Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Debuts iPhone 17

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 290 posts

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#241

Post by dijit »

Jtsummers wrote: post #164
dijit wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally laid them on top of each other and the 6 was marginally larger. Betrays the point anyway: the ideal size was the 5 and it was nowhere near that, even by your official numbers (which I would guess are excluding the rounded edges maybe? - regardless, not the point)

> I literally laid them on top of each other and the 6 was marginally larger. So you did that and still wrote that the minis were larger? Or you did that after I pointed out that the minis were smaller?

Apologies, what I meant was "larger than an iPhone 5/5s";

I provided pictures in a sibling comment thread to show what I mean, there's about 20% of a difference between the iPhone 5 and 6, and that size difference is very similar for the mini.

If people wanted to buy a phone that was the size of the 6, they would have purchased the SE from 2020, which was that roughly that size.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#242

Post by patapong »

toastercat wrote: post #115

I always have a hard time swallowing the price of modern smart phones. Having something so ridiculously expensive and fragile as an everyday carry seems absurd to me. For reference, you can buy two Steam Deck LCDs for the price of one iPhone 17.

I see your point, on the other hand I have never lost or broken a phone by dropping it. I also use mine around 3h per day. From that perspective, it is definitely something I get a lot of value out of.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#243

Post by zuhsetaqi »

msk-lywenn wrote: post #210
Macha wrote: post #138

I'm actually considering buying myself an iPhone for the first time. I have basically two priorities when buying an phone: 1. Freedom. I should be able to build and run apps on it without the platform holder having a barrier on it. 2. Privacy. The phone shouldn't be an object to track me for better ad sales or any other purpose. Of course, priority 1 has until recently always led to Android while priority 2 has alway…

Battery and USB-C ports can easily be changed. You don't need to change the whole thing to fix that. Just like you don't buy a new car when you have a flat tire or broken AC.

The comparison is a bit off. A replacement battery as a part alone does cost more than 10 % of a completely new Pixel 7 Pro. So definitely not comparable with a cars flat tire or broken AC...

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#244

Post by Hamuko »

wildrhythms wrote: post #236
Hamuko wrote: post #39

I'm surprised that Apple is giving every single iPhone model 256 GB starting capacity. My prediction would've been 256 GB for the Pro and 128 GB for the base iPhone 17. Guess those AI models need space?

What AI models?

The AI models that take up 7 GB of your storage.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/121115

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#245

Post by joseda-hg »

Macha wrote: post #238
gumby271 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It appears there's a third priority then. That's not a criticism, it's true of all of us, I'm curious where it ranks and how you make that work with the other two. I'm in the same boat of being pissed at Google for destroying Android.

True, that priority is probably "runs the apps which I require to function in society", which basically means Revolut for payments and Whatsapp for messaging here. Oh and the occasional taxi app. I mean the fact that GrapheneOS and PureOS and Plasma Mobile etc. are not even in the running for me is probably a good indicator that where it's placed is first.

For me that looks something like:

- N Banking Apps

- Whatsapp / Telegram

- Uber/Lift/ Whatever your local flavor of theses are, or even regular taxi apps

- Deliveries and Groceries (I don't have/need a car, I get most of my groceries delivered, and just but fruits and vegetables on a farmers market near my house)

- Some payments app

- Access control for my building

- Navigation

- Entertainment

- 2FA/OTP

Many of these are local apps that have 0% chance of getting built for anything outside of Android and iOS, and further, some would break on GrapheneOS / Plasma / A stock rooted device (I'm pretty sure at least one of my banking apps auto closes if it even detects Developer options enabled)

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#246

Post by snowwrestler »

dang wrote: post #113

Related ongoing threads: Compare the New iPhone Models - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45186294 - Sept 2025 (95 comments) iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45186044 - Sept 2025 (42 comments) iPhone Air - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45186015 - Sept 2025 (431 comments)

It would be cool if these sorts of internal references were implemented as a feature of HN, so the headlines and comment counts are up to date whenever they are displayed.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#247

Post by sillyfluke »

viraptor wrote: post #212
pertymcpert wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Millions of people in the US use their banking online apps. A lot of people don’t own a computer at all, just a mobile device.

You can still use the bank website on the phone.

This is where iphones are a risk actually. Android webapps on old phones with their original OS installed have a better chance of working compared to old iphones with their original iOS version. This is both due to Apple's continued stubborness in keeping Safari releases tied to iOS releases (eg. "to get the banana you need the gorilla holding the banana and the entire rainforest the gorilla lives in...") and the dominance of Chromium browsers in webapp testing.

On old Android phones it's easier to install newer browsers without having to update the OS.

Edit: your comment is also not valid on occasion. I've recently witnessed some banking mobile webapps being broken for long periods of time and one bank that decided to remove the agreement approval function from their webapp, forcing you to download the app in order to approve updated agreements.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#248

Post by xiconfjs »

mdavid626 wrote: post #234
xiconfjs wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem with used phones: no guarantee of water resistance. Many of the resold phones got their battery replaced, which itself it a good thing, but they are usually not applying the gasket required for water resistence.

How often you take your phone underwater? If so, why?

It’s more about using it while it’s raining on my bike (attached to the handle). No need for a water-thight case so far.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#249

Post by penguin_booze »

toastercat wrote: post #115

I always have a hard time swallowing the price of modern smart phones. Having something so ridiculously expensive and fragile as an everyday carry seems absurd to me. For reference, you can buy two Steam Deck LCDs for the price of one iPhone 17.

Apple is the pioneer of 'expensive is the new cool' phenomenon. Like the pied piper, with every release, Apple keep leading the fan boys to jump off progressively taller cliffs. Meanwhile, other manufacturers realized that they, too, can play this game. Rather, they gets looked down upon if they don't amp up their prices. It's amazing to witness this happening.

Economists knew this phenomenon well before, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#250

Post by naravara »

toastercat wrote: post #179
majormajor wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you're gonna carry those two Steam Decks in your pockets? I think modern smart phones are pretty remarkably un-fragile compared to 20 years ago before the iPhone ($300-700 for a Symbian with a tiny plastic screens that got scratched super fast) or even 10-ish years ago with much more fragile screen glass and cases. Last phone I did major damage to was my HTC Evo in 2012. (That Nokia N95 was in 2007 dollars, too!)

> you're gonna carry those two Steam Decks in your pockets? Watch me! My point was more about how expensive phones are. I'm not so sure about modern smart phones being less fragile. My first phone was a Nokia 3310-descendent, and my second a Samsung Beat flip phone. Neither were over $100 at the time of purchase, and both were rugged devices I could throw in my pocket or in a bag without thinking it would need a prot…

The screens could definitely break, they were just very small so the likelihood that they would suffer an impact that would break them was comparatively small. In fact, the reason for the flip form factor was to protect the increasingly fancy displays when it’s in your pocket. They also didn’t weigh very much so they didn’t fall as hard.

Modern phones are extremely sturdy, people are just more precious about them because they’re much fancier and more expensive and more of a requirement for everyday life.

Post reply on HN