"Impossibly thin" is right in line with Patrick McGee's "Apple in China" who argues that the main reason for Apple's designs is to keep imitators at bay by introducing manufacturing challenges that only they can meet. Indeed impossible at the time of release. One generation after the other. He estimates this gains them about 6 months of headway. Tough world.
(Yes, to be fair, there is more to this new phone than just "impossibly thin".)
0.16mm is roughly the diameter of a strand of human hair. (0.1 to 0.18mm.) In a consumer product, that's basically imperceptible -- and, in all but the most precision-engineered products, it would be within standard manufacturing tolerances.
So I suppose there already is a phone with an analogous form factor.
Yeah. I got a kick out of looking at the specs and the Edge and the Air had the same exact imperial measurement of 0.22 inches.
It just spurred the rage that we still haven't adopted metric in the US -- even after spending a good chunk of the 1970s learning it in school and being promised metric would be the new measurement standard.
In all seriousness everybody still probably needs to learn it in school, because the scientific literature is entirely in metric. Even papers authored by Americans and published by, e.g., the American Chemical Society, all use µg/mg/g/kg and µm/mm/cm/m for their measurements. If you don't have an intuitive understanding of those measurements, you can run into visualization problems.
The funny part is that in elementary school here in the mid to late 90s, growing up in a rural area, metric was only touched upon for a day at most and until high school chemistry and physics classes, I very rarely had to deal with metric. Which sucked! My math classes kept to U.S. customary system / imperial units for example.
(It wasn't even told to me that it was the default for most of the world. It was disappointing to learn later how much resistance to metric there was in the U.S.)
weird. i did elementary in the midwest during the 1980s and we spent equal time on metric and imperial, in fact i think it was some kind of requirement that both were given equal attention
It turns out they have been teaching metric in (US) schools, through the grades, not just for an hour or whatever, again. Why? I don't know, but I approve.
>but I literally had store security walk up to me and ask me not to do that.
Are you suggesting they did this because they expected it to bend because it was thin?
If so, I doubt it. Regardless of thickness, I suspect security would ask someone not to physically damage their devices.
I kinda metered the amount of force I was using very closely. For lack of a better description, I tested the springiness very carefully. But yeah, would've paid for it.
This just seems like Apple's reality distortion field in full force. There are already thinner phones. Just like there were thinner laptops than Macbook Air when it was launched but Apple fans in their Apple bubble hadn't heard of them and so bought Apple's propaganda.
I say this as someone that owns 2 MacBooks Pros, an Apple TV and an iPhone.
Absolutely, and yes on the Macbook Air! Although the Honor phone mentioned elsewhere calls itself "thinnest at 8.8mm", +/- camera mesa, etc... So at best 8.8mm folded in pocket for a complete phone. Much thicker that an iPhone Air complete phone (and more screen space).
But mostly one thing that's difficult for us to evaluate is whether this is "at scale and profitably". On the competitors' side anyway. The Honor seems to be a $2000 phone (higher even than Google's foldable!) - probably before tariffs, not clear. How many will sell? What margin will Honor make on this? Hard to tell although it would be possible to dig the historical numbers.
Is anyone buying an iPhone because it's slightly thinner than other phones? I've never heard anyone say the width of the phone was their reason for picking an iPhone, or any phone for that matter.
There are certainly people buying iPhones essentially for fashion/status-symbol reasons: i.e., because they look visually different from other phones, whether that is because of thinness or anything else. Why else would so many Android devices have copied the FaceID notch so soon after it was released?
Its unlikely anyone is buying a phone because of how thin it is (within reason), but it is quite likely that they are more likely to learn about a new phone available to buy if it is "impossibly" thin. Advertising is important — even for recognized names like Apple.
In a month we'll get the inevitable slew of stories about bent and broken iPhone Airs as sure as water is wet. I really don't care how thick my phone is, I care that when I drop it, it's not automatically broken.
I generally like and buy Apple stuff, but yeah, I'm weary as hell. I don't do subscriptions and I don't like the tech bros--agree 100% with the rant on here about how crappy everything has become--"enshitification."
>Is anyone buying an iPhone because it's slightly thinner than other phones?
Yes. I have at least two co-workers that have stated (we will see if they follow through) that they are going to move from their current phones (13 Pro and 15 Pro) to the Air because of the thinness.
People who buy iPhones don't need a reason to buy iPhones other than just for the sake of buying iPhones. That's the key to Apple's trillions. Apple would have made this phone 2.75cm thick and there would have longer lines and same people singing paeans of thick phones and how it is going to change the world and solve global warming and eventually bring everlasting peace.
I'm strapping phone to my arms during runs; for me, shaving off those extra grams count. Bought an Infinix specifically for this reason. I didn't specifically look for the thinnest but it came the the most lightweight.
What’s the evidence for which way causality works? Apple solving design problems they care about would inevitably involve solutions only viable at their scale. It’s hard to say whether that’s how they choose their design problems.
Their process seems pretty similar to their approach with unibody MacBooks or the original MacBook Air, both of which were introduced long before imitators were their primary competition.
> What’s the evidence for which way causality works?
One qualifier would be "at scale and profitably."
But for more detail, yes, the situation has changed over time and probably the reasoning has changed over time.
McGee spends a lot of time on the difficulty for Apple R&D to keep up with Apple design bureau's demands. To the point that Apple execs arrive at decisions that for the sake of internal peace and meeting deadlines, Apple Industrial Design is not to make arbitrary demands (like they used to) and must consider manufacturing realities. Which still leaves Manufacturing struggling at every step to keep up. So - usually - manufacturing is very much pushed to the edge of what's possible by Design. Even though Apple teach China phone manufacturing (again "at scale and profitably"). Design are the ones pushing. Whether Design is really concerned with keeping ahead of competitors... is not explicitely told by Apple people. They do seem to love "impossible". In my recollection, it's more McGee's observations and conclusion.
Apple mainland China companies competition has also been a widely varying quantity. In part due to Chinese fashion trends and in part due to Apple political difficulties in China (which come and go). Underlying should be "at scale and profitably": Apple rightly shouldn't care if a few exotic phones come out. That wouldn't matter to their bottom line. They are described as caring when there is a flood of matching phones coming out - and even then with some latency.
Overall btw, "Apple in China" is fantastic. With massive amounts of local color and "story viewed from the Apple China people's side". Lots of bits that were missed if you mostly followed Apple from the side of what we see in the US.
Thinnest smartphone so far is Chinese HONOR Magic V5 folding phone at 4.1mm, though. iPhone Air is thicker by 1.5mm(1/16") at 5.6mm. Thinnest Samsung Galaxy is 5.8mm.
That was partly true when he was writing the book or doing research, but is no longer true today. China have manage to make phone that is under 5mm, and even stated the only thing that is stopping them getting even thinner is the USB-C port.
(Yes, to be fair, there is more to this new phone than just "impossibly thin".)