A render of what the iPhone 17 Slim could look like
Rumors continue to swirl that Apple will launch a new iPhone 17 Slim in 2025. Why does Apple think anyone wants it?
In a world where people want their devices to last for longer than ever on a single charge, shouldn’t tech companies like Apple focus on bigger, better batteries rather than slimming phones down instead?
The rumors surrounding the iPhone 17 Slim have been around for a little while at this point but the consensus has settled on a couple of notable things. The most is obviously where the name comes from — the fact the iPhone 17 Slim will be thinner than other models on sale alongside it.
Surely by making the iPhone thinner Apple must also reduce the internal volume that can be filled with battery. Just look at the iPhone 13 mini compared with the iPhone 13 — Apple’s own specs had the former running out of battery a couple of hours sooner than the latter.
And then there are thermal considerations. Apple’s iPhone 15 Pro was infamous for getting too warm when pushed — how will a similar chip perform in something even thinner?
Another aspect is that the iPhone 17 Slim is expected to feature a smaller display than the high-end models, something that might fly in the case of a third rumor that this will be the most expensive option in the 2025 lineup. Will people really pay more for a thinner phone with a smaller display?
For those who want the biggest and the best, the iPhone 17 Pro Max would still have a bigger display and a faster chip, but it would presumably be slightly thicker. That begs the question of just who the iPhone 17 Slim will be for. Notably, the iPhone 17 Thin would replace the Plus iPhone which itself replaced the Mini, two devices that also struggled to find a market of their own.
I realize I’m ringing a premature death knell for the iPhone 17 Slim here, but stay with me here. If people don’t want a smaller iPhone and they don’t seem to have wanted to pay for a big screen but slower chip, what do they want?
I’d posit that all we really need to do to answer that question is look at what people perpetually complain about with every new iPhone release. In fact, they complain about it whenever any new phone is released regardless of the badge on the back. They complain about battery life.
Could the iPhone 17 Slim offer notably worse battery life based on the reasons I mentioned earlier? Is that a trade-off people are willing to make?
Realistically, nobody looks at an iPhone 16 and thinks that it should be thinner. They wish that it would run for longer on a single charge, no matter how fast USB-C or Qi2 chargers can power them back up again. But making thinner iPhones is the enemy of battery life, the two things just don’t get along.
Apple Park and its many offices around the globe are full of undoubtedly talented designers and engineers. Battery life is surely a concern for many of them, and I’ve no doubt it’s high up on the list of requirements for each new device — an even thinner iPhone, surely not so much.
So I’m here to say this. Apple, please, stop trying to make everything thinner than thin and consider even making them a fraction of a centimeter thicker. Add a couple of extra hours to how long my iPhone can run before I reach for the charger and I’ll consider the upgrade worthwhile.
But slimming a phone that I already drop more than I should and can barely feel in my pocket? I think I’ll probably just skip that one, thanks. Charging more for it just because there’s less of it is just an insult to injury.
As for Samsung, we know it has a history of taking Apple’s ideas and running with them if we’re being kind, and copying them if we aren’t. But I recommend that it sits this one out. I’m sure Samsung fans would, too.
