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.
The Regular iPhone 17 is Reportedly Proving Popular — Here's Why
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’ve heard many say that some people are just more sensitive to this than others. I don’t believe this is a physical thing, it’s just a matter of whether it bothers you. When I pick up a device without it, I notice it instantly.
3rd reason: variable 1-120hz refresh = the display can sync perfectly to 24, 25, 30, 60 and 120 fps. fixed 60hz can't play 24/25/48 fps properly.
That and reduction to 1 fps when locked/always on display active saves power as per above.
As far as air battery life goes... i think it will be fine, despite a loud vocal minority who will complain about it when they were never in the market for it anyway.
There's the option for a battery back which will give it more than enough, and a lot of people now put their phone on charge in their car when using carplay during their commute, either wireless charging or wired.
If the phone can get through 12 hours with no charge, and do something like 20-80 percent in 15-30 minutes, it is probably plenty good enough - if you need more for a couple of days without power then the battery back exists for those occasional times you need it - or a usb battery charger for say, camping away from power or whatever. I did all those things with my 13 mini and only towards the end of its life did i start running low on battery life (when health was in the mid 80s).
And if not... buy the non-air models.
I bought the 16 last year and paid the extra $100 for 256gb. For the first time ever, I’m considering upgrading after a year. The extra size is making me hesitant, the 16 is as big as any phone needs to be, IMO.
I’m older and the Pro Max with display zoom makes things way easier to read than the base non-Pro. It basically turns the Pro Max into the Pro in terms of screen real estate but with bigger fonts and screen elements.
Using the Pro or base model gives me more eye strain because everything is smaller. You can increase font sizes but that can throw off the formatting for some sites, and it seems some sites really aren’t designed well to be used that way. IOW, it seems 6” (or 5.8”-ish) is the target minimum size for mobile sites these days.
I have a 13 mini and have been a staunch proponent of phones like that that can be used one-handed by normal-sized hands.
But the reality is that some of my apps have stopped supporting that screen size. I literally have to blindly confirm a warning message when making a money transfer in my banking app, for example. Obviously this is technically the fault of the banking app that presumably ignores 2% of its users or however many are on my screen size, but what am I gonna do? Write a letter to the bank’s CEO?
So I feel ready for the base 17 screen size even if I wish things had developed differently.
But the reality is that some of my apps have stopped supporting that screen size. I literally have to blindly confirm a warning message when making a money transfer in my banking app, for example. Obviously this is technically the fault of the banking app that presumably ignores 2% of its users or however many are on my screen size, but what am I gonna do? Write a letter to the bank’s CEO?
So I feel ready for the base 17 screen size even if I wish things had developed differently.
…and an even better value one year from now at $699 when the iphone18 becomes available!
Wow, we’ve not seen that on either of our iPhone13minis, at least not yet. Perhaps submit a less-than-stellar review to the AppStore for those offending apps? That’s just lazy development.
You mean 18 months! They’re changing the release schedule.
But also: debatable. I think the 18 will:
- change the casing design. The 17 is a rehash of the 16 (which, however, made me confident to pre-order the 17. I wouldn’t pre-order the 17 Pro because who knows what flaws it contains, although Apple hardware even in its first iteration is miraculously reliable these days)
- add a tele camera like Google’s Pixel 10 (although that phone shrunk the main-camera sensor to keep the Pro still attractive – a risk for the base iPhone 18 too)
- go to 12 GB of RAM (near certainty).
But that’s in 18 months, as I said. Right now the 17 is a stonking bargain in the Apple world.
I agree.
It’s a French bank. French banks are impressively hermetic to external competition or even reality.
I sort of think of the Air as a kind of experiment phone and future versions will be much better. The extremely weak speaker is a major issue to me...
I Speaker Phone for 90% of my calls. And listen to podcasts and YouTube with the speaker. If the volume is really weak, that's a deal breaker.
I Speaker Phone for 90% of my calls. And listen to podcasts and YouTube with the speaker. If the volume is really weak, that's a deal breaker.
Piling on with everyone else. I'm trading my iPhone X in for a base 17. For about 5 seconds I considered the 17 Pro, but given that I'm already making a monumental leap in technology there seemed to be no point in paying another $300 basically for a better camera that I'm never likely to approach its limits when taking pics.
Is is definitely a monumental leap in technology. The main camera will be way better in the 17 than in the X. Totally different league.
However, the iPhone X has a telephoto lens, whereas the iPhone 17 does not. If you used the telephoto on the X, then you may miss it on the 17. IMO it's not really about maximizing the camera quality, but having options and the convenience. I don't need most of the pro features of the Pro line but I continue to get them because I want that telephoto.
Well, it's entry level for the mainstream iPhone line. I got the 16e for my kid, but at the time the 17 didn't exist. If I were buying today I'd get the 17 for my kid because they didn't drop the price of the 16e, and the 17 is a big leap over the 16e, much more so than the 16 was at that same price.
I think this also demonstrates the uniqueness of the Chinese tech market. Mainly because people won’t accept that a $150 phone has stereo speakers, which makes the iPhone Air seem “inferior” and missing an important feature.
For me the iPhone 17 is just catching up to some pro features. This phone is for users that have older phones and need to upgrade to the latest technology, but do not need the bleeding edge technology.
Accoding to rumors, Apple is changing the release schedule beginning with iPhone 18 series. iPhone Air / iPhone 18 Pro series / iPhone Fold in Fall 2026. iPhone 18e / iPhone 18 in Spring 2027
But the 17 main camera sensor is more than four times larger than the X’s tele, which was 2×.
So cropping to a virtual 2× on the 17 main camera gives a slightly greater sensor area than the X’s tele.
Plus, the lens is much faster at f/1.6 versus f/2.4 (more than twice as bright).
In other words, the cropped 2× on the 17 will outright beat the X’s tele in every way.
Progress!
However, it's total PITA to have to frame and crop every close up pic you want.
Just tap the 2× button in the Camera app, no? Exactly like you would to use the X’s optical 2× tele.
2 speakers so close together doesnt really count as stereo to say
But it is possible that the air could have a solo speaker that sounds better and louder then the 2 in current phones (not likely but possible)