I’d also prefer focus put on a smaller device, not just thinner. That said, I do like that the Air emphasizes great screen and lighter weight while remaining humble when it comes to cameras. In the past, Apple forced folks who wanted a great screen to go Pro and thus incur the size and weight penalty that comes from a truck of a camera array. The Air now gives people a great screen without forcing camera overkill. With my photo skills I’m sure an Air or 16e would easily suffice. The 16e was dismissed for having just a single camera, but I have little doubt if the Air takes off those same reviewers will spin things so that the single camera is not an issue at all.
Some of the criticism leveled elsewhere against the Air in terms of battery I cannot follow. The battery life of the Air is exactly the same as that of the 16 Pro. And I do not recall the 16 Pro getting dinged for its “all-day” battery life. Perhaps some people are getting carried away with the battery pack offered for the Air.
Personally I wouldn’t get an Air. For me it’s just too big at 8+ mm taller and 3+ mm wider than my 15 which I already cannot operate single handed. And I could not argue that the better screen of the Air over the 16e justifies an extra $300 (256 GB model). The Air certainly offers other improvements over the 16e, but to me the only one that really counts would be the better screen. I don’t need the extra CPU or RAM (on a phone), I don’t need a better selfie camera or Wifi7/BT6/Thread.
The 17 itself seems to be the star of the show. It got a superior screen that was previously exclusive to the Pro. And with the new 256 GB base, most users will be perfectly happy getting pretty much everything you need at $800 and forgetting about $1100+ Pro models that at this point seem to be geared at people who want the best cameras possible, videographers with huge storage demands, or those that just want the most expensive iPhone money can buy.
I guess if my 15 got run over by a truck, I’d likely replace it with either a 16e or a 17, not a 16. The 17 offers a much nicer screen for only $100 more than the 16e at 256 GB. Even if I’d be content with 128 GB (which I am now, but assume I’ll no longer be a year or two from now) I’d probably still not go for the 16, but rather just take a 16e and enjoy saving $100 with no real perceived downside. Of course, what I’d really like is the guts of the 17 in a 12/13 mini form factor and that appears just not to be happening.
I’m still turned off by Apple thinking it’s acceptable in 2025 to sell a $1k premium phone with 480 Mbps USB2 from the year 2000. But I won’t lose sleep over it. I’ve just given up hope they will once again become sufficiently aggressive, unless eventually forced to by declining sales revenue.
What I do find really surprising is that Apple seems to have made a much stronger case this time for their regular non-Pro iPhone and buyers saving money. I’m used to seeing them emphasize upsell and pushing people to their high revenue models. But not feeling that this time. Perhaps they expect the Air will do spectacular and if that happens I’m sure they’ll make a ton of profit off of it considering the $1k price tag. OTOH perhaps they are hedging their bets for a broader economic downturn they anticipate. If people start limiting their spending on these phones, perhaps it makes more sense to offer them a cheaper iPhone that still presents a decent upgrade and at least making some profit from that sale over watching people just hold on to their older iPhone and not buying at all.
I’m very happy Apple made use of the space saved by not having a SIM card slot (on models sold in the US, Canada, Japan, and a few others) for extra battery. Much better than just installing a plastic insert. Great improvement!
Last thought. Any idea why the iPhone Air was labeled the Air and not the 17 Air? Could this be intended as a one-off? Perhaps until release of the foldable?