4 reasons I’m blowing past the iPhone Air, and why you should too

As expected, the star product of Apple’s September 9 press event was the iPhone Air. There wasn’t much left for Apple to reveal about it, in fact — I already knew, based on leaks, that it would be about 5.6mm thick with a 6.5-inch display, and sport a single rear-facing camera, despite the presence of two or three cameras on the iPhone 17 and 17 Pro. I even knew what it would look like. Not that there was much Apple could’ve done about that — accessory makers needed blueprints to have products ready on time.

The phone is more tempting than I thought it would be, but I’m also pretty comfortable about skipping it. You should be as well, and there are a variety of reasons why. Here’s hoping that Apple sorts things out by the time the Air 2 rolls around.

4

Thinness comes at the expense of battery life

Form over function

Apple / Pocket-Lint

The biggest surprise is that the battery life on the Air isn’t as bad as rumors predicted. Apple claims that the device can handle up to 27 hours of video playback, putting it on par with my iPhone 16 Pro. This is partly attributable to the Air’s custom C1X modem, which is more power-efficient than the third-party modems in previous devices. Apple’s benchmarks never correspond directly to reality, of course — but you should be able to get through a day on a single charge if you’re not playing Resident Evil or shooting a lot of 4K video.

What Apple doesn’t tell you is that the Air rates below everything else in its 2025 lineup. The iPhone 17 is rated for 30 hours of playback, and the 17 Pro gets up to 33. The 17 Pro Max delivers up to 39 hours — meaning that with light activity, it could legitimately be a two-day phone.

None of this would matter if it weren’t for the Air’s $1,000 entry price. You can get a longer-lasting device for less money, which is the opposite of how things normally work. Maybe Apple will narrow the gap next year by switching over to silicon-carbon batteries, which offer higher energy density.

3

You’re sacrificing camera functionality

Think carefully about how you shoot photos and videos

Apple / Pocket-lint

The Air sports a 48-megapixel wide-angle camera, similar to the one on the iPhone 17, with the option of 2x zoom for filling the frame a little better. For some people, this may be more than good enough, allowing them to snap friends, family, and many other subjects in high detail. But unlike the 17, there’s no ultrawide camera to speak of. That means you can’t shoot in cramped spaces, or even take macro photos, which could be a dealkiller if you like to use your phone to take group pics, or save pairing codes and serial numbers.

Once again, the Air’s pricetag comes into play. You can actually save $200 and get an ultra-wide back if you buy an iPhone 17. Alternately, by spending $100 more you can upgrade to the 17 Pro, which includes both an ultra-wide and a 48-megapixel telephoto camera with 8x zoom. If you’re considering an Air, you’d better think long and hard about your camera needs — you don’t want to find yourself missing key memories because your phone lacks basic equipment. Even the similarly-designed Galaxy S25 Edge has twin cameras.

2

Durability is a giant question mark

There’s only so far material choices can go

Apple / Pocket-lint

Apple went to great lengths to stress the toughness of the Air during its press event. The phone not only sports a titanium body — unlike the iPhone 17 and 17 Pro, which use aluminum — but Ceramic Shield glass on both the front and the back, intended to reduce the threat of scratches and cracks. The front specifically uses Ceramic Shield 2, claimed to have three times the scratch resistance of its predecessor.

None of this directly addresses the biggest concern with ultra-thin phones: bending. Titanium may be stiffer than aluminum, but it’s not immune to pressure, and there’s only so much structural rigidity Apple can provide in a device so thin. Presumably Apple has learned the lessons of Bendgate, which plagued the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus — yet it’s not hard to imagine someone warping or cracking their Air by accidentally sitting on it. We’ll have to wait for reviewers to prove things one way or another.

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that I’d rather have a thicker, heavier phone that’s rugged than one that (briefly) impresses me with how slim and light it is. For the sake of buyers, I sincerely hope that Apple’s marketing is more than hyperbole.

1

It skimps on 5G, graphics, and USB tech

The iPhone 16 Pro may actually be a better deal

Something I’ve learned over the years is to pay close attention to Apple’s specs sheets, because the company isn’t always transparent with its forward-facing press materials. While it brags about the iPhone 17 having a 120Hz adaptive refresh rate, for instance, I had to delve into specs to confirm that this enables always-on display (AOD) functions like lockscreen widgets and StandBy. I guess Apple considers this all standard now, even though you still get a locked 60Hz without AOD if you buy an iPhone 16 or 16e.

If you’re weighing an Air against a 17 Pro, you may be surprised by some of its compromises, which go beyond camera and battery tech. While both products use an A19 Pro chip, the Air has one less graphics (GPU) core, which could hurt its performance in some games. It also doesn’t support the fastest version of 5G, mmWave, and can only sync wired data at sluggish USB 2.0 speeds. That last point is pathetic, frankly. The 2.0 spec dates back to the year 2000, so there’s no excuse for any iPhone to have it today, given the sizes of modern music, video, and backup files. USB 3.1 should be treated as a minimum — not a Pro luxury.

Consider this: the base Air is equipped with 256GB of storage. USB 2.0 could make some backups take over an hour, whereas USB 3.1 would shorten that to less than seven minutes. I get that most people rely on Wi-Fi and cloud sync these days, but that’s no excuse for leaving USB users in the Dark Ages.