close
close

$1,300 iPhone Slim with a camera – Apple's biggest crime yet: Give me a metal iPhone!

When it comes to phones, I'm always drawn to the latest leaks and rumors, trying to figure out what the next big thing might be. There's been a lot of excitement lately about the rumored iPhone 17 Slim, a super-thin iPhone with an “all-new design” set to launch next year.

According to several sources, the price of the “iPhone Slim” could start at $1,300, making it the most expensive mobile phone Apple has ever built.

But as exciting as a super-thin phone might sound, I can't help but feel that Apple may be missing the point here…

For example, why not take the opportunity to create something truly unique instead of a thinner iPhone?

Furthermore, if the iPhone 17 Slim does indeed cost $1,300, you would expect it to be the best iPhone you can buy. However, according to the leaks, that won't be the case.

So what's the deal with the iPhone Slim?! Does that make sense?

iPhone Slim: Who told Tim Cook people want a $1,300 iPhone with a camera?! This isn't the iPhone SE, Apple…

This is a tricky one, as I (usually) believe that future phones should have a single camera that can do multiple things – like zooming. However, with the iPhone 17 Slim, there are rumors of an iPhone with a single camera that can't do anything special. And that's impossible, as the technology simply isn't there yet – Apple isn't ready to make a single camera with variable aperture and continuous zoom to eliminate the need for additional sensors.

In this context, the iPhone 17 Slim immediately feels like a step backwards compared to the iPhone 17 Pro, which will (of course) have multiple high-end cameras. In fact, this should be the first iPhone to feature a triple 48MP camera system with 10x lossless zoom.

A single camera may have been acceptable a few years ago, but in today's market, multi-camera systems have become the norm, and for good reason. They offer versatility and quality that a single lens simply can't match (at least not yet), which makes me doubt many would pay $1,300 for a phone with only one camera. Even if it's an iPhone.

The idea of ​​spending that much money on a phone that's glaringly lacking something like that is crazy. People expect to get something for their money, and a single camera at this price point feels like a rip-off.

Not to mention, the rumored iPhone Slim will share the stage with the upcoming iPhone SE 4 – another iPhone that is expected to feature a single camera on the back. The “small difference,” of course, is that the iPhone SE 4 is expected to start at $500.

Personally, as someone who regularly uses their phone to take photos (especially when traveling), I just don't want a phone with only one camera. Let alone one that costs $1,300, or around €1,600 in Europe.

And if I wanted a phone with only one camera, why not get an iPhone SE 4, which should cost almost three times less?!

How much thinner can a smartphone be and is it possible that Apple is looking at the wrong problems here?

What I also don't quite understand is Apple's newfound obsession with making things thinner… How much thinner can a smartphone be? And is it even necessary?

We don't know how thin the iPhone Slim will be, but if the iPad Pro's 5.1mm width is anything to go by, the more compact iPhone could well be less than 6mm thin. I wonder, though, if Apple is focusing on the wrong problems here…

While a thinner phone might look sleeker and even be lighter (which is great), it would certainly require some compromises.

For example, battery life can suffer on ultra-thin devices simply because there's less room for a large battery. And I don't know about you, but I'd rather have a slightly thicker phone with great battery life than a super-slim device that needs to be charged more often. Additionally, thinner phones can be more fragile, and we've already seen Apple screw this up with the iPhone 6, which was prone to… bending.

All in all, it's just not worth the compromises if a thinner phone also means a higher risk of breakage.

In my opinion, the durability of a smartphone should always take precedence over minor weight/thickness reductions for aesthetic reasons. A phone that can withstand daily wear and tear is far more valuable than one that breaks under minimal pressure.

The iPhone Slim could be Apple's biggest missed opportunity to create something truly different (like a metal iPhone)

Why doesn't Apple make another unique iPhone that's made of metal? And if Apple's ultimate goal is to sell a more expensive iPhone rather than a super thin iPhone, then I would actually pay more money for a metal iPhone.

The other (in my opinion) obvious question is: why would Apple make a slimmer iPhone instead of using its unlimited resources to create a truly different iPhone? Of course, I'm talking about a metal iPhone, which I would actually spend more money on.

A premium iPhone with a sleek, all-metal design – it would not only look premium, but also offer greater durability. Not to mention, metal phones have an appeal that glass and plastic just can't compete with. At least for me…

Additionally, a metal iPhone would stand out in a market flooded with glass-backed devices. It could also bring back the nostalgia of models like the iPhone 5 and iPhone 16, which were popular for their industrial design.

What I'm saying is that Apple may be missing an incredible opportunity to innovate in more meaningful ways. Just look at the OnePlus Nord 4, which is the only metal phone on the market right now. This makes it stand out from the crowd of mid-range phones that look and feel the same.

And I'm telling you: The iPhone would benefit from a little more personality. Especially since so many Android phones are now copying the iPhone 15's design.

Ironically, this means that if Apple were to make a metal iPhone, other Android phone makers could follow the trend, and that would be the best news for everyone.

Ditch the $700 iPhone Mini to produce a slimmer $1,300 iPhone? Come on, Apple…

In summary, while the idea of ​​a super-thin iPhone 17 Slim may sound intriguing at first, the reality (according to the leaks and rumors) is that for its alleged $1,300 price tag, the Slim would offer very little that could make its chances of popularity… pretty slim.

This makes me wonder: Why discontinue the iPhone Mini to launch an iPhone that may appeal to an even smaller niche audience than the Mini?

If the user base of the super-compact iPhone Mini was too small to catch on, why would a thinner iPhone that's more expensive and less capable than an iPhone 17 Pro Max be able to grab people's money and attention?

But what do I know…

You may also like...