The iPhone 12 generation was also probably the last time the regular iPhone and the Pro were this similar. Those phones used the same basic design, the same basic chip, and the same basic screen, leaving mostly camera-related improvements and the Max model as the main points of differentiation. That’s all broadly true of the split between the iPhone 17 and the 17 Pro, as well.
The iPhone Air and Pro both depart from the last half-decade of iPhone designs in different ways, but the iPhone 17 sticks with the tried-and-true.
Credit:
Andrew Cunningham
The iPhone 17’s design has changed just enough since last year that you’ll need to find a new iPhone 17-compatible case and screen protector for your phone rather than buying something that fits a previous-generation model (it’s imperceptibly taller than the iPhone 16). The screen size has been increased from 6.1 inches to 6.3, the same as the iPhone Pro. But the aluminum-framed-glass-sandwich design is much less of a departure from recent precedent than either the iPhone Air or the Pro.
The screen is the real star of the show in the iPhone 17, bringing 120 Hz ProMotion technology and the Pro’s always-on display feature to the regular iPhone for the first time. According to Apple’s spec sheets (and my eyes, admittedly not a scientific measurement), the 17 and the Pro appear to be using identical display panels, with the same functionally infinite contrast, resolution (2622 x 1206), and brightness specs (1,000 nits typical, 1,600 nits for HDR, 3,000 nits peak in outdoor light).
It’s easy to think of the basic iPhone as “the cheap one” because it is the least expensive of the four new phones Apple puts out every year, but $799 is still well into premium-phone range, and even middle-of-the-road phones from the likes of Google and Samsung have been shipping high-refresh-rate OLED panels in cheaper phones than this for a few years now. By that metric, it’s faintly ridiculous that Apple isn’t shipping something like this in its $600 iPhone 16e, but in Apple’s ecosystem, we’ll take it as a win that the iPhone 17 doesn’t cost more than the 16 did last year.
Holding an iPhone 17 feels like holding any other regular-sized iPhone made within the last five years, with the exceptions of the new iPhone Air and some of the heavier iPhone Pros. It doesn’t have the exceptionally good screen-size-to-weight ratio or the slim profile of the Air, and it doesn’t have the added bulk or huge camera plateau of the iPhone 17 Pro. It feels about like it looks: unremarkable.
Leave a Reply