there are two options, 1) using a smaller,shittier camera, or 2) making an extremely thick phone. neither option is very “apple”, especially for a flagship model.
considering the vast majority of people use phone cases and will never notice the bump anyway, i think this whole thing is blown way out of proportion.
No thicker than very popular and successful phones from just 5 years ago. They can use the extra space for a larger battery, so they dont have to nerf performance to maintain stability in older phones. They can also use the space to restore repairability.
But probably not for a folding phone, since making both sides that thick will probably be too much.
…no they can’t. Do you realize just how thick modern camera bumps are? Even not including the bump phones nowadays are thicker than phones 5 years ago.
The iPhone X was 7.7mm thick. The iPhone 17 pro excluding the bump is 8.7.
Damn, I keep forgetting that the iphone X was already 5 years ago. 10 years ago then. There has been so little improvements in phones in the ladt 5 years, it all just blurs together.
I think the point is, we used to have phones that were 9mm+ thick. Iphone 4s and iphone 5c from Apple and Samsung Galaxy S3 and motorola G phones were all that thickness. They even had replacable batteries and expandable storage. Some of those were even waterproof despite all of that.
I think the main driver of impractical thinness has been marketing, planned obselecence and cost savings.
The marketing about it being an incredibly thin phone was a misstep - it just looked absurd to have such a chunky lump stuck onto it, and it felt very much like they were attempting a have cake / eat cake situation by claiming it had incredible camera stats (which werent very good) to justify the bump on an otherwise amazingly thin phone, and then that giant electronics bump had an external lens on it too.
Had it just been an ugly phone, I doubt it would have met with anywhere near the same criticism, but all the adcopy about how thin it was overtop of photos where you could see it had a giant lump on it felt really dishonest, and if this article is accurate it may count among the biggest apple flops ever.
(The thickness may just need to be accepted at this point. The S25 Ultra is 8.2mm, which is thinner than the Air if you include the bump. It seems like the camera wasnt the issue then, but that they hamstrung their design team with their drive for a thin phone. What elegance might even an extra millimeter of chassis space produced?)
What elegance might even an extra millimeter of chassis space produced?
People really don’t seem to understand that in the electronics world, one single millimeter can make worlds of difference.
You absolutely can cram so much more stuff in “dumber” electronics, but phones are even more constricted in design, because they need to send and receive signals of different types, so feedback and signal noise are concerns.
Adding in even slightly more space allows for much better design, because you have more tolerances to reduce signal noise. It allows dozens of wires for camera sensors to route better. A 20% longer battery life. Heck, just being slightly more ergonomic and less droppable is a bonus to slightly thicker phones.
I didn’t even consider signal noise until I got into fpv drones and rc stuff, it can mame a ton of difference if you have a single wire 2mm out of place. (and crash your drone because the motor interfered with your antenna)
The marketing had nothing to do with it not selling. Pick one up, yeah it’s thin but it’s also a bar of soap to hold. Plus a ton of deal breaking trade off like less battery life and poor camera system compared to the alternative iPhone 17s/Pros.
Lol “extremely thick phone”. Get that apple boot, you got it to your gills this time. Only when it’s razor thin and cuts the hands of the unworthy will then your lust be satisfied.
how do you propose removing it?
there are two options, 1) using a smaller,shittier camera, or 2) making an extremely thick phone. neither option is very “apple”, especially for a flagship model.
considering the vast majority of people use phone cases and will never notice the bump anyway, i think this whole thing is blown way out of proportion.
No thicker than very popular and successful phones from just 5 years ago. They can use the extra space for a larger battery, so they dont have to nerf performance to maintain stability in older phones. They can also use the space to restore repairability.
But probably not for a folding phone, since making both sides that thick will probably be too much.
Phones 5 years ago have lightyears worse cameras than phones today.
But their thickness can accomidate todays cameras.
…no they can’t. Do you realize just how thick modern camera bumps are? Even not including the bump phones nowadays are thicker than phones 5 years ago.
The iPhone X was 7.7mm thick. The iPhone 17 pro excluding the bump is 8.7.
Damn, I keep forgetting that the iphone X was already 5 years ago. 10 years ago then. There has been so little improvements in phones in the ladt 5 years, it all just blurs together.
I think the point is, we used to have phones that were 9mm+ thick. Iphone 4s and iphone 5c from Apple and Samsung Galaxy S3 and motorola G phones were all that thickness. They even had replacable batteries and expandable storage. Some of those were even waterproof despite all of that.
I think the main driver of impractical thinness has been marketing, planned obselecence and cost savings.
lol how is 11mm extremely thick
how is it not?
The marketing about it being an incredibly thin phone was a misstep - it just looked absurd to have such a chunky lump stuck onto it, and it felt very much like they were attempting a have cake / eat cake situation by claiming it had incredible camera stats (which werent very good) to justify the bump on an otherwise amazingly thin phone, and then that giant electronics bump had an external lens on it too.
Had it just been an ugly phone, I doubt it would have met with anywhere near the same criticism, but all the adcopy about how thin it was overtop of photos where you could see it had a giant lump on it felt really dishonest, and if this article is accurate it may count among the biggest apple flops ever.
(The thickness may just need to be accepted at this point. The S25 Ultra is 8.2mm, which is thinner than the Air if you include the bump. It seems like the camera wasnt the issue then, but that they hamstrung their design team with their drive for a thin phone. What elegance might even an extra millimeter of chassis space produced?)
are you talking about the Air? last time i checked all iphone models have a camera bump.
People really don’t seem to understand that in the electronics world, one single millimeter can make worlds of difference.
You absolutely can cram so much more stuff in “dumber” electronics, but phones are even more constricted in design, because they need to send and receive signals of different types, so feedback and signal noise are concerns.
Adding in even slightly more space allows for much better design, because you have more tolerances to reduce signal noise. It allows dozens of wires for camera sensors to route better. A 20% longer battery life. Heck, just being slightly more ergonomic and less droppable is a bonus to slightly thicker phones.
I didn’t even consider signal noise until I got into fpv drones and rc stuff, it can mame a ton of difference if you have a single wire 2mm out of place. (and crash your drone because the motor interfered with your antenna)
Thiner≠better.
Wildly appropriate username here. Also, 100% correct.
The marketing had nothing to do with it not selling. Pick one up, yeah it’s thin but it’s also a bar of soap to hold. Plus a ton of deal breaking trade off like less battery life and poor camera system compared to the alternative iPhone 17s/Pros.
Lol “extremely thick phone”. Get that apple boot, you got it to your gills this time. Only when it’s razor thin and cuts the hands of the unworthy will then your lust be satisfied.
_