If we go by this years models there wouldn’t be much loss of power. The only thing separating the standard iPhone 16 from the Pro like is a 5x camera and VRR. The chipset is more capable but nobody is really pushing it.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.
That's not exactly true. I live in a city with mmWave support and that doesn't happen--even in crowds. It's a little tricky inside buildings though. It's another connectivity option which is beneficial and not meant to stand on its own. I understand a lot of people live in areas that don't have it but it's a small but significant benefit to those who do. The lack of support would cause me to hesitate before a purchase as would the overall rumor that the Apple modem would generally have slower speeds.I don't consider mmWave 5g is a step forward with anything since it you have to be line or sight to the tower to get it, and if so much as person walks in front of you, it cuts out.
Yeah, that era was nonsense and I hated that Apple did that. However, the variance between the intel modem and the Qualcomm version was within one model as I recall. This would be a different model and so I hope Apple wouldn't gimp the other iPhone models in sympathy.So they are going back to the Qualcomm vs intel days where they slowed the qualcomm modems because the intel ones were ass. "that is smaller and more power efficient than Qualcomm modems used in current iPhones. However, the report said that Apple's modem will lack ultra-fast mmWave 5G support, and have slower overall cellular data speeds compared to the Qualcomm modems."
A 17 Mini is not in the cards and not the subject of this discussion. I’m sorry - I feel your pain. The Plus is the perfect phone for me but it’s apparently going away - no matter how much I love it. The Mini is gone and it’s not coming back. Let’s take a look at the new SE, the base 17 and the 17 Air when they come out and decide if there’s anything left among iPhones that will work well enough for us.Why would you prefer an air over a 17 mini? Am I the only one who can’t reach my thumb easily to the top of these giant screens if holding with one hand?
Sounds like the upcoming iPhone SE 4 with A18 chip will suit your needsI think it's for me. I currently have an iPhone 14 Pro Max as my main phone, and an iPhone 13 mini that I only use professionally (so phone, messages, mail, LinkedIn, light browsing, and links to notes and documents from my work iPad, etc.) The iPhone 13 mini is that phone because I want it to be capable when I need it, but light, I don't need a lot of battery but I also need the ecosystem support (Handoff, iCloud, etc.). When that iPhone Mini dies, I'll probably replace it with the Air.
Don't believe EVERYTHING you read MacRumors,..at this close to production, tooling will have already taken place. To say that the design is not yet finalized is just absurd.The device currently lacks a physical SIM card tray, the report said, but the design is not yet finalized.
All these compromises are why phones aren't this thin.
I'd rather have a larger battery, better speaker and more cameras. Who cares if it's 5 mm thicker.
Why? are you avoiding Apple's CPU's as well?Apple modem is the real dealbreaker - not hopeful for an excellent product considering how inferior the intel wireless solutions were previously