Comment by microtonal | Hacker News Reader

Comment by microtonal | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Agreed, there is very little happening from generation to generation. Yes, the 17 Pro had a redesign and better thermals, but was very boring otherwise. I don't really see why non-enthusiasts with a 14/15/16 Pro would upgrade.

The 17 was a good step up, but it's hard to cheer for finally getting a 120Hz display, while 300-400 Euro Android phones had them for a few years already.

The iPhone Air was the only really interesting model. But with only one camera and high introduction price, I don't think it was a failure in the market. Samsung had a similar problem with the S25 Edge - fewer cameras, but priced near the Ultra (the Air/Edge are a steal at the current pricing of 880/520 Euro, if you can live with the battery life).

I'd love to see more actually meaningful features. While the Samsung privacy display of the S26 Ultra may not have been perfect the first iteration, it's a innovative feature that is useful to a lot of people. (No, a privacy screen protector is not the same, I want to see most apps with the full flagship display glory.)

Another issue is that the pricing barely gets reduced over the year, while you can already get an S26 for just over 600 Euro.

The only phone I would consider upgrading from my 14 Pro Max is Air. I think phone cameras have hit a limit several years ago and stopped improving, the end results looking really weak even with all this heavy post processing. Air finally doesn’t feel like a brick while having a large enough screen. It’s a breath of fresh air, pun intended.

Take a look at the regular 17 then. Only slightly more expensive, a couple grams heavier but it will not be as much of a downgrade from your 14PM. The 17 is very good in the hands with that screen size. And it has an aluminum housing.

The regular 17 is cheaper than the Air, not more expensive. And it has a better camera and battery and a slightly worse processor (but still better than the 14 there). The next gen Air might be worth getting but the current one is an awkward model that only makes sense if you want it for its thinness. It is $200 more than the plain 17 with only one better feature (processor) other than thinness and $100 cheaper than the Pro which has a lot of improvements (battery, camera, screen).

In most of Europe the Air is cheaper than the 17.

The 17 Pro also has the benefit of the aluminum housing.

Is that the base price from Apple or with discounts to try and move the product?

Price in shops. The MSRP of the Air is higher.

I have an iPhone 14 Pro and honestly can’t tell the difference between mine and the newest gen besides the different colour options.

Releasing a new iPhone every year at this point is stupid, innovation has slowed right down, but Apple aren’t going to turn down the free FOMO money.

> Releasing a new iPhone every year at this point is stupid

That buying a new iPhone is stupid for the typical user doesn’t mean releasing a new on every year is stupid for Apple.

If users upgrade their iPhone every X years, Apple still can sell their new model to 1/X of their customers.

That means they have extra costs of having to design more new models and losing some economies of scale, but it also removes some risks:

- it prevents their phones from looking old compared to the competition

- it means that a slightly flawed design can be iterated upon faster

- at Apple’s sales numbers, I’m not sure economies of scale matter much. Scaling down might even help them. Imagine having to negotiate production of half a billion identical screens over a period of X years. A one-year contract for a hundred million ones means Apple can switch easier between suppliers, putting some pressure on suppliers to offer lower prices.

The iPhone Air not only lacked in the camera department, it also didn’t have video output, no SIM card slot and it had a titanium housing. And for me personally it was just too big.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com