Other Time for an iPhone Neo?

[BSDnostalgia]

I don’t think so. The EU regulation that became effective last year requiring iOS updates for five years from the discontinuation of a model also disincentivizes Apple from releasing multi-year models like the SE.

I'm not arguing, but, I don't really understand how this works. The production cost and margin on the SE must have been quite good. Releasing security patches for five years isn't really a change for Apple? Having a cheaper model available solves a lot of problems at the "family level". Expensive devices are a big negative in some family uses.

 

[BSDnostalgia]

There is definitely a market for a cheaper phone, I bought a $129 Motorola last summer.

No way I am willing to go back to Android again. iPhones can largely be left to themselves. With Android, suddenly I'm back in the IT support business again to manage privacy and security.

Apple chooses to have no entry in that market and that is their call to make. My call was to save $400. The Motorola came with 128 GB storage, a 120 Hz display, and a battery that can go a week. It also required extensive

"extensive ..." Unfortunately, I may have to get into GrapheneOS if Apple is too expensive. The irony of having to buy a Pixel to avoid Android ...

 

[klasma]

Releasing security patches for five years isn't really a change for Apple?

It’s not just security updates. Functional and corrective updates have to be provided as well for five years when they are provided to other models that use the same operating system (iOS).

And the SE/e have the weakest hardware, hence impose the most constraints on performance when new functions are implemented (or things like Liquid Glass).

 

[ayephoner]

There is definitely a market for a cheaper phone, I bought a $129 Motorola last summer. The cheapest phone in the Apple refurb store was $529.

Apple chooses to have no entry in that market and that is their call to make. My call was to save $400. The Motorola came with 128 GB storage, a 120 Hz display, and a battery that can go a week. It also required extensive cleansing of preinstalled crapware, but that only took an hour. I also had to uninstall a bunch of junk from the A16 iPad I bought last fall and would love to uninstall several Mac apps that Apple has made immutable (voice memos, stickies, news, podcasts, reminders, to name five) so it's not just an Android thing.

Cheap motorola phones are what made me switch from android back to iphone. I had bought every Nexus phone for 6 years, then when the pixel line started decided I needed a less expensive option. The motorola G5S was okay, but clearly a step down from my Nexus 6P. The motorola G6 was a nightmare. After ~8 months of use it was VERY slow and needed restarts pretty often. I didn't pay much for it, but after a year of use, it wasn't even worth trading in.

I think Apple can get away with more expensive phones because of how well they work for years and years, and how much they demand on the second hand market. After the G6, I bought a 12 pro max. I saw it as a one time investment into the premium level Apple ecosystem. Sure enough, I got $800 for trading it in 3 years later.

 

[fzJNotIBOxgnbqejSeVCvJScL]

There is definitely a market for a cheaper phone, I bought a $129 Motorola last summer. The cheapest phone in the Apple refurb store was $529.

Apple chooses to have no entry in that market and that is their call to make. My call was to save $400. The Motorola came with 128 GB storage, a 120 Hz display, and a battery that can go a week. It also required extensive cleansing of preinstalled crapware, but that only took an hour. I also had to uninstall a bunch of junk from the A16 iPad I bought last fall and would love to uninstall several Mac apps that Apple has made immutable (voice memos, stickies, news, podcasts, reminders, to name five) so it's not just an Android thing.

Some people would pay a lil' extra to avoid that hassle in bold.

Minimum standard even within the Android realm would be a Samsung phone... unless you consider the preinstalled Samsung (and Microsoft) apps to be crapware too.

iPhone 17e is as cheap as it gets from Apple. If you want cheaper, feel free to get the previous year's model, get a refurbed handset, or wait till a special sale event e.g. Black Friday.

 

[Anaxarxes]

The cheapest iPhone (17e) is the same price as the MacBook Neo! (In the UK: both £599.) If Apple can make a laptop for that price, then surely a basic phone should be a fraction of that?

There's clearly a market for a cheaper iPhone. Loads of people who need a phone that can handle 'apps', given that they have become such currency -- I had to download an app just to park my car today -- but who don't need all the bells and whistles. People who don't spend their life glued to it, but still need something that works.

A laptop and a phone may share a price point, but they’re fundamentally different products in terms of engineering. A phone packs everything into a much smaller space — cellular radios, multiple cameras, sensors, battery, display, and a high-end chip — all tightly integrated and power-efficient. That miniaturization comes at a cost.

Also, the MacBook Neo is likely Apple optimizing around older components, fewer constraints on size, and less complex hardware integration. A phone, on the other hand, is something Apple refreshes more aggressively every year, especially with things like cameras, connectivity, and silicon.

Apple doesn’t optimize for “cheap,” they optimize for segmentation. The 17e isn’t just about cost reduction, it’s about protecting the rest of the lineup while still offering an entry point into the ecosystem.

Could they make a significantly cheaper iPhone? Probably.

Would they though? Only if it doesn’t cannibalize their higher-margin products. And 17e does exactly that.

It's less about what’s technically possible and more about how Apple chooses to position its products.

 

[benwiggy]

Alright..! 🤣

I think we've established, it's a terrible idea.

 

[Fallforward]

The cheapest iPhone (17e) is the same price as the MacBook Neo! (In the UK: both £599.) If Apple can make a laptop for that price, then surely a basic phone should be a fraction of that?

There's clearly a market for a cheaper iPhone. Loads of people who need a phone that can handle 'apps', given that they have become such currency -- I had to download an app just to park my car today -- but who don't need all the bells and whistles. People who don't spend their life glued to it, but still need something that works.

Intersting how much more you pay in the UK. After taking out the 20% VAT/sales tax, it's £499.17 which in dollars is about $670.36. So, your "Apple" price is about $60 to $71 more, depending on local sales tax in the US. (Is the math correct?)

 

[Happy_John]

Interesting how much more you pay in the UK. After taking out the 20% VAT/sales tax, it's £499.17 which in dollars is about $670.36. So, your "Apple" price is about $60 to $71 more, depending on local sales tax in the US. (Is the math correct?)

Pretty much ( although I haven't checked your figures). Usually Apple gear is always significantly cheaper in US dollars than in UK Sterling or Euro, even when you account for VAT / Sales Tax.

If you're looking at current exchange rates though, and comparing Euro . UK Sterling prices to US Dollar prices, by converting the UK or various Eurozone prices to US dollar, the relative value of the currency will skew the numbers.

Basically Apple have always applied their "Apple exchange rate" for other currencies, which has always favored the US dollar. Apple converts their prices into other countries in the way businesses in tourist districts do. :-(

EDIT: This isn't meant to be a political comment, it's simply stating why currently countries other than the US are getting a better deal than usual, while other countries are getting. worse deal. But it makes no difference in the country you're in, unless you're buying in from the US directly, as the price is the price.

But I often notice in Europe that there are many smaller retailers ( mostly online) selling genuine, new boxed Apple gear at discounted prices, which turns out to have been bought from Apple or an Apple reseller in the USA and then shipped over by the retailer to be sold in Europe.

It is pretty obvious by the plug on the charger ( if the item still comes with a charger).

 

[Timpetus]

It's the 16E or a used/refurb 15/15 Pro. My 15 Pro is still a great device, and I see them for $400-500 on Swappa right now. The advantage of tech slowing down is that a device that was cutting edge a few years ago is still extremely competent today.

 

[KnowsHowItWorks]

“Surely.”

Even the E line is way above the nearest competition at the price point.

The ecosystem itself deserves premium.

 

[ignatius345]

But the 17e costs as much as a laptop!!! So still not really a "budget" phone. That's my point.

It also has a bunch of hardware that a laptop doesn’t have. 5G modem, gyroscope, cameras, FaceID components, and probably other things I’m not remembering right now. I know it’s smaller and seems like it would be less expensive but when you think about it it’s got more or less all the internals a laptop has packed into a more compact space.

To get what you’re suggesting, they’d have to cut out a ton of stuff that people would absolutely howl about not getting.

 

[JPack]

The cheapest iPhone (17e) is the same price as the MacBook Neo! (In the UK: both £599.) If Apple can make a laptop for that price, then surely a basic phone should be a fraction of that?

There's clearly a market for a cheaper iPhone. Loads of people who need a phone that can handle 'apps', given that they have become such currency -- I had to download an app just to park my car today -- but who don't need all the bells and whistles. People who don't spend their life glued to it, but still need something that works.

Of course Apple can make a cheap $399 iPhone, but they don't want to.

Why do you think MacBook Air/Pro is always in the refurb store within 90-120 days after launch, but iPhone refurbs take 18-24 months? There is huge competition in the PC space but not so much in smartphones.

iPhone is Apple's crown jewel and Apple maintains maximum price discipline. iPhone is in the center of the Apple universe. It allows them to sell AirPods, Watch, Mac, iPad. iPhone is what allows Apple to build Neo cheaply (A18 Pro).

In short, it's a great idea for consumers but terrible idea for Apple.

 

[HuskerNKS]

Alright..! 🤣

I think we've established, it's a terrible idea.

 

[ElPaso]

In my opinion, the 17e is the budget phone of the lineup. I don't see that changing.

Until the 18e comes along? 😊

 

[zenmacx]

The cheapest iPhone (17e) is the same price as the MacBook Neo! (In the UK: both £599.) If Apple can make a laptop for that price, then surely a basic phone should be a fraction of that?

That would threaten and negatively impact Apples history of huge profit margins across the board.

An iPhone Neo while a good idea for consumers, this companies number one priority is profit. They’ve even convinced the majority of loyalists that it’s the only reason a corporation exists is maximum profits above all.

 

[AppleTO]

E series is it. Won’t see a $400 iPhone again

The "e" line replaced the SE line.

The SE line was discontinued. The E series is more of a replacement for what the XR and 11 represented when the XS and 11 Pro were the more expensive models. Makes sense, users who have stuck to those models are now in need of replacements.

 

[Andeddu]

Apple doesn’t make budget iPhones, simple as that. Even the “e” lineup outperforms the vast majority of Android phones on the market.

Entry level ≠ budget.

 

[Moukee]

Apple doesn’t make budget iPhones, simple as that. Even the “e” lineup outperforms the vast majority of Android phones on the market.

Entry level ≠ budget.

"Outperforms" in what exactly? Geekbench? Sure, the "vast majority" would include $100 devices and the 17e will be better in most aspects than these. But the Pixel 10a for example can be had for 100,-€ less where I live (normalized for 256 GB storage) and you get a brighter 120 Hz display and better camera system.

 

[Andeddu]

"Outperforms" in what exactly? Geekbench? Sure, the "vast majority" would include $100 devices and the 17e will be better in most aspects than these. But the Pixel 10a for example can be had for 100,-€ less where I live (normalized for 256 GB storage) and you get a brighter 120 Hz display and better camera system.

In terms of raw performance, the 17e will pretty much destroy any Pixel along with all but the newest flagship Samsungs.

Like you say, the 17e will concede in other areas such as the display and possibly the camera.

The 17e’s A19, however, is at least twice as powerful as the Pixel 9 Pro’s Tensor G4 so it’s well worth the additional €100.

I wouldn’t go near the Pixel given that its usable lifespan will be significantly lower than the 17e’s.

 

[Return Zero]

They'll never do it, but I actually do think a minimalist iPhone based on the Watch chip would be pretty dang sweet. Could even be plastic. $299, side Touch ID (recessed like camera control and allow swiping to emulate Digital Crown?), parts bin cameras, sized like an iPhone 4/4S without the top/bottom bezels (3:2 form factor). Watch apps only, but allow setup from a Mac or iPad, not just another iPhone. No games, no social media, no health sensors (other than motion).

 

[ayephoner]

The SE line was discontinued. The E series is more of a replacement for what the XR and 11 represented when the XS and 11 Pro were the more expensive models. Makes sense, users who have stuck to those models are now in need of replacements.

I agree with you. I do think the E option has grown too close to the regular option, which has grown too close to the pro options. And the Air is somewhere in the middle.

They could easily condense the E and regular model into a single model and introduce a smaller, cheaper model in place of the E. But they won't...

 

[Moukee]

In terms of raw performance, the 17e will pretty much destroy any Pixel along with all but the newest flagship Samsungs.

Like you say, the 17e will concede in other areas such as the display and possibly the camera.

The 17e’s A19, however, is at least twice as powerful as the Pixel 9 Pro’s Tensor G4 so it’s well worth the additional €100.

I wouldn’t go near the Pixel given that its usable lifespan will be significantly lower than the 17e’s.

As I said, Geekbench. Most users wouldn't be able to tell the two chips apart because for day-to-day tasks or doomscrolling smartphones have had plenty fast chips for many years now.

Google states newer Pixel devices will receive 7 years of software updates. Apple usually supports devices with feature updates for around 7 years, but they never promise anything in advance. So I'd say they're about even in that department.

Saying that the usable lifespan will be significantly lower is pure speculation. I could speculate it'll be longer because it'll run the latest software in 7 years, and after that Android apps usually support older Android versions for quite a while because of the fragmented ecosystem, so whatever OS the 10a ends up on will probably run popular smartphone apps for even longer than the 17e.

In contrast, even devices as recent as the iPhone 15 miss quite a few features from current and likely future software updates, as Apple set the minimum spec for Apple Intelligence to 8 GB of RAM.

But I get the bias considering the forum we're on.

 

[KAF]

Just lower the price of the e series. Idk what they can realistically lower it to but seems like the best course of action if they wanted a true budget phone.

 

[Fallforward]

But I often notice in Europe that there are many smaller retailers ( mostly online) selling genuine, new boxed Apple gear at discounted prices, which turns out to have been bought from Apple or an Apple reseller in the USA and then shipped over by the retailer to be sold in Europe.

It is pretty obvious by the plug on the charger ( if the item still comes with a charger).

This sort of gray market is common and legal in the USA. Costco is well known to to it. Some companies like Omega sued Costco and lost. Sometimes the tricky part is warrantee, but at least in the case of Costco, they have a money back policy.