Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Latest iPhone 17 Series CAD Images in Line With Redesign Rumors

As a Pro Max user I'm OK with this rumoured change. The camera bump is already ugly, makes the phone wobble, and makes it awkward to position on a horizontal (coaster/bar-mat style) charging pad. Making the bump full width doesn't make that any worse and maybe the hardware designers can put that tiny bit of extra internal case volume that the full-width bump presumable gives them to good use by shuffling some components around.

If for instance internal re-arrangements to use the extra bump volume freed up a little bit of volume inside the main body of the device for even a small increase in the battery size that would be some measurable benefit for what I see as no downside (because I personally don't see this full-width bump as any uglier than the current corner bump).
 
  • Like
Reactions: DefNotAnLLM, mathieuplante and dg1974
Whilst I don’t dislike the basic idea of the designs, these could have taken me 10 minutes to knock up in Fusion based on a few sketchy rumours floating around.

I’m not convinced for example that Apple would put the flash and LiDAR directly underneath where your fingers rest when shooting in landscape on the 17 Pro. There is also a lot of dead space that could be used for helpful things like a larger Xenon flash or a larger, higher resolution LiDAR sensor. The latter hasn’t had any updates since the iPhone 12.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DefNotAnLLM and smogriver
I am sooo curious to see what the actual phone looks like lol.

I need to know how the materials and colors between the top and bottom will look…

oh Apple
 
  • Like
Reactions: decypher44
just a thought, but if the current camera systems are getting this out of hand what on earth are they going to do when they launch a foldable
 
MayaUser said:
Why choosing this camera design if the camera will still wobble on the tabel?!
Click to expand...
The design is likely the first step in implementing technological upgrades for future iPhones. While the iPhone 17 Pro will probably have only minimal camera upgrades compared to the iPhone 16, the iPhone 18 might bring a more significant advancement, particularly with the expansion of camera technology within the long bulging camera chamber.
 
Everyone commenting on how “ugly” this is based on rumours and CAD designs really have short memories. Apple is not known for producing “ugly” designs. Everything that’s been called ugly at these early stages were widely accepted by the public when the final product arrived, and not a single reviewer would call the design changes ugly.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: AlexESP, DefNotAnLLM, decypher44 and 1 other person
What if the camera bump is removable and then becomes and action cam still linked to the phone as a view finder?

Or even interchangeable like an SLR so that you can have different lens options like a camera. The new MagSafe connector / ecosystem??
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanderEvers
This may be the worst looking iPhone ever. I upgrade annually and this is a huge disappointment in design. Its just a change for the sake of change, kind of like the useless camera button added last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: decypher44
brofkand said:
Batteries are heavy
Click to expand...

No they're not. Source: I'm holding one right now.

I use a MagSafe battery on my phone, the weight is a non-issue, just like phone weight has always been a non-issue (indeed, people tend to equate heavier consumer electronics with higher quality).

Lightness and thinness are mostly for marketing, not for real world benefit.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: decypher44, klasma and Razorpit
RealE said:
Why not make the entire phone as thick as the camera bump and use that extra internal space to pack in more battery?
Click to expand...
Batteries are more about software optimization rather than much more mAh, a smaller battery with good software optimization will last more than a big battery with poor optimization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RealE
C7 POWER said:
Because of Spatial Video, it has to be in this format
Click to expand...

That's not true. The triangle has nothing to offer Spatial capture. It was established before Spatial capture with a phone was a thing. Spreading those lenses out to average eye width would improve spatial capture. The triangle is too "tight" to do that except perhaps for baby's eyes.

If you wear glasses or sunglasses, place the center of one lens on any of the cameras in the triangle on your current phone. Now rotate the glasses trying to find a way to get any other camera lens to be in the center of the other glasses lens. You can't do it. Why? because they are too tightly packed.

However, if you adopted the Pixel approach of spreading them across the back (or significantly widening the triangle layout if that is a must to preserve), this would easily work. Fake that now with your glasses or sunglasses. You'll easily see that a lens placed across the back could be dead center for your other glasses lens (even if you happen to have a neanderthal skull size). And in that, better spatial should be captured naturally than doing what I presume is some processing fakery to try to mimic such spread... much like turning 2D films into 3D with processing.

No glasses? Hold the back of an iPhone up to your eyes. Try to align one camera lens with the front of one eye. No wink that eye closed and see if you can get any other phone lens in front of the other eye. You can't. Now imagine the Pixel layout. Can you see the back of the phone with that other eye? You can. Your view is basically eclipsed by the phone. If there was a second camera where your other eye aligns, that pair of cameras would shoot natural Spatial for you- no special processing required.

One key reason to bail on the triangle and go Pixel layout is better spatial. The big bonus even for those with no interest in spatial capture (and thus probably the bigger reason for most people): no more wobble.
 
Last edited:
Cloudyskies22 said:
Why do you not think about what a 2-3mm thicker phone would feel like in your hand? do you want to hold a 1990’s cell phone in your hand? Nope, you don’t.

It’s very very very easy for you to think that, but you simply don’t realize how absolutely AWFUL a phone is if it is literally 3mm thicker. It doesn’t sound like a lot but it is. It’s a massive amount, especially when you’re trying to use it with 1 hand. Remember….if using with 1 hand, the thicker the phone, the less distance your thumb can reach across its face.

Moreover, if you were to have a 3mm thicker phone and fill all that volume with a bigger battery and more components, it will be far far far heavier and you’ll want to immediately throw it as hard as you can at the nearest brick wall, and with good reason.

Good day to you.
Click to expand...
They could also make an iPhone 17 mini. I have a 13 mini. It's great. Not everyone wants or needs a massive screen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dampfnudel, klasma and Razorpit
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back