charlesn

ne1 said:

For the love of God, please stop changing the thickness and dimensions of the phone every year. Does Apple no longer have any hardware forethought or long range planning? Are these year-to-year teams not coordinating with each other? Find a thickness and case dimensions that will work for several years and stick to it! 

This isn't viable. Have you seen a teardown of an iPhone? There is zero space wasted. Dimensions have to be tightly based around the phone's capabilities and the size of components needed to deliver those capabilities at that time. Component sizes change, usually getting smaller over time, while the dimensions of new components may not be locked a few years in advance when they're still being tested. From what we can see in this video, the 17 Pro Max capabilities require a case that's .5mm thicker--but it wouldn't have made sense to make 16 Pro Max thicker for no reason, leaving that space empty until the 17 Pro Max came along. And what of the larger screens introduced with the 16 models? Should the 15 models have adopted thick bezels on the top and bottom of its smaller screen so it could maintain size parity with the upcoming 16? You could go pretty far down the rabbit hole with other examples. 

I'm a fan. Clean, simple, Ends the mishmosh of different numbers for MacOS, WatchOS and iOS/iPadOS. And while we're simplifying:

Stop naming each year's new MacOS. A number is enough. I can never remember which CA locale is this year's MacOS. 

Do we really need a number for iPhones? On Apple's website, a click on the iPhone tab takes you to a list of numbered phones. But click on the Mac tab, and it's just model names, no numbers for desktops and laptops. Click on the iPad tab and you see the same thing: model names, no numbers. My 6th Gen iPad Mini is simply engraved on the back as "IPad Mini." So why can't we just have iPhone E, iPhone, iPhone Air, iPhone Pro and iPhone Pro Max? Why do September's phones need to be additionally labeled "17" when they could simply be the 2026 editions of these models? The lack of numbering for so many other essential Apple devices pretty much proves that you don't need numbering. 

thedba said:

AirPods max haven't changed since their introduction back in December 2020, other than a port change in September 2024.

The Sonys OTOH have been constantly updated XM4 (2020), XM5 (2022) XM6 (2025) making them more technologically advanced. 

That being said I still prefer the Max. I've been on my original pair since the end of 2021. 

Probably without realizing it, you've made an important point here: in the world of audio, technological "advancement" does not necessarily translate into significant audible improvements. Despite Sony "updating" their premium headphones and earbuds about every two years, you still prefer your 4.5 year old AirPods Max. I own the XM4 and the APM, and while I thought upgrading to the XM5, my audition of them confirmed what I read in a lot of reviews: no compelling audible advantage over the XM4, and I have a huge preference for the more streamlined look of the XM4 over the bulbous XM5. (If you think the XM5s sound much better than the 4s, I'm not going to tell you that they're wrong--you have to be a fool to try and tell someone what their ears are hearing.) Anyway... now the reviews on the XM6 seem pretty mixed as well for the same reason--yes, they're a very fine set of headphones but not compellingly better than the XM5. It's important to keep in mind that consumer tech companies need to keep selling us stuff, and there's no more powerful sales word in the English language than "new."

What's my definition of compelling audible advancement? That's an easy one. AirPods Pro 2 vs AirPods Pro 1. I still have both and the difference in sound quality and ANC is night and day. 

anonymouse said:

ssfe11 said:

... Look Sure we all agree that Trump is not the brightest bulb however people like him deep down know this but they are astute at identifying those with intelligence and then surround themselves with them. ...

You're joking right? Because Trump has surrounded himself with the dumbest, craziest bunch of people of any administration in my lifetime.

Dumbest, craziest bunch? Not a chance and don't get confused here. They are, in fact, the perfect choices for each department they lead if your goal is to destroy that department and administrative government overall. It's all in the Project 2025 manual. 

endorphinity said:

AppleInsider said:

iPhone 16e long-term review: Two missing features

I do realize the position I'm in here, coming from an iPhone 16 Pro. That's not an upgrade path users follow.

If you are upgrading to an iPhone 16e from an iPhone 11 or from an Android device, you aren't going to miss these features. Because you never had them in the first place.

Perhaps that's the real angle Apple is counting on.

And this confession makes all the preceding content of this section absolutely irrelevant.

9 posts in 21 years and you drop by to offer this bit of snarky bs for no reason? Please don't hurry back anytime soon. 

I'm also a 16 Pro owner whose wife was issued a black 16e by her company and I would second nearly all of Mike's positive commentary about this phone. It wasn't until I got to see, hold and use a 16e for myself that I could appreciate how well Apple succeeded here. And it finally delivers on being a true black, all-black phone that iPhone fans have been clamoring for since the iPhone 7--I think the black 16e is best looking iPhone out there. Is it a phone for me? It would be were it not for the single lens camera--a multiple lens camera system is essential for me. But we all have our non-negotiables in a phone. 

The only critique of Mike's with which I would somewhat disagree is the lack of MagSafe. The vast majority of people put their iPhone in a case anyway, and a MagSafe case will solve most of this problem. No, you don't get 25W charging, but even Apple's latest MagSafe phones only get that from Apple's own MagSafe puck, a $39 option, plus you'll need a 30W charger. Otherwise, even the latest MagSafe phones are limited to Qi2 speeds of about 15W. Yes, the 16e will only do 7.5 watts with a MagSafe case, but that's perfectly fine for overnight charging, which people are going to do anyway, It's only if you need a big boost of power quickly that you'll want to plug in via USB-C. 

It's also no secret that a major goal of the 16e is to get people using older iPhones to finally upgrade and to attract new switchers from Android--goals at which the iPhone SE had failed. It's increasingly difficult to persuade people to upgrade when they feel their "old" phone does everything they need it to do. By offering a pretty close equivalent of the latest iPhone 16 at a price reduction of $200, Apple may have found the right feature/price point formula to be persuasive (or not), and perhaps we'll hear some comments about that when Apple next reports earnings in July. They will have a full quarter of sales data by that time, and If Apple chooses not to comment at all about the 16e, then saying nothing would be saying a lot.