6,6 inch is not an ultra portable phone, no matter how thin it isHave to assume that this product is Apple's new approach to spicing up the entry level models, which are largely unattractive. Because nothing else really makes sense. A new mix and match of features that enables an ultra portable iPhone, to appeal to the mass market.
So, feature phones? I don’t see Apple going that way for what I thought to be obvious reasons.It would make sense to have a different “special interest” phone in the lineup each year, to catch more of the long tail, spread over the years.
Un-Apple, hm. I get that sentiment, but I think it is very Apple‘y. Make the phone thinner than the camera can physically be, make the whole thing so thin people are like wow the rest of the thing is even thinner than that tiny camera.I’d pay literally anything for a pro iPhone without a GD camera bump.
I hate it so much. At the very least make it centered & rectangular so the phone doesn’t rattle back and forth when typing on it when it’s laying flat.
It feels like the most un-Apple design choice.
The iPhone Air as rumored (extra thin, single camera) would be an example. The mini was another example. Arguably the iPhone 5C. An extra thick iPhone with double the battery, or a heavy but foldable to near-iPad mini size, or a gaming-oriented iPhone with foldable physical controls, might be further examples.So, feature phones? I don’t see Apple going that way for what I thought to be obvious reasons.
I think it would make perfect sense. They have Macbook Air and iPad Air. Why not iPhone Air for those wanting better portability?So, feature phones? I don’t see Apple going that way for what I thought to be obvious reasons.
ah I’m definitely not that type but I liked the small size, materials, and no camera bump.
I was never thinking of that possibility.iPod touch 8th generation.
![]()
That single camera could turn out to be more advanced than we expect with a mechanical aperture.How is this not the new SE, given it has one camera?
This is a good point. What’s the target for this iPhone ?Anyone care to enlighten me what the idea behind the 17 air is?
I don’t find a place for it even if it’s a niche element of the iPhone esque line up
If you use 3X on an iPhone it is not a digital zoom but the crop of a real zoom. Different things in terms of quality.I have a 16 Pro and I'm a bit mixed with the 5x lens. Sometimes it's awesome, especially for Portraits, but sometimes I don't want to zoom as much and was used to my 3x lens.
Can I still zoom at 3x with my 16 Pro ? Of course. But this is a digital zoom, not an optical one. I end up losing some quality.
Might sound crazy, but I think they could have added a 5x or 10x lens instead, next to the 3x, or use a variable zoom (which anybody know would end up being a failing part in the iPhone though...)
Exactly ! The thickness doesn’t really affect portability.6,6 inch is not an ultra portable phone, no matter how thin it is
Because being thin doesn’t mean being more portable, for a smartphone. Screen dimensions still are the main point about portability.I think it would make perfect sense. They have Macbook Air and iPad Air. Why not iPhone Air for those wanting better portability?
Just give it Pro features without Pro cameras and perhaps smaller battery to keep it slimmer, and you've got yourself a new model line.
Would that make it better than two or three fixes lenses? The mechanism would be very small, too, considering you're dealing with light. Wouldn't surprise me if this is an SE replacement rebrand.That single camera could turn out to be more advanced than we expect with a mechanical aperture.
Maybe a re-marketing effort for an SE replacement? To what end? Well, this is Apple.What is the point of this alleged iPhone Air other than it’s really thin? Who is it for?
Is this replacing the SE ?Maybe a re-marketing effort for an SE replacement? To what end? Well, this is Apple.
The most plausible use of the thinness has got to be a foldable in the usual Apple way of creating something refined, a quality foldable phone that’s thin when folded unlike the Samsungs.What is the point of this alleged iPhone Air other than it’s really thin? Who is it for?
You can, if you want, take the vibrancy out of your iPhone display. This works since iOS 17 and is supported on all iPhones running it, I believe.I would prefer a 48mp ultra-wide sensor. I want to be able to zoom in digitally and at 48mp it works. The problem has been 12mp sensors for so long.
As far as other wants. All-day battery. Display that has nothing but a hole-punch camera cutout. They can use software to show stuff like a Dynamic Island but not needed. Super thin sounds nice, but carbon fiber lightweight sounds better than thin. More than anything want TouchID if FaceID cannot be without notch/island. I want an uninterrupted display more than anything else. The hole punch is all I want at very most. Android flagships have done it for years and it’s such a better viewing experience. I would do without FaceTime or heck put a small display on the back with just the back camera to line up selfies or FaceTime calls. One camera. Not two or four.
I don’t care about gaming. I don’t care about AI. Heck, if Apple built a front lit epaper display that would be great for me. Not eInk. There is a computer company called Daylight Computers that I think are headed in the right direction for what we need. Not backlit but front lit like a Paperwhite Kindle. Not saying eliminate the colors just eliminate the flashlight in our eyes feeling.
I know none of this is what sells as it’s not flashy, but what should sell is what’s better for our eye health and stop the dopamine from vibrant bright colors. We all need to be healthy. Tim can preach the environment all he wants but Apple really does what makes shareholders money. I get that’s what companies do. I just wish there were options for health as that’s just as important as the environment.
I have noticed 2X produced a 12 MP photo which I expected because it is a crop from the 1X lens.If you use 3X on an iPhone it is not a digital zoom but the crop of a real zoom. Different things in terms of quality.
People want everything they can get. If you get a Pro and don’t have the Air features, software wise at least, people won’t be happy.The iPhone Air as rumored (extra thin, single camera) would be an example. The mini was another example. Arguably the iPhone 5C. An extra thick iPhone with double the battery, or a heavy but foldable to near-iPad mini size, or a gaming-oriented iPhone with foldable physical controls, might be further examples.
More generally, iPhones with special features that only a minority will appreciate, but that keep the lineup exciting, and that addresses those who wish for such non-mainstream features, instead of only serving the middle of the bell curve.
So you want a better Pro with fewer cameras. That’s not a feature phone.I think it would make perfect sense. They have Macbook Air and iPad Air. Why not iPhone Air for those wanting better portability?
Just give it Pro features without Pro cameras and perhaps smaller battery to keep it slimmer, and you've got yourself a new model line.