Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My question is, where are all those people on here that told me aluminium was a cheap inferior material because they believed the marketing spin Apple put on stainless steel and titanium?

Aluminium has always been a superior material for mobile phone framework due to better heat dissipation and weight. Not to mention it is 100% recyclable and much more environmentally friendly to produce and manufacture with.
I remember when you discussed the different grades etc, but personally the brushed natural Titanium frames look better aesthetically. There is no reason why Apple cant make Aluminium look almost the same though.
 
The 3G, 4, 5 and 6 all had a significant portion of time dedicated to discussing the new designs and/or materials… What are you on about?
Yes, but the material “downgrades” as one might call them, even if I don’t necessarily agree, we’re never highlighted.
When the bands on the back of the iPhone 6 went to plastic from the previous iPhone 5S’s glass windows, apple didn’t say a word. They talked about how the new devices were bigger, they talked about how they were curved, they talked about how they were newly designed, but they never once mentioned the fact that the back went from aluminum and glass to aluminum in plastic.
Same with a change from stainless steel to aluminum from the iPhone 4S to 5, they talked about how the iPhone 5 was taller, they called it a “magnificent jewel”, but they absolutely did not mention how the sides technically were “downgraded” from stainless steel to just aluminum.
It’s likely the very same thing will happen this year, Apple will talk about how the iPhone 17 Pro has a “beautiful new aluminum and glass design”, but you will never see them directly compare it to the previous titanium edges.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.