Alleged 3D renders of Apple's 2019 iPhone hit the internet

Posted:
in General Discussion
Alleged leaked CAD renders of the new 2019 iPhone have appeared on the internet, showing details that line up with prior rumors about the devices expected to launch in September

Image Credit: Slashleaks
Image Credit: Slashleaks


The renders that appeared on Slashleaks showcase the triple-camera, as well as the controversial alignment of the lenses, and the square-shaped camera bump.

The third camera lens on the next iPhone could potentially be a super-wide lens, that features a broader zoom.

Like the iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max, and iPhone XR, the phones will likely be 5.8 and 6.5-inch OLED iPhones, with a 6.1-inch LCD iPhone rounding out the line. The new iPhones are also rumored to have larger batteries and be roughly 0.1 millimeter thicker than older phones.

The new iPhones will likely look quite similar to the current generation, though rumors suggest that in addition to a frosted glass back, lavender and green may be added to the upcoming color lineup. It is expected that they will also be available in black, white, yellow, and (PRODUCT)RED.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    seanismorrisseanismorris Posts: 1,089member
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
  • Reply 2 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    edited July 1 chemengin1
  • Reply 3 of 40
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 5,152member
    I am surprised and disappointed that Apple isn't offering a 'consumer grade' smaller/normal sized phone.   The Xr is too big and the Xs too expensive.   It leaves a hole.   For myself, I want a smaller phone (particularly when out running or exercising, but I don't want to pay Xs type prices.   (There is the 8 -- but that feels too dated).
    edited July 1 AI_liasschlackrepressthismattinozCarnage
  • Reply 4 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    StrangeDaysrepressthis
  • Reply 5 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    edited July 1 repressthis
  • Reply 6 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    edited July 1 williamlondonStrangeDaysrepressthis
  • Reply 7 of 40
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 978member
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    For the foreseeable future the design of the iPhone will be set in minimalist stone. Changes will be slight, new colors, more focus on camera enhancements since let's face it the camera will soon be the most used feature. Phone calls won't really improve, batteries will squeeze in several minutes more with each update, but the iOS will continue to be Apple's advantage for the near future. I can't wait to see the iPhone model which will have a back resembling a set of spider eyes, cool. 
    tmayStrangeDaysrepressthis
  • Reply 8 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far.

    On the Pixel 4 there's no need to wait on a release as Google already confirmed the array and offered an official case rendering showing it: Square module with five elements made up of two lenses, one flash equidistant from the lenses, and two sensors. One of those sensors almost certainly a spectral one as seen on the previous Pixel while the other has no official comment yet on what purpose it serves. Time of flight perhaps? They will not be adapting Apple's array nor perhaps even using it all for the same express purpose. On its own do I find it an attractive design element? No I do not, and that's despite Google's attempt to hide the extra sensor to make the layout appear balanced but that's simply a personal opinion of mine. No doubt others will claim it's a melding of form and function and looks nice. Let's not get too distracted by the designs others are using other than acknowledging there are different choices within the confines of that square bump.  FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses.

    Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? On a more simple note Chinese handset makers had already decided on this "square block" as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 
    edited July 1 repressthischemengin1
  • Reply 9 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far. 

    FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses. Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? Chinese handset makers had already decided on this as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    williamlondon
  • Reply 10 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far. 

    FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses. Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? Chinese handset makers had already decided on this as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    Oh, ok.

    Is the lens configuration not working efficiently on other square bump camera modules, but Apple's layout is? I hadn't seen articles on that yet so you're a bit ahead of me. 

    Then too it would seem the flash being mounted equidistant from all three lenses, ala iPhoneX where it was placed in the center, would be more aesthetically pleasing than in the corner if not more efficient as well.
    edited July 1 chemengin1
  • Reply 11 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far. 

    FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses. Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? Chinese handset makers had already decided on this as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    Oh, ok.

    Is the lens configuration not working efficiently on other square bump camera modules, but Apple's layout is? I hadn't seen articles on that yet so you're a bit ahead of me. 

    Then too it would seem the flash being mounted equidistant from all three lenses, ala iPhoneX where it was placed in the center, would be more aesthetically pleasing than in the corner if not more efficient as well.
    "Aesthetically pleasing" perhaps, but there is the problem of the physical volume of the camera module to deal with, which is why most arrays are linear or in an "L" configuration; it's just an easier packaging job. In the case of the flash, position isn't critical to performance, so it's easier to package in the corner.

    Of course, things get more complex when you add a folded lens variable telephoto module into a 3 lens array, and there are a few of these out there as well.
    edited July 1 repressthis
  • Reply 12 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far. 

    FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses. Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? Chinese handset makers had already decided on this as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    Oh, ok.

    Is the lens configuration not working efficiently on other square bump camera modules, but Apple's layout is? I hadn't seen articles on that yet so you're a bit ahead of me. 

    Then too it would seem the flash being mounted equidistant from all three lenses, ala iPhoneX where it was placed in the center, would be more aesthetically pleasing than in the corner if not more efficient as well.
    "Aesthetically pleasing" perhaps, but there is the problem of the physical volume of the camera module to deal with...
    There's general agreement that a square module will be used. That's a given. As far as specific placement of the elements within that array I'd personally be surprised if Apple arranges it as shown here. To me it appears cluttered, disorganized, not quite "Apple-y". I believe there's been other renderings floated that show it as being more balanced.
    edited July 1
  • Reply 13 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    That's the opinion I'm offering, not some point I'm trying to make. It looks like less "minimalist' to me. In your opinion it does not. 

    Now with that settled what is your opinion of the shell design: Like it? Love it? Meh? A necessary evil? Is it just as you would have expected from Apple? 
    It's both a "necessary evil" and minimalist, ie, form follows function, but the truth will be that buyers will readily adopt the design language, just like they have the notch, and own it.

    Of course, there will be copycats of the same configuration to ride iPhone's coattails.

    I imagine that you will be as forthright in your design critique of the Google 4's at release, when it too adopts multiple cameras.

    I just wanted to add that I will be in line to buy the triple lens model this fall. 
    Ah, the obligatory "whatabout Google" paradigm. A bit early in the thread for that IMO. Of course you're quite familiar with my opinion of Google's hardware aesthetics which have rarely been very imaginative so far. 

    FWIW there's more than one way to include multiple lenses. Is this the way you would have expected Apple to do so? Chinese handset makers had already decided on this as the best way of incorporating multiple cameras and I thought you mentioned you were not fan of it. 

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    Oh, ok.

    Is the lens configuration not working efficiently on other square bump camera modules, but Apple's layout is? I hadn't seen articles on that yet so you're a bit ahead of me. 

    Then too it would seem the flash being mounted equidistant from all three lenses, ala iPhoneX where it was placed in the center, would be more aesthetically pleasing than in the corner if not more efficient as well.
    "Aesthetically pleasing" perhaps, but there is the problem of the physical volume of the camera module to deal with...
    There's general agreement that a square module will be used. That's a given. As far as specific placement of the elements within that array I'd personally be surprised if Apple arranges it as shown here. To me it appears cluttered, disorganized, not quite "Apple-y". I believe there's been other renderings floated that show it as being more balanced.
    I guess we will know in September.
  • Reply 14 of 40
    Eric_WVGGEric_WVGG Posts: 669member
    > "square-shaped camera bump"

    It's a "squircle"
    GeorgeBMacrepressthisCarnage
  • Reply 15 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,954member
    Eric_WVGG said:
    > "square-shaped camera bump"

    It's a "squircle"
    Yes, yes it is, though I still call them roundrects.
    StrangeDaysrepressthis
  • Reply 16 of 40
    tmay said:

    You are incorrect about my opinion.

    It was that the existing multiple camera arrays, some linear and some in an "L" configuration, were not as efficient as a what Apple appears to be using for this fall's triple lens model, a camera array in an equilateral triangle.

    Hence why I expect that Apple's configuration will become a standard; it will just work better for 3D and AR. Next year, when Apple is likely to add a time of flight sensor, it will likely be right in the center of the array.

    As efficient... what does that mean?  I ask because I've seen several posters on several sites parrot similar sentiments without any valid supporting logic.  Whether the camera module is vertical, horizontal, triangular, or... it's all basically immaterial.  Any combination of images and info from multiple lenses is going to be handled by each company's computational algorithms.  Some algorithms may be better than others, but all of them can "do the math", regardless of lens orientation.   Seriously, computational photography has gotten so good companies are producing pics with single lenses that are just as good as pics from multiple lenses.  More importantly, you can't claim "more efficient" than other implementations because you don't have a baseline to judge "efficient" 

    Your hypothesis with 3D and AR.  Why?  Afaik, there's no science that backs that up.  If there is, I'd love to see it.   There could be any number of reasons for Apple's rumored equilateral layout, but the reason you gave is suspect at best.
    gatorguyavon b7fastasleepbigtds
  • Reply 17 of 40
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,586member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    Agreed, it appears the same minimal design language. The presence of three lenses is function and itself makes no determination whether it is in a minimalism style. No idea what he’s on about, other than the usual dropping of FUD pellets. 
    edited July 1
  • Reply 18 of 40
    netmagenetmage Posts: 277member
    The reason has to do with perspective- a triangular arrangement provides the iPhone with 2D perspective capabilities versus the 1D provided by a horizontal or vertical arrangement. This should provide a better DOF estimation and more successful computational photography dependent on it, such as portrait mode. 
    tmayrepressthis
  • Reply 19 of 40
    schlackschlack Posts: 700member
    I am surprised and disappointed that Apple isn't offering a 'consumer grade' smaller/normal sized phone.   The Xr is too big and the Xs too expensive.   It leaves a hole.   For myself, I want a smaller phone (particularly when out running or exercising, but I don't want to pay Xs type prices.   (There is the 8 -- but that feels too dated).
    Feeling the same. I'm holding on to an iPhone 7. It's nearly 3 years old. I typically upgrade every 1-2 years. But the new phones are not what I want. XR too big. XS too expensive. It's very likely I won't upgrade this cycle for the same reasons...leaving me with a nearly 4 yr old iPhone by this time next year. Disappointed. An iPhone SE sized phone with a full frontal screen (like the XR) would be something I'd easily pay $650 to buy.
    edited July 1 GeorgeBMacrepressthis
  • Reply 20 of 40
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    3D printers are a dime a dozen, means nothing...
    You feel this is far from accurate then? What's your opinion of it if it does closely represent the finished shell? Certainly looks like a break from Apple's past decade minimalist design philosophy. 

    I'm certain you have some opinion beyond the obvious "there are lots of 3D printers". 
    The 3D model renders certainly appear a continued evolution of the iPhone, from single, to dual, to triple lens, and it also appears a minimalist design, given the layout of the various lenses, flash, and secondary sensor.

    Certainly both can be true, so I'm not seeing the variance from Apple's design philosophy, if that is the point you are attempting to make.
    Agreed, it appears the same minimal design language. The presence of three lenses is function and itself makes no determination whether it is in a minimalism style. No idea what he’s on about, other than the usual dropping of FUD pellets. 
    Three lenses plus a sensor and flash can be presented in several ways.

    To me this camera array appears cluttered and disorganized, unlike the clean minimalist design elements I've seen on other Apple products, tho the 2 lens version is much better from a pure design standpoint IMO.   Personally I'm more than a bit surprised you don't see other possibilities for the arrangement, maybe even like me expecting Apple to ship a more aesthetically pleasing and balanced one rather than this render. It looks like someone saw an empty space and needed to put something in it so an area wasn't orphaned. Haven't you seen other renders you like more? 
    bigtds
Sign In or Register to comment.