I believe I've read on another website that the iPhone 16e is "assembled in India" rather than the other iPhone 16 models being "assembled in China." That's all I need to know to make my decision, because I oppose genocide and support democracy, freedom and human rights.
You a correct. All the variations of the iPhone 16 (no-suffix/Plus/Pro/Pro Max/e) are assembled in India. iPhones are, of course, assembled in China as well though. You could get an assembled in India iPhone 16e. Or you could get an assembled in China iPhone 16e.
(Are you in America? I ask because):
With the US tariffs of Chinese goods and whatnot, it would make sense for Apple to send the India assembled iPhone 16e to America. However, I’m not sure if that’s been confirmed yet. I guess we will find out for sure very soon though. I’m also very interested in what country the iPhones 16e will be from.
He is from Canada, not US. He has mentioned this in multiple posts.
Apple's website is specifically pitching the 16e to current owners of the IPhone 11, 12, 12 Mini and SE 2 and 3 phones. Overall, it's a nice upgrade if you're coming from one of those phones.
I disagree. I myself upgraded from a 12 Mini to the regular 16 in January. The 16e is a step backwards in camera features. It doesn’t have Ultra Wide lens and the 12 Mini did. I use the Ultra Wide often, why would I want to downgrade?
The 16e is really for people who want an iPhone, but don’t want to spend $800. Sure for $200 more you can get a better iPhone, but there are plenty of people who don’t want a 16 and would rather get a 14 or 15 just because of the price. They don’t care about the multiple cameras, they don’t care about MagSafe because usually many of them are coming from an iPhone 11 or OLDER. The old SE was tired in terms of features and my friends who work at an Apple Store have said that the SE was usually sold to the elderly who wanted or had to upgrade. So Apple wasn’t moving a lot of these anyway. At least not in the US.
Apple for me at least although I suspect a lot of others has badly positioned the new iPhone 16e if the intention was to provide a solution to encourage holdouts also like me who have stuck with older now obsolete iPhone models.
It is much more expensive than the previous SE 3 model - with some justification but has one key expected feature omitted allegedly to save Apple money and presumably keep the cost increase down which is the omission of MagSafe. I personally do not feel the cost to Apple for including MagSafe support would have been that significant. One aspect of the historical design of the SE models and the iPhone 16e is to reuse existing slightly older components e.g. the camera and screen. Therefore Apple would have been expected to reuse an existing MagSafe design and components.
The result is the 16e is too expensive to be an SE replacement and too limited to justify the significant price increase if the intention is to provide a model to encourage holdouts to upgrade. (MagSafe is not the only omission but by far the most significant.)
I am therefore like I suspect many people going to continue to hold off upgrading and to wait and see what further new models bring to the table. Apple might be intending and hoping this will result in people moving further up the model spectrum and this may indeed happen in a significant number of cases. I am indeed considering the iPhone 17 Air, however I suspect this will be priced much nearer the top of the price scale and I am currently anticipating a price of $999 which is more than double the SE 3. This will probably make it too expensive for me to justify.
(As an aside, I have some concerns that the iPhone 17 Air might also omit MagSafe support if this is deemed necessary by Apple to achieve the thinness of the new design. This might then actually provide a marketing justification as to why MagSafe is being omitted from the 16e.)
I therefore suspect a lot of holdouts may then wait even longer to see what the rumoured iPhone 17e might offer and at what price. Here the fact Apple chose to name this new model the 16e and imply moving to an annual cycle further shoots Apple in the foot if the intention has been to get holdouts to upgrade now.
Note: My own prediction is that if the iPhone 17e is launched next year and if it includes MagSafe support it will not include reverse charging whereas other higher end models might. I would be ok with that. If the iPhone 17e continues to have the best battery life of any model it ironically might be considered to be the most suitable to use reverse charging with.
Comments
It is much more expensive than the previous SE 3 model - with some justification but has one key expected feature omitted allegedly to save Apple money and presumably keep the cost increase down which is the omission of MagSafe. I personally do not feel the cost to Apple for including MagSafe support would have been that significant. One aspect of the historical design of the SE models and the iPhone 16e is to reuse existing slightly older components e.g. the camera and screen. Therefore Apple would have been expected to reuse an existing MagSafe design and components.
The result is the 16e is too expensive to be an SE replacement and too limited to justify the significant price increase if the intention is to provide a model to encourage holdouts to upgrade. (MagSafe is not the only omission but by far the most significant.)
I am therefore like I suspect many people going to continue to hold off upgrading and to wait and see what further new models bring to the table. Apple might be intending and hoping this will result in people moving further up the model spectrum and this may indeed happen in a significant number of cases. I am indeed considering the iPhone 17 Air, however I suspect this will be priced much nearer the top of the price scale and I am currently anticipating a price of $999 which is more than double the SE 3. This will probably make it too expensive for me to justify.
(As an aside, I have some concerns that the iPhone 17 Air might also omit MagSafe support if this is deemed necessary by Apple to achieve the thinness of the new design. This might then actually provide a marketing justification as to why MagSafe is being omitted from the 16e.)
I therefore suspect a lot of holdouts may then wait even longer to see what the rumoured iPhone 17e might offer and at what price. Here the fact Apple chose to name this new model the 16e and imply moving to an annual cycle further shoots Apple in the foot if the intention has been to get holdouts to upgrade now.
Note: My own prediction is that if the iPhone 17e is launched next year and if it includes MagSafe support it will not include reverse charging whereas other higher end models might. I would be ok with that. If the iPhone 17e continues to have the best battery life of any model it ironically might be considered to be the most suitable to use reverse charging with.