In the last five years, iPhone has felt like a sponge to me (so does Mark). Apple can shrink it and introduce a mini model; it can also enlarge it and introduce a Plus model. This year, Apple decided to flatten it and introduce the thinner iPhone Air. So is this another experiment, or a strategic move?

Maybe Apple ran out of options

iPhone Air is 5.64 mm thick. Making smartphones thinner is not a new topic or challenge. A lot of recent phones can be quite thin: Galaxy Edge is 5.8 mm, Galaxy Z Flip 7 is 6.5 mm, and OPPO Fold N5 is a remarkable 4.2 mm. Even the Moto Z from a decade ago is only 5.2 mm. Being thin on its own doesn’t hold a strong enough selling point. 

Would being an iPhone help? The sentiment doesn’t suggest so. 

Since the keynote event, there have been several theories online. Some of them are: (1) it’s preparing for the upcoming foldable phone—or essentially half of a foldable phone; (2) the stacked parts can be reused for the next XR glasses; (3) it’s preparing for a portless model; (4) maybe all iPhones will be this thin in the future. 

None of these theories is new, but it’s interesting that they’re all based on one assumption: that iPhone Air is a “transition” between now and the future, instead of a device that can hold its own. This likely suggests that nobody really thought of it—and nobody truly needs it.

Some more public info suggests similar: SellCell’s survey shows interest in iPhone Air is on the lower side compared with the other models. Google Trends data as of today also doesn’t look promising.

Apple should have known this before launching iPhone Air, as it would have its own market research drawing similar conclusions.

So, knowing overall interest is low, why would Apple still introduce such a model? Part of the reason, as I covered in my previous blog, may be the low sales of iPhone Plus and potential cannibalization of the Pro models. Furthermore, Apple is also facing pressure from partners that it can’t lose a price point it has established for three years. Since other size options have already been explored, making it thinner seems like the logical choice.

The iPhone Air inherits last year’s iPhone 16 Pro price point.

Engineering first; function over form

What’s different about iPhone Air is that, unlike simply changing the screen size to make it Plus or mini (along with some internal parts and the battery), Apple claims it uses a totally new hardware structure—different from any iPhone—by squeezing all the essential components, including the camera and chipset, into its camera plateau area, in order to make it incredibly thin.

This indicates that iPhone Air prioritizes function over form in its design direction. I’d also assume the project moved through a few key questions inside Apple: (1) What’s the thinnest we can make it? (2) What’s the minimum acceptable battery size for all-day use? (3) Based on that battery size, how large should the screen be? (4) How do we stack the other components while keeping the phone thin overall?

What’s the thinnest we can make it?

Teardown videos show the body is mostly screen and battery with front and back panels. So 5.64 mm may be the theoretical physical limit for an iPhone.

What’s the minimum acceptable battery size for all-day use?

With thickness set, let’s talk about battery size.

Apple likely has enough user data and performance simulations (since it also owns the chipset and, this year, the modem) to determine the bare minimum for an all-day battery. 

iPhone Air is reported to have a 3,149 mAh battery, which concerns many people. But that capacity is roughly on par with older iPhones (iPhone 13: 3,227 mAh; iPhone 14: 3,279 mAh; iPhone 15: 3,349 mAh), and it’s certainly larger than the iPhone 13 mini’s 2,406 mAh. 

Similarly, in Apple’s official video-playback data, iPhone Air is rated at 27 hours—longer than the iPhone 16’s 22 hours or the iPhone 15’s 20 hours. Hands-on reviews have called the iPhone Air’s battery less than ideal, but on average it does last a full day.

Based on that battery size, how large should the screen be?

Of all the specs, the odd choice is the screen size. iPhone Air uses a 6.5" screen that’s slightly larger than both iPhone 17 and iPhone 17 Pro, while smaller than iPhone 16 Plus. There are also reports showing that the Dynamic Island on iPhone Air has a larger gap from the edge than on other devices, which creates some aesthetic inconsistency.

The iOS 26 UI doesn’t even cover whole iPhone Air display

The bigger Dynamic Island gap causing UI issues

How do we stack other components while keeping the phone thin overall?

At this final stage, it’s all about trade-offs. Once the key features are defined, most parts can fit within the camera plateau; other features get dropped due to space limits—such as the ultra-wide camera or stereo speakers. 

In my previous blog, I noted that removing stereo speakers was so unthinkable that the item doesn’t even appear in the official comparison chart. Personally, I consider it non-negotiable. So how did such an important user-experience feature get removed?

We’ve seen a trend in Apple’s product design since Jony Ive’s departure. Products like Vision Pro (external battery pack) and newer MacBooks (notch display) launched with so-called design compromises. 

Along with the display choices, dropping stereo speakers makes iPhone Air feel like another project spearheaded by engineering—aligned with Apple’s current org chart, departing from a user experience centered approach.

With those engineering choices, it also feels like Apple isn’t fully confident in iPhone Air from a marketing standpoint.

Not “One More Thing”

My thought during the iPhone Air section of the keynote was that Apple was trying really hard to market features that aren’t new and were already available on previous iPhones. That’s why, instead of a “one more thing” moment, it was introduced after iPhone 17 and before iPhone 17 Pro. 

Imagine if it had been introduced as a “one more thing”—none of the features would be interesting other than the thickness, which is hard to convey unless you can physically feel it in your hand. 

It’s a logical choice, but it lost the touch of Apple magic from the Jobs era.

Standalone naming

The iPhone Air doesn’t have “17” in its name, which is a strange choice given how many similarities it shares with other iPhone 17 models. To me, this seems like a marketing choice based on psychological perception—so iPhone Air won’t be seen as a sibling or as a superior/inferior device that will be constantly compared to other models in the family, but as a new species.

So why does iPhone Air exist?

Sentiment doesn’t view iPhone Air as a major innovation this year. Apple doesn’t seem fully confident in the device; it feels like only the engineering team is celebrating the achievement. That’s a problem.

After all the analysis above, I’d say Apple likely launched it as a strategic move to keep a price point, and the engineering team used the opportunity as a test bed.

Based on Apple’s official accessory guidelines, the phone is 5.64 mm thick, while the camera bump totals 5.68 mm—thicker than the body itself. This suggests that, without a screen, the whole body could be kept under 6 mm with nothing protruding. I’d assume that’s a sweet spot for the temple arms of XR glasses—what do you think?