After the countless jokes at last week’s All-School Meeting (ASM), it seems taboo to talk about phones. Still, I press on. On September 9, Apple launched its latest lineup of new phones: the iPhone 17, the iPhone 17 Pro, the iPhone 17 Pro Max, and the iPhone Air. One of the new launches, the iPhone Air, is 5.6 millimeters and weighs 165 grams, by far the lightest iPhone made. But it is hard to appreciate this newfound slenderness when it is accompanied by a multitude of drawbacks, especially considering its price of nearly a thousand dollars, the same as last year’s Pro Phone. In their pursuit of creating the thinnest phone possible, Apple has sacrificed key features of the iPhone that consumers actually value.
One of the many shortcomings of the iPhone Air is its battery capacity, which is significantly smaller than that of older, cheaper iPhone models. Due to this, the iPhone Air not only stores less energy but also requires more frequent charging. The iPhone Air also has a USB-C 2, rather than USB-C 3, an upgrade that came in the equally priced iPhone 16 Pro of the year prior. This lower-caliber port supports slow charging, slow data speeds, and offers limited support for the thousands of other devices. Additionally, the iPhone Air features a worse camera system than the 200 dollars-cheaper base iPhone 17, with a singular primary camera equal to the one on the iPhone 17 and the absence of an ultrawide camera. In their pursuit of creating the thinnest phone possible, they’ve sacrificed key features of the iPhone that consumers actually value. Now, if consumers were solely searching for the thinnest and lightest phone possible, then this would not be as problematic. However, a poll reported by “Business Insider” shows that this is not the case: about 73 percent of respondents stated that they would prefer a thicker phone if it came with a longer battery life. Therefore, while this move may be successful in gaining initial attraction, due to the iPhone Air’s functional shortcomings, it is unlikely that such attention will be sustained.
Yet, what may seem like a complete drawback to the new iPhone launch could serve as an advantage for Apple. The decoy effect is a psychological phenomenon in which a third, less attractive option is offered to make the target option seem much more appealing. This is a tactic employed in numerous markets. A typical example is movie theater popcorn: by providing the medium size at only a slightly cheaper price than the large, customers are more likely to be enticed to buy the larger popcorn. Following the same logic, the iPhone Air could potentially have the same effect as the medium-sized popcorn for the other iPhone 17s through its terrible value and exorbitant price. This is not the first time such an effect has benefited Apple: In fact, a 2025 study published in Research in Management and Accounting found that Apple had used the “decoy effect during the launch of the iPhone by positioning the Pro as the ‘decoy’ for the Pro Max.” They found that by creating the Pro to be of worse quality and a higher price, it acted as the decoy, significantly attracting consumers to the iPhone 14 Pro Max. Understanding this effect encourages us to make informed decisions about our purchases.
The iPhone Air, though marketed as a premium offering with its sleek and smooth design, may not be the high-quality phone that many customers are looking for. It may, instead, be part of a larger marketing ploy to indirectly convince consumers to buy the other iPhone 17 models released. Apple has observed that minor, incremental upgrades do not drive sales, and they employ this strategy to maintain their profits, a strategy that other phone companies are likely to follow. This could lead to a landscape where innovation takes a backseat, potentially stalling advancements in smartphones due to a sole focus on profitability. In the end, it will be interesting to observe how markets respond to this latest offering. Even I, as a self-proclaimed “Apple glazer,” or someone who usually praises the company, cannot justify the creation of this device in terms of customer practicality and utility. The question of “will consumers embrace the iPhone Air for its sleek design, or will they lean towards models that provide more practical features for a similar, or lower, price” is the one we await to see unfold. Only time will tell, but one thing is for certain: the pursuit of sleekness in technology should not come at the expense of functionality and practicality, especially with an increase in cost.
