tht

The complaint was filed on February 26, 2025, in San Jose, California federal court by representatives of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP. The plaintiffs from California, Florida, and Washington, DC, specifically claim that Apple is using carbon offsetting rather than genuine carbon reductions.

More, Apple's carbon offsetting projects concern land in Kenya and China, that have become protected from deforestation. The claimants say these two tree protection projects have nothing to do with Apple.

"In both cases, the carbon reductions would have occurred regardless of Apple's involvement or the projects' existence," they said in their filing. "Because Apple's carbon neutrality claims are predicated on the efficacy and legitimacy of these projects, Apple's carbon neutrality claims are false and misleading."

Carbon offsetting is genuine carbon reductions. These forests will be burned down. It's really a race between electrification, renewables penetration and how fast all these forests will be burned down.

Claimants are hypothesizing that these forest protection projects would have occurred without money coming from carbon credits. They would have to prove this counterfactual and prove that Apple knew their money didn't contribute to the forest protection projects. Sounds tough.

I'm not a fan of reforestation, and much prefer direct, deterministic methods for putting CO2 back into the ground. I can see groups trying to end the practice of carbon credits representing avoided CO2 releases, so I can sympathize with them here. But this sounds like ambulance chasing to me.

randominternetperson said:

I really don’t understand why the internet talking heads are being so obtuse about this. So many people making their ignorance the headline: “I don’t know who this is for” or complaining that it’s just a watered down iPhone 16. The answer is so simple and obvious that the average consumer will get it immediately. The answer: $200 that stays in your bank account (or doesn’t add to your credit card balance). 

I’ve been an Apple consumer since the 80s and I’ve lost track of how many iPhones (and iPod, iPods, etc) I’ve purchased for myself and family over the years. This is the first “economy” model iPhone I am actually considering. A current generation device, with better battery life (probably the most important “feature” of a phone imo) that omits two features I never use and don’t care about at a 25% discount? Yes please and thank you. 

It’s the price, silly. 

I think it is part and parcel of their training as gadget or product reviewers. It's a common question for a lot of reviews I've read over the years. It's so common that it's almost guaranteed that LLM chatbot reviews will have the same question in their responses. It's basically fine to ask the question as a product reviewer. They are trying to get in the minds of the product marketers of the company. Like you say though, it is a stupid mistake to put the question in writing and to answer it with an "I don't know".

As soon as I see the question in a review, I stop reading. It's not even a good rhetorical device for writing the review.

The iP16e is a great phone for the vast majority of users. Even heavy users on their phone all day. It will last 6, 7, 8 years, especially if the battery is replaced in year 4 or so. A starting price of $600 is fine for what you get. As is normal, if you want more, you have to pay more. If you want to pay less, that's an interesting question.

kkqd1337 said:

I would be surprised if market research suggests there is a demand for folding phones. It makes sense for Apple to do some R&D into folding screens. But I don't see a market for them in phones for the foreseeable future. For TVs? HomePods? Maybe.

There is demand as Android OEMs are on their 3rd, 4th, and 5th generations. They are niche part of the market, but it's a high priced part of the market. People are paying $1500+ for these devices. I don't think Apple wants to have no models in this market. They will want a model for this market, and have just been waiting for the technologyto  enable them to make the folding device they want.

Apple's model will likely cost $2000 to $3000 though. It will have 2 displays: a typical 6" OLED for the front, and an 8" flexible OLED for the interior. Probably closer to $3000 than $2000. Take the price of the iPhone Pro 6.3", add the cost of the 8" flexible OLED, a hinge, 512 GB storage (?) and new assembly processes, other new components, and such. Sounds over $2000 pricey.

Nice writeup, AI. My compliments!

The CAD image by Majin Bu is of a case with an iPhone 17 model inside, no? Too bad as I was excited to see something I have wanted for a very long time: side buttons that are recessed (a la the old home button). I'd actually want the power/standby button moved back to the upper right, more separation of the volume up, volume down buttons, and different shape and textures for the buttons. No idea about the usefulness of the camera control button as I have an iP12.

My pet theory on the new camera arrangement is that the square camera bumps of recent models are getting too big and will start encroaching on things like MagSafe, battery design, etc. So, moving them to the top is the least worst option so as to accommodate other stuff in the phone. Don't like the design fashion of a camera lens bump on top of a camera cluster bump. My wish remains for a phone that is flush in the back. The top side of an iPhone 17 Pro will have: main back camera, ultra-wide back camera, a telephoto back camera, a front camera, an infrared camera, a dot projector, infrared light, an LED flash, and a speaker. Yowsers.

Regarding the vapor chamber, people have to remember energy is conserved. If the SoC is using 8 Watts of power, all the heat it generates has to come out of the phone. The only thing the vapor chamber is doing better than thermal paste and a solid metal interface plate to the SoC is that is able to move more heat off the SoC per square area. That heat still has to get out of the phone. Apple needing to use a vapor chamber is sign that chip is getting smaller or hotter relative to old SoCs. You may get more performance, but your phone will still be hot. That's the point. Move heat from the SoC to the surface of the phone as efficiently as possible, spread the heat across the surface of the phone as wide as possible.

TBD on whether I get a model from this years lineup. My iP12 is still holding up. Needs a nee battery, but I'm managing.

charlesn said:

tht said:

I think we are at the point now, where if this 2025 iPhone has an A18 with 8 GB RAM, ~6” OLED, 128 GB storage, and a single 48MP back camera, that basically 90% of iPhone buyers should just get this model. 

Smartphones are so mature now, so good, that the base models from nearly every OEM is good enough for the 90%. The remaining 10% are your niches of wanting more: bigger display, more cameras, more features. 

This iPhone SE model can last you 6 to 7 years. 

The only big thing left is a more robust phone with glass that doesn’t crack and metal bands that don’t dent. This only makes the phone last longer.

We are getting pretty close to have solar glass on both the front and the back, which can trickle charge the battery, adding even more runtime, and further extending the life of the phone. 

Like 10 years is possible. 8 GB RAM is dicey for that, but with 12 GB to 16 GB RAM phone, it can go 10 years and be able to run updated software 10 years from now. 

I don't disagree about the new SE potentially being all the phone that 90% of buyers really need. Fortunately for Apple, lol, huge swaths of people continue to pay premium prices for what they really want. It's not for nothing that the Pro models continue to be best sellers every year. Your estimates of how long iPhones could last got me wondering: what IS the average lifespan for an iPhone? I did some quick research online, but most sources focused on how long the initial owner keeps the phone, but that's a different thing. Phones that are sold or traded in go on to a second life. 

I think the average lifespan of an iPhone is 6 years now. There’s a lot of 2nd and 3rd owners.