iPhone SE 4 Likely to Use Modified iPhone 14 Chassis

[webkit]

Remember, the first iPhones have screens smaller than 4 inch.
The iPhone 5 has a 4 inch screen, and many people worldwide don't want anything larger.

The iPhone SE 1 has it all, even a standard 3,5 mm headphone jack and a notchless screen: "iPhone SE takes an incredibly popular design and refines it even further. Crafted from bead-blasted aluminum for a satin-like finish, this light and compact phone is designed to fit comfortably in your hand. A brilliant 4‑inch Retina display makes everything look vibrant and sharp. And matte-chamfered edges and a color-matched stainless steel logo finish the look."

Steve Jobs knew all this very well. Regardless of what Apple's current "designers" think, people don't want iPads in their pockets. People want a pocketable portable iPhone; All the current iPhones are really just overpriced iPads with a phone.

Times change. Early televisions had very small screen sizes too.

People have bought iPhone SE models over the years for reasons besides (and sometimes despite) the smaller screen size. Some prefer LCD over OLED, some prefer having a home button/Touch ID, and probably the biggest selling point is its low price at least relative to other iPhones. There's also the enterprise market where companies give SE phones to employees.

Sales have shown that most people want larger screens and that's why smartphone makers (not just Apple) mostly offer larger screen phones. According to Counterpoint Research, the top ten best selling smartphones globally in 2022 all had screens 6.1" to 6.6" in size with the exception of the iPhone SE 2022 at #9.

 

[jeffpeng]

As I hinted at before: I guess the primary problem is that "smartphone" encapsulates two types of devices.

Device type one is the actual smartphone. A phone, meaning a primarily communication focussed device, that has "smart" capabilites, in that it can run arbitrary apps on a high resolution screen, has wireless internet access and can make use of a camera and a few other sensors. You can technically browse the web on it on the go if you have to, even consume content or play games like "Snake!", but since you are usually busy doing other stuff or do this kind of stuff on a dedicated device those functions really are primarily a fall back for situations where you don't have access to those devices and are bored - like on the can. You need to be able to type a short message effectively, but you're not writing poems. As you use it only sporadically during the day battery life is not paramount, but it still needs to be good, since you rely on it to keep in touch.

Device type two is an all around digital assistent and lifestyle device, lovingly nicknamed the phablet. It is your digital brain and primary device for interacting with everything internet as you can still carry it around with you in a handbag or jacket despite having a large enough screen to allow comfortable internet browsing or consuming content. It is large enough to play games in high fidelity and has amazingly good cameras to fully realize your main character syndrome. You can use it to place a phonecall, you'd rather do messenger, for which its large screen is perfect. As you use it all day all the time for literally everything even when you shouldn't it can't have enough battery to quench your battery anxiety.

The iPhone today is a phablet and has been a phablet first and foremost since the XS at least, but technically since the 6 plus. It is important to understand that the customer base for phablets and smarthpones is different. One must also remember that phablets existed since there was an iPhone and that Apple was strongly opposed to making the iPhone a phablet, as Jobs believed in the coexistence of iPhone and iPad as complimentary devices.

One might now say he was wrong. I think he still is right. It's just that the customerbase for phablets is much, much larger today than it is for smartphones since a) they are much closer in price now and b) phablets are good enough for many people that they do not require any other device period. And let's not fool outselves: phablets are and will remain the dominant species moving forward until something really disruptive happens.

That is also why a smartphone that is (almost) as expensive as a phablet, but lacks the size and the battery, must fail. This is also the reason the SE is still around (albeit being too big for a classic smartphone) But it's cheap enough while having what counts.

The smartphone needs a rethink. The smartphone needs a reposition. Basically what the iPhone 5 / 5s / SE2016 was, but with a modern touch. With a modern, but binned/underclock chip to compensate for the lack of phsical space for a battery, and a borderless display that doesn't require pristine resoltution or contrast, but needs decent brightness to work well under all lighting conditions. The camera the SE 2022 has is good enough. If you can make it better at the same cost and no bump - k. Keep touch ID around, but at the side of the device (where the 6 has it's power button). It's doesn't need cinema sound speakers, but loud and clear output of speech.

Put all of that into a package around 300-350 bucks, and you'll have a seller. Not a hit, but a seller, and you'll grab significant market share from cheaper, smaller android devices. Also: put it on a 2-4 years update cadence. People buying this won't be back next year, maybe not even the year after. So you can better justify design costs as you sell it over multiple years. Also maybe some people will then buy iPads again....

 

[JPack]

Remember, the first iPhones have screens smaller than 4 inch.
The iPhone 5 has a 4 inch screen, and many people worldwide don't want anything larger.

The iPhone SE 1 has it all, even a standard 3,5 mm headphone jack and a notchless screen: "iPhone SE takes an incredibly popular design and refines it even further. Crafted from bead-blasted aluminum for a satin-like finish, this light and compact phone is designed to fit comfortably in your hand. A brilliant 4‑inch Retina display makes everything look vibrant and sharp. And matte-chamfered edges and a color-matched stainless steel logo finish the look."

Steve Jobs knew all this very well. Regardless of what Apple's current "designers" think, people don't want iPads in their pockets. People want a pocketable portable iPhone; All the current iPhones are really just overpriced iPads with a phone.

Apple was trying to rationalize iPhone 5 when phablets on the market were gaining a lot of traction. Between 2010-2012, Apple was also trying to sell two devices to every single consumer: one small iPhone and one big iPad.

Jony Ive confirmed Steve Jobs was still alive when he designed the iPhone 6 series in 2011. The iPhone 5 had not been released to market yet. It tells you Apple and Jobs knew phablets were the future

 

[paradox00]

In other words, iPhone mini isn't commercially viable.

No, it wasn't priced at $399 like the SE. No, Apple can't put in three cameras and stainless steel and sell at $699 either.

Yes, I'd like an iPhone 16 Ultra Pro Max at $599 as well. Who wouldn't?

Late reply, but this is nonsense and not what I was suggesting. First, no one asked for a $699 pro phone in a mini chassis. The iPhone 15 Pro starts at $999 and the iPhone 15 starts at $799. A hypothetical iPhone 15 Pro mini would most reasonably slot between those two (replacing the iPhone 15 plus) at $899ish. No one has suggested that a mini iPhone Pro should cost less than a base model iPhone.

Second. The current rumour is that the next iPhone SE will be in an iPhone 14 chassis. If Apple can build an iPhone SE in an iPhone 14 chassis, they could absolutely have chosen to build a similar phone in an iPhone 13 mini chassis at a similar price to whatever the new SE will cost. The people suggesting this know it would come with compromises somewhere to hit that price point, just like the current SEs do (i.e.,camera and processor).

My point remains that neither of these concepts have been tested with consumers.

 

[Pezimak]

This could be one of the most significant iPhone launches in years and years. If they notice it right, it'll sell fast if that camera is still able to perform well. Wonder if it will have Mag Safe? Hope so.

 

[SVegaVelez1]

Following our last in-depth report on the iPhone SE 4, MacRumors has received additional information which further confirms the claims made in our previous article.

The iPhone SE 4, also known by the device identifier D59 and project codename Ghost, is a continuation of Apple’s budget-oriented line of iPhones, and is expected to replace the current third-generation iPhone SE.

With the arrival of the fourth-generation iPhone SE, Apple plans to finally retire the aging iPhone 8-style design used for the previous two generations of the iPhone SE. Instead, the iPhone SE 4 will feature a more modern look and increased display size, closely resembling the base model iPhone 14.

Newly obtained specifications indicate the iPhone SE 4 will use a modified version of the existing iPhone 14 chassis, with the same flat design. The dimensions of the iPhone SE 4 in its current stage perfectly match those of the base model iPhone 14. Recent findings also confirm that the fourth-generation iPhone SE will not include a Touch ID home button, instead featuring an all-screen design derived from the iPhone 14, with Face ID serving as the means of biometric identification.

To better illustrate the size difference between the iPhone SE 4 and the current iPhone SE third-generation, we have included the dimensions for the iPhone 14 and iPhone SE 3, respectively.

iPhone 14 dimensions and weight:

• Length: 146.7 mm
• Width: 71.5 mm
• Thickness: 7.80 mm
• Weight: 172 g

iPhone SE 3 dimensions and weight:

• Length: 138.4 mm
• Width: 67.3 mm
• Thickness: 7.3 mm
• Weight: 144 g

The iPhone SE 4 is expected to be lighter than the iPhone 14 by about 6 grams, weighing 165 grams. The change in weight is likely a result of the single-camera design Apple has planned for the device. Unlike the iPhone 14, the iPhone SE 4 will feature a single 48-megapixel rear camera, developed under the codename "Portland", with a custom backplate for the device to account for the design change.

The decision to use a single-camera design lines up with all previous models of the iPhone SE, with the flash located in a similar position as well. It’s worth emphasizing that there is significant evidence that backs up the single-camera design, with Apple’s internal documentation highlighting it as a key change from the iPhone 14.

Apart from the single-camera design, no other significant factors could impact the weight of the iPhone SE 4. No changes in materials are expected, with the fourth-generation iPhone SE using the same 6013 T6 aluminum found in the iPhone 14, along with a glass backplate. Prototypes of the iPhone SE 4 have been seen in a black color closely resembling the Midnight color variant available for the iPhone 14, suggesting that black will be one of the color options Apple plans to offer with the fourth-generation iPhone SE.

Although the chassis dimensions of the iPhone SE 4 remain identical to that of the base model iPhone 14, the device will bring two significant features greatly differentiating it from previous iPhone models – a multi-purpose Action button and a USB-C port.

The Action button is a user-configurable button located above the volume buttons, first introduced with the iPhone 15 Pro, where it replaces the mute switch. Current information suggests that Apple intends to make the Action button a standard feature across the entire iPhone 16 range, with it eventually being available on the iPhone SE 4 as well. The current development status of the fourth-generation iPhone SE suggests a potential release date of 2025.

While Apple is experimenting with an all-new capacitive Capture button for the iPhone 16 range, there are no indications that this feature is being tested on the iPhone SE 4. The Capture button is expected to remain exclusive to the iPhone 16 lineup.

It is important to remember that the information presented here is pre-production information and may not reflect the hardware found on final mass production units, as changes are always possible during development.

For more details on what to expect, check out our guide for the iPhone SE 4.


Article Link: iPhone SE 4 Likely to Use Modified iPhone 14 Chassis

I wish Apple would give the IPhone SE 4 the Dynamic Island.

 

[JPack]

Late reply, but this is nonsense and not what I was suggesting. First, no one asked for a $699 pro phone in a mini chassis. The iPhone 15 Pro starts at $999 and the iPhone 15 starts at $799. A hypothetical iPhone 15 Pro mini would most reasonably slot between those two (replacing the iPhone 15 plus) at $899ish. No one has suggested that a mini iPhone Pro should cost less than a base model iPhone.

Second. The current rumour is that the next iPhone SE will be in an iPhone 14 chassis. If Apple can build an iPhone SE in an iPhone 14 chassis, they could absolutely have chosen to build a similar phone in an iPhone 13 mini chassis at a similar price to whatever the new SE will cost. The people suggesting this know it would come with compromises somewhere to hit that price point, just like the current SEs do (i.e.,camera and processor).

My point remains that neither of these concepts have been tested with consumers.

Think about what you’re proposing.

The iPhone 12/13 mini didn’t sell well enough at $699. So you’re proposing a 30% hike to $899 for an iPhone mini Pro, making the market size for that type of device even smaller. Apple didn’t try a 30% hike except for iPhone 7 Plus to iPhone X. Apple has $100 increments between iPhone models to avoid cannibalization. Your $899 mini would fight with the bread and butter $799 iPhone 15 and $899 iPhone 15 Plus. Your idea of replacing the iPhone 15 Plus is the epitome of being commercially unviable. We already know iPhone 14 Plus outsells iPhone mini by a big margin.

The 6.1-inch iPhone models sold an order of magnitude better than the 5.4-inch mini. There is no reason to believe an SE based on the mini would enjoy the same economies of scale or cost in manufacturing.

Apple already tested the 5.4-inch market and it failed their expectations. You can’t seriously expect Apple to throw good money after bad money by making a Pro model.

 

[paradox00]

Think about what you’re proposing.

The iPhone 12/13 mini didn’t sell well enough at $699. So you’re proposing a 30% hike to $899 for an iPhone mini Pro, making the market size for that type of device even smaller. Apple didn’t try a 30% hike except for iPhone 7 Plus to iPhone X. Apple has $100 increments between iPhone models to avoid cannibalization. Your $899 mini would fight with the bread and butter $799 iPhone 15 and $899 iPhone 15 Plus. Your idea of replacing the iPhone 15 Plus is the epitome of being commercially unviable. We already know iPhone 14 Plus outsells iPhone mini by a big margin.

The 6.1-inch iPhone models sold an order of magnitude better than the 5.4-inch mini. There is no reason to believe an SE based on the mini would enjoy the same economies of scale or cost in manufacturing.

Apple already tested the 5.4-inch market and it failed their expectations. You can’t seriously expect Apple to throw good money after bad money by making a Pro model.

Why don't you think about it? Ignoring size for a second: people wouldn't want a pro phone that's $100 cheaper? You know they would. I believe Apple's fear is that those sales would come from the existing iPhone Pro buyers instead of iPhone buyers, which would bring down average selling price.

An iPhone mini pro and iPhone mini would be completely different Phones with different tradeoffs. Since you don't want a mini iPhone, you have no idea how painful the "I want the smaller phone, but also want the telephoto lens" tradeoff was. With the Pro max moving to being the clear top end phone with the Pro a rung below it, I think there's room for a pro mini beside the pro. But again, all I'm saying is that Apple hasn't tested this market. That's a factual statement.

PS: You're thinking about sales numbers wrong. No one's suggested that the 6.1 iPhone is going anywhere. It's the 6.7" plus that would possibly go away. Both the 5.4" mini and 6.7" plus have not been super hot sellers and orders of magnitude behind the base iPhone: although the plus has admittedly done better than the mini. This is strong evidence that size wasn't the primary issue for the mini. Instead it's evidence that theres only room for one successful base iPhone. Other phones have to go much cheaper or more premium. Hence this post.

 

[JPack]

Why don't you think about it? Ignoring size for a second: people wouldn't want a pro phone that's $100 cheaper? You know they would. I believe Apple's fear is that those sales would come from the existing iPhone Pro buyers instead of iPhone buyers, which would bring down average selling price.

An iPhone mini pro and iPhone mini would be completely different Phones with different tradeoffs. Since you don't want a mini iPhone, you have no idea how painful the "I want the smaller phone, but also want the telephoto lens" tradeoff was. With the Pro max moving to being the clear top end phone with the Pro a rung below it, I think there's room for a pro mini beside the pro. But again, all I'm saying is that Apple hasn't tested this market. That's a factual statement.

PS: You're thinking about sales numbers wrong. No one's suggested that the 6.1 iPhone is going anywhere. It's the 6.7" plus that would possibly go away. Both the 5.4" mini and 6.7" plus have not been super hot sellers and orders of magnitude behind the base iPhone: although the plus has admittedly done better than the mini. This is strong evidence that size wasn't the primary issue for the mini. Instead it's evidence that theres only room for one successful base iPhone. Other phones have to go much cheaper or more premium. Hence this post.

Because Pro buyers aren't in the habit of saving $100 for huge compromises in display size and battery life.

If regular iPhone 12 and 13 buyers (who are somewhat price sensitive) already rejected iPhone 12/13 mini and didn't want to save $100, there's no chance a Pro buyer would.

 

[paradox00]

Because Pro buyers aren't in the habit of saving $100 for huge compromises in display size and battery life.

If regular iPhone 12 and 13 buyers (who are somewhat price sensitive) already rejected iPhone 12/13 mini and didn't want to save $100, there's no chance a Pro buyer would.

You're making things up about the pro buyer. Apple knows that they'll buy a cheaper model if given the opportunity. That's why they discontinued the 128 GB Pro Max. Now if you want the absolute best camera, you have to pay the higher price of the 256 GB model. Their fear with a pro mini is precisely that more pro buyers would downgrade than regular users would upgrade. I would have upgraded, but without Apple testing the market, we'll never know for sure which way it would go.

But let's assume you're right for a second and no existing pro buyer would consider a pro mini. If that was true, Apple would already have made a Pro mini. Why? Because no matter how few they sold, every iPhone pro mini would be an upsell from a regular iPhone. This increases the average selling price of an iPhone, which is an obvious benefit for Apple. Thank you for making an argument in favor of a pro mini.

 

[JPack]

You're making things up about the pro buyer. Apple knows that they'll buy a cheaper model if given the opportunity. That's why they discontinued the 128 GB Pro Max. Now if you want the absolute best camera, you have to pay the higher price of the 256 GB model. Their fear with a pro mini is precisely that more pro buyers would downgrade than regular users would upgrade. I would have upgraded, but without Apple testing the market, we'll never know for sure which way it would go.

Regular iPhone buyers didn't even buy the mini for $699. It was the lowest priced 5G iPhone market. You have no evidence there are customers at $899, which is an even smaller market than $699.

But let's assume you're right for a second and no existing pro buyer would consider a pro mini. If that was true, Apple would already have made a Pro mini. Why? Because no matter how few they sold, every iPhone pro mini would be an upsell from a regular iPhone. This increases the average selling price of an iPhone, which is an obvious benefit for Apple. Thank you for making an argument in favor of a pro mini.

LOL! There's this thing called NRE costs. Apple has to design it, stock it, service it, make parts available for it for 7 years. There is limited space in Apple Stores. In your world, none of this exists. As long as there is a single buyer of this iPhone mini Pro, it's worth making. In your world, there would be no prioritization of projects. Apple would be a mess. My mistake, there would be prioritization, they would make a single iPhone mini Pro to serve you. 😆

 

[paradox00]

Regular iPhone buyers didn't even buy the mini for $699. It was the lowest priced 5G iPhone market. You have no evidence there are customers at $899, which is an even smaller market than $699.



LOL! There's this thing called NRE costs. Apple has to design it, stock it, service it, make parts available for it for 7 years. There is limited space in Apple Stores. In your world, none of this exists. As long as there is a single buyer of this iPhone mini Pro, it's worth making. In your world, there would be no prioritization of projects. Apple would be a mess. My mistake, there would be prioritization, they would make a single iPhone mini Pro to serve you. 😆

You made a false claim about pro users not caring about a $100 price difference, I was just running with it. Not going to argue that hypothetical further.

All I've said is that there are markets that the mini form factor hasn't been tested in. This is true, can we agree on that?

 

[JPack]

You made a false claim about pro users not caring about a $100 price difference, I was just running with it. Not going to argue that hypothetical further.

All I've said is that there are markets that the mini form factor hasn't been tested in. This is true, can we agree on that?

If mainstream iPhone 12 and 13 buyers weren't willing to save $100 and settle for a mini, why would Pro buyers do that? Just to say, "I've got a Pro... it may be the cheapest Pro with bad battery life and a small display, but I got a Pro!" That doesn't make sense.

I agree an iPhone mini Pro hasn't been tested, but realize how unrealistic that hypothesis is. The mainstream market already rejected iPhone mini. Android manufacturers like Sony have compact flagships. They all failed. It's extremely unlikely a mass of iPhone mini Pro holdouts will pop out of nowhere.

BMW doesn't need to make a three wheeled sedan to know how it'll sell. Boeing doesn't need to test a triple deck wide-body to know it's not commercially viable.

 

[ric22]

I like the Pro Max format and battery life, though my pockets are not designed to take it, which is super annoying. Would probably buy a smaller phone next time around. Tailors need to up their game and advertise pocket enlarging!

After everyone has had their phase of "upgrading" to bigger phones, I agree with what others have said about how the pendulum is bound to swing back the other way, and people will want smaller phones.

 

[adb1973]

The iPhone X with new hardware. I'd buy that immediately. Probably everyone so they won't do it because it will canabalize all other models and the profit maximalists will start whining immediately.