Apple's iPhone 17 Slim is a wrongheaded approach that ignores what people really want

AppleInsider

Rumors continue to swirl that Apple will launch a new iPhone 17 Slim in 2025. Why does Apple think anyone wants it?

A render of what the iPhone 17 Slim could look like

In a world where people want their devices to last for longer than ever on a single charge, shouldn't tech companies like Apple focus on bigger, better batteries rather than slimming phones down instead?

The rumors surrounding the iPhone 17 Slim have been around for a little while at this point but the consensus has settled on a couple of notable things. The most is obviously where the name comes from -- the fact the iPhone 17 Slim will be thinner than other models on sale alongside it.

Surely by making the iPhone thinner Apple must also reduce the internal volume that can be filled with battery. Just look at the iPhone 13 mini compared with the iPhone 13 -- Apple's own specs had the former running out of battery a couple of hours sooner than the latter.

And then there are thermal considerations. Apple's iPhone 15 Pro was infamous for getting too warm when pushed -- how will a similar chip perform in something even thinner?

Another aspect is that the iPhone 17 Slim is expected to feature a smaller display than the high-end models, something that might fly in the case of a third rumor that this will be the most expensive option in the 2025 lineup. Will people really pay more for a thinner phone with a smaller display?

For those who want the biggest and the best, the iPhone 17 Pro Max would still have a bigger display and a faster chip, but it would presumably be slightly thicker. That begs the question of just who the iPhone 17 Slim will be for. Notably, the iPhone 17 Thin would replace the Plus iPhone which itself replaced the Mini, two devices that also struggled to find a market of their own.

I realize I'm ringing a premature death knell for the iPhone 17 Slim here, but stay with me here. If people don't want a smaller iPhone and they don't seem to have wanted to pay for a big screen but slower chip, what do they want?

I'd posit that all we really need to do to answer that question is look at what people perpetually complain about with every new iPhone release. In fact, they complain about it whenever any new phone is released regardless of the badge on the back. They complain about battery life.

Could the iPhone 17 Slim offer notably worse battery life based on the reasons I mentioned earlier? Is that a trade-off people are willing to make?

Realistically, nobody looks at an iPhone 16 and thinks that it should be thinner. They wish that it would run for longer on a single charge, no matter how fast USB-C or Qi2 chargers can power them back up again. But making thinner iPhones is the enemy of battery life, the two things just don't get along.

Apple Park and its many offices around the globe are full of undoubtedly talented designers and engineers. Battery life is surely a concern for many of them, and I've no doubt it's high up on the list of requirements for each new device -- an even thinner iPhone, surely not so much.

So I'm here to say this. Apple, please, stop trying to make everything thinner than thin and consider even making them a fraction of a centimeter thicker. Add a couple of extra hours to how long my iPhone can run before I reach for the charger and I'll consider the upgrade worthwhile.

But slimming a phone that I already drop more than I should and can barely feel in my pocket? I think I'll probably just skip that one, thanks. Charging more for it just because there's less of it is just an insult to injury.

As for Samsung, we know it has a history of taking Apple's ideas and running with them if we're being kind, and copying them if we aren't. But I recommend that it sits this one out. I'm sure Samsung fans would, too.



Read on AppleInsider

antiprotest

Quite surprised by this one-sided strong take. I've consistently seen complaints that iPhones are too thick and heavy, especially since the 14 Pro, and requests for smaller and lighter phones, like the equivalent of a iPad mini or a better SE. And many would sacrifice a bit of battery life for it. Definitely not the majority, but there is a market for it. Such a one-sided take seems out of touch especially from a professional tech writer. 

RayDaManX

“ If people don't want a smaller iPhone and they don't seem to have wanted to pay for a big screen but slower chip, what do they want?”

I want a folding iPhone w/o a camera bump. Not a thinner phone with a huge bump.  Apple has made it clear their focus is on thinning things out.  Who needed a thinner ipad? 

twolf2919

Must be a slow news day when a lengthy article complains about Apple's "wrong-headedness" on the scantiest of rumors regarding the iPhone 17 "Slim".  First of all, we don't know how much slimmer - some rumors, since that's what you're basing your entire article on - state that it'll barely be a millimeter thinner.  We also don't know what "smaller display" means - it could be that it's merely smaller than the Max - but still larger than the Pro.  Lastly, the fact that there are always people complaining about battery life doesn't mean much because it's just a vocal minority on tech forums that always squeals..  I bet the vast majority of iPhone users are perfectly fine with battery life.  I have the 16 Max and just came back from a flight to Asia and another one to Spain.  Never had a problem with battery life.  But, then, like most folks, I just watch movies and browse the web while on the planes.  But still - lasted fine.

To answer your question: I'd love a 17 Slim if it slotted between the Pro and the Max.

melgross

Of course some people will want this. The question is how many? Anyone here remember when “people wanted” a cheaper iPhone and so app,EU came out with the 5c? They so,d millions, but not enough for Apple to continue making a polycarbonate back phone. So, if this phone is going to g to be real, it will be interesting to see the take up. There must be some reason Apple thinks this will sell well enough, assuming that’s really what they’re thinking.

retrogusto

Different people want different things. To adapt and repurpose Steve Jobs’ “cars vs. trucks” analogy, an electric Hummer might be the most capable car you can buy, from a certain perspective, but if you’re single and you live in the city you’d be better served by any number of other vehicles, even if they couldn’t otherwise compete on hauling capacity, passenger capacity, off-road ability, cup holders or even acceleration. I’ve been using iPhones for about 16 years, and never once had a real problem with battery life, although I did run low on battery a handful of times over the years when I forgot to charge—and this is coming from someone who used the 6.9mm iPhone 6 happily for quite a while. Like most people who can afford an iPhone, I never go more than a day without access to a power outlet. Over time, people’s priorities can change as certain features lose their novelty, and sometimes people don’t know what they want until they see it. I would love a thinner, lighter phone, and those are attributes that I would enjoy whenever I was using, holding it or just carrying it around. I’d get a new phone more often if it weren’t always a trade-off of better features for a bigger, heavier device. I’m sure Apple is always researching ways to make more powerful batteries and more efficient processors, and it’s not unreasonable to think that they might one day be able to make something as sleek as the iPhone 6 but with updated specs. They may have come to the conclusion that the current models are good enough in most respects, so improving the form factor would be an area where they can continue to innovate and differentiate themselves. 

bsimpsen

"And then there are thermal considerations. Apple's iPhone 15 Pro was infamous for getting too warm when pushed -- how will a similar chip perform in something even thinner?'

It's time for a physics lesson. My iPhone 15 pro measures 77mm wide X 160mm tall X 8.3mm thick. The sides of the phone present a surface area of (77*2+160*2)*8.2=3,886.8 mm2. The front and back faces present a surface area of 77*160*2=24,640mm2, or about 86% of the phone's total surface area. To a first approximation, iPhone internal heat will dissipate in proportion to the total surface area, which will shrink far more slowly with decreasing thickness than with decreasing display area. Peak internal temperature rise above ambient, to a first approximation depends on distance from the heat sources to the ambient. The shortest path will generally be through the front and back faces. The distance to those faces will decrease in proportion to the reduction in iPhone thickness, placing the heat generating internals closer to the ambient heat sink. At the same time, the available battery energy will as you've noted, be reduced by thinning the phone.

Reducing the thickness of an iPhone will very likely result in reduced heating.

DAalseth

I agree completely. The idea of a thinner phone with a less capable camera than even the base model, shorter battery life, and for more money seems like a non-starter to me. It makes no sense. You are right, while some people might want a thinner phone, most at this point really don’t give a damn. Most of us put our phones in a case so it’s moot. Battery life is the big complaint with cost coming in second. So a model with a shorter battery life for more money would be a weird response from Apple. 

tht

Well, I think what we should want is for Apple to serve more niches, not subject themselves to Highlanderism. Ie, a model with a unit sales run of 2 to 3 million per year should be enough to support the continuing development of that model.

This rumored 6.6 inch "iPhone Air" has me excited. So, I'm the customer for it. I don't need fancy cameras, just a nice competent one. I'd prefer it if there was no back camera bump at all. I'm not on my phone for 10 hours straight, so having 10 to 12 hours of screen-on time is perfectly fine with me. Heck, my current iPhone 12 battery is at the "Service" stage now at 77% capacity, and I'm barely thinking about getting its battery replaced. I should tho.

And, I'm disappointed that the rumors are saying 6 mm thick. Hoping for 5 mm thick. They did it for the iPP13, so it should be achievable for the iPhone. Just make that thing a nice thin monolithic slab!

iPhone models I think they should have:

• 5.6" model at 9 mm thickness. The "mini" but just a little bit larger at 5.6", 1.5 millimeter thicker for 20% more battery capacity, and a flush back cam
• 6.1" model at 7 mm thickness. The mainstream model. The usuals.
• 6.7" model at 7 mm thickness. The Pro model. The usuals.
• 6.7" model at 5 mm thickness. This is essentially a fashion model. It would be about 40% thinner than the iPP models and about 50% lighter than the iPPM.
• 7.0" model at 10 mm thickness. The "ultra" model. Mx level SoC. 2x the battery capacity of the regular iPPM. Go crazy with the cameras, speakers.

I suppose they can have a folding model, but I'm not sure when flexible and glass like OLED display covers will come.

prof

I for one do want a smaller phone but certainly not the iPhone 17 Slim but rather the iPhone 17 Mini! I still think it was the perfect form factor but unfortunately I have to take what's available. And yes: I also do want better battery life, but I disagree very much about how to achieve it. My iPhone 7 used to last a week to 10 days, my iPhone 13 and 15 only 3 to 4 days under the same circumstances despite having a better and larger battery and way more power efficient processors. Why's that? Simple, because the OS is doing a lot more shit in the background I absolutely do not care about and there's no way to effectively turn this off; low power mode is a true joke.

Fun fact: the iPhone SE 2020 was truly terrible in that regard, small battery AND a less efficient processor AND iOS doing it's background madness are a horrific combination.

darbus69

totally disagree

charging is so fast now that battery is not as important

apple needs to work on fold technology, with your watch for quick glances nothing would be more pleasant than a lees bulky presence in your pocket (or are you just happy to see me😏)

bobolicious

I tried a 16 recently and returned it in favour of my SE with its compact size and rounded edge.

I used ultra slim cases on both and find I barely notice the SE in my pocket vs the 16 with its hard edges, size, weight and camera bulge...

Until Apple improves the sharpness of the UWA lens there seems little benefit at least to me...

A larger SE screen might add value however I also like touch ID. 

Apparently some Samsung Galaxy have touch ID 'in screen'...

JohnDenver101

I worry more about what this means for the 17 Pro. What incentive does it give Apple to make significant upgrades to the iPhone 17 Pro for fears it will cannibalize sales of the 17 Slim? I still fail to understand where a product like this will fit into the lineup. 

6ryph3n

I feel like both the Slim and the Fold are niche gimmicks. Unless they’re actually the same phone so that when it’s folded it’s still the same thickness as a normal iPhone. That could be a good solution for fitting a large screen in your pocket. Otherwise I don’t see that either really gives any major benefit. 

Calvinator

When you run out of ideas, you make up a solution for a non-problem and pass it off as the reason to upgrade way more often than necessary.

Tim Cook's obsession with thinness and pretty new colors for existing products is embarrassing. He should, or somebody at Apple should, focus on standardizing the interfaces within (and across) Apple's product line. The changes in settings, options, and processes from one product version (and OS) to the next would be laughable if they weren't so frustrating.

Steve Jobs would never, and I mean never, allow Apple's user experience to get so out of control.

RG2154

“Apple's iPhone 17 Slim is a wrongheaded approach that ignores what I really want”

Fixed your headline. 

avon b7

Fat or slim. Longer battery life will appear at some point but, as Apple simply drip feeds features to users, they will have to wait.

It's batteries and charging have long been far below best in class but as actual usage times have increased it's been less of a problem. 

If you can get through a day of moderate use without recharging, most users will be happy. 

That doesn't change the fact that Apple really should be pushing for faster charging and higher density batteries in line with current flagships (or even with those from a few years ago). 

13485

Calvinator said:

When you run out of ideas, you make up a solution for a non-problem and pass it off as the reason to upgrade way more often than necessary.

Tim Cook's obsession with thinness and pretty new colors for existing products is embarrassing. He should, or somebody at Apple should, focus on standardizing the interfaces within (and across) Apple's product line. The changes in settings, options, and processes from one product version (and OS) to the next would be laughable if they weren't so frustrating.

Steve Jobs would never, and I mean never, allow Apple's user experience to get so out of control.

Tim Cook is the CEO. He doesn't make those kind of decisions. That's what department heads and VPs are for. Steve Jobs is dead, and he was the guy that promoted iPod socks. He was not infallible.

tht said:

Well, I think what we should want is for Apple to serve more niches, not subject themselves to Highlanderism. Ie, a model with a unit sales run of 2 to 3 million per year should be enough to support the continuing development of that model.
...

Highlanderism var.: There can be only one.

bulk001

Agreed! Feels a little weird 😁

dexy

Battery life blah blah blah, bigger is better blah blah.  Spoken like a man.  Let me say this this without indemnifying myself - some women want something that fits easily in a pocket or in hand and don't necessarily think bigger is better.  Men aren't the only market segment buying iPhones.

drpaul

Hmmm. Maybe I am the expected audience. I got an M4 13” iPad Pro more for the screen and power than anything else. The fact that it is impossibly thin and light with amazing battery life is a massive bonus and has become a very attractive feature. Now if the iPhone 17 Thin is a scaled down version of that, I’d be all over it. If only they could flatten the camera bump. 

You never know, they might make the iPhone Pro Max along the same lines as the iPad Pro. i.e. the 17 Pro Max is the Thin.