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

61–70 of 290 posts

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#61

Post by microtonal »

losvedir wrote: post #2

I'm still on an iPhone 11 and this might finally be the one to get me to upgrade. I don't need the "Pro" stuff, but the ProMotion was always frustratingly only associated with the Pro phones. That said, I'm sort of frustrated with iOS overall, and sorely tempted to go back to Pixels, so I can't decide.

I have a Pixel 9 to check out where Android is standing and for GrapheneOS. Unfortunately Pixel OS still has pretty bad bugs all the time (oneUI is much more polished, but has other issues) and the Pixel 10 is really overpriced compared to the iPhone 17 (the Pixel 10 is more midrange than a flagship, even though it has a flagship price).

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#62

Post by astrange »

musha68k wrote: post #7

Through the last iterations I only ever upgrade my iPhone whenever there is a "meaningful" RAM upgrade in it for me. So this one here is not too bad going from 8GB to 12GB (Air, Pro, Pro Max).

You won't notice a difference, RAM upgrades get used by new camera features.

Use an ad blocker if you want Safari tabs to stay open longer.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#63

Post by kotaKat »

devrand wrote: post #43
kotaKat wrote: post #6

Once again disappointed that we’re getting screwed over by “bill credit” carrier offers for 36 months and wish that US carriers would stop that crap.

What's the concern here? Can the phone not just be bought outright?

If I trade in my phone, I want my trade-in offer now. Instead, the full value of whatever trade-in deal provided is split over 36 months as bill credits.

While the new phone might actually be “free” in one of these promotions, it’s not, naturally, because you’ve been thrown into a 36 month installment agreement separate of the cellphone service they’ve sold you on (that they also claim is “price locked” while independently raising surcharges and other fees).

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#65

Post by mattkrick »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #8

I have a 12 Pro, I am definitely going to be upgrading, I've had my phone for 5 years now (since 2020) that's actually longer than I've owned any other cell phone without upgrading. I think I could probably squeeze more life out of my phone, but the 17 has a nicer camera, me and my wife are noticing our relatives with newer iPhones have photographs that look slightly (I meant to write NOTICEABLY here) better. As we r…

I’m in the exact same boat. Also toying with the idea of going back to android for the pixel 10 pro. I do miss android notifications and keyboard. Are there any features keeping you from going back?

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#66

Post by microtonal »

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?

I didn't pay attention for the non-Pro, but for the Pro they 'said' they give you 256GB for the price of last year's 256 GB. So it seems like another step in moving the prices up.

Edit: 16 Pro 128 GB was $999 at introduction iPhone 17 Pro 256 GB is $1099. Better for the non-Pro though - the 16 128 GB was $799, the 17 256 GB is also $799.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#67

Post by NewsaHackO »

hdjl930jK wrote: post #12
bitpush wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind walking through what you saw that helped you make the decision?

> Mind walking through what you saw that helped you make the decision? I upgrade every year to impress friends, family, and colleagues. I don’t use a case. I’ll be ordering the orange 17 pro.

based

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#68

Post by kjkjadksj »

microtonal wrote: post #52
skydhash wrote: post #3

Still no reason to upgrade. My shift from iPhone 8 to iPhone 13 was qualitative. Now much of the barrier to improvement is software, and they’re all gated by Apple.

I think iPhone 17 is the first worthy upgrade to the base model in years, LPTO is a huge upgrade to the aging pre-iPhone 17 screen. The difference between Pro and non-Pro is pretty thin this year. I currently have a 16 Pro, might upgrade, but mostly because models are typically shifted through our family (so everyone gets an upgrade).

What I found with screens going back to an old 1280px macbook screen when the retina was in the shop is that you quickly lose appreciation for quality when you don’t have an example next to you. This is why the Apple Store model is good for sales, you can dangle the new screens on an hdr wallpaper and its clear that it is different to the one you already have. But again, it only became an issue because one day you made it an issue.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#69

Post by astrange »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #58
kingsleyopara wrote: post #13

Surprising there’s no matte-black iPhone 17 Pro - dark, low-reflectance finishes are standard in pro video kit because they minimise specular reflections and stray highlights; keeping a shiny silver finish and skipping a subdued matte black feels like a strange choice and undercuts the “Pro” claim.

These have never been actual pro devices. Arguably not even prosumer. You probably don’t want scorched earth ai processing done on your photos as a pro but that is what the iPhones have been doing as of late. Most damning is no way to turn that off.

There is no such thing as a digital camera without processing. But third party camera apps can get images as raw as they want them and it supports professional video standards.

Try Halide with "Process Zero" if you want that, but I'm pretty sure the most popular 3p camera apps are Asian beauty apps that do far more and far worse quality processing.

Re: Apple Debuts iPhone 17

#70

Post by burnt-resistor »

devrand wrote: post #43
kotaKat wrote: post #6

Once again disappointed that we’re getting screwed over by “bill credit” carrier offers for 36 months and wish that US carriers would stop that crap.

What's the concern here? Can the phone not just be bought outright?

With inflation such as it is, finance it and don't be concerned about a temporary lock. Most carriers will unlock it after X months and/or for travel. Let the phone carrier eat it and conserve capital.
Post reply on HN