iPhone 17 iPhone Air a Flop, 17 Pro a Massive Hit

[blairh]

I just don't know what Apple was thinking with the Air, it was clear it would bomb based solely on them charging more for a device with less battery, cameras and speakers than a regular iPhone. Bizarre marketing decision and the only thing I can think of is it was a way to begin getting a return for the R&D for parts developed for the Fold.

My prediction is the Air is dead, it will not see a second model.

What you will see is a discount in September to start shifting some of the existing stock and the early 2027, you'll see an Air 'inspired' regular iPhone 18 (think plateau but thicker and with 2 cameras and speakers) replace both the 17 and the Air, and this experiment will be quietly forgotten about. The iPhone E will then essentially be what was the iPhone 17.

It will also be the end of the larger non Pro model. The future iPhone line up will be:

iPhone E - iPhone (regular) - iPhone Pro - iPhone Pro Max - iPhone Fold

We are definitely getting a second Air IMO. For the Air to survive, Apple needs to add to it. Second camera and a second speaker at a minimum. There is no way the same Air with an updated screen and/or chip is going to make a difference with respect to sales.

I truly believe the Air could potentially replace the standard iPhone one day if Apple can simply add to it and get the price closer to $800 (like $900, for example).

I definitely don't think the 18 is going to get the changes you speak of.

 

[blairh]

I’m bristling a bit at the form over function argument. I got the Air to replace my 16 Pro Max and I don’t feel like I’ve sacrificed any significant amount of function. I have all day battery life, the fastest newest processor, highest quality and almost largest screen, a camera that takes beautiful photos and videos, and amazing sound quality. And my phone is half the thickness and much lighter than a pro so it doesn’t pull my pants down when I’m not using any of those things. And I saved a couple hundred bucks to boot.

You absolutely do not have amazing sound quality. The Air single speaker is terrible. The Pro Max line has amazing speakers.

 

[nkgmd]

You absolutely do not have amazing sound quality. The Air single speaker is terrible. The Pro Max line has amazing speakers.

Sounds good to me for a FaceTime call or to show someone a quick video. I’m not using it as home theater equipment. AirPods Pro 3 sound better than either phones speakers.

 

[blairh]

Sounds good to me for a FaceTime call or to show someone a quick video. I’m not using it as home theater equipment. AirPods Pro 3 sound better than either phones speakers.

If you value smartphone speakers, then the Pro Max speakers are a night and day difference versus the Air.

If you don't, which you don't seem to, then it doesn't matter.

For most consumers, speakers matter a great deal, and it's the Achilles' heel of the Air.

 

[Paul1964]

If you value smartphone speakers, then the Pro Max speakers are a night and day difference versus the Air.

If you don't, which you don't seem to, then it doesn't matter.

For most consumers, speakers matter a great deal, and it's the Achilles' heel of the Air.

If you only listen through AirPods/headphones then the speaker quality is a moot point, so it's the right phone nkgmd in his use case and preferences.

We have choices. I prefer the better cooling, speakers, battery and zoom capability of the 17 Pro Max but each to their own.

 

[nkgmd]

If you value smartphone speakers, then the Pro Max speakers are a night and day difference versus the Air.

If you don't, which you don't seem to, then it doesn't matter.

For most consumers, speakers matter a great deal, and it's the Achilles' heel of the Air.

Not trying to argue that point, I'm sure the Pro speakers are better and it's stereo, Atmos vs Mono, conceded. I'm just saying I don't feel like there's so much of a difference that I'm sacrificing any functionality to go with this form factor. The sound quality of the Air is actually quite good even with it's single speaker, and I haven't noticed any difference over my prior 16 Pro Max when doing things like FaceTime or showing someone a video which is all I ever really do with the built in speakers. For any other use I either stream to a bluetooth or Airplay speaker, headphones or my car.

 

[Wando64]

Mac mini has a clear reason for existence. iOS app development requires a Mac: to sell the iPhone ecosystem, Apple needs a cheap Mac. The same is true for developers who want to create and test multiple complex iOS and iPadOS apps. They need Mac Studio.

So what’s the strategic reason for iPhone Air to continue to exist?

How should I know?
The point I am making is that looking at percentage share of product range is an irrelevant metric.
As you have neatly pointed out in relation to the Mini and the Studio, often there are other factors at play (which was exactly my point).
Just because you and I cannot see a reason, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

 

[JPack]

How should I know?
The point I am making is that looking at percentage share of product range is an irrelevant metric.
As you have neatly pointed out in relation to the Mini and the Studio, often there are other factors at play (which was exactly my point).
Just because you and I cannot see a reason, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

If you don't know, then why post about it?

It's like suggesting a unicorn might exist but not suggesting anything meaningful why it might exist. It doesn't contribute to the discussion.

 

[Wando64]

If you don't know, then why post about it?

It's like suggesting a unicorn might exist but not suggesting anything meaningful why it might exist. It doesn't contribute to the discussion.

How many times should I repeat, “The point I am making is that…”
I think I have explained quite clearly why I have said what I have said.
You too seem to agree that, at least in the Mac product line, a small share of sale does NOT indicate a product failure.
Why should it be any different on the iPhone product line?

Anyway, I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing, especially with someone that is not the OP.
I’ve explained why I think the original post is pointless, and everyone else is free to disagree.

 

[JPack]

How many times should I repeat, “The point I am making is that…”
I think I have explained quite clearly why I have said what I have said.
You too seem to agree that, at least in the Mac product line, a small share of sale does NOT indicate a product failure.
Why should it be any different on the iPhone product line?

Anyway, I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing, especially with someone that is not the OP.
I’ve explained why I think the original post is pointless, and everyone else is free to disagree.

The point you've made is actually an appeal to corporate infallibility. You're effectively claiming that you can't see Apple's rationale, but we should still assume a good hidden strategy and ignore weak iPhone Air sales.

Someone famous once said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I'm not asking for that, just what purpose you think the Air serves.

Mac mini has a clear purpose. Xcode is needed to build iOS apps. Just because a clear strategy exists for Mac mini doesn't mean the same for iPhone Air.

 

[rui no onna]

I think it's the balance of the phone in hand. I have an Air and a Mini12 that weighs less, but the Air feels lighter in my hand.

Yup this. The Air felt lighter in hand than my iPhone 13 mini (141g) and SE3 (144g) likely thanks to the weight distribution.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

We are definitely getting a second Air IMO. For the Air to survive, Apple needs to add to it. Second camera and a second speaker at a minimum. There is no way the same Air with an updated screen and/or chip is going to make a difference with respect to sales.

If they added those features then I must admit I would be struggling to understand where it sits in the range. The standard iPhone already has 2 cameras, and better speakers, so that segment already exists. Adding those features to the Air would confuse things as its an 'Air' because it lacks components allowing it to be thinner, due to design constraints. I think the only way you are gong to boost sales of the Air is to lower the price of it and market it as a lightweight SE tier product. Pricing it between a standard iPhone that has better specs and the Pro model meant consumers had options either side of it to get a better performing phone and the premium price tag helped divert people to other models.

 

[ayephoner]

The Air is a very cool device. It's neat that they crammed in what they did to such a thin package. That said, it just makes too many compromises for not much saving in size (generally speaking). I'm sure it's a great device for some people, but an infinitely inferior device for most people. It's a shame. I think it has a polish and premium feel that the pro models don't. I'd love to have the best of both worlds.

 

[Spinarelo]

I just don't know what Apple was thinking with the Air, it was clear it would bomb based solely on them charging more for a device with less battery, cameras and speakers than a regular iPhone. Bizarre marketing decision and the only thing I can think of is it was a way to begin getting a return for the R&D for parts developed for the Fold.

My prediction is the Air is dead, it will not see a second model.

What you will see is a discount in September to start shifting some of the existing stock and the early 2027, you'll see an Air 'inspired' regular iPhone 18 (think plateau but thicker and with 2 cameras and speakers) replace both the 17 and the Air, and this experiment will be quietly forgotten about. The iPhone E will then essentially be what was the iPhone 17.

It will also be the end of the larger non Pro model. The future iPhone line up will be:

iPhone E - iPhone (regular) - iPhone Pro - iPhone Pro Max - iPhone Fold

The only thing you're right about is the "charging more" part... There is definitely a user base for this phone, not everyone needs pro level cameras and not everyone is a power user who needs all-day battery life. There is definitely a market for this phone.... The mistake Apple made was price it too close to the pro. They don't kill a phone after just one iteration because too much r&d goes in to it. They'll pivot and add some features or lower the price.

 

[krspkbl]

The Air is a very cool device. It's neat that they crammed in what they did to such a thin package. That said, it just makes too many compromises for not much saving in size (generally speaking). I'm sure it's a great device for some people, but an infinitely inferior device for most people. It's a shame. I think it has a polish and premium feel that the pro models don't. I'd love to have the best of both worlds.

it's a great phone but yes it makes more sense to buy other models for most people.

the only good thing about the Air is that it's thin. if that's all you care about (and can ignore the huge camera bump) then it's a great phone. it sacrifices too many other things for the sake of being thin: battery, ugly camera bump, worse speakers, worse camera, doesn't make much use of the processor, and it's got a stupid price.

the only things that justify a higher price than the base 17 model is the processor, larger display, and titanium.

most people should just get the iPhone 17 or 17 Pro. if you're spending £999 on an Air then another £100 gets you a much better 17 Pro. or you can save £200 and get a better iPhone 17.

 

[Spinarelo]

it's a great phone but yes it makes more sense to buy other models for most people.

the only good thing about the Air is that it's thin. if that's all you care about (and can ignore the huge camera bump) then it's a great phone. it sacrifices too many other things for the sake of being thin: battery, ugly camera bump, worse speakers, worse camera, doesn't make much use of the processor, and it's got a stupid price.

the only things that justify a higher price than the base 17 model is the processor, larger display, and titanium.

most people should just get the iPhone 17 or 17 Pro. if you're spending £999 on an Air then another £100 gets you a much better 17 Pro. or you can save £200 and get a better iPhone 17.

That's definitely NOT the only good thing about the air.... It has a pro level chip, pro level display, by all accounts a great in house modem, and despite missing 2 lenses, the one lense it has is a great pro level lense. I don't own one since I decided to stick with my 16PM.... It has its shortcomings, but to say the only good thing about it is that it's thin is totally unfair

 

[ericgedi77]

That's definitely NOT the only good thing about the air.... It has a pro level chip, pro level display, by all accounts a great in house modem, and despite missing 2 lenses, the one lense it has is a great pro level lense. I don't own one since I decided to stick with my 16PM.... It has its shortcomings, but to say the only good thing about it is that it's thin is totally unfair

Don't forget more RAM than the base 17 and Titanium build. And you are correct the modem is very good. The battery is way better than advertised.

 

[blairh]

If they added those features then I must admit I would be struggling to understand where it sits in the range. The standard iPhone already has 2 cameras, and better speakers, so that segment already exists. Adding those features to the Air would confuse things as its an 'Air' because it lacks components allowing it to be thinner, due to design constraints. I think the only way you are gong to boost sales of the Air is to lower the price of it and market it as a lightweight SE tier product. Pricing it between a standard iPhone that has better specs and the Pro model meant consumers had options either side of it to get a better performing phone and the premium price tag helped divert people to other models.

I believe the Air will eventually replace the standard iPhone once it receives more hardware features. Much like the MacBook Air is the standard MacBook in the lineup.

They will not lower the price to make it an SE tier product.

 

[joshwithachance]

We are definitely getting a second Air IMO. For the Air to survive, Apple needs to add to it. Second camera and a second speaker at a minimum. There is no way the same Air with an updated screen and/or chip is going to make a difference with respect to sales.

I truly believe the Air could potentially replace the standard iPhone one day if Apple can simply add to it and get the price closer to $800 (like $900, for example).

I definitely don't think the 18 is going to get the changes you speak of.

The problem I have with this is anything added to the Air will increase its weight and/or thickness, while reducing space for added battery capacity (until Apple finally moves to silicon carbon anyway), kinda sorta negating its entire point of existence. Just adding a tempered glass screen protector makes it noticeably heavier, let alone an entire camera sensor and speaker...

Reducing the starting price to $899 would do wonders for sales, however.

 

[Ctrlos]

The problem I have with this is anything added to the Air will increase its weight and/or thickness, while reducing space for added battery capacity (until Apple finally moves to silicon carbon anyway), kinda sorta negating its entire point of existence. Just adding a tempered glass screen protector makes it noticeably heavier, let alone an entire camera sensor and speaker...

Reducing the starting price to $899 would do wonders for sales, however.

Samsung managed to squash 2 cameras and a vapour chamber into a device maybe 1mm thicker and slightly less battery life. It also has a 200mpx main sensor good for a 5x crop zoom, video-out and Dex mode. I'm not saying its a better phone, but Apple could find a way to keep it thin-ish and still put in the bells.

 

[Ctrlos]

If you value smartphone speakers, then the Pro Max speakers are a night and day difference versus the Air.

If you don't, which you don't seem to, then it doesn't matter.

For most consumers, speakers matter a great deal, and it's the Achilles' heel of the Air.

It sounds good for a phone but its still a bit of a wet fart.

If there was any justice they'd get rid of the speakers completely in favour of a tiny MIDI amp for ringtones and so I never have to sit through a stranger playing music or video from such a hideously tinny source. The phonecall speaker would only be audible to an ear pressed right up to it to prevent 'chocolate bar calls' as well.

 

[blairh]

The problem I have with this is anything added to the Air will increase its weight and/or thickness, while reducing space for added battery capacity (until Apple finally moves to silicon carbon anyway), kinda sorta negating its entire point of existence. Just adding a tempered glass screen protector makes it noticeably heavier, let alone an entire camera sensor and speaker...

Reducing the starting price to $899 would do wonders for sales, however.

S25 Edge is 3 grams lighter than the Air with dual cameras and stereo speakers. It has already been done.

 

[tomtad]

The only thing you're right about is the "charging more" part... There is definitely a user base for this phone, not everyone needs pro level cameras and not everyone is a power user who needs all-day battery life. There is definitely a market for this phone.... The mistake Apple made was price it too close to the pro. They don't kill a phone after just one iteration because too much r&d goes in to it. They'll pivot and add some features or lower the price.

But isn't that just the regular iPhone? Having a bespoke design and internals for such a slow selling model just isn't going to happen.

 

[Wando64]

Mac mini has a clear purpose. Xcode is needed to build iOS apps. Just because a clear strategy exists for Mac mini doesn't mean the same for iPhone Air.

Last time I checked, Xcode could also run on a MacBook.
By the way, the share of sales is even smaller for the iMac. Is the iMac a “failure”? I can only assume Apple must have a good reason for continuing to sell it.

I am going to say it one very last time, then I am out of here for good:
Perhaps the iPhone Air is a “failure”. I don’t know that, but what I do know for sure is that its failure or success CANNOT be determined by looking at its share of sales within the iPhone product line alone.

 

[JPack]

Last time I checked, Xcode could also run on a MacBook.
By the way, the share of sales is even smaller for the iMac. Is the iMac a “failure”? I can only assume Apple must have a good reason for continuing to sell it.

I am going to say it one very last time, then I am out of here for good:
Perhaps the iPhone Air is a “failure”. I don’t know that, but what I do know for sure is that its failure or success CANNOT be determined by looking at its share of sales within the iPhone product line alone.

The cheapest MacBook is $999.

The cheapest Mac mini is $599. At that price, it democratizes the ability to use Xcode to create iOS/iPadOS apps.

iMac is at 10% in 2023.