Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I can see that would be nice, but we probably won't get iPhones like that again any time soon, at least not until metalenses become commercially viable for phones. These have nano-scale patterns etched into them which bend, focus, and filter light similar to traditional lenses, but much thinner.

In the meantime, given that when an iPhone is on a table and tilted slightly upward at its top end due to its camera bump, there's some "wasted" air space between the iPhone's rear housing and the table that might best be filled with a slight wedge design for the rear of the housing, tapering up and out from the bottom of the rear of the housing. This might eliminate the need for a separate bulging camera bump, creating a smoother rear surface that won't snag on pockets, etc., eliminate rocking, and might also allow for a significantly bigger battery, or at least moving some of the bulk of the battery upward might also allow the thinner lower half of the housing, where most people hold a phone, to be thinner than the current iPhones, thus being a kind of hybrid housing between the rumored Air and the other iPhones, with battery size and life at least equal to non-Air iPhones. It would also make it visually distinct from other manufacturers' phones, which I understand is one of the factors that Apple considers important for branding.

Hard to say how this might actually feel in the hand without making a mockup. A 3D printer could do it, but a lot of people could bash one out of just a piece of wood.

Why is this all necessary though

I don’t need 10% of the camera my iPhone mini has

Strip the camera out and make that an option for people that either already have real cameras or don’t care about cameras

Why does an iPhone have to be an expensive mid range camera?!?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mzubb
Why is this all necessary though

I don’t need 10% of the camera my iPhone mini has

Strip the camera out and make that an option for people that either already have real cameras or don’t care about cameras

Why does an iPhone have to be an expensive mid range camera?!?

Welcome to the tech bubble. They can’t keep selling the same old stuff forever.

And also unfortunately that’s how a lot of other people use their phones. So we’re stuck using phones designed for them first.
 
Why does an iPhone have to be an expensive mid range camera?!?
Because Jobs wanted to put a camera (later a video camera) in every pocket that contains an iPhone, since at the time relatively few people always carried a separate camera too, or ever will, even though standalone cameras can fairly easily be better than a phone camera. It was a reasonable goal, but with the phone cameras we had back then, it didn't mean having anything close to the kinds of camera bumps we have now. Lens technology and simple housing design haven't yet caught up with the ever-thicker phone cameras, but they might get there before much longer, and that's what phone manufacturers are counting on.
 
Sorry to be that guy but Apple are idiots for as long as they keep going without making a 5.4 inch "mini" phone.

Right now there are rumors of both a new SE and and "Air" that are supposedly 6.1 inch phones at the same time that we have two mainstream iPhone lines already with a similar form factor. Like we need four new options for 6.1+ inch iPhones and no option for the 5.4 inch design that many people think is the best of all iPhones ever made.
You are speaking my language, friend! If they took the iPhone 13 mini, upgrade the internals, and rebrand it as the iPhone SE 4th gen for a $500 price it would sell like hotcakes. Would make a lot more sense for those upgrading from previous gen SE's with a 4.7 inch screen.
 
In case it’s not obvious, these are two different sizes. So it’s not just the iPhone Air. I’m not generally against the bar design, but these look quite ugly.
Could it be the base 17 and 17 Plus with a mechanical aperture? Rumors of the 17 Plus model’s demise may have been wrong.
 
Because Jobs wanted to put a camera (later a video camera) in every pocket that contains an iPhone, since at the time relatively few people always carried a separate camera too, or ever will, even though standalone cameras can fairly easily be better than a phone camera. It was a reasonable goal, but with the phone cameras we had back then, it didn't mean having anything close to the kinds of camera bumps we have now. Lens technology and simple housing design haven't yet caught up with the ever-thicker phone cameras, but they might get there before much longer, and that's what phone manufacturers are counting on.
Ok sure

But the camera in every iPhone users pocket is now completely overkill for any normal use case

Surely whatever the best current lens tech is that would allow an iPhone to sit flat on a table would be more than sufficient for 90% of users
 
  • Like
Reactions: mzubb
I am now ready to upgrade my iphone 12 pro max, i have been waiting for a design change it looks like the iphone 17 pro max may be it. At the end of the day as long as i hold something different in my hands, i will be one happy Chappy.
 
But the camera in every iPhone users pocket is now completely overkill for any normal use case

Surely whatever the best current lens tech is that would allow an iPhone to sit flat on a table would be more than sufficient for 90% of users
iPhone cameras have evolved over the years both to (mostly) improve them, as well as in competitive response to improvements in cameras in non-Apple smartphones. If there had been no such competition, maybe Apple wouldn't always be tinkering with their design, but that's hard to say, given that there have always been things about iPhone cameras that can stand improvement even for average photographers. Saying that the current quality of iPhone cameras is overkill for any normal use case is kind of like saying if they're more than good enough for what you use them for, and for what you think most other people use them, then they're better than they need to be, so they should be able to use lower-quality, thinner optics to get rid of the camera bump, but that's not entirely evidence-based but rather a perception. Even if it were true, then downgrading the iPhone camera system just to make it thin enough to eliminate the camera bump would alienate that 10% of users you claim are the only ones who benefit from a thicker, better camera system, and that's not a small number. Fewer than that want Apple to bring back the iPhone mini, and in these forums they're pretty vocal.

There are always complaints about even the best of today's smartphone cameras--still not enough sensitivity to some lower light levels, noise (especially at low light levels), optical zoom level, stabilization, etc.--that can make many photos less than what they could be, so Apple is aiming to make iPhone cameras come ever-closer to "real" cameras to address these complaints, and of course to snag some of the people who otherwise choose an SLR and an Android phone. The physics of current commercial optical hardware is such that to improve on some of these factors, thicker camera assemblies are needed. If that weren't true, then the manufacturers of other smartphones would have cameras as thick, or thin, as iPhones, and no camera bump, but those don't seem to exist.

We don't know how close Apple (or any other manufacturer) will get to something resembling true SLR quality, but with today's commercial optics, to get a smartphone with a camera that's able to achieve better photos and videos, apparently requires a thicker camera assembly. But at some point in the near future, metalenses as well as Samsung's ALoP technology (All Lenses on Prism, which reduces the thickness of telephoto camera modules) are anticipated to help greatly reduce or get rid of the camera bump. Don't know when that will happen, but Samsung demonstrated ALoP at CES 2025, and they're anticipated to release their first phone using it, the Galaxy S25 Slim, maybe some time around May 2025, after their 2025 lineup is announced tomorrow (Wednesday Jan 22). Don't know when or if Samsung will make lens assemblies for Apple using ALoP, or license the technology to Apple and/or others who actually make the lens assemblies for iPhones (not currently Samsung), but we'll find out as time goes by.
 
Last edited:
iPhone cameras have evolved over the years both to (mostly) improve them, as well as in competitive response to improvements in cameras in non-Apple smartphones. If there had been no such competition, maybe Apple wouldn't always be tinkering with their design, but that's hard to say, given that there have always things about iPhone cameras that can stand improvement even for average photographers. Saying that the current quality of iPhone cameras is overkill for any normal use case is kind of like saying if they're more than good enough for what you use them for, and for what you think most other people use them, then they're better than they need to be, so they should be able to use lower-quality, thinner optics to get rid of the camera bump, but that's not entirely evidence-based but rather a perception. Even if it were true, then downgrading the iPhone camera system just to make it thin enough to eliminate the camera bump would alienate that 10% of users you claim are the only ones who benefit from a thicker, better camera system, and that's not a small number. Fewer than that want Apple to bring back the iPhone mini, and in these forums they're pretty vocal.

There are always complaints about even the best of today's smartphone cameras--still not enough sensitivity to low levels of light, noise (especially at low light levels), optical zoom level, stabilization, etc.--that can make many photos less than what they could be, so Apple is aiming to make iPhone cameras come ever-closer to "real" cameras to address these complaints, and of course to snag some of the people who otherwise choose an SLR and an Android phone. The physics of current commercial optical hardware is such that to improve on some of these factors, thicker camera assemblies are needed. If that weren't true, then the manufacturers of other smartphones would have cameras as thick, or thin, as iPhones, and no camera bump, but those don't seem to exist.

We don't know how close Apple (or any other manufacturer) will get to something resembling true SLR quality, but with today's commercial optics, to get a smartphone with a camera that's able to achieve better photos and videos, apparently requires a thicker camera assembly. But at some point in the near future, metalenses as well as Samsung's ALoP technology (All Lenses on Prism, which reduces the thickness of telephoto camera modules) are anticipated to help greatly reduce or get rid of the camera bump. Don't know when that will happen, but Samsung demonstrated ALoP at CES 2025, and they're anticipated to release their first phone using it, the Galaxy S25 Slim, maybe some time around May 2025, after their 2025 lineup is announced tomorrow (Wednesday Jan 22). Don't know when or if Samsung will make lens assemblies for Apple using ALoP, or license the technology to Apple and/or others who actually make the lens assemblies for iPhones (not currently Samsung), but we'll find out as time goes by.

I feel like the exchange we are having is essentially:

“I don’t care about cameras”

“cameras blah blah blah”

“But I don’t care about cameras”

“But cameras blah blah blah blah”

Seems like it’s going nowhere
 
I feel like the exchange we are having is essentially:

“I don’t care about cameras”

“cameras blah blah blah”

“But I don’t care about cameras”

“But cameras blah blah blah blah”

Seems like it’s going nowhere
I'm trying to give you information about the factors that explain why the camera bump exists with today's technology, rather than how you think it should be despite these factors, and how the bump will probably shrink or disappear in the relatively near future as lens technology evolves. Apple isn't going to start making an iPhone before then with substantially degraded optics (compared to today's standards) just to get rid of the camera bump.

On the other hand, it's mostly the thickness of the telephoto lens assembly, with increasing levels of zoom over the years, that's largely responsible for the thickness of the camera bump (the external raised rings around the other two lenses might not need to stick out as far as they do), so Apple could make an iPhone with a telephoto lens with a lower zoom level to make the entire telephoto camera assembly thin enough that it would be no thicker than the other two cameras, and thus make the bump negligible or get rid of it altogether (though maybe also requiring the iPhone housing to be a little thicker, which most people would be fine with and even welcome if it meant a bigger battery too). But the optical zoom level might be reduced to only 2x, which very few people would find useful.

iPhones with a single camera don't have optical zoom, so they might not need much of a camera bump, but even with that single, non-zoom camera, with today's technology, the camera module might be thick enough that there would still need to be a slight bump, as with the iPhone SE, if Apple chose to keep the iPhone's current thickness.

This may sound like a lot of information, but it's some of the stuff that smartphone designers have to think about.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to give you information about the factors that explain why the camera bump exists, rather than how you think it should be despite these factors. Apple isn't going to start making an iPhone with substantially degraded optics (compared to today's standards) in order to get rid of the camera bump.

And I’m saying I wish that they would make an iPhone with “substantially degraded optics…in order to get rid of the camera bump.”

I don’t care about the factors that explain why you think it’s necessary

Like i was saying…
 
Why is this all necessary though

I don’t need 10% of the camera my iPhone mini has

Strip the camera out and make that an option for people that either already have real cameras or don’t care about cameras

Why does an iPhone have to be an expensive mid range camera?!?
Let's do a separate iPhone for everyone who has a "real camera"!

Just don't forget to charge for the development of such a phone. (Hint: it would probably be more expensive than the regular iPhone because its small sales number)
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsawyercjs
It’s about time Apple copied something from Android Google, after all they are all using the Apple sandwich type flat sides now which Apple brought back in to fashion from the 12 pro onwards.
 
Looks more and more likely that this will be the final design. Even the Pro models might be having a rectangular camera island/bump. Waiting to hear more about the colour options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
I was really hoping the iPhone 17 Air/Slim/Thin would be the thinnest they could make it..... without a camera bump.
I am into photography, and I would kill for a worse camera that means no bump on the back at all. Think iPhone 4. I also thought thin would be nice but battery life would probably suck. I have a Pixel 8 Pro and 15PM. The Pixel is a nicer phone with a worse ecosystem - none. It doesn’t easily work simply (automatically) with anything. That is the power of an anticompetitive monopoly that runs rampant in tech today. No regulation is hurting consumers. I would love to buy different products from different companies and get all the interoperability I want which should be simple. It’s locked down and sad because it’s all for shareholder value not for consumers as Apple marketing would have us all think. Even the AirPods suck with the Pixel in comparison. That tech should be interoperable - and we should be able to install whatever we want on phone we buy. Same with computers and tablets. My Nothing Ear work perfectly with the Pixel or the iPhone or my old Nothing Phone 1. But not as simple as connect AirPods and they just connect to whatever device I am on.
 
No No.

You can't have a bar across the back like a Pixel (which I'm fine with)
but then, have an additional lens bump on top of the bar. That would be just plain dumb.
it's Tower of Hanoi design, flip it on the flat size to meditate on form over function.
Full disclosure: It's because of LLewellyn, now-retired engineer at Apple Battery dept. For some reason he patented all L-shaped batteries, and now they're free to reclaim all battery space with standard horizontal bar.
 
In case it’s not obvious, these are two different sizes. So it’s not just the iPhone Air. I’m not generally against the bar design, but these look quite ugly.
But everyone will love them when they get ahold of them because thank god they’re different. The old design is so boring at this point. I mean with these massive camera bumps, we should have Leica/Hassleblad or etc sensors. Instead not so good. But like some others, I would prefer no camera bumps, eliminate the FaceID if it means camera bump or Dynamic Islands and just give me a simple hole-punch camera and TouchID on the home whatever they call it button. FaceID is nice but too many drawbacks. Cannot wait until phones have no interruptions on the front display. Especially not notches meant to show it’s an iPhone! Dumbest marketing ever to ruin the user experience to show everyone this person has an iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma
If you look closely, you can see that the phone on the right is bigger than the one on the left. When measured, this size difference is ~equal to the 0.2-inch gap between the 6.7 and 6.9-inch Pro and Pro Max models.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.