I made no secret that I want an ultra-thin iPhone like the iPhone 17 Air despite some of the obvious compromises. I returned the iPhone 16 Plus because it was too large, and I don’t mean the display. It so happens that I miss that large 6.7-inch screen. The handset’s thickness, especially when you slap a case on it, becomes too much to handle. Give me a thin iPhone 17 Air, and I’ll gladly accept the camera and battery compromises that Apple will have to make.
The only thing that might stop me from buying the iPhone 17 Air is the price. Some of the first reports said the ultra-thin device might be more expensive than the iPhone 17 Pro. However, those reports suggested the iPhone 17 Air would actually be an “Ultra” type of product, an even more premium handset than the 17 Pro Max.
It turns out the price will apparently not be an issue, as a report says the iPhone 17 Air will be cheaper than the 17 Pro.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Apple is looking at new iPhone designs to revive growth. These include the iPhone 17 Air next year and a foldable iPhone as soon as 2026.
It’s in this report that the iPhone 17 Air’s price comes up. The Journal doesn’t mention the “Air” moniker, which is what we’ve been calling the device for lack of an official name. But the paper says, “Apple plans to introduce an iPhone that will be thinner than the approximately 8-millimeter profile of current models.” The most recent reports say the iPhone 17 Air will measure 6.25mm.
“The model is intended to be cheaper than Pro models, with a simplified camera system to reduce costs,” The Journal continues, citing information from people familiar with Apple’s plans. The ultra-thin iPhone would target consumers who “like a sleek-looking device and don’t mind giving up some features available in Pro models.”
I’m one of those buyers. After years of thinking the iPhone Pro model was the only way to go, I realized I could do without the Pro experience. The regular iPhone is good enough for my needs, even though it might lack the Pro camera seen on the more expensive models. I also want a larger screen. That’s why I went with the iPhone 16 Plus in September.
I had no issue using the 60Hz display on the iPhone 16 Plus, a setting I’d probably keep on the iPhone 17 Air to save battery life, even though this model should support 120Hz ProMotion. That goes to show I’m already well-trained to accept iPhone compromises without feeling like I’m missing out on anything.
That’s why it’s great to hear Apple isn’t looking to slap a sky-high price on this thing. I certainly wouldn’t want to pay a premium price for a phone that can’t deliver a Pro experience.
I will note that the report might be wrong about one thing. That “simplified camera system” might not be about cutting costs. Instead, it’s likely about cutting the internal space occupied by camera components so it can be freed up for the battery.
