Not enough ram. Period. Hence why the entire ios was built on disabling multitasking. It seems like Apple straight up refuses to use more ram like it's a sin, when their entire OS is built to not use it
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.
Skipping the iPhone 16 Pro? Here's What's Rumored for iPhone 17 Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let me know when Apple sell a foldable phone, then I'll be a lot more interested.
If they do the “Air “ I could easily see it being mid range, a 60hz 6-inch screen, a recycled cool running A18 chip, reasonable (for Apple) price just relying on people being desperate for a new form factor and fresh look, while also appealing to the ex mini customers…
I could be wrong but I don’t think it will be a flip or a fold.
Curious to see what Apple's implementation looks like... I am not sold on the form factor at all.... I was playing around with the new pixel fold in a Verizon store yesterday and they just feel too thick when folded... and the crease feels weird when unfolded. Not for me... right now.
Yeah, I will skip the iPhone 16. And moste probably the 17 too. Running an 12 mini and see little value in changing the phone, aka 'upgrading'. The incremental changes are too small for me. If they come out with something big, like micro LED, true all screen front, the option to boot into macOS or something really groundbreaking, I'll upgrade. But I guess it will be my phone not getting iOS updates that will "motivate" me to switch.
Oh I agree the crease is the killer, plus the screens are pretty prone to being scratched.
If they can find a way to remove the crease it would be good, but probably a miracle too judging by every foldable phone so far.
Clearly you're not into photography. The 48MP rear telephoto rear camera is going to be a major improvement.
I am unclear with this rumor if the 48MP telephoto will also include the rumored 15X (320 mm equivalent ) telephoto which was feature I want beyond my 15 PM. Will have to see when we get close obviously
If I'm seriously into photography, I'd rather get the Sony RX-100 VII digital camera.
Perhaps, but it's difficult to imagine 15x zoom in such a tiny lens providing decent quality shots.
Yeah I have read the difficulties of this, but for a bit there were tons of rumors this would appear in 17 Pro line but they are rumors after all well maybe after 2 years that 48 mp will perhaps justify me upgrading from my trusty 15 PM that I really like. I really need to work my iPhone like i do iPads and MacBooks and upgrade every 3-5 years ;-)
I don't think apple has a single 3.2 2x2 usb device. They either do regular or Thunderbolt. Even the MBP doesn't support 3.2 2x2
Thunderbolt is twice as fast too.
I truly hate the 14 I hope the 16 max is better
Gonna come back here next year to see comments about how the 16PM buyers will want the 17PM. 16PM is not worth it if you have a 15PM or 14PM. If you have a 13PM, you are in a tough spot. Obviously, this is just my opinion.
What’s the point of 24MP front camera and 48MP telephoto camera? Do people print out the photos they take with a phone, let alone in large formats? This craziness today, they call it “improvement” to tell you the new device is better, whereas in reality it’s the other way round. Bigger MP cameras require more storage, which in turn will make you buy a more expensive phone that you don’t need. But you gain the possibility to make prints as large as the wall in your livingroom.
All I wish is an iPhone 17 Pro Mini with three-48 mpx camera units, to be made possible by high power-density solid state battery tech. (Mini = Normal)
Image Credit: Apple Tech - Instagram
Last edited:
Phones are coming closer to dedicated cameras with every iteration. It should be regarded as a device in your pocket replacing 3 kg camera bag plus a tripod! It won't totally replace a DSLR or MILC but it's perfect for travel photography. As for photography, I don't mean some junk snaps, but of professional quality processed from raw images.
If you don't like these improvements, you may always purchase a less expensive non-pro model with all functionality.
That would be an interesting phone… it would attract a fair share of people.
I admit I would want to check it out…
Laws of physics cannot be changed. A dedicated camera with DX or FX sensor will always produce better images than any phone in terms of dynamic range, ISO sensitivity, optics. Lets not forget that the bokeh the phones produce is digital (in other word, fake). I admit, however, that phones nowadays produce good enough pictures. My rant was about the needless number of megapixels which only matters if you print the pictures out. If you don’t (which is true for most of the people), then the pictures will just eat out more space of the already expensive memory.
Is the phone perfect for trafel photography? No, it’s barely good enough. Then again, the best camera is the one you have on you.
P.S. I belong to the camp of people who would rather carry a dedicated camera. Even the ones with 1” sensor are better than a phone. Personally, I’m contemplating a Nikon DX Z30 or 50. More inclined towards the 30 because it’s physically smaller.
I have an 11pro and 15pro and the photos on the 15pro are much better than my 11pro. With that said, photos from either are good enough for my vacation pictures that no one wants to look at.
The real magic is in the iOS (iOS 18 for example). There are so many more upgrades from one iOS to the next it's incredible.
I do wish Apple would someday say: "The new iPhone, now you can make reliable phone calls". On some level, that doesn't always seem to be a priority to Apple, it is a Phone for pete's sake.
The real magic is in the iOS (iOS 18 for example). There are so many more upgrades from one iOS to the next it's incredible.
I do wish Apple would someday say: "The new iPhone, now you can make reliable phone calls". On some level, that doesn't always seem to be a priority to Apple, it is a Phone for pete's sake.
I wish there would be more focus on sensor of the camera than megapixels that by now don't really matter.
As someone coming from a very old android 16pm is enough of an upgrade for me.
But definitely gotta hold out for the iphone 20, anyone buying the 16-19 is getting scammed frankly.
As someone coming from a very old android 16pm is enough of an upgrade for me.
But definitely gotta hold out for the iphone 20, anyone buying the 16-19 is getting scammed frankly.
bought 16pro max because why not have 13 pro today , only reason to wait for next iphone if you feel you dont need it then dont buy its very simple.
As someone who regularly carries around a camera… or multiple cameras.. and lenses.. and flashes.. and filters… and film, lots of film…
Almost all this holds true. But one point in favor of the iPhone is the dynamic range.
Sure, I can capture way more dynamic range in a frame of Portra 160. WAY more. Maybe it’s my workflow, but none of it ever seems to get translated to the final image, where it really counts, and nothing on iPhone seems to be able to support it when I load up my TIFF scans.
Whereas I take a photo on my iPhone, and what it already produces out of the box has a greater dynamic range than what I’ve been used to seeing from smartphone cameras - and the phone knows how to display it. The apps know how to process it. I post the photo online, my friend loads it up on their phone, and everything is retained. You can even see the HDR kicking in on the screen to display it. The brights are bright and bursting out of the display. In the most Apple fashion “it just works”
For the first time, there were some shots I took while traveling this year where I chose the iPhone shot over what actually came out of my Leica or Nikon. Incredible.