Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Major iPhone 17 Pro Redesign Backed by Supply Chain Info, Claims Leaker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I would definitely prefer the camera’s at the top so it won’t wobble anymore. But I think they won’t do this because of spacial recordings (even if nobody uses them).
Even better would be if it had no camera bump at all off course without sacrificing the quality of the main camera. Since the ultra wide and zoom cameras are worse quality cameras I wouldn’t mind if they just removed those and just focus on the main camera.
Even better would be if it had no camera bump at all off course without sacrificing the quality of the main camera. Since the ultra wide and zoom cameras are worse quality cameras I wouldn’t mind if they just removed those and just focus on the main camera.
With this design, how would you hold the phone vertically with your hands grabbing both sides for taking photos or videos without (partially) covering the lenses with your fingers? Or am I the only person left on Earth who records videos and takes photos in landscape?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
The argument is usually neither of your choices. Make the overall phone thicker to make the camera flush (just as early iPhones were)...
...and fill the expanded space with battery.
As you can see there, Apple made phones that way at one time... so the most holy of holy fan doctrine says it can't be wrong. And if you step back to threads about that phone, you'll find very, VERY few (if any?) griping about it being "too thick."
Similarly, very, very few genuinely voice "thinner" wishes today... but MANY want more battery built inside. To do that, phone probably gets that tiny bit thicker to flush mount the camera... and then that added internal space can fill with more battery.
Of course, "same great battery life" is typically a cost savings (for Apple) vs. spending the nickels or dimes extra to add more battery to each unit... and "thinner" is historically fun to spin in the big reveal for that 5-minute oooooh, ahhhhhh reaction (as opposed to spinning how much more profitable each unit sale is for Apple, by NOT doing something like the want summarized above). I have to think that a flush camera and more battery would be much better received by most customers than more "thinner." But again, one cuts cost while the other adds cost. And "who makes the most profitable..?" seems to rule all decision-making.
Last edited:
Personally, I don't care much about the cameras and would be fine with a single lens and a flat(er) back. I almost never use zoom on my iPhone, and prefer my actual camera for that.
I hope you don't truly care if people think you have one phone brand over another.
I'd love to have a symmetrical camera bump like this. I am a caseless user and I don't like how the phone wobbles on a desk.
maybe it will happen if DCS is talking about it. seems odd though when they changed the camera layout for the iphone 16
Another case of analysts and renderers knowing nothing about product design.
Think for a second about the way you cradle your phone in landscape when taking a shot. You likely have your LH midde finger on the back of your phone to provide stability. This is why the camera module is in the top corner to begin with,so your fingers don't get in the way when taking a snap.
Whilst it seems like Apple's idea of ergonomics has gone out the window with the placement of the camera controls, there is method in that madness. The iPhone is the 'everyperson' phone that has to appeal to a broad range of people. They went with a design that tries to sit in a place where it is useful to both portrait and landscape shooters that also has symmetry with the power button.
I imagine that the 'horizontal camera bar' will in fact be horizontal with the device in landscape and echo the camera design on the Samsung Ultra phones.
Think for a second about the way you cradle your phone in landscape when taking a shot. You likely have your LH midde finger on the back of your phone to provide stability. This is why the camera module is in the top corner to begin with,so your fingers don't get in the way when taking a snap.
Whilst it seems like Apple's idea of ergonomics has gone out the window with the placement of the camera controls, there is method in that madness. The iPhone is the 'everyperson' phone that has to appeal to a broad range of people. They went with a design that tries to sit in a place where it is useful to both portrait and landscape shooters that also has symmetry with the power button.
I imagine that the 'horizontal camera bar' will in fact be horizontal with the device in landscape and echo the camera design on the Samsung Ultra phones.
WOT?
Anyway, I welcome this design change with MASSIVE OPEN ARMS.
Oh god Jeff Williams certainly got a telling off for the low sales and utter lazy designs he's used now for 6 years, hope he gets sent to another team because that bean counter has been a virus on iPhone hardware since he took over.
kinda needed at this point as everyones constantly complaining the phone looks the same... plus the current design has been awful for years
Thank god we're finally getting rid of the hideous corner camera blob I thought was a joke prior to the iPhone 12 release.
It would be more accurate to call it rumor for the sake of increasing your MacRumors screen time, i.e. to serve you ads.
Conceptual speaking this is not creative. It's a lazy way to brainstorm. people know this isn't Apple rendering it's just found Internet search crap.Only until confirmed. The physical change reaction cycle from first rumor to release:
Same sequence every time.
- (first rumor) Rejection: "ugly", "never", "why", "Apple would never...", "the square layout is 'iconic'", etc.
- (with more rumors implying it really is happening) Moderating Reluctance: "it's starting to grow on me", "I'll have to see it in person", etc. (basically creating room to embrace it if the change turns out to be true).
- (launch yields overwhelming) Acceptance: "best iPhone camera setup ever", "finally, no more wobble when lying on a table", "Apple made the whole camera layout better than ever before", "shut up and take my money!"
- Sales Support: "the old design looks goofy next to this one", "this is so much better than the old square layout", "how did we ever tolerate all that wobble?"
- (rewriting history) Revisionism: "how aggravating that Google & Samsung copy Apple's camera layout"
I wonder if it's less mimicking but rather both seeing the same technical advantage to have cameras arranged centrally.
Perhaps miniturization and advancements have allowed them to move the position of the camera here.
Sure, maybe back during the early days of smartphones. But today with the amount of R&D and experience with cameras, I don't see either Apple or Google copying for the sake of look and feel.
I mean, this is MacRumors. Spend ten minutes here and you come away with the disquieting feeling that an awful lot of people are consumed by both FOMO and what everyone else thinks about what brand or model of technology they own.
They could add a small bump to one of the lower two corners for an audio jack. That would fix the stability problem.If true, goodbye wobble, hello slope.
Cue fans soon talking up the typing ergonomics of that slight slope.
Issue is.. MagSafe.
Yeah! Then sophisticated software could pick the set of lenses not covered by your fingers. Brilliant!
The camera module used to be hilariously tiny compared to today's tech. I can understand sizing the phone thickness to house that. However these days the cameras are growing each year and I don't agree that there's no limit to battery size.
IMO flip the entire concept back to make a phone fit the human hand. Let the camera module be what it needs to be even if it sticks out, but maybe strive to work on a single all purpose module instead of two-three-four separate ones. Battery size should achieve all-day battery, not more, not less. Actually, maybe that 17 Air could be my kind of phone.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
But that might add something like 12¢ to each unit sold.
Do you think Apple is made of money or something? Think about the starving children of shareholders! And yes, I'd be fully in favor of putting the 3.5 back in this resurrected space. Why? Bluetooth still doesn't have the bandwidth for lossless (which Apple has since added and spins in marketing) and dongles are still- IMO- stupid vs. tapping into the (quality Apple-made) digital-to-analog functionality already built inside (so it can be used as a phone and/or play analog through the speakers). Those happy with "the future" option or even direct attachment to USB-C/Lightning would still have their preferred options too... just as it was before Apple got "courageous" (and then made a vast fortune by getting most to pay $1XX or more for "the future" buds over and over vs. using the phones/buds everyone already owned which, ironically, are still the best way to hear Apple Lossless).