Review: A Week With the iPhone 17

[MacRumors]

It's iPhone launch day, and MacRumors videographer Dan Barbera is here to tell you why the iPhone 17 is the best iPhone that Apple has to offer this year. Dan has been using the iPhone 17 for the last week, and he has some thoughts on feature set and value.

Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos.​

The iPhone 17 is still priced starting at $799, but this year, it has some features that were previously limited to the Pro models. It supports 120Hz ProMotion refresh rates for smoother scrolling and video, and Always-On display technology.

It has a larger 6.3-inch display that matches the size of the iPhone 17 Pro, and it has a faster A19 chip. It's not quite as good as the A19 Pro in the iPhone 17 Pro models, but it's more than fast enough for everyday use. You do get 4GB less RAM, but the iPhone 17 still works with Apple Intelligence and supports all of the same AI features as the other iPhone 17 models.

The front glass is more durable and less prone to scratching, and you get two camera lenses, which is one more lens than you get with the iPhone Air. The iPhone 17 has Wide and Ultra Wide cameras, but it lacks the Telephoto that comes with the iPhone 17 Pro models. The Ultra Wide camera is the same 48-megapixel camera that was added to the iPhone 16 Pro models last year, and this is the first time the iPhone 17 has had two 48-megapixel lenses.

You do get the same 18-megapixel front-facing camera that's in the Pro models. It supports taking selfies in portrait or landscape mode without having to rotate your phone, which is a neat feature. There's also dual capture, so you can record with the front and rear cameras at the same time.

Battery life is up, and you get up to 30 hours, which is eight hours more than the iPhone 16. Charging is faster too, and with a 40W adapter, you can charge to 50 percent in 20 minutes.

At $799, the iPhone 17 offers quite a few pro-level features, which makes it a steal for the price. It's definitely worth considering if you're upgrading from an older phone.

Article Link: Review: A Week With the iPhone 17

 

[wanha]

Maybe the video is different (I didn't watch it), but this article at least reads like a list of features rather than a personal account of what the 17 has actually been like to use

 

[EugW]

The iPhone 17 is the best value in the iPhone 17 series by a long shot, and I say that as someone who has ordered the iPhone 17 Pro Max.

I bought the 16e for my kid several months back, because I felt its value at the lower price range was better than the iPhone 15 and the iPhone 16. The iPhone 15 had too many compromises, and the iPhone 16 was considerably more expensive than the 16e. However, if I were buying today, even with the new reduced price of the iPhone 16, I'd choose the iPhone 17 over both the 16 and 16e.

 

[azentropy]

Great value, disappointing size. They should have kept it at 6.1" and slimmed it down - not increase the screen AND the size and weight yet again.

 

[Jeremy3292]

Let's drop the bit that 8 GB isn't PLENTY of RAM, now and for the next few years. The 3 year old iPhone 14 Pro has only 6 GB of RAM and I've yet to hear anyone complaining about it.

 

[EugW]

Great value, disappointing size. They should have kept it at 6.1" and slimmed it down - not increase the screen AND the size and weight yet again.

The increased screen size is a feature that will attract buyers.

 

[OliOliOliOli]

Why Apple told us is 30h00 battery life on video… is because 98% of the people will just scroll video on social media which % of the people use alle the app from Apple at more then 50% of the power of each app…

 

[MacMan988]

TLDR: It is good, like every other previous iphones

 

[raybo]

If you're going to keep the phone for over 3 years, for an extra $300, get the 17 Pro with 4gb more RAM, a faster Pro chip, better battery life and extra lens. The "Apple Intelligence" we have now won't be the same in 3 years. If the additional 4gb of RAM was not necessary, why do the Air and 17 Pro models have 12gb? Does Apple ever add anything extra if it's not needed?

 

[bookcase]

If not for the Air, this was the iPhone I was eyeing. It’s a value as far as iPhone prices are concerned.

 

[EugW]

If you're going to keep the phone for over 3 years, for an extra $300, get the 17 Pro with 4gb more RAM, a faster Pro chip, better battery life and extra lens. The "Apple Intelligence" we have now won't be the same in 3 years. If the additional 4gb of RAM was not necessary, why do the Air and 17 Pro models have 12gb? Does Apple ever add anything extra if it's not needed?

Paying almost 40% more now to future proof for an immature feature that might mature 3 years down the road the line is not a really a good way to use your money. If AI really does come into its own in 2-3 years, and if you actually find a good use for it, then you can just sell the iPhone 17 and buy the iPhone 20.

 

[BeerDrinkerDan]

I think this statement "and this is the first time the iPhone 17 has had two 48-megapixel lenses" meant to say something like "this is the first time the base model of an iPhone has had two 48-megapixel lenses" since, of course, there never was an iPhone 17 before this release.

Yes, this is nit-picky.

-bdd

 

[BelgianChoklit]

If you're going to keep the phone for over 3 years, for an extra $300, get the 17 Pro with 4gb more RAM, a faster Pro chip, better battery life and extra lens. The "Apple Intelligence" we have now won't be the same in 3 years. If the additional 4gb of RAM was not necessary, why do the Air and 17 Pro models have 12gb? Does Apple ever add anything extra if it's not needed?

I disagree. The Pro isn’t the much better phone it used to be. I think the iPhone 12 lineup was the last time the regular phone was this close to the Pro in terms of specs. When it comes to RAM, I have never actually noticed it when it comes to keeping apps in memory, I once read an article Apple adds RAM for the cameras because they make so many calculations, and for Apple Intelligence of course. iPhone chips have gotten so good they can easily last 5 years, I have an iPhone 14 here for work that is super smooth. I think you should only get the Pro if you really really need the cameras. That’s it.

 

[neilw]

Paying almost 40% more now to future proof for an immature feature that might mature 3 years down the road the line is not a really a good way to use your money. If AI really does come into its own in 2-3 years, and if you actually find a good use for it, then you can just sell the iPhone 17 and buy the iPhone 20.

These are always the two competing strategies:
1) Pay more up front and future-proof
2) Pay less up front and upgrade more frequently

I think it's a personality thing. I almost always lean towards #1, in computers, phones, cars, everything.

At this point the telephoto lens is the *only* feature I really need from the Pro. But I use it so much I'll probably go Pro again, even though I'd prefer to do without the extra bulk and weight.

Great value, disappointing size. They should have kept it at 6.1" and slimmed it down - not increase the screen AND the size and weight yet again.

The trend towards embiggening is unstoppable. It's what people want. I have a fantasy that having all the phones now at 6.3" or larger gives them room to come out with a larger mini. 5.8" would be the ideal size as far as I'm concerned.... provided they could eke out decent battery life.

 

[jicon]

If you're going to keep the phone for over 3 years, for an extra $300, get the 17 Pro with 4gb more RAM, a faster Pro chip, better battery life and extra lens. The "Apple Intelligence" we have now won't be the same in 3 years. If the additional 4gb of RAM was not necessary, why do the Air and 17 Pro models have 12gb? Does Apple ever add anything extra if it's not needed?

That’s my gut feeling too. Wife is replacing her seven year old XS, indicating to me battery and longevity of device is what she’s after… and I think what is offered on the table, the Pro gets it for a bit bigger battery, and future proofing RAM.

She never did replace the battery on her current phone, and still 80% health, which is impressive.

 

[EugW]

These are always the two competing strategies:
1) Pay more up front and future-proof
2) Pay less up front and upgrade more frequently

I think it's a personality thing. I almost always lean towards #1, in computers, phones, cars, everything.

At this point the telephoto lens is the *only* feature I really need from the Pro. But I use it so much I'll probably go Pro again, even though I'd prefer to do without the extra bulk and weight.


The trend towards embiggening is unstoppable. It's what people want. I have a fantasy that having all the phones now at 6.3" or larger gives them room to come out with a larger mini. 5.8" would be the ideal size as far as I'm concerned.... provided they could eke out decent battery life.

I do number 1 when it might be something like $200 on a $1099 product. That’s an 18% premium.

I do number 2 when it is $300 on a $799 product. That’s a 38% premium.

 

[jmjake21]

Maybe the video is different (I didn't watch it), but this article at least reads more like a list of features rather than a personal account of what the 17 has actually been like to use

Completely agree. This article has no content about hands-on usage. This is not a review. Who’s signing off on this crap?

 

[Entilzha]

In fairness, the video itself does have a bit more info than this boilerplate writeup. But also apparently has a sponsor which isn’t mentioned in this post.

 

[one more]

5.8" would be the ideal size as far as I'm concerned.... provided they could eke out decent battery life.

iPhone 11 Pro had an excellent battery life with its 5.8” back in the day. 🖐️

 

[rui no onna]

Why Apple told us is 30h00 battery life on video… is because 98% of the people will just scroll video on social media which % of the people use alle the app from Apple at more then 50% of the power of each app…

30 hours is for offline video though. If you're streaming, advertised battery life is 27 hours which is still good.

Curiously, the Air show 27 hours offline and 22 hours streamed so a 5-hour reduction compared to the 17's 3-hour reduction.

 

[Anaxarxes]

Great value, disappointing size. They should have kept it at 6.1" and slimmed it down - not increase the screen AND the size and weight yet again.

The display size increase is not due to physical size increase, more due to thinning of the bezels.
It's 0.08 inches taller
0.01 inches wider
has almost the same depth
and it's 7 grams heavier

I think you're complaining for the sake of complaining.

 

[mcled53]

Why Apple told us is 30h00 battery life on video… is because 98% of the people will just scroll video on social media which % of the people use alle the app from Apple at more then 50% of the power of each app…

Unless you have conducted a survey you don't know what 98% of the people would do. You only know what you would do.

 

[ThatGuyInLa]

my personal take on this is Apple's engineering and design department had a split and instead of compromising. They allowed them to go down their own paths .

so we get a nice robust durable feature packed pro phone and then we get the super slick Apple design air.

I would not put it past some people who have the means to buy both just like having multiple pairs of shoes or watches.

For other folks they might just prefer Apple design over the function of the other.

 

[Astrohunter]

Imo ugliest iPhones ever together with 6s.
Won’t even comment on the colour choices.

 

[NVDA]

Why is this being advertised as a $799 phone? If you buy unlocked from Apple it's $829, and the carriers charge an activation fee. Am I missing something?