plus model, again because of all the features you'd be missing. Maybe there's something that's not being leaked to the rumor mill that would make this product more attractive or make more sense because based on what we currently know this looks like a disaster.
