Awww... I was so much hoping for an iPhone that will fit into my pocket. The 1st iPhone SE was the perfect form factor. But no, Apple's phones just had to grow and grow and grow like cancer ...
In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
> they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
I loved the iPhone SE and small phones generally, but at the same time I realize Apple's not failing at anything. They're giving the market the size people actually want. The smaller phones don't sell nearly as well. Most people prefer a bigger phone even if carrying it is less convenient.
I've just accepted my phone will be bulky now, so I double down and attach a magnetic wallet to it, and carry it in my hand or jacket pocket or bag rather than my pants pocket like I used to. During meetings it lies on the table rather then in my pants pocket. C'est la vie.
Maybe there's room in the world for a device people want, even if it's not the device the majority want? I mean I know Apple is just a small startup company with only a $4 trillion valuation, but maybe they could just do one thing that isn't maximally profitable once in a while.
They used to make the "mini" but that's because Jobs had taste and it's what he, specifically, wanted in his pocket. Now Jobs is gone and... no more mini.
But I'll keep my iPhone 13 mini going as long as I can.
They made it, it didn't sell well. Last I checked zero Android manufacturers were still creating high quality small phones (<5.5"). The Android community has resorted to petitions like https://smallandroidphone.com
Some people definitely want it, but when not even one Android manufacturer will create a model when they can get 100% market share, it looks like there isn't enough demand.
What people like me wanted was an iPhone 13 mini that's a bit thicker so it can have a bit more battery capacity. And with the 120 Hz PWM nausea fixed.
The iPhone Air has worse battery life. And it has a larger screen. And it's worse to handle one-handed. Coming from the 13 mini, it's not an improvement.
I bought an Air, coming from a 13 mini, and I largely agree with you on all those points except the battery life. I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying the Air has bad battery life, which maybe it does compared to the 17 or 17 Pro etc, but the past week I've been test driving it it has more than all day battery life for me. My 13 mini needed a recharge in the middle of the day (battery was worn down to about 83%).
Otherwise, yeah, you're right. I'm pretty sure I'm going to return it this week before my 14 days are up.
I bought a Pro Max for myself and an Air for my wife, who had a Mini before.
The Air is DAMN SMALL. You really should try holding it. Yes the 2D dimensions are as large as a normal modern phone but it’s hardly there otherwise. It’s a good compromise.
I'm curious how well it is selling. Early on there was a lot of enthusiasm, but I haven't heard much since. I don't know if I'd want a phone with less battery life, but my understanding is the Air's battery is actually not much smaller than last year's pro?
Neither is Samsung's similar Galaxy Edge apparently, to the extent that it's rumored that the product line has already been cancelled after just one generation. Both companies probably should have sat on that idea until they could offset the physically smaller batteries with the much denser silicon-carbon chemistries.
Yes, the point I was trying to make is that companies can get away with not being maximally profitable. There's nothing legally stopping Apple from accepting a slightly lower profit margin on the 5% of sales volume that might go to smaller iPhones if they would offer them. But it might brighten the day for millions of customers.
I'm all for that when it comes to things like accessibility technology that allows people to do things they otherwise couldn't. But screen sizes? You can use a larger screen, you just prefer a smaller one.
An Apple Watch with a cellular connection, paired with Airpods, fulfills some of the role of a small iPhone - you can make calls, listen to music, and even do some light texting if Siri likes your accent.
I love my apple watch but I can safely say i've never done any of the above with it. It's too much of a pain to switch the bluetooth headphones to it and the screen is too small to do much actual computing with it. The fitness aspects are totally worth the money, though.
What “the market wants” is a maximally addictive device. It’s a really low bar even if highly profitable. Bigger screens make it more exciting and addictive.
Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers can’t make small phones because they’re small and can’t pay for it, and large manufacturers can’t make it because…(checks notes)…they’re large and don’t want to pay for it even if there’s demand.
> Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers can’t make small phones because they’re small and can’t pay for it, and large manufacturers can’t make it because…(checks notes)…they’re large and don’t want to pay for it even if there’s demand.
Large and small companies sell smaller Android phones.
It's very difficult to find something around 140 grams and 140x80 even giving them some slack about the thickness. The Samsung S25 [1] is about there but I currently still use an A40 [2] because of the size and weight. I'd give away a couple of cm of height. A zero bezel 120mm phone would be ok. 120 grams are a dream.
Your weight requirements are more restrictive than your size requirements. GSMArena's phone finder found foldable or rugged phones which satisfied size but not weight. And Unihertz phones appear well known where small phones are discussed but are not in GSMArena's database for some reason. The Unihertz Jelly Star satisfied your requirements. But the screen is smaller than the 1st iPhone's even.
The problem is Apple's monopoly on devices that run iOS. In an alternate reality, Apple licensed out iOS, and alternative designs could flourish. The Android ecosystem still has keyboard phones a la Blackberry. Caterpillar makes an Android phone with a FLIR camera. It's a gimmick, unless you work somewhere where it's not.
In this alternate history, there's a tiny design firm out of Carmel, south of Cupertino, doing bespoke runs of an iPhone 4 with A18s and eSIM capability and they're always sold out.
My guess would be that all those people that wanted small phones had an iPhone SE and now all their data is locked into Apple's walled garden and that's why they will begrudgingly buy a larger phone, even though they would have preferred a smaller one.
In short: Apple can get away with ignoring what those customers want.
I mean, I would assume most folks who liked the SE still have one. The SE 3 just stopped production this year and should have several years of software updates left (the SE 1 just ended software support this year, 7 years after it was discontinued.
Can Apple lock-in those people who definitely want small phones by some prepaid arrangements which the users can't back out? That would be market working. Is there a reason why they don't do this?
It's not that they can't. They want to make money. When given the choice between making more money and less money, they'll generally choose more. They think making a smaller device would make less money. The sales numbers for previous attempts back this up. There's an enormous fixed cost for developing a new model, and it's not worthwhile unless that results in enough additional sales. There's demand, for sure, but how much? They think not enough, and I suspect they know what they're doing here.
That's a weird take. Large screens aren't primarily more "addictive", they're primarily more productive. They work as a better e-reader, a better text editor, better for watching a movie on a plane, better for reading maps, I could go on and on. (And if a company were incentivized to truly make an "addicting" phone, it would be Meta that would benefit from the social media ads, or TikTok. Not Apple.)
Large manufacturers can make them. But there isn't enough demand to make them profitable enough. It's not a question of whether they "want to pay for it", it's just simple economics. They're businesses, not charities. I like small phones, but I understand manufacturers are doing what's economically rational given market preferences and I don't blame them for it.
There are studies that show that engagement with smartphones is higher when the screen is larger. Seems like Apple's been doing their homework.
> However, a follow-up phantom model analysis using 10,000 bootstrap samples at 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals revealed that the overall magnitude of the hedonic path (i.e., LS→PAQ→AT→IU; B=0.14, SE=0.06, p<0.01) was larger than that of the utilitarian path (i.e., LS→PC→PEOU→PU→IU; B=0.07, SE=0.03, p<0.01) even though participants were given a task-oriented, rather than entertainment-oriented (e.g., gaming, movie watching), assignment during the experiment. This implies that users are likely to put greater emphasis on the affective dimension of the technology than on its utilitarian dimension, despite the practical, purposeful nature of the assigned task. Given that user affect (e.g., positive or negative feelings) toward a technology is typically attributed as the central characteristic of the technology (regardless of the accuracy of the attribution),55 the practical implication of this finding is that smartphone manufacturers ought to take full advantage of the positive effects of the large screen on PAQ when designing their products. However, the more challenging design implication is that the optimal level of screen size that does not jeopardize the anywhere–anytime mobility of smartphones should first be identified, since screen size cannot be indefinitely increased in the mobile context. Thus, the remaining question to be addressed in future research is the optimal size of the mobile screen.
There is a number of small Android phones, so apparently there is demand in that niche, and smaller companies can address it and make money.
But this is because Google is a software / service company, so it keeps Android open.
Apple is a hardware company, and always has been. They have a relatively narrow lineup of devices which they support for a very long time, compared to Android devices. So Apple are not interested in fringe markets; they go for the well-off mainstream mostly.
But why are we needing a phone to be productive? And they were already a distraction from the world around us when they fit in a single hand.
I know I'm probably abnormal, but my phone is a phone first, camera second, and "work" device fifth.
As a society, our boundaries around communication and instant contact to anyone have collapsed. Now if you don't respond to a message within a few minutes, you get multiple follow ups. If you don't pick up the phone when a friend calls you, they don't leave a message, they text, then call again, then text again.
We've gone from being able to leave the house, and no one can contact us for a few hours, to no matter where we are people are trying to contact us. So they may be more "productive" with larger screens, but we never asked whether they SHOULD be more productive.
Being able to instantly communicate via photo and video makes a lot of people’s lives easier. For example, getting quotes for a house repair to save on travel time and energy getting estimates, showing before and after pictures to document performed work, and myriad more examples.
If someone is contacting you too much, that’s a problem solved by asking them not to harass you, not by putting limits on the device for everyone else.
I don't think they even set out to make a small phone with the SE, they set out to make a cheap phone. They achieved that by reusing older generation iPhone tooling which just happened to be smaller, as was the style at the time. When they refreshed the SE line it too got larger as it graduated to using later generation tooling.
I don’t know what they set out to do, but the marketing material specifically emphasized the compact form factor. (I’m reluctant to call it “small”, because the iPhone 5 didn’t seem small to me at the time.)
That's not a compelling argument when the same chart also shows the iPhone SE 2022 lagging behind iPhone SE 2020, even though they have identical form factors.
When the SE2022 came out, most people preferring smaller iPhones were already using either an SE or a mini, and the SE2022 didn’t offer much compelling reasons to upgrade from an SE2020. The SE2020, on the other hand, launched before the first mini, and after four years of waiting since the SE1.
Small phones (to an extent) are less expensive than larger phones to manufacture.
The thought that "Small phones are only more popular because they're less expensive" seems to willfully ignore that the phones are less expensive because their inputs are less expensive, because they're smaller.
I wonder about the idea that they're less expensive. True in terms of materials, but possibly not true if the smaller production run means you can't offset the capital costs of manufacturing the parts.
That's fair. I suspect that as phones get more "premium" the margin from a small phone shrinks faster than a larger phone.
HTC has been making cheap (very cheap) and small phones for the discount market. Foldables exist in the premium space, but the price tags appear to bake in a higher margin for a device that won't sell the same volume.
And in Germany, the iPhone 16e 128GB in white currently sells for €537 at "Netto Marken-Discount", a supermarket chain famous for its low price. "Marken-Discount" = "brand name rebates"
If Apple produced an Iphone SE with battery life that lasted, by making it a little thicker, then people would buy it IMO. The problem with the small phones is they arecreated on the premise that they should be crappy phones.
Of course everyone has a different version of what they consider crappy but bad battery life has got to be at the top of most people's crap-o-meter
iPhone 13 Mini was as you say. In every way as good as the full size iPhone but small. I hear it was quite an engineering challenge. I love the thing. The people of earth did not buy it.
The iPhone sales figures where probably a disappointment, for Apple. Had it been released by any other company it would have been viewed as a huge success. The sales numbers are just pretty poor, for an iPhone.
I think Apple has such high expectation to sales figures that even if a smaller iPhone comes in, even as the 10th best selling phone, that's maybe only 5% of all iPhone sales. Massively successful as a phone, millions of people bought it, but to Apple, the SE is a side hustle at best.
My daughters friends made fun of my iPhone SE3, they had never seen a phone that small.
Is it too big as a phone/SMS device? Yes. But as long as it's smaller than an equivalent digital camera or handheld gaming device or portable GPS it's still appropriately sized for how I mostly use it.
This is solving an entirely different problem than you imagine. This is solving the problem of “no one can tell I use an iPhone when it’s in my purse/pocket”. This is a conspicuous bag that loudly announces “I’m carrying an iPhone”. That’s what it’s for.
Also, can you actually not fit a phone in your pocket? I can fit the biggest iPhone in my pocket just fine in all of my pants. Conversely my wife cannot, but that’s because women’s pockets are vestigial. She couldn’t fit the 3GS in most of her pockets either.
The price is incredible. Many phones on the market are cheaper than this accessory. Maybe the true market need is “people don't know how much disposable income I'm willing to throw at nonsense”.
Anecdotally, just this past month I had a pair of good quality jeans from J. Crew wear out and tear at the pocket due to friction from my iPhone 13 Pro Max. The jeans are fairly lightly used.
I would love a smaller phone that doesn't kill my pants...
"But no, Apple's phones just had to grow and grow like cancer ..."
Larger screens are better for advertising
More eyeballs on mobile than on larger form factors
Mobile OS are, with few exceptions, exclusively corporate-controlled. The corporations controlling the OS are enagaged in advertising services
Makes sense to try to increase mobile use for more tasks. Perhaps increasing screen size will help
I still have an old iPhone 4. Is it still possible to jailbreak and install some old software for experimentation. I'm not interested in using it to access Apple servers. All computers I own access the web through a TLS forward proxy
This isn't a pragmatic item though. It's a fashion item. Similar to when Apple made the real gold Apple Watch. It's not a statement on the broader market, it's Apple associating its brand name with high fashion and prestige. They've done this for many years.
Yep. If someone is looking for a more functional item similar to this, Fjallraven sells a "Greenland Pocket" which I used to solve the "too much phone" problem. (And, unsurprisingly, costs many times less while doing much more.)
(I'm not associated with Fjallraven, I just enjoy this bag and think it makes the functionality of the Apple Pocket look even more ludicrous in comparison.)
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
Marketing 101: Create a customer. Even if phones were small enough that there was no need for such a product, Apple's marketing team would convince you that you needed this product for [reasons].
I wish the iPhone 12/13 mini had been a few mm thicker for a bigger battery, and had been in the Pro class of devices. As it stands they didn't have a good enough battery to last a day, and most people interested in smaller devices had probably just picked up the new SE that was released just half a year earlier.
I believe the issue is that with Jobs gone, Apple's design team is now apparently unable to continue their job. Instead of developing their own UI paradigm for small screens, they keep copying from Google Pixel both the UI ideas and the screen size. And now that they ran out of useful ideas, they turned everything transparent. Why make the iPhone look more like Apple Vision when people so obviously hate the latter? [1]
My prediction is that the age of AI and LLM assistance will make tiny devices the norm. Like those AI pins. Like Siri inside AirPods. Like Meta's AR glasses. But it seems that Apple is losing the race here. They lost their edge when it comes to developing new user interface paradigms.
>Apple's design team is now apparently unable to continue their job
Honestly id say this is a mix of both Jobs and Ive being gone.
Now under the operational maximalist that is Tim Cook, they just revert to old designs every few years and call it revolutionary. See: edges on the iPhone. First, rounded edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, rounded edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard edges. WOW, revolutionary!
All the while stripping actual functionality out of the devices and removing useful features like headphone jacks. There hasn't been real product innovation at Apple in over a decade.
The most important thing Jobs did (and he mentioned this) is to say No to great ideas. Like this, like iPhone Air, like Apple Vision Pro, etc.. Apple without Jobs is now much like it was before Jobs in the 90s, only this time it has a lot more momentum than it had before. Still though Apple is back to throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
Can any woman with a purse or man with a fanny pack chime in and let us know if they've ever thought about putting their phones in their bags before?
Is this supposed to dispute the claim? A man putting his phone in his fanny pack would also signify apple's phones are inconvenient to carry. Apple releasing a 'solution' is them admitting it
No, it's supposed to point out that there exists an entire set of people who have been putting their phones in bags for as long as phones have existed. We mostly don't hear from women here on HN thanks to old gender biases in tech.
> Apple releasing a 'solution' is them admitting it
Apple released a collaboration with a fashion brand.
Yes, I do this because when I'm using my bike to get into work as it often involves more than one set of clothes and swapping everything between different pockets is annoying so I have a big 'unipocket' fanny pack, my 6.7" phone is still cumbersome in there making digging out other items annoying. And when I'm wearing some pairs of pants and the phone isn't angled just right it will dig into my hip while walking up stairs until it's adjusted.
(and that's with a relatively budget android phone, smaller devices are a tiny niche of old less powerful devices that barely have support)
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
I think it's an admission that consumers prefer phones that are large enough that they have become inconvenient to carry in a pocket.
Some people have never had pockets big enough to comfortably fit even a smaller smartphone and have been carrying them in bags this whole time.
Phones have grown, but people are the same size as ever. It's as if the industry has collectively forgotten what ergonomics is. It's especially frustrating for me as someone who is a comparatively compact person and who still considers the phone a secondary device mostly for use outside.
The choice in the form of the iPhone mini that sold by millions but is somehow still considered a failed product by Apple, yeah. And nothing comparable in the Android world, where all manufacturers pretty much move in lockstep.
The choice has happened over many years. Incrementally consumers were offered the choice of the same size phone or larger, and they kept choosing larger.
If the smaller iPhones and Android phones of 10+ years ago had continued to sell well as larger models were introduced alongside them, they'd still be selling phones that size today.
I wonder what percentage of people who complain about not being able to buy smaller phones actually ever bought the smaller phones when they were available. Are these people carrying 3rd gen iPhone SEs right now? I suspect no.
It’s not as if Apple dislikes money. If they believed the market for small phones was large enough, they’d still be selling small phones.
I have sympathy for folks who want a small phone and legitimately would buy it if available. Unfortunately the set of people who will actually buy a smaller phone seems to be very small, which is why all the manufacturers have just stopped. Apple with their two sizes seems to be trying harder than most manufacturers.
You seem to have missed my point about manufacturers moving in lockstep.
Most people use a phone for at least two years. The way it happened in the 2010s, by the time someone is looking at buying a new one, all available phones on the market have already grown larger compared to their current one. So, they get sad and buy whatever is available.
Which is perhaps why Apple tried the iPhone Mini, to go back and see if they were missing a large market segment. Their answer was that some people bought it, but not enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
There isn't a grand conspiracy to make everyone sad with big phones they don't want.
> Their answer was that some people bought it, but not enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
This is the key thing. It’s not that no one wants it. But it’s a lot of engineering to produce another distinct hardware model and the market is tiny compared to the larger models.
But I have kids, and am less willing to compromise on camera quality than I am size.
I’d pay the same price for a smaller phone if the camera specs (and ideally battery life—go ahead and make it a little thicker, they’re too thin anyway) were the same as the larger phones, but they’re not.
I bet those kinds of differences are what do it for a lot of folks. They’re like me and would prefer smaller, all else being equal—but all else is typically not equal, even compared to standard iPhones and not the ultra-high-end ones.
iPhones have always fit in my pockets. Even in different types of pants and different brands. This is already the case and I don't understand how the iPhone isn't already pocket sized.
I was also hoping it was a small phone announcement but it not being part of a keynote didn't give me high hopes.
I've been on Android since day 1 but I'm thinking about switching to iPhone. If they ever made foldable (clamshell style, not book style) phone I would buy it immediately. I just want a small phone.
Yes I could get an Android foldable that already exists but I like to stick with Pixels and they don't have one yet and I'm kinda of done with Pixels. They are crap quality.
I had a look for covers, and I could only find silicone (?) or plastic sleeves and the 'handbag straps'. I think / suppose a lot of people just have their phone in their hand or on a table all the time, so why make it pocket sized?
One of the subtext reasons is that women’s’ clothing lacks proper pockets for whatever sexist reason, so a pocket you wear on the outside can seem like a great idea.
I'm typing this on an iPhone SE 2022 (the last one with a home button). I'm done with iPhone as soon as I am no longer able to use this model. I don't like the new, oversized pieces of junk, and I also like the home button as opposed to the new Face ID/swipe up workflow.
For people that have good visual acuity, the smaller screen is ideal; it's such high resolution that you can fit a lot of things in a small area. For people that turn the font size up to 600, the bigger screen is obviously ideal, but nobody really wants to have to hold something that is bigger if they don't need it for the screen size. That's the market I fit in and Apple has abandoned at market, along with all common sense (re: liquid glass, the recent Apple/Google Gemini deal, etc.).
If Google sold five million iPhones Mini it would be considered a smash hit. But because it's Apple it's considered a flop because of the ridiculous sales numbers of their other models.
There's one data point. I would bet, though, that Apple, Sony and Samsung have plenty more data points of devices that didn't move and thus they stop making smaller devices.
Yup, keep in mind the generally Western audience on HN is only a small minority of the total market, which is... hundreds of millions of people for the iphone alone.
This is the correct answer. I don't think anyone believes that Apple doesn't manufacture smaller phones out of spite? They are just not popular enough.
That must be why all those vacuum robots and smart TVs phone home to China. Because people really love appliances that spy on them. Good thing Samsung patched their fridges to add advertisements and spyware, because that's what their customers (in the US) were really waiting for.
Pixel 1 was the ideal phone. Not too large. Completely flat back. Screen didn't bulge above the sides so you could drop it without shattering the screen. Google's design has only gone downhill since then. (The pixel 5 looks pretty nice, but it seems to have the bulging glass and the beginnings of camera bumps)
The current form factors are what people are buying. Even the Apple design team is surprised. I think even iPhone Air sales aren’t as good as they projected
The worst part of this is the UI bloat that came along with it. Since there's no longer a need to consider smaller phones, everything got bigger and more padded also worsening the information density on larger phones.
Irredentist pro-war language, Tim Cook? I am so done with Apple. They knew what they did when they chose the words; they certainly spent thousands of hours deliberating them.
This is Lebensraum with Chinese Characteristics.
> "The term is often used to avoid invoking sensitivities over the political status of Taiwan.[16] Contrastingly, it has been used in reference to Chinese irredentism in nationalist contexts, such as the notion that China should reclaim its "lost territories" to create a Greater China.[17][18]"
It's a large step up from "it's used for job postings in (or closely working with) mainland China", to "it's featured in Apple product announcements targeting a global audience of millions".
Has it been used in an Apple product announcement before? My search is imperfect, but I actually can't find an example (on their /newsroom subdomain).
As recently as two months ago, with the Airphone announcement, they weren't doing this:
2020 - "First, I want to recognize Apple’s family in Greater China. Though the rate of infections has dramatically declined, we know COVID-19’s effects are still being strongly felt. I want to express my deep gratitude to our team in China for their determination and spirit. As of today, all of our stores in Greater China have reopened."
2024 - "Today, Apple has 57 stores in Greater China, with thousands of team members delivering exceptional service and creating magical experiences for customers."
It's not a "loose geographical region". It's usually denotes precisely the PRC (People's Republic of China, including mainland China and the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macao) together with the ROC (Republic of China, usually known as Taiwan).
> Just like how they removed all the gay dating apps in China yesterday (by request of the government of course).
Those apps have always been illegal in China. Of course, one could say Apple should not operate in China (and this is perhaps true), but they cannot both operate there and break the law.
Apple could choose to give the users of their devices freedom to run whatever operating systems and programs they choose. Then they could truthfully say that there is no way for them to control what people do with their devices once they leave the Apple store. If you put yourself in control of such things because it is profitable, you ought to take responsibility for the consequences.
It's not really about outsmarting them. Authoritarian systems of control rely on centralization. If you create an ecosystem where end users have lots of agency, of course most of them will go the path of least resistance, but the few who are willing to put in the effort to resist still can. Google and Apple tightening their grip over their respective mobile ecosystems is a very potent lever for authoritarian governments to pull.
Surely there’s a difference between hardware being a locked down appliance and… well, a more generic computation device.
I think the argument is that Apple or even any company that makes Android phones could choose to have an open bootloader (and maybe some driver stuff) and normally that wouldn’t really offend any government, while also giving the users more freedoms.
Otherwise, what’s next, PCs that only run Windows and only allow Edge as the browser and force the telemetry on?
Would they? Unlikely, given iPhone creates a lot of jobs there. But if iPhone becomes the de facto devices for Chinese citizens to access illegal content then the chance is none-zero.
(And of course they can make Linux illegal too. It's just harder to enforce than making iPhone illegal.)
Can you give me the source of where brazil made linux illegal? I am sorry but I tried to search and the only references I could find were of brazil banning twitter/X for some reason.
I am genuinely curious how someone can decide linux to be illegal. How would the ban even work out?
It's delusional to think the default OS would be replaced by anyone more than a few percent of niche users.
It's your desire to have open OS just say so. Doesn't really tie into avoiding oppression by communism. The Chinese need to solve that problem at its root.
The iPhone is a Chinese product. China ultimately controls whether or not the iPhone exists. No place else on earth can manufacture 20,000 iPhones an hour, 24/7/365.
Making two hundred million devices of the iPhone’s complexity and quality is not a trivial matter, and takes tens of thousands of skilled (and experienced) workers. Almost all of those people are Chinese, in China, subject to Chinese law. Apple cannot meaningfully fight Chinese law.
“sit comfortably” is a big stretch here. I imagine it must upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you and I. We, after all, can speak publicly about how upsetting it is. He cannot.
> must upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you and I. We, after all, can speak publicly about how upsetting it is. He cannot.
Yes, he will just have to comfort himself by crying into his pillow made of solid gold bars on his California King-size bed made of a solid block of hundred dollar bills. Poor Tim Apple — the real victim here.
In seriousness, even if he feels (and is right!) that there was nothing Apple could do better, nothing stops him from resigning, and then publicly stating that he didn’t want to be a part of a company that had to collaborate with a brutal and inhumane government. He just would rather acquire more billions for some reason.
I didn't know that tim cook was gay and here is one message from wikipedia I want to quote
> In June 2014, Cook attended San Francisco's gay pride parade along with a delegation of Apple staff.[85] On October 30, Cook publicly came out as gay in an editorial for Bloomberg Business, saying, "I'm proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me."[86] While it had been reported in early 2011 that Cook was gay,[87][88] at the time, Cook tried to keep his personal life private
I feel like Tim Cook should be a man of his words and try to actually help the community he is proud to be in but I am sure that investors might not be happy but that just goes on to show that maybe even some CEO's could be puppets of shareholders and can be forced to do things solely for profit where their heart might not lie.
I think that another point is that shareholders can also be puppets of CEO's in the case of Elon musk 1 Trillion $ deal shows that imo
I feel like we live in the times where morality can be side-lined for profit and be celebrated. The whole idea why even people can be puppets of each other could be because they get profits and power and influence because of it (basically money most of the times)
But what power do those CEO's have if they can't stand for what they think is right or educate themselves on these matters.
This is why, as a gay man, I give people a look when they ask why I still rant about gay rights "even though you guys have marriage and stuff now".
It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing for it. People are entitled to be who they are.
Most hetero people will never (thankfully) know that pitted feeling of having to check your surroundings and environment every single day when you simply want to hold your partners hand, chat to a coworker, book a hotel reservation, or book a night out to celebrate.
Every single macro outcome like this only demoralizes gay people just wanting to wake up and not think about anything other than the stresses and excitement of the day ahead.
If anyone reads this and you think it sounds dramatic, it’s not. It’s a reality, and Tim Cook knows that..he should do better.
I am a straight man and I feel like some communities just become scape-goats
We have this us vs them mentality which some people use to collect power and influence at the costs of them
Ultimately I think that it is a very foolish thing because I think that as long as nobody bothers on my freedom etc., I should be in literally nobody's business bothering their freedom
> It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing for it. People are entitled to be who they are.
I agree 100% with this message.
But one thing I have problem with (on the straight side of things) is that I have seen occasionally some extremely feminist comments which do try to impeach or try to have this very fundamental skewed problem that man are ALL the problem and its all man's fault etc. and I have seen the same in masculinity cultures as well and I feel like both of them are just radicalizing people to seize power and influence or sell courses or feel better about themselves.
I think that we sometimes forget that people are people and we should treat others with the same courtesy and kindness that we expect to be treated with, I guess. maybe we sometimes don't treat them that way or didn't treat them that way and I guess we should just apologize or try not to do that ever again. Mistakes happen but as long as we still have a mindset similar to doing good, I feel like things would be hopeful.
There is no middle ground. Mentioning "Greater China" isn't neutral. It's precisely the idea of considering "Greater China" as neutral that is de facto siding with the PRC.
No, this is Apple being confident that the USA will drop Taiwan and that this and that siding with China is the "responsible" thing to do.
I'd rather we drop the pretense or expectations that corporations have anything but one goal. That will help us direct our energy to where it can actually be productive.
If the marketplace demands better corporate stewardship, and people vote with their wallet, and companies decides to change then great, but the corporate ship is only ever getting steered in one direction and it's not for noble reasons.
Because what you consider moral issues are actually just issue prominent in media.
And yes, I want my business to be prudent in earning money. Doing harm to people is not effective or prudent. Getting in political name callings is also not prudent.
Nothing pro war about it. Read history books instead of making assumptions. It is referring to the mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau as a whole. It became popular with the rise of China. Try any business newspaper in the 90s. It is less relevant now as Hong Kong and Macau are now part of China.
It isn’t unlike Benelux, or Scandinavia, or Iberian, or Balkan, or Gulf countries.
When was the last time Greater Italy being used? Right.
From the book “The Concept of “Greater China”: Themes, Variations and Reservation”:
The world is suddenly talking about the emergence of “Greater China.” The term has appeared in the headlines of major newspapers and magazines, has been the topic of conferences sponsored by prominent think-tanks, and is now the theme of a special issue of the world's leading journal of Chinese affairs. It thus joins other phrases – “the new world order,” “the end of history,” “the Pacific Century” and the “clash of civilizations” – as part of the trendiest vocabulary used in discussions of contemporary global affairs.
of the 193 members of the UN, only 12 (6%) recognize Taiwan as a country.
the Kuomintang lost the war. its effectively the same as if the confederacy retreated to the Florida keys and China maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity.
It is unfortunate that iPhones cannot be made anywhere else in the world. No other country has the right tooling, workforce, or skill set, at that volume.
China made a strategic decision to go deep there, and the rest of the world decided it was post-industrial
People in Taiwan don’t care. They will care if there’s an actual invasion, not which language Apple uses on their website. Please get a life. Ditto folks engaging with this troll.
They've been using this term for years. It's nothing new and nothing unique to Apple.
Don't forget that the "we are the only legitimate Chinese government and we own it all" attitude is shared by both Chinese governments. The PRC claims Taiwan, but Taiwan claims all of China as well.
The CCP has Apple hostage. Their products are (effectively) all made there.
China has more control over Apple than the US does, at present. They are, of course, in crash override priority mode trying to change that, but nowhere else on earth can manufacture (on average) 20,000 iPhones per hour, 24/7/365. (TBH it’s probably closer to 50k per hour in the months up to release day.)
The iPhone is a Chinese product, made by tens of thousands of Chinese people, on machines in China, subject to Chinese jurisdiction and law. That’s an uncomfortable fact for the US economy.
If Apple doesn’t do exactly what China wants them to do, the iPhone does not exist, and Apple as we know it today does not exist.
US government has FAR more control over Apple as a company. China only has control of the Chinese operations. The president is personally beefing with companies and buying stakes in them. The tariffs alone could have severely hurt Apple, but Apple bent over backwards to appease the president. The US government can simply request an app be removed and Apple and Google will do it worldwide.
China does not have that power over Apple. China can threaten Apple but they have already diversified their manufacturing to other countries so China does not have a strangle hold on the supply line.
Your comment is the actual prowar propaganda though in my europeean eyes.
The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever wars to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred thousand civilians, - where is China geonociding hundreds a week right now? Yeah nowhere, but the US is doing that every decade.
Incredible to see this angle that 'the good guys' are bowing down to bad China in this context when you have so much poverty, political repression and lack of gay rights, abortion etc in many right wing states to straight up hyper right wing terrorism targeting vulnerable populations every year.
I feel like in geo-politics. No country can be good.
Personally, I feel like america still has (had) hope with zohran mamdani but after the recent american shutdown, I would consider democratic party to be an extension of republican party or not doing anything radical except bernie,aoc, zohran and some other people.
I feel like America could have a hope to swing whereas china doesn't imo.
although, I feel like what is happening is that people made (short term?) decisions earlier generations earlier which lead us to where we are today where any country over-all needs a radical change as both europe and america and a lot of other countries need to radicalize what they are doing to give hope to the youngsters
Personally I feel like we shouldn't care much about US or chinese products but rather the ideologies of the product creators if we are worried about things and I think this is one of the reasons I love open source so much.
Hope to swing? The US has killed many more people in wars of conquest than China in the last 50 years. So i really see both as problematic but the US is still much more violent geopolitically. Ie worse in my eyes, Israels latest genocide being a creszendo on an already horrible track record.
>The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever wars to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred thousand civilians.
My man, the US and China are more or less the exact same here with the exception of forever wars.
Climate? China pollutes like crazy, and so does the US.
Colonialism? Maybe not in the same vein but China does engage in actions to other nations, such as Macau, Hong Kong, and Taiwan that could be classified as colonialism.
Fascism? Well yeah both countries are pretty much openly fascist right now.
Support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide of over a hundred thousand people? Yeah the US and China are both complicit there. In fact, in China, you're speaking about the regime itself, with context to the ongoing genocide of Uyghur people.
How does that excuse China's pollution? They still chose to do that, no one forced them to. I do agree that other countries are guilty of China's pollution as well, but that certainly does not excuse China choice to do that pollution laundering for them.
Yes its imperial logic so why arent you saying that to OP's bizzare US = peace and gay rights comment?
And the Uyghur repression is no genocide compared to Palestine thats complete US misinformation and frankly a sinister comparison - the US is much much more violent, again look at Palestine, before that literally 30+ wars for resources and markets with millions of civilians dead.
Im not naive about China but this US = beacon of human rights angle is frankly gross to me.
China has many problems but americans are literally worse and you wanting to boycut due to human rights, is this a joke?
I sometimes wonder what the comments will look like here when China invades/blockades Taiwan, and I suspect they will look a lot like this. Lots of US whataboutism. Note that the OP doesn’t mention the US at all.
Yeah i've looked into it and its bad still much much less violent than the over 100.000 civilians, kids and mothers killed in Palestine so whats up with this weird focus when you guys are littersally killing muslims by the thousands every other year with no remorse?
Do you condemn Israel? And if not - then what even is this concern of yours? Both are bad but Israel is much worse according to litterally all major NGOs.
Seriously do you condemn US imperialism and the genocide in Gaza too?
You can ask a traditional crafts person in most the world to make you a custom one with traditional patterns and it would be significantly better. Then they can feed their family for a least a week.
Apple isn't the only one who can make a giant sock!
(As an aside, I swear by pants from the Issey Miyake Homme Plissé collection. Since investing in some pairs about 10 years ago, I have hardly worn anything else—no other pants match their comfort. The iPhone Pocket is of course ridiculous anyway.)
The pants cost around 500 bucks? I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money unless they are lined with gold or something.
I usually buy cheap clothes and mend them and ten years for a pair of pants isn't unusual for me. I probably haven't spent $500 dollars on clothes in a year ever in my entire life (except maybe the year I bought a suit for getting married).
I guess I'm just genuinely curious how you found yourself in the position of even contemplating $500 for pants.
I never knew what a difference good pants can make. I usually just bought my pants from H&M/other retailers or Amazon. I usually bought what I considered good value pants for like $30-80. I then, out of curiosity, bought pants that were 2-4 times as expensive (~$150) and it really made a difference. I never really liked the pants I had… they never fit right… they felt very uncomfortable. The new pants I got about 2 years ago (the more expensive ones) were very very different. Very comfy. They also had a lot of nice features that I never knew I needed but that I now want by default…
- A button that just "clicks". Most pants I usually owned had a traditional pants button. Those more expensive ones had buttons that just "clicked". Away goes the worry about a button falling off while you are on the go.
- Pockets with hidden zippers: My pants have pockets and in those pockets are smaller pockets with a zipper. Perfect to store things that are small and easily lost.
There are more "features" but those are the important ones. The most important feature is just the material that is used. I barely feel it. Also the company that makes those pants makes other things as well. I ordered a lot of cloths by now and the amazing thing is that everything they make fits me perfectly. I don't know how they do it… When I usually buy pants I have to try on like 10 pants to find one that fits. Even if I pick the "correct" size.
$500 for something you might wear for a decade straight? A brand-new pair of Levis at JC Penny is gonna run you like $90 anyways. It's not that much more expensive.
But also, quality has diminishing returns in basically every category. At the low end, it's extremely efficient to improve the quality of your product and charge a bit more. At the high end, you can't make any more inexpensive moves to set yourself apart, so you use higher end materials, fabrication methods, and workers.
> $500 for something [...] run you like $90 anyways. It's not that much more expensive.
To be honest, I did abandoned school as quickly as I could and my math skills aren't that of my peers, but 5x times as much is pretty "much more expensive" for most people out there, not sure how someone can say else with a straight face. $100 vs $500 would easily be a "Can I eat properly the entire month?" decision for a lot of the population.
Different strokes for different folks. I'm a fashion lover but a fan of cheap cars, and I could equally say something similar about people who drive new luxury cars when there's plenty of reliable functionality to be had under $10k. There's a lot of craftsmanship that goes into nice clothes, and you can get way more expensive than $500. And fashion is a form of art in a way. What makes a painting worth thousands of dollars?
I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money unless they are lined with gold or something.
I don't think Steve Jobs went shopping for pants. Nor do many of the people who buy this sort of garment. They either have an assistant who buys things for them, whose goal is to keep them happy and not blow a predetermined budget, or they go to a store and sit in a nice suite where a personal shopper suggests things to them. In either scenario the price of individual items probably don't even get a mention.
Steve was a notoriously picky shopper and obsessed with details. In the biography it says they went without a dishwasher or something in his house for half a year because he could never be satisfied with the geometry or finishing. So his billionaire wife washed dishes by hand.
I once paid $1000 for some sneakers. I’m still regularly wearing them 7 years later. I’ve bought $50/$100 and they never last that long. It was an insane purchase at the time, done in a moment of jet lagged madness when my shoes fell apart in an airport. But over time it’s turned out to be a great investment. Smart, comfortable, well made.
Do you wear them like $50 shoes or like $1000 dollar shoes? I run around 18 miles a week on trails and I doubt your $1000 dollar sneakers would last ten years with that usage pattern.
When you run 18 miles a week you should measure the lifetime of your shoes by mileage rather than time. I think 600 miles is about right for a pair of running shoes. It's just that some people run 600 miles in a year, others run that in ten years.
I'm sure that if you got super high quality durable running shoes, and only used them for running, you'd get some good milage out of them before the shoes either wore out or wore through.
I play tennis regularly and only go through a pair of shoes maybe once a year or every 18 months. I always pay extra for a higher quality and more durable pair because they last. I only use the shoes for tennis - I put them on when I enter the court and take them off when I end my session. The shoes probably run me $180-200 but totally worth it if they can last me 100+ hours.
The maximum durability running shoes are $150-$200. No amount more than that will give you more durability and assuredly almost all $1000 shoes won’t last as long as $200 Asics Superblasts
I do have a pair of $250 leather riding boots that have lasted me many years so far and I'm pretty sure will last that long, but they also require cleaning and polishing a few times a year....
I'm happy to pay $$$$ for something that lasts but my exerience is some of the most expensive things I've bought, well known luxury brand names, had the lowest quality.
In my younger years, I really did believe that cost correlated with longevity, but as I've gotten older, I'm finding that most of the very affordable things I've purchased, including shoes and pants and jackets, have lasted 15+ years. So I no longer believe that paying a thousand dollars for an item of clothing is going to yield a material benefit in terms of longevity -- I think some of it is just marketing, but there are also other elements of comfort and fit. I'm just not very discerning.
I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money
Maybe he's amortizing them.
He says they've lasted ten years, so that's $50/year.
Don't rule out until you've tried it. High end clothing (not just brand name, but real advanced stuff) is pretty amazing in how it makes you feel. I'm inclined to spend on anything I interact with, and clothes is pretty big interaction.
Sure, but you need to have a certain level of wealth before even considering it. $500 is a ridiculous sum for a pair of trousers. I've had €80 or €120 Levi's at one point when I had a bit more expendable income but they only lasted me two years. I'm back on affordable jeans now (when outside, when inside it's pajama pants all the way lmao), I think they're €30 or so.
I'm sure the branded ones are "better" but is it to scale with the price? Are Levi's 4x as good as cheap ones? Are these Steve Jobs ones 16x as good?
I am wondering what you call consumption that feeds $499 designer margins on polyester like that, while so many people can barely afford to scrape by day to day.
Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what appears to be a universal truth. In all types of economic and political systems (after we left the forest, and probably while we were still in the forest), some people have been desperately poor while other people are not. What would be interesting is a single counterexample of sustained "income equality."
That said, our current degree of inequality and the particular way it is distributed seems to be unusual and remarkable. But pointing to someone having a hard time is, IMO, not a critique of that.
Yes, yes ... It's the same as it ever was, only so much more so!
Beyond just critiquing the disparity here, I feel like the psychology that treats capital in such a frivolous way, shifting it about already privileged pockets of society, rather than apply it to any sort of material good is rather abhorrent. That's just my take.
I got excited until I saw they cost $600? Once in a while I'm reminded we exist in very different universes. Still trying to justify splurging on common projects 2 years later.
in my experience as a tech guy who got into fashion and then after several years went back to not caring: Sneakers are the product category with the least differentiation in value-for-money between the high end (especially designer, but also not-designer-but-still-expensive like common projects) both in terms of aesthetics and quality/durability. You're paying $300 more for a 10% better product. Jeans, outerwear, knits, boots, you can more easily justify that cost
I’m so glad there are some people willing to pay over $200 for “a piece of cloth” which I assume is a translation issue but it sounds uninspired- who knew your inspiration for a bag could be the material that most bags are made of?
I especially like how it’s sized to fit almost any iPhone ever made. So not only are you getting a bag made of cloth, for over $200 it’s not even custom fitted!
Anyway, this product isn’t for me. I suppose enough other people will buy it.
Edit: I suppose the short version is under $200 but my sentiment hasn’t changed. Perhaps I’m even more cranky now that increasing the length of the strap costs $80. That’s the same level of rip-off that Apple charges for increased SSD storage on their Macs.
I bought my current phone for $94 brand new. It can communicate with other devices over the air through literal magic. It has 2.5 million tiny lights, each independently controlled to be any color I want. It knows where I am anywhere on the planet. Through it, I can access an essentially infinite pool of entertainment, hail life-saving emergency services, perform monetary transactions, acquire food, etc.
This piece of cloth is twice the price and it can't even make phone calls.
This is like complaining about the $400 Hermès band. The "iPhone Pocket" is obviously a luxury item from a high end designer, of course it's going to be expensive.
It's kind of hilarious to me when the tech world collides with the high-end fashion world. On the one hand, I get how absurd this seems from a tech perspective. On the other hand, dropping a couple hundred dollars on a fashion item that will be trendy for a season among a certain group... it's no different from any other high-end fashion accessory. It's just that the two worlds so rarely overlap.
The fashion world's biggest sellers are handbags and shoes, which are practical purchases and tend to feature pretty intricate design details. This is a Speedo for a phone, and it makes Apple's already over-the-top descriptions of its products sound even more absurd.
At this point, you may as well get a powerpack for a mini and put it in one of these slings, you could have a crazy powerful machine in your "sock-et" sling thing here...
When the iPhone Air was just another huge phone...but thinner...smh. Apple should put up some page to check interest level in a smaller phone, and with enough interest, go manufacture it. If it is more expensive because economies of scale don't work out, but they create one that is small yet powerful, that's what I would buy at premium, because apparently compactness is a luxury.
And they say you can “create your own personalized color combination”. This is just literally just the pairing of the phone color and whatever color you pick for the bag. Who calls this a customized color combination?!
Apple should experience the same surge of collective excitement everyone felt when they first saw the headline "iPhone Pocket," followed by the crushing disappointment of discovering it's just a grocery bag for your iPhone.
For those surprised by the cost, this is an Issey Miyake product, and the price is in-line with that. It's no different than the $800+ Hermes leather Apple Watch straps.
I was out with my young coworkers and was absolutely baffled to see a bunch of them with slings for their phones. That was the only time I’d heard of such a thing until now. I kinda thought I’d drunkenly hallucinated it.
I was just talking to my wife about this, literally 5 minutes ago. I just moved from the 13 mini to the Air and am hating that it doesn't comfortably fit in my jeans, to the point where I might go return it today. My young cousin was wearing her iPhone on a cross body sling, and I was commenting that we've gotten to the point where the phones are so big that you need bags or extra things to carry it comfortably.
To a contemporary person their smartphone is probably the single most functionally important object they carry with them. People have always modified their clothes around common items, and then those modifications become subject to fashion trends and then eventually tradition themselves. Think like briefcases and wallets, but also japanese inro, european snuffboxes, decorative scabbards, etc.
This is more like an ancient and near universal practice being applied to a modern tool, rather than a totally new thing in itself.
For sure, I had that thought as well, that clothing is evolving alongside the things people are needing to carry.
But, for me, it does seem like we're going in a functionally poorer direction. Just a few years ago I could have a computer I could fit in my pocket. I can't buy that anymore. The fact that people are selling modifications to these devices (cross body slings, cases with those weird pop up things on the back so you can hold it one handed) to me means we've missed the mark on design. For more than a decade we had a great one handed computer that'd disappear into my pocket. No longer.
Ha, I bet the muggers/phone thieves will have a field day.
I find it interesting that anybody is that surprised. Remember, this is the company that overcharges for SSDs (no they're not magical super SSDs that only Apple can make)/extra ram.
They charged $1000 for a monitor stand that's pretty much just a thin block of aluminium.
Honestly… was having a conversation with my aunt about this last week. Knitting, crocheting, and quilting are all high-skill activities and no one charges enough for it.
I used to joke that I made some of the most expensive socks in the world: 20 hours per pair, and I’m a run-of-the-mill IT ops person in western Europe - do the math.
I have decided to up the cost by taking up fleece processing and hand spinning. Even on the wheel, it takes another twenty hours to clean, comb, and spin enough wool for a pair of socks.
If I were doing this for income, I’d definitely get faster at all the steps.
As I pick up more of the steps in making clothes, it’s mind-boggling how cheap even “luxury” clothes like the 500 EUR pants discussed above, much less my sturdy midrange jeans (Tom Tailor, 60 EUR, pockets that hold an iPhone 13 mini, even in a ladies’ cut), are.
The vast majority of people making handcrafted do not charge enough for their items. If they did, nobody could afford them. Most items are priced based on the cost of the material with little consideration to the time to make them. I have a friend that is a very skilled knitter, but for large items like blankets and sweaters, there are weeks of effort involved. When broken down, "kids in Chinese factories" make more per hour.
The great thing is that this type of person will tell you they are not in it for the money. As long as they can "buy more string" with the proceeds (or whatever their materials are), they are quite happy.
I found the reddit ManyBaggers recently and there is a cottage industry of high-end bags that seem incredibly made for the price that are in no way luxury products.
Its just a stiff translation of a marketing term. If you look up 一枚の布, you'll see a bunch of Miyake's clothes, where the whole gimmick is that they have no seams. A better translation probably would have been "inspired by the concept of seamless design"
Back when Steve Jobs was at Next, Apple released the Duo Dock. Instead of plugging your laptop into a docking station, you put it in a slot like a giant 3.5" floppy. It was different, sure, but I still don't know what design problem it solved.
This pattern repeats itself in "high" fashion quite a lot. Simple, ridiculous things that are relatively trivial to make, yet massively expensive due to hype/brand/fomo. I guess it wouldn't exist if people didn't pay for it, but it also shows how people don't value craftsmanship so much as status symbols.
Show them two identical products, one from Apple, one from Auntie down the street, and they'll pick Apple and tell you the other is inferior.
I'm sure theirs is better than anything I could make myself in all sorts of little ways. I'm just not sure it would be $140 better.
On the other hand, if I did make one for myself (which I won't - one purse is enough) it would probably have a 2-color brioche stitch or something like that for more visual interest.
The next product Apple will unveil will be an iPhone case made of human fingernails from those who have tried to climb this K-shaped economic ladder and failed. It'll be a steal at only $500 a pop.
Like many, I was disappointed this wasn't a new iPhone mini.
$30 for a pack of six iPod socks always seemed like a horrible value to me in the mid-2000s. I'm not denying they were fun and whimsical, but as cases, they didn't protect your iPod or allow you to use it while inside them. It felt like a rip-off two decades ago, and these are 30-46 times more expensive per-sock.
I know Apple does things like this to position themselves as a luxury brand and as a shareholder I still do not buy the idea stunts like these are what's best for the company. At best, a small segment of the target demographic will see this as a curiosity at the cost of further damage to Apple's reputation. People will see this as further proof Apple is more concerned with products and services which rip off their customers and developers, as opposed to providing real value.
I will be the first to welcome Apple bringing back some semblance of fun and whimsy into their product line-up, and this is not the way to do it.
This does look like a gag to me too, but 3D knitting technology is interesting. I have a pair of carbon-plate marathon race shoes made with 3D knitting. They're very light and very comfortable, with stretch in some axes and stiffness in others as needed, no seams but form-fit around my foot in compound curves.
Instead of making the thing out of 2D pieces of fabric, even stretchy knit fabric, and sewing those planar shapes together into something 3D, they made this as one continuous knit object that adds and drops stitches to give it shape without seams. The machines and programs that manipulate the yarn and partial garments, tying knots at crazy speeds to create something 3-dimensional out of something 1-dimensional, are just astonishing. Equally astonishing is the fact that with two sticks and their hands, it's not that challenging for a human knitter to do the same. I think that "knit a sock" is one of the most challenging tasks to give a humanoid robot.
They bought a bunch of 3D knitting machines to make Vision Pro headstraps, and since that isn't selling I guess they're using the excess capacity to make iPhone socks.
I don't want to kink shame anyone, but I'd be concerned about getting all of that fuzzy caught in someone's throat. Unless I missed the version made of silk.
This is gonna launch first in Taipei (among other stores) and looks a lot like the bags people use to carry their boba tea in here. It's a bit expensive for a drink bag though.
> I already have a pocket for my phone, it’s my.. pocket.
As Steve Jobs intended.
(Like, really. I think the original "one more thing" presentation was also so powerful became he could just casually pull some next-gen tech out of his pocket)
Aww. I was hoping for a super mini flip or foldable low-power minimalist iPhone, but it's another weird Apple hipster fashion accessory. Very disappointing.
The long strap version is too short on that model. Purse straps hang to hip level for a reason. Hanging at the hip makes reaching in substantially more ergonomic.
Also lmao at the photo of the little bag strapped to the other larger bag. Yo dawg, I heard you like bags.
Also they're super ugly. But I guess that's "subjective".
I don't have an iPhone and will not get one at least until Google kills ReVanced, nor would I ever get a sock for my phone but wow, I fully expect this to be hit. Not only in this collaboration, it will spawn a thousand copies as well.
Everything about this is perfect. The Japanese origin, the idea, high tech manufacturing (single cloth, 3d knitted, whatever), the cheap material, the timing... I am in awe. The kind of shock and awe that militaries aim to deliver.
Apple has ingested a million tiny current trends of craftsmanship, story telling, accessorizing, ground them into this magnificent triumph of corporate capitalism. This is why commies never even stood a chance.
Quote: “ Inspired by the concept of ‘a piece of cloth.’” Is this some kind of joke? If it were April 1st I’d assume the whole article is meant for comedic effect.
I take the pants that have insufficient pockets to a tailor, and ask them to extend the depth of the phone pocket. You can even ask them to do the extension in phone size if you want to restrict its movement in your pocket. On average I've needed about a 3" extension which both restricts lateral phone movement, and also carries it low enough on my thigh that the phone doesn't pinch into my hip when I sit down.
$30 or so later you'll have an integrated Pholster and don't have to carry another thing around with you. For $200 you should be able to update all the pants you have that lack a proper pocket. This is also an incredibly easy thing to sew yourself, by hand, while you watch TV. $30 for a tailor to do the first pair to give you a template to follow, $50 at a craft store will get you some decent scissors, needle, thread, and a yard of whatever material you like. You'll butcher the first pair of pants, but the second, will be better and the third will be perfect.
I’m not trying to be glib here, but this genuinely looks like something a satirical blog might post.
I’m not a product or UI/UX designer but when you have to design a new, ridiculous way to carry a phone your company’s manufacturing and selling, I’d have thought that’s your sign to focus on making it less awkward to carry. “Think different”, indeed.
"Crafted in Japan, iPhone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted construction that is the result of research and development carried out at ISSEY MIYAKE."
How would a 2d knitted construction look like? Lmfao.
As silly a product as this is, the fact that it made it to the front page of Hacker News makes it a bigger deal than it actually is.
It's not like it's sitting on Apple's frontpage. It's not some major product announcement. To get to the `/newsroom` page where the product was listed, you have to literally scroll to the bottom of https://apple.com and click a tiny link.
I will however comment on the price and utter lack of functionality. This product is utter garbage--a total niche for art goblins (said lovingly).
Meanwhile, can I have multi-message selection back in (iPad) Mail? Whoever decided to axe that feature apparently has a spam-free inbox.
This company has become such a joke. Maybe Apple should start being concerned about building computers that Just Work well again rather than continuing to flounder after Cook's obsession with bad fashion.
I suppose the underlying message here is that, if you can no longer innovate, shill overpriced purses instead.
This is yet another sign of the K Shaped economy. While I am homeless through no fault of my own, people can buy a $200 sweater pocket for their iphone.
Awww... I was so much hoping for an iPhone that will fit into my pocket. The 1st iPhone SE was the perfect form factor. But no, Apple's phones just had to grow and grow and grow like cancer ...
In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
> they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
I loved the iPhone SE and small phones generally, but at the same time I realize Apple's not failing at anything. They're giving the market the size people actually want. The smaller phones don't sell nearly as well. Most people prefer a bigger phone even if carrying it is less convenient.
I've just accepted my phone will be bulky now, so I double down and attach a magnetic wallet to it, and carry it in my hand or jacket pocket or bag rather than my pants pocket like I used to. During meetings it lies on the table rather then in my pants pocket. C'est la vie.
Maybe there's room in the world for a device people want, even if it's not the device the majority want? I mean I know Apple is just a small startup company with only a $4 trillion valuation, but maybe they could just do one thing that isn't maximally profitable once in a while.
They used to make the "mini" but that's because Jobs had taste and it's what he, specifically, wanted in his pocket. Now Jobs is gone and... no more mini.
But I'll keep my iPhone 13 mini going as long as I can.
They made it, it didn't sell well. Last I checked zero Android manufacturers were still creating high quality small phones (<5.5"). The Android community has resorted to petitions like https://smallandroidphone.com
Some people definitely want it, but when not even one Android manufacturer will create a model when they can get 100% market share, it looks like there isn't enough demand.
If each iPhone model served only 3% of total iPhone users like the iPhone mini did, you'd end up with 33 iPhone models
>maybe they could just do one thing that isn't maximally profitable once in a while.
They tried that this year and called it iPhone Air
The iPhone Air was a turn in the wrong direction.
What people like me wanted was an iPhone 13 mini that's a bit thicker so it can have a bit more battery capacity. And with the 120 Hz PWM nausea fixed.
The iPhone Air has worse battery life. And it has a larger screen. And it's worse to handle one-handed. Coming from the 13 mini, it's not an improvement.
I bought an Air, coming from a 13 mini, and I largely agree with you on all those points except the battery life. I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying the Air has bad battery life, which maybe it does compared to the 17 or 17 Pro etc, but the past week I've been test driving it it has more than all day battery life for me. My 13 mini needed a recharge in the middle of the day (battery was worn down to about 83%).
Otherwise, yeah, you're right. I'm pretty sure I'm going to return it this week before my 14 days are up.
I get you're referring to the profitability, but the iPhone Air is just thin, not small, which is where this conversation started.
I bought a Pro Max for myself and an Air for my wife, who had a Mini before.
The Air is DAMN SMALL. You really should try holding it. Yes the 2D dimensions are as large as a normal modern phone but it’s hardly there otherwise. It’s a good compromise.
I’d want it myself but I shoot ProRes Video.
Right, forgot to mention it should also be somewhat practical.
I'm curious how well it is selling. Early on there was a lot of enthusiasm, but I haven't heard much since. I don't know if I'd want a phone with less battery life, but my understanding is the Air's battery is actually not much smaller than last year's pro?
It doesn’t seem to be selling well: https://www.macrumors.com/2025/11/10/next-generation-iphone-...
Neither is Samsung's similar Galaxy Edge apparently, to the extent that it's rumored that the product line has already been cancelled after just one generation. Both companies probably should have sat on that idea until they could offset the physically smaller batteries with the much denser silicon-carbon chemistries.
It felt more like: keep the size, reduce the battery life
Ya got me there.
You missed the part where he said "make a device people want."
They are making 5 different iPhone models of varying sizes, features, prices.
Not in Tim Cook land. If a product is profitable that’s not good enough, it has to be very profitable.
Shareholders would never ever be ok with a company not trying to be maximally profitable.
That's why Tesla stock tanked as soon as the FT wrote that "$1.4bn appears to have gone astray." ;)
https://www.ft.com/content/62df8d8d-31f2-445e-bfa2-c171ac43d...
What's Tesla's forward PE? Close to 200? I don't think we can use them as an example of anything resembling a sane market.
Edit: Found a link to the article content, I gather that's basically the point you're making?
Yes, the point I was trying to make is that companies can get away with not being maximally profitable. There's nothing legally stopping Apple from accepting a slightly lower profit margin on the 5% of sales volume that might go to smaller iPhones if they would offer them. But it might brighten the day for millions of customers.
> What's Tesla's forward PE? Close to 200?
Nope, close to 300 actually…
I'm all for that when it comes to things like accessibility technology that allows people to do things they otherwise couldn't. But screen sizes? You can use a larger screen, you just prefer a smaller one.
> They're giving the market the size people actually want.
No - call it what it is. They are catering to the largest market segments and ignoring the smaller segments who desire smaller phones.
Reasoning as to why is another thing, but it doesn't negate the existence of the segment who does want one.
Much like there is a segment of the population who wants a brown diesel station wagon.
An Apple Watch with a cellular connection, paired with Airpods, fulfills some of the role of a small iPhone - you can make calls, listen to music, and even do some light texting if Siri likes your accent.
No camera => not a phone replacement for most of the market
I love my apple watch but I can safely say i've never done any of the above with it. It's too much of a pain to switch the bluetooth headphones to it and the screen is too small to do much actual computing with it. The fitness aspects are totally worth the money, though.
There is one, shame it’s 3%.
What “the market wants” is a maximally addictive device. It’s a really low bar even if highly profitable. Bigger screens make it more exciting and addictive.
Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers can’t make small phones because they’re small and can’t pay for it, and large manufacturers can’t make it because…(checks notes)…they’re large and don’t want to pay for it even if there’s demand.
> Just profoundly weird to me that small manufacturers can’t make small phones because they’re small and can’t pay for it, and large manufacturers can’t make it because…(checks notes)…they’re large and don’t want to pay for it even if there’s demand.
Large and small companies sell smaller Android phones.
It's very difficult to find something around 140 grams and 140x80 even giving them some slack about the thickness. The Samsung S25 [1] is about there but I currently still use an A40 [2] because of the size and weight. I'd give away a couple of cm of height. A zero bezel 120mm phone would be ok. 120 grams are a dream.
[1] https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s25-13610.php
[2] https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_a40-9642.php
Your weight requirements are more restrictive than your size requirements. GSMArena's phone finder found foldable or rugged phones which satisfied size but not weight. And Unihertz phones appear well known where small phones are discussed but are not in GSMArena's database for some reason. The Unihertz Jelly Star satisfied your requirements. But the screen is smaller than the 1st iPhone's even.
The problem is Apple's monopoly on devices that run iOS. In an alternate reality, Apple licensed out iOS, and alternative designs could flourish. The Android ecosystem still has keyboard phones a la Blackberry. Caterpillar makes an Android phone with a FLIR camera. It's a gimmick, unless you work somewhere where it's not.
In this alternate history, there's a tiny design firm out of Carmel, south of Cupertino, doing bespoke runs of an iPhone 4 with A18s and eSIM capability and they're always sold out.
My guess would be that all those people that wanted small phones had an iPhone SE and now all their data is locked into Apple's walled garden and that's why they will begrudgingly buy a larger phone, even though they would have preferred a smaller one.
In short: Apple can get away with ignoring what those customers want.
I mean, I would assume most folks who liked the SE still have one. The SE 3 just stopped production this year and should have several years of software updates left (the SE 1 just ended software support this year, 7 years after it was discontinued.
The 3 is not really an SE. It's an iphone 8
When people say SE in the context of wanting skaller phones they generally mean SE 1, which has about the same form factor as iPhone 5.
Not hard to take your data anywhere you wish.
Can Apple lock-in those people who definitely want small phones by some prepaid arrangements which the users can't back out? That would be market working. Is there a reason why they don't do this?
It's not that they can't. They want to make money. When given the choice between making more money and less money, they'll generally choose more. They think making a smaller device would make less money. The sales numbers for previous attempts back this up. There's an enormous fixed cost for developing a new model, and it's not worthwhile unless that results in enough additional sales. There's demand, for sure, but how much? They think not enough, and I suspect they know what they're doing here.
That's a weird take. Large screens aren't primarily more "addictive", they're primarily more productive. They work as a better e-reader, a better text editor, better for watching a movie on a plane, better for reading maps, I could go on and on. (And if a company were incentivized to truly make an "addicting" phone, it would be Meta that would benefit from the social media ads, or TikTok. Not Apple.)
Large manufacturers can make them. But there isn't enough demand to make them profitable enough. It's not a question of whether they "want to pay for it", it's just simple economics. They're businesses, not charities. I like small phones, but I understand manufacturers are doing what's economically rational given market preferences and I don't blame them for it.
There are studies that show that engagement with smartphones is higher when the screen is larger. Seems like Apple's been doing their homework.
> However, a follow-up phantom model analysis using 10,000 bootstrap samples at 95% bias-corrected confidence intervals revealed that the overall magnitude of the hedonic path (i.e., LS→PAQ→AT→IU; B=0.14, SE=0.06, p<0.01) was larger than that of the utilitarian path (i.e., LS→PC→PEOU→PU→IU; B=0.07, SE=0.03, p<0.01) even though participants were given a task-oriented, rather than entertainment-oriented (e.g., gaming, movie watching), assignment during the experiment. This implies that users are likely to put greater emphasis on the affective dimension of the technology than on its utilitarian dimension, despite the practical, purposeful nature of the assigned task. Given that user affect (e.g., positive or negative feelings) toward a technology is typically attributed as the central characteristic of the technology (regardless of the accuracy of the attribution),55 the practical implication of this finding is that smartphone manufacturers ought to take full advantage of the positive effects of the large screen on PAQ when designing their products. However, the more challenging design implication is that the optimal level of screen size that does not jeopardize the anywhere–anytime mobility of smartphones should first be identified, since screen size cannot be indefinitely increased in the mobile context. Thus, the remaining question to be addressed in future research is the optimal size of the mobile screen.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4080862/
There is a number of small Android phones, so apparently there is demand in that niche, and smaller companies can address it and make money.
But this is because Google is a software / service company, so it keeps Android open.
Apple is a hardware company, and always has been. They have a relatively narrow lineup of devices which they support for a very long time, compared to Android devices. So Apple are not interested in fringe markets; they go for the well-off mainstream mostly.
> they're primarily more productive.
But why are we needing a phone to be productive? And they were already a distraction from the world around us when they fit in a single hand.
I know I'm probably abnormal, but my phone is a phone first, camera second, and "work" device fifth.
As a society, our boundaries around communication and instant contact to anyone have collapsed. Now if you don't respond to a message within a few minutes, you get multiple follow ups. If you don't pick up the phone when a friend calls you, they don't leave a message, they text, then call again, then text again.
We've gone from being able to leave the house, and no one can contact us for a few hours, to no matter where we are people are trying to contact us. So they may be more "productive" with larger screens, but we never asked whether they SHOULD be more productive.
Why do you need an iPhone for that? Wouldn’t any old phone work then?
Why do you need phones to not be productive?
Being able to instantly communicate via photo and video makes a lot of people’s lives easier. For example, getting quotes for a house repair to save on travel time and energy getting estimates, showing before and after pictures to document performed work, and myriad more examples.
If someone is contacting you too much, that’s a problem solved by asking them not to harass you, not by putting limits on the device for everyone else.
How did you translate “I want a smaller phone available” to “putting limits on the device for everyone else?”
Can you write down the actual detailed argument?
Just opining that it’s weird can’t possibly be convincing against a consensus amongst all the large smartphone manufacturers.
I don't think they even set out to make a small phone with the SE, they set out to make a cheap phone. They achieved that by reusing older generation iPhone tooling which just happened to be smaller, as was the style at the time. When they refreshed the SE line it too got larger as it graduated to using later generation tooling.
I don’t know what they set out to do, but the marketing material specifically emphasized the compact form factor. (I’m reluctant to call it “small”, because the iPhone 5 didn’t seem small to me at the time.)
Yall forgetting they literally made an amazing iPhone Mini that no one bought
"iPhone 16e Sales Lag Behind SE Models"
Ooops ?
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/06/03/iphone-16e-sales-lag-be...
Looks like the market did like the SE size.
>Looks like the market did like the SE size.
That's not a compelling argument when the same chart also shows the iPhone SE 2022 lagging behind iPhone SE 2020, even though they have identical form factors.
When the SE2022 came out, most people preferring smaller iPhones were already using either an SE or a mini, and the SE2022 didn’t offer much compelling reasons to upgrade from an SE2020. The SE2020, on the other hand, launched before the first mini, and after four years of waiting since the SE1.
Sure, but between the SE2020 and the SE2022 was the iPhone 12 line-up which included the 12 Mini
Good point. Thx.
> Unsurprisingly, the primary reason identified for the iPhone 16e 's weaker debut is its higher launch price.
Adjusting for inflation, the SE (€479 in 2020) was €588 and the SE2 (€519 in 2022) was €567. The 16e is 699, a 25% increase.
Small phones (to an extent) are less expensive than larger phones to manufacture.
The thought that "Small phones are only more popular because they're less expensive" seems to willfully ignore that the phones are less expensive because their inputs are less expensive, because they're smaller.
I wonder about the idea that they're less expensive. True in terms of materials, but possibly not true if the smaller production run means you can't offset the capital costs of manufacturing the parts.
That's fair. I suspect that as phones get more "premium" the margin from a small phone shrinks faster than a larger phone.
HTC has been making cheap (very cheap) and small phones for the discount market. Foldables exist in the premium space, but the price tags appear to bake in a higher margin for a device that won't sell the same volume.
And in Germany, the iPhone 16e 128GB in white currently sells for €537 at "Netto Marken-Discount", a supermarket chain famous for its low price. "Marken-Discount" = "brand name rebates"
That is utterly worthless without knowing what the SE and SE2 were sold for in the same context. The 16e's MSRP in germany is 699.
IMO the e series is/could be used as an anchor to ratchet other phones higher in price.
If Apple produced an Iphone SE with battery life that lasted, by making it a little thicker, then people would buy it IMO. The problem with the small phones is they arecreated on the premise that they should be crappy phones.
Of course everyone has a different version of what they consider crappy but bad battery life has got to be at the top of most people's crap-o-meter
iPhone 13 Mini was as you say. In every way as good as the full size iPhone but small. I hear it was quite an engineering challenge. I love the thing. The people of earth did not buy it.
While small iPhones don’t sell nearly as well as larger sizes, I suspect they are still a very profitable product as Apple keeps releasing them.
Not small like they used to be. Not like the original SE, nowhere even close. The options now are basically big, bigger and biggest.
The iPhone sales figures where probably a disappointment, for Apple. Had it been released by any other company it would have been viewed as a huge success. The sales numbers are just pretty poor, for an iPhone.
I think Apple has such high expectation to sales figures that even if a smaller iPhone comes in, even as the 10th best selling phone, that's maybe only 5% of all iPhone sales. Massively successful as a phone, millions of people bought it, but to Apple, the SE is a side hustle at best.
My daughters friends made fun of my iPhone SE3, they had never seen a phone that small.
Huh? They haven’t released a remotely small phone in years.
There was a 4 year gap between the iPhone SE1 and iPhone SE2, it’s been less than 4 years since the SE3.
It’s not clear if they decided to alternate SE and E models, or given up on SE models entirely.
Mind that there is also a feedback loop: applications only work correctly on bigger phone screens.
> They're giving the market the size people actually want.
Some people clear still want those small phones, just not enough for Apple's profit margins.
Is it too big as a phone/SMS device? Yes. But as long as it's smaller than an equivalent digital camera or handheld gaming device or portable GPS it's still appropriately sized for how I mostly use it.
Can’t really want a smaller modern iPhone if no one is selling it.
Foldables…
This is solving an entirely different problem than you imagine. This is solving the problem of “no one can tell I use an iPhone when it’s in my purse/pocket”. This is a conspicuous bag that loudly announces “I’m carrying an iPhone”. That’s what it’s for.
Also, can you actually not fit a phone in your pocket? I can fit the biggest iPhone in my pocket just fine in all of my pants. Conversely my wife cannot, but that’s because women’s pockets are vestigial. She couldn’t fit the 3GS in most of her pockets either.
The price is incredible. Many phones on the market are cheaper than this accessory. Maybe the true market need is “people don't know how much disposable income I'm willing to throw at nonsense”.
Of course. Conspicuous consumption requires a high price. No one is impressed by the $15 cross-body bag you buy from Amazon.
Anecdotally, just this past month I had a pair of good quality jeans from J. Crew wear out and tear at the pocket due to friction from my iPhone 13 Pro Max. The jeans are fairly lightly used.
I would love a smaller phone that doesn't kill my pants...
"But no, Apple's phones just had to grow and grow like cancer ..."
Larger screens are better for advertising
More eyeballs on mobile than on larger form factors
Mobile OS are, with few exceptions, exclusively corporate-controlled. The corporations controlling the OS are enagaged in advertising services
Makes sense to try to increase mobile use for more tasks. Perhaps increasing screen size will help
I still have an old iPhone 4. Is it still possible to jailbreak and install some old software for experimentation. I'm not interested in using it to access Apple servers. All computers I own access the web through a TLS forward proxy
This isn't a pragmatic item though. It's a fashion item. Similar to when Apple made the real gold Apple Watch. It's not a statement on the broader market, it's Apple associating its brand name with high fashion and prestige. They've done this for many years.
Yep. If someone is looking for a more functional item similar to this, Fjallraven sells a "Greenland Pocket" which I used to solve the "too much phone" problem. (And, unsurprisingly, costs many times less while doing much more.)
(I'm not associated with Fjallraven, I just enjoy this bag and think it makes the functionality of the Apple Pocket look even more ludicrous in comparison.)
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
Marketing 101: Create a customer. Even if phones were small enough that there was no need for such a product, Apple's marketing team would convince you that you needed this product for [reasons].
It's profit margin, I'd assume. Big phones have big margins. Just like SUVs and the other land yachts that dominate the car industry.
Yep We need iPhone mini. Every year the phone is bigger which is worse. Android is the same.
I wish the iPhone 12/13 mini had been a few mm thicker for a bigger battery, and had been in the Pro class of devices. As it stands they didn't have a good enough battery to last a day, and most people interested in smaller devices had probably just picked up the new SE that was released just half a year earlier.
I believe the issue is that with Jobs gone, Apple's design team is now apparently unable to continue their job. Instead of developing their own UI paradigm for small screens, they keep copying from Google Pixel both the UI ideas and the screen size. And now that they ran out of useful ideas, they turned everything transparent. Why make the iPhone look more like Apple Vision when people so obviously hate the latter? [1]
My prediction is that the age of AI and LLM assistance will make tiny devices the norm. Like those AI pins. Like Siri inside AirPods. Like Meta's AR glasses. But it seems that Apple is losing the race here. They lost their edge when it comes to developing new user interface paradigms.
EDIT: [1] Bloomberg claims 10-15% return rate, which would be massive: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-02-18/apple-... (for comparison, Galaxus reports 2% as normal for Smartphones and <5% for Meta's Quest)
>Apple's design team is now apparently unable to continue their job
Honestly id say this is a mix of both Jobs and Ive being gone.
Now under the operational maximalist that is Tim Cook, they just revert to old designs every few years and call it revolutionary. See: edges on the iPhone. First, rounded edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, rounded edges. WOW, revolutionary! Then a few years later, hard edges. WOW, revolutionary!
All the while stripping actual functionality out of the devices and removing useful features like headphone jacks. There hasn't been real product innovation at Apple in over a decade.
But I digress.
The most important thing Jobs did (and he mentioned this) is to say No to great ideas. Like this, like iPhone Air, like Apple Vision Pro, etc.. Apple without Jobs is now much like it was before Jobs in the 90s, only this time it has a lot more momentum than it had before. Still though Apple is back to throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.
> Why make the iPhone look more like Apple Vision when people so obviously hate the latter
They are normalizing Apple Vision look so it looks less weird when you switch.
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
Can any woman with a purse or man with a fanny pack chime in and let us know if they've ever thought about putting their phones in their bags before?
Blazers and sport coats.
They’re purses you can wear that also tend to make you look better.
They’re friggin’ great, and even the largest smart phones easily fit their hip pockets.
No more keys poking you through jeans pockets. No more sitting on your wallet. Even room for a smallish paperback book.
We never should have moved away from them. They’re a utility garment.
What if you're in 30 °C weather?
Is this supposed to dispute the claim? A man putting his phone in his fanny pack would also signify apple's phones are inconvenient to carry. Apple releasing a 'solution' is them admitting it
No, it's supposed to point out that there exists an entire set of people who have been putting their phones in bags for as long as phones have existed. We mostly don't hear from women here on HN thanks to old gender biases in tech.
> Apple releasing a 'solution' is them admitting it
Apple released a collaboration with a fashion brand.
Yes, I do this because when I'm using my bike to get into work as it often involves more than one set of clothes and swapping everything between different pockets is annoying so I have a big 'unipocket' fanny pack, my 6.7" phone is still cumbersome in there making digging out other items annoying. And when I'm wearing some pairs of pants and the phone isn't angled just right it will dig into my hip while walking up stairs until it's adjusted. (and that's with a relatively budget android phone, smaller devices are a tiny niche of old less powerful devices that barely have support)
This is not any kind of admission about phone sizes. This is an "exclusive" tie-in with a high fashion brand, nothing more.
Same. I got so excited by the thought of a new iPhone that would fit in my pocket, but clicked on the link to see… phone socks?
I too thought we were finally getting a reasonable sized phone again.
Instead it’s an overpriced Apple branded jock strap.
> In my opinion, the fact that Apple is now selling a bag to carry your oversized phone around in, is an admission that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
I think it's an admission that consumers prefer phones that are large enough that they have become inconvenient to carry in a pocket.
Some people have never had pockets big enough to comfortably fit even a smaller smartphone and have been carrying them in bags this whole time.
I also thought it was like Gameboy Pocket - another small form iPhone. Yeah not too excited about whatever this sling is. I already have pockets
Phones have grown, but people are the same size as ever. It's as if the industry has collectively forgotten what ergonomics is. It's especially frustrating for me as someone who is a comparatively compact person and who still considers the phone a secondary device mostly for use outside.
The industry has given consumers the choice, and they overwhelmingly prefer to spend their money on the larger phones.
The choice in the form of the iPhone mini that sold by millions but is somehow still considered a failed product by Apple, yeah. And nothing comparable in the Android world, where all manufacturers pretty much move in lockstep.
The choice has happened over many years. Incrementally consumers were offered the choice of the same size phone or larger, and they kept choosing larger.
If the smaller iPhones and Android phones of 10+ years ago had continued to sell well as larger models were introduced alongside them, they'd still be selling phones that size today.
I wonder what percentage of people who complain about not being able to buy smaller phones actually ever bought the smaller phones when they were available. Are these people carrying 3rd gen iPhone SEs right now? I suspect no.
It’s not as if Apple dislikes money. If they believed the market for small phones was large enough, they’d still be selling small phones.
I did! As much as I could as someone who can't stand iOS, anyway. I used the Pixel 1 and then the Pixel 4a, for 4 years each.
I have sympathy for folks who want a small phone and legitimately would buy it if available. Unfortunately the set of people who will actually buy a smaller phone seems to be very small, which is why all the manufacturers have just stopped. Apple with their two sizes seems to be trying harder than most manufacturers.
You seem to have missed my point about manufacturers moving in lockstep.
Most people use a phone for at least two years. The way it happened in the 2010s, by the time someone is looking at buying a new one, all available phones on the market have already grown larger compared to their current one. So, they get sad and buy whatever is available.
Which is perhaps why Apple tried the iPhone Mini, to go back and see if they were missing a large market segment. Their answer was that some people bought it, but not enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
There isn't a grand conspiracy to make everyone sad with big phones they don't want.
Anecdotally, I, personally, know several people who bought the iPhone mini, some of them still using it.
I still blame Apple for considering that 3% of total iPhone sales is a failure. And then launching the iPhone air, as if it will do any better...
> Their answer was that some people bought it, but not enough to justify the product at Apple's scale.
This is the key thing. It’s not that no one wants it. But it’s a lot of engineering to produce another distinct hardware model and the market is tiny compared to the larger models.
Estimates are that the mini was only about 3% of total iPhone sales.
>that they failed to make phones that are convenient to carry.
It would appear people simply don't want them based on mini 13 and other sales.
I want a tiny phone.
But I have kids, and am less willing to compromise on camera quality than I am size.
I’d pay the same price for a smaller phone if the camera specs (and ideally battery life—go ahead and make it a little thicker, they’re too thin anyway) were the same as the larger phones, but they’re not.
I bet those kinds of differences are what do it for a lot of folks. They’re like me and would prefer smaller, all else being equal—but all else is typically not equal, even compared to standard iPhones and not the ultra-high-end ones.
Me too, I loved my mini 13.
But overall people didn't.
Reading this on a first gen SE. Still works great.
Since it can’t get the lastest OS many apps don’t install, effectively making it the type of dumb phone I always wanted.
Apple can pry my iPhone 13 Mini from my cold, dead, normal-sized hands.
I too was expecting a small iPhone. But this giant sock is hilarious. What are they thinking.
> I was so much hoping for an iPhone that will fit into my pocket
Yes, and I was about to write "so some Android manufacturer will copy Apple and deliver a phone of the size that was common 10 years ago."
Almost all of them are too large and they weight too much. 200 grams, why?
I'm surprised trouser pocket sizes have not adapted to the larger phones.
iPhones have always fit in my pockets. Even in different types of pants and different brands. This is already the case and I don't understand how the iPhone isn't already pocket sized.
I was also hoping it was a small phone announcement but it not being part of a keynote didn't give me high hopes.
I've been on Android since day 1 but I'm thinking about switching to iPhone. If they ever made foldable (clamshell style, not book style) phone I would buy it immediately. I just want a small phone.
Yes I could get an Android foldable that already exists but I like to stick with Pixels and they don't have one yet and I'm kinda of done with Pixels. They are crap quality.
I had a look for covers, and I could only find silicone (?) or plastic sleeves and the 'handbag straps'. I think / suppose a lot of people just have their phone in their hand or on a table all the time, so why make it pocket sized?
One of the subtext reasons is that women’s’ clothing lacks proper pockets for whatever sexist reason, so a pocket you wear on the outside can seem like a great idea.
Why sell someone a small phone when you could sell them a large phone and a watch?
When I had to buy an iPhone 13 because support for the 5s ended, my hands hurt from the big phone...
Literally this.
I'm typing this on an iPhone SE 2022 (the last one with a home button). I'm done with iPhone as soon as I am no longer able to use this model. I don't like the new, oversized pieces of junk, and I also like the home button as opposed to the new Face ID/swipe up workflow.
For people that have good visual acuity, the smaller screen is ideal; it's such high resolution that you can fit a lot of things in a small area. For people that turn the font size up to 600, the bigger screen is obviously ideal, but nobody really wants to have to hold something that is bigger if they don't need it for the screen size. That's the market I fit in and Apple has abandoned at market, along with all common sense (re: liquid glass, the recent Apple/Google Gemini deal, etc.).
I was hoping for a zfold
I remember there was the iphone12 mini but it failed as people didn't want it. It was quite good honestly.
I share the frustration. But apparently small phones don't sell.
> small phones don't sell
It's all relative.
If Google sold five million iPhones Mini it would be considered a smash hit. But because it's Apple it's considered a flop because of the ridiculous sales numbers of their other models.
Apple sold 10-15 million of the minis each year, with a marketing budget of approximately zero.
The problem is that everyone believed Tim Cook when he claimed that this is a failure.
How much did it cost Apple to make those minis? Do we know?
I surely don’t. But if it wasn’t profitable, then Apple sucks at supply chain management (which is something I don’t believe).
opens cupboard
iPhone 3GS
Galaxy S3
Sony XZ1 Compact
iPhone SE 2016
iPhone SE 2020
iPhone SE 2022
Unihertz Atom
There's one data point. I would bet, though, that Apple, Sony and Samsung have plenty more data points of devices that didn't move and thus they stop making smaller devices.
Yup, keep in mind the generally Western audience on HN is only a small minority of the total market, which is... hundreds of millions of people for the iphone alone.
This is the correct answer. I don't think anyone believes that Apple doesn't manufacture smaller phones out of spite? They are just not popular enough.
"They are just not popular enough."
The various Mini models accounted for 3 to 6% of sales, which was still millions of units.
That must be why all those vacuum robots and smart TVs phone home to China. Because people really love appliances that spy on them. Good thing Samsung patched their fridges to add advertisements and spyware, because that's what their customers (in the US) were really waiting for.
The Unihertz Atom is probably too small but it really fits the niche its web site targets. I might consider it for my bike.
Stop hogging the mineral resources and recycle them already!
Pixel 5 is a nice size. I like smallies too.
Pixel 1 was the ideal phone. Not too large. Completely flat back. Screen didn't bulge above the sides so you could drop it without shattering the screen. Google's design has only gone downhill since then. (The pixel 5 looks pretty nice, but it seems to have the bulging glass and the beginnings of camera bumps)
The current form factors are what people are buying. Even the Apple design team is surprised. I think even iPhone Air sales aren’t as good as they projected
It’s a fancy colostomy bag for all your digital shit
The worst part of this is the UI bloat that came along with it. Since there's no longer a need to consider smaller phones, everything got bigger and more padded also worsening the information density on larger phones.
In Soviet Russia, pocket fit phone.
> speaks to the bond between iPhone and its user
With this phrasing, does it feel like iPhone owns its user?
> "Greater China"
Irredentist pro-war language, Tim Cook? I am so done with Apple. They knew what they did when they chose the words; they certainly spent thousands of hours deliberating them.
This is Lebensraum with Chinese Characteristics.
> "The term is often used to avoid invoking sensitivities over the political status of Taiwan.[16] Contrastingly, it has been used in reference to Chinese irredentism in nationalist contexts, such as the notion that China should reclaim its "lost territories" to create a Greater China.[17][18]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_China
I think it's a common term used to loosely describe the geographical region. It's used by many other companies like Microsoft [1] and Google [2]
[1] https://careers.microsoft.com/v2/global/en/locations/gcr.htm... [2] https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/intl/en-apac/collections/gre...
It's a large step up from "it's used for job postings in (or closely working with) mainland China", to "it's featured in Apple product announcements targeting a global audience of millions".
Has it been used in an Apple product announcement before? My search is imperfect, but I actually can't find an example (on their /newsroom subdomain).
As recently as two months ago, with the Airphone announcement, they weren't doing this:
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/09/introducing-iphone-ai... ("Introducing iPhone Air, a powerful new iPhone with a breakthrough design")
> "The 40W Dynamic Power Adapter with 60W Max will be available in Canada, China mainland, Japan, Mexico, Taiwan, the Philippines, and the U.S."
Apple seems to have been using "Greater China" for a number of years, going by the newsroom section of their site.
2016 - "Users in Greater China will see these new features by default on iOS and OS X® after updating."
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2016/05/17Apple-Celebrates-Ch...
2019 - "The New Artist of the Week program provides new talent with a prominent platform across greater China for their work to be discovered."
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2019/01/HomePod-available-in-...
2020 - "First, I want to recognize Apple’s family in Greater China. Though the rate of infections has dramatically declined, we know COVID-19’s effects are still being strongly felt. I want to express my deep gratitude to our team in China for their determination and spirit. As of today, all of our stores in Greater China have reopened."
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2020/03/apples-covid-19-respo...
2024 - "Today, Apple has 57 stores in Greater China, with thousands of team members delivering exceptional service and creating magical experiences for customers."
https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/03/apple-jingan-to-welco...
That might be because that product was only available in China mainland, unlike this product which is available in Greater China.
It's not a "loose geographical region". It's usually denotes precisely the PRC (People's Republic of China, including mainland China and the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macao) together with the ROC (Republic of China, usually known as Taiwan).
Greater China is never used to describe a region. It means China, Tibet, Macao, Hong Kong and Taiwan according to Apple.
It’s a common, if highly distasteful, euphemism used by entities which must speak out of both sides of their mouths, yes.
Just like how they removed all the gay dating apps in China yesterday (by request of the government of course).
So sad to watch a gay CEO just sit comfortably and allow his company quietly destroy his own “community”. Don’t get me started on SA either…
> Just like how they removed all the gay dating apps in China yesterday (by request of the government of course).
Those apps have always been illegal in China. Of course, one could say Apple should not operate in China (and this is perhaps true), but they cannot both operate there and break the law.
Apple could choose to give the users of their devices freedom to run whatever operating systems and programs they choose. Then they could truthfully say that there is no way for them to control what people do with their devices once they leave the Apple store. If you put yourself in control of such things because it is profitable, you ought to take responsibility for the consequences.
China could also make that illegal, and probably has.
You're never going to outsmart the Chinese government with clever little tricks. They don't play like that.
It's not really about outsmarting them. Authoritarian systems of control rely on centralization. If you create an ecosystem where end users have lots of agency, of course most of them will go the path of least resistance, but the few who are willing to put in the effort to resist still can. Google and Apple tightening their grip over their respective mobile ecosystems is a very potent lever for authoritarian governments to pull.
Surely there’s a difference between hardware being a locked down appliance and… well, a more generic computation device.
I think the argument is that Apple or even any company that makes Android phones could choose to have an open bootloader (and maybe some driver stuff) and normally that wouldn’t really offend any government, while also giving the users more freedoms.
Otherwise, what’s next, PCs that only run Windows and only allow Edge as the browser and force the telemetry on?
Can china make linux illegal?
Not only that, they can ignore their laws and disappear/kill you whenever they feel like it.
They're not killing their own people by the millions like in Mao's days, but it's still a brutal dictatorship when it wants to be.
What makes you think they wouldn’t if they felt it would be useful? Or more likely, require a particular government-endorsed Linux.
They can make iPhone illegal.
Would they? Unlikely, given iPhone creates a lot of jobs there. But if iPhone becomes the de facto devices for Chinese citizens to access illegal content then the chance is none-zero.
(And of course they can make Linux illegal too. It's just harder to enforce than making iPhone illegal.)
If Brazil can, China can.
Can you give me the source of where brazil made linux illegal? I am sorry but I tried to search and the only references I could find were of brazil banning twitter/X for some reason.
I am genuinely curious how someone can decide linux to be illegal. How would the ban even work out?
Then China asks Apple to blacklist prohibited apps via notarization revocation. This isn’t the gotcha you think it is.
If only you could run your own software on the computer you bought and paid for.
It's delusional to think the default OS would be replaced by anyone more than a few percent of niche users.
It's your desire to have open OS just say so. Doesn't really tie into avoiding oppression by communism. The Chinese need to solve that problem at its root.
> they cannot both operate there and break the law.
Clearly they were doing exactly that until yesterday?
Or you know, allow third party app stores?
You can’t fight City Hall.
The iPhone is a Chinese product. China ultimately controls whether or not the iPhone exists. No place else on earth can manufacture 20,000 iPhones an hour, 24/7/365.
Making two hundred million devices of the iPhone’s complexity and quality is not a trivial matter, and takes tens of thousands of skilled (and experienced) workers. Almost all of those people are Chinese, in China, subject to Chinese law. Apple cannot meaningfully fight Chinese law.
“sit comfortably” is a big stretch here. I imagine it must upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you and I. We, after all, can speak publicly about how upsetting it is. He cannot.
> must upset him as much or perhaps more than it does you and I. We, after all, can speak publicly about how upsetting it is. He cannot.
Yes, he will just have to comfort himself by crying into his pillow made of solid gold bars on his California King-size bed made of a solid block of hundred dollar bills. Poor Tim Apple — the real victim here.
In seriousness, even if he feels (and is right!) that there was nothing Apple could do better, nothing stops him from resigning, and then publicly stating that he didn’t want to be a part of a company that had to collaborate with a brutal and inhumane government. He just would rather acquire more billions for some reason.
He did give a tour of Apple HQ to MBS. But maybe they think they can do more good than harm by selling products in Saudi.
I didn't know that tim cook was gay and here is one message from wikipedia I want to quote
> In June 2014, Cook attended San Francisco's gay pride parade along with a delegation of Apple staff.[85] On October 30, Cook publicly came out as gay in an editorial for Bloomberg Business, saying, "I'm proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me."[86] While it had been reported in early 2011 that Cook was gay,[87][88] at the time, Cook tried to keep his personal life private
I feel like Tim Cook should be a man of his words and try to actually help the community he is proud to be in but I am sure that investors might not be happy but that just goes on to show that maybe even some CEO's could be puppets of shareholders and can be forced to do things solely for profit where their heart might not lie.
I think that another point is that shareholders can also be puppets of CEO's in the case of Elon musk 1 Trillion $ deal shows that imo
I feel like we live in the times where morality can be side-lined for profit and be celebrated. The whole idea why even people can be puppets of each other could be because they get profits and power and influence because of it (basically money most of the times)
But what power do those CEO's have if they can't stand for what they think is right or educate themselves on these matters.
Food for thought.
> virtue was not convenient at the time
Maybe we live just in such times.
Tim Cook has no ability to change the Chinese government's policies.
This is why, as a gay man, I give people a look when they ask why I still rant about gay rights "even though you guys have marriage and stuff now".
It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing for it. People are entitled to be who they are.
Most hetero people will never (thankfully) know that pitted feeling of having to check your surroundings and environment every single day when you simply want to hold your partners hand, chat to a coworker, book a hotel reservation, or book a night out to celebrate.
Every single macro outcome like this only demoralizes gay people just wanting to wake up and not think about anything other than the stresses and excitement of the day ahead.
If anyone reads this and you think it sounds dramatic, it’s not. It’s a reality, and Tim Cook knows that..he should do better.
>It’s a reality, and Tim Cook knows that..he should do better.
You say that, but he's made billions by explicitly not doing better. And he's Wall Street's darling for it.
Tim Cook has no ability to change the Chinese government's policies.
I am a straight man and I feel like some communities just become scape-goats
We have this us vs them mentality which some people use to collect power and influence at the costs of them
Ultimately I think that it is a very foolish thing because I think that as long as nobody bothers on my freedom etc., I should be in literally nobody's business bothering their freedom
> It's 2025, almost 2026 and we're still doing this shit. I don't care if you think I'm icky, I think other people are icky sometimes but I don't try to stop them from existing for it. People are entitled to be who they are.
I agree 100% with this message.
But one thing I have problem with (on the straight side of things) is that I have seen occasionally some extremely feminist comments which do try to impeach or try to have this very fundamental skewed problem that man are ALL the problem and its all man's fault etc. and I have seen the same in masculinity cultures as well and I feel like both of them are just radicalizing people to seize power and influence or sell courses or feel better about themselves.
I think that we sometimes forget that people are people and we should treat others with the same courtesy and kindness that we expect to be treated with, I guess. maybe we sometimes don't treat them that way or didn't treat them that way and I guess we should just apologize or try not to do that ever again. Mistakes happen but as long as we still have a mindset similar to doing good, I feel like things would be hopeful.
Friend, this criticism has been relevant since 1998.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-criticised-for-dumping-t...
Not engaging in political fights outside your circle of influence is actually good for business and responsible leadership.
There is no middle ground. Mentioning "Greater China" isn't neutral. It's precisely the idea of considering "Greater China" as neutral that is de facto siding with the PRC.
No, this is Apple being confident that the USA will drop Taiwan and that this and that siding with China is the "responsible" thing to do.
Apple is the third most valuable company in the world. Not a mom and pop grocery store.
Apple CEO meets with the US president.
And the US President does the talking and makes demands. Not the other way around.
"Good for business" is not the highest goal a human can achieve. Not even close.
Start with "do the right thing" and progress from there.
I'd rather we drop the pretense or expectations that corporations have anything but one goal. That will help us direct our energy to where it can actually be productive.
If the marketplace demands better corporate stewardship, and people vote with their wallet, and companies decides to change then great, but the corporate ship is only ever getting steered in one direction and it's not for noble reasons.
I really dislike this narrative.
Because if you really want to stick with it, most companies should do business in a handful of countries in the world.
I think businesses should mind their own businesses and comply with local laws, end of story.
I ain't got no patience for companies quitting country X, but not Y.
if you really want to stick with it, most companies should do business in a handful of countries in the world.
Why is that a bad thing?
Difficulty: Don't use the trope "maximize shareholder value."
Because what you consider moral issues are actually just issue prominent in media.
And yes, I want my business to be prudent in earning money. Doing harm to people is not effective or prudent. Getting in political name callings is also not prudent.
How's that Gulf of America map working out in Mexico?
- What do you desire from professionals you hire?
- is performative naming of countries that hurt your relationships “the right thing”
- is business where we achieve our highest goals as humans?
- What are you having for lunch?
- What flavor are hydrogen protons?
- How fast does a cow moo?
We're playing Non-Sequitur Theater now, right?
Nothing pro war about it. Read history books instead of making assumptions. It is referring to the mainland, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau as a whole. It became popular with the rise of China. Try any business newspaper in the 90s. It is less relevant now as Hong Kong and Macau are now part of China.
It isn’t unlike Benelux, or Scandinavia, or Iberian, or Balkan, or Gulf countries.
>It isn’t unlike Benelux, or Scandinavia, or Iberian, or Balkan, or Gulf countries.
Greater Israel, Greater Italy, Greater Germanic Reich oh wait I lost the point, I guess any connections to irredentism are purely coincidental.
When was the last time Greater Italy being used? Right.
From the book “The Concept of “Greater China”: Themes, Variations and Reservation”:
The world is suddenly talking about the emergence of “Greater China.” The term has appeared in the headlines of major newspapers and magazines, has been the topic of conferences sponsored by prominent think-tanks, and is now the theme of a special issue of the world's leading journal of Chinese affairs. It thus joins other phrases – “the new world order,” “the end of history,” “the Pacific Century” and the “clash of civilizations” – as part of the trendiest vocabulary used in discussions of contemporary global affairs.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S030574100003229X
Yeah I think you may have understood my point. If you don't like Greater Italy, replace it with Greater Netherlands, it's much more relevant today.
of the 193 members of the UN, only 12 (6%) recognize Taiwan as a country.
the Kuomintang lost the war. its effectively the same as if the confederacy retreated to the Florida keys and China maintained a policy of deliberate ambiguity.
The population of Taiwan is 23 million. The population of Florida Keys is 82000. Not the same.
It is unfortunate that iPhones cannot be made anywhere else in the world. No other country has the right tooling, workforce, or skill set, at that volume.
China made a strategic decision to go deep there, and the rest of the world decided it was post-industrial
Today I heard the word "Irredentist" for the first time as I'm about to turn 42.
Taiwan still claims the rest of mainland China so maybe it's a reference to that.
People in Taiwan don’t care. They will care if there’s an actual invasion, not which language Apple uses on their website. Please get a life. Ditto folks engaging with this troll.
Thanks for pointing this out.
Since 2021, Tim Cook has repeatedly quoted the old IBM CEO's line "world peace through world trade."
This was the same line IBM used to protect their huge business with... wait for it... Nazi Germany
History shows without exception that authoritarianism and commerce are bedfellows.
I’m unaware of any for profit business interest over all of known history that hasn’t bent the knee to the desires of an authoritarian government
They've been using this term for years. It's nothing new and nothing unique to Apple.
Don't forget that the "we are the only legitimate Chinese government and we own it all" attitude is shared by both Chinese governments. The PRC claims Taiwan, but Taiwan claims all of China as well.
The CCP has Apple hostage. Their products are (effectively) all made there.
China has more control over Apple than the US does, at present. They are, of course, in crash override priority mode trying to change that, but nowhere else on earth can manufacture (on average) 20,000 iPhones per hour, 24/7/365. (TBH it’s probably closer to 50k per hour in the months up to release day.)
The iPhone is a Chinese product, made by tens of thousands of Chinese people, on machines in China, subject to Chinese jurisdiction and law. That’s an uncomfortable fact for the US economy.
If Apple doesn’t do exactly what China wants them to do, the iPhone does not exist, and Apple as we know it today does not exist.
US government has FAR more control over Apple as a company. China only has control of the Chinese operations. The president is personally beefing with companies and buying stakes in them. The tariffs alone could have severely hurt Apple, but Apple bent over backwards to appease the president. The US government can simply request an app be removed and Apple and Google will do it worldwide.
China does not have that power over Apple. China can threaten Apple but they have already diversified their manufacturing to other countries so China does not have a strangle hold on the supply line.
Your comment is the actual prowar propaganda though in my europeean eyes.
The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever wars to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred thousand civilians, - where is China geonociding hundreds a week right now? Yeah nowhere, but the US is doing that every decade.
Incredible to see this angle that 'the good guys' are bowing down to bad China in this context when you have so much poverty, political repression and lack of gay rights, abortion etc in many right wing states to straight up hyper right wing terrorism targeting vulnerable populations every year.
I feel like in geo-politics. No country can be good.
Personally, I feel like america still has (had) hope with zohran mamdani but after the recent american shutdown, I would consider democratic party to be an extension of republican party or not doing anything radical except bernie,aoc, zohran and some other people.
I feel like America could have a hope to swing whereas china doesn't imo.
although, I feel like what is happening is that people made (short term?) decisions earlier generations earlier which lead us to where we are today where any country over-all needs a radical change as both europe and america and a lot of other countries need to radicalize what they are doing to give hope to the youngsters
Personally I feel like we shouldn't care much about US or chinese products but rather the ideologies of the product creators if we are worried about things and I think this is one of the reasons I love open source so much.
Hope to swing? The US has killed many more people in wars of conquest than China in the last 50 years. So i really see both as problematic but the US is still much more violent geopolitically. Ie worse in my eyes, Israels latest genocide being a creszendo on an already horrible track record.
>The US is worse than China in many aspects, from forever wars to climate over colonialism to fascism and support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide on over a hundred thousand civilians.
My man, the US and China are more or less the exact same here with the exception of forever wars.
Climate? China pollutes like crazy, and so does the US. Colonialism? Maybe not in the same vein but China does engage in actions to other nations, such as Macau, Hong Kong, and Taiwan that could be classified as colonialism. Fascism? Well yeah both countries are pretty much openly fascist right now. Support for an ongoing extremely violent genocide of over a hundred thousand people? Yeah the US and China are both complicit there. In fact, in China, you're speaking about the regime itself, with context to the ongoing genocide of Uyghur people.
No the chinese people, most of whom do not have a ICE car, do not produce those carbon numbers
China is where the west exported pollution to by the fact that we pushed most of the deadly and dangerous production and manufacturing there.
So all the west does is launder pollution through east and southeastern asia.
How does that excuse China's pollution? They still chose to do that, no one forced them to. I do agree that other countries are guilty of China's pollution as well, but that certainly does not excuse China choice to do that pollution laundering for them.
Yes its imperial logic so why arent you saying that to OP's bizzare US = peace and gay rights comment?
And the Uyghur repression is no genocide compared to Palestine thats complete US misinformation and frankly a sinister comparison - the US is much much more violent, again look at Palestine, before that literally 30+ wars for resources and markets with millions of civilians dead.
Im not naive about China but this US = beacon of human rights angle is frankly gross to me.
China has many problems but americans are literally worse and you wanting to boycut due to human rights, is this a joke?
I sometimes wonder what the comments will look like here when China invades/blockades Taiwan, and I suspect they will look a lot like this. Lots of US whataboutism. Note that the OP doesn’t mention the US at all.
>where is China geonociding hundreds a week right now?
Xinjiang. They put people in camps and take extensive efforts to prevent births, to eliminate the Uighur population over time.
Yeah i've looked into it and its bad still much much less violent than the over 100.000 civilians, kids and mothers killed in Palestine so whats up with this weird focus when you guys are littersally killing muslims by the thousands every other year with no remorse?
Do you condemn Israel? And if not - then what even is this concern of yours? Both are bad but Israel is much worse according to litterally all major NGOs.
Seriously do you condemn US imperialism and the genocide in Gaza too?
I had to check the calendar to see if it was April 1. If Apple can sell a sock to put your iPhone in for 150 bucks… I wish I had the skills for that.
I just can't.
This is 150$ and probably cost 5 to 10$ to make.
You can ask a traditional crafts person in most the world to make you a custom one with traditional patterns and it would be significantly better. Then they can feed their family for a least a week.
Apple isn't the only one who can make a giant sock!
But its like 3D! Totally worth it when other objects are totally not!
It’s a very long sock though. And it’s, ahhh… “3D woven”
They're hardly the only retailer that successfully markets overpriced accessories.
Just some trivia (and an aside):
The collaboration is with Issey Miyake. Steve Jobs black turtlenecks was Issey Miyakes:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferhicks/2022/08/10/heres-...
(As an aside, I swear by pants from the Issey Miyake Homme Plissé collection. Since investing in some pairs about 10 years ago, I have hardly worn anything else—no other pants match their comfort. The iPhone Pocket is of course ridiculous anyway.)
The pants cost around 500 bucks? I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money unless they are lined with gold or something.
I usually buy cheap clothes and mend them and ten years for a pair of pants isn't unusual for me. I probably haven't spent $500 dollars on clothes in a year ever in my entire life (except maybe the year I bought a suit for getting married).
I guess I'm just genuinely curious how you found yourself in the position of even contemplating $500 for pants.
I never knew what a difference good pants can make. I usually just bought my pants from H&M/other retailers or Amazon. I usually bought what I considered good value pants for like $30-80. I then, out of curiosity, bought pants that were 2-4 times as expensive (~$150) and it really made a difference. I never really liked the pants I had… they never fit right… they felt very uncomfortable. The new pants I got about 2 years ago (the more expensive ones) were very very different. Very comfy. They also had a lot of nice features that I never knew I needed but that I now want by default…
- A button that just "clicks". Most pants I usually owned had a traditional pants button. Those more expensive ones had buttons that just "clicked". Away goes the worry about a button falling off while you are on the go. - Pockets with hidden zippers: My pants have pockets and in those pockets are smaller pockets with a zipper. Perfect to store things that are small and easily lost.
There are more "features" but those are the important ones. The most important feature is just the material that is used. I barely feel it. Also the company that makes those pants makes other things as well. I ordered a lot of cloths by now and the amazing thing is that everything they make fits me perfectly. I don't know how they do it… When I usually buy pants I have to try on like 10 pants to find one that fits. Even if I pick the "correct" size.
Alright, after that lead-in, you really need to tell us what the pants are.
It might be a well known brand to many folks – I am not sure since I am new in the US. My pants are all from Rhone Apparel.
$500 for something you might wear for a decade straight? A brand-new pair of Levis at JC Penny is gonna run you like $90 anyways. It's not that much more expensive.
But also, quality has diminishing returns in basically every category. At the low end, it's extremely efficient to improve the quality of your product and charge a bit more. At the high end, you can't make any more inexpensive moves to set yourself apart, so you use higher end materials, fabrication methods, and workers.
> A brand-new pair of Levis at JC Penny is gonna run you like $90 anyways
I'm seeing a range of around $33 to $60 at the moment, with other brands dipping under $30.
https://www.jcpenney.com/g/men/jeans?id=cat100250010
> $500 for something [...] run you like $90 anyways. It's not that much more expensive.
To be honest, I did abandoned school as quickly as I could and my math skills aren't that of my peers, but 5x times as much is pretty "much more expensive" for most people out there, not sure how someone can say else with a straight face. $100 vs $500 would easily be a "Can I eat properly the entire month?" decision for a lot of the population.
What in Silicon Valley salary is this statement?
Median weekly salary is 1159 according to BLS. That’s 7% of weekly salary vs 43% of weekly salary.
Different strokes for different folks. I'm a fashion lover but a fan of cheap cars, and I could equally say something similar about people who drive new luxury cars when there's plenty of reliable functionality to be had under $10k. There's a lot of craftsmanship that goes into nice clothes, and you can get way more expensive than $500. And fashion is a form of art in a way. What makes a painting worth thousands of dollars?
I always have a hard time telling is it craftsmanship and superior materials or marketing
I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money unless they are lined with gold or something.
I don't think Steve Jobs went shopping for pants. Nor do many of the people who buy this sort of garment. They either have an assistant who buys things for them, whose goal is to keep them happy and not blow a predetermined budget, or they go to a store and sit in a nice suite where a personal shopper suggests things to them. In either scenario the price of individual items probably don't even get a mention.
Steve was a notoriously picky shopper and obsessed with details. In the biography it says they went without a dishwasher or something in his house for half a year because he could never be satisfied with the geometry or finishing. So his billionaire wife washed dishes by hand.
I believe the word for it is "rich".
I once paid $1000 for some sneakers. I’m still regularly wearing them 7 years later. I’ve bought $50/$100 and they never last that long. It was an insane purchase at the time, done in a moment of jet lagged madness when my shoes fell apart in an airport. But over time it’s turned out to be a great investment. Smart, comfortable, well made.
Do you wear them like $50 shoes or like $1000 dollar shoes? I run around 18 miles a week on trails and I doubt your $1000 dollar sneakers would last ten years with that usage pattern.
When you run 18 miles a week you should measure the lifetime of your shoes by mileage rather than time. I think 600 miles is about right for a pair of running shoes. It's just that some people run 600 miles in a year, others run that in ten years.
I'm sure that if you got super high quality durable running shoes, and only used them for running, you'd get some good milage out of them before the shoes either wore out or wore through.
I play tennis regularly and only go through a pair of shoes maybe once a year or every 18 months. I always pay extra for a higher quality and more durable pair because they last. I only use the shoes for tennis - I put them on when I enter the court and take them off when I end my session. The shoes probably run me $180-200 but totally worth it if they can last me 100+ hours.
The maximum durability running shoes are $150-$200. No amount more than that will give you more durability and assuredly almost all $1000 shoes won’t last as long as $200 Asics Superblasts
I do have a pair of $250 leather riding boots that have lasted me many years so far and I'm pretty sure will last that long, but they also require cleaning and polishing a few times a year....
I have had $20 sneakers last that long. You don't need to pay $$$$ to have clothes last a long time, you just need to take care of your stuff.
I'm happy to pay $$$$ for something that lasts but my exerience is some of the most expensive things I've bought, well known luxury brand names, had the lowest quality.
In my younger years, I really did believe that cost correlated with longevity, but as I've gotten older, I'm finding that most of the very affordable things I've purchased, including shoes and pants and jackets, have lasted 15+ years. So I no longer believe that paying a thousand dollars for an item of clothing is going to yield a material benefit in terms of longevity -- I think some of it is just marketing, but there are also other elements of comfort and fit. I'm just not very discerning.
As someone who is on the lookout for long-lasting durable products, what brand and model sneakers did you buy? How often do you wear these?
I've heard that Common Projects are pretty good at a $400 retail price point, but it sounds like you got something else.
I got a pair of Santoni’s leahther sneakers in 2017, for about $500. I still have them and while they worn out a bit, they are still nice.
The most comfortable shoes I’ve ever owned. I remember describing them like “walking in clouds”.
Never bought any of them and all the other pairs I got from different brands in the $200-$400 bracket have been awfully disappointing
Which? I struggle to find any sneakers that last more than a couple years, while also avoiding the big brands.
statistically, inheritance
decent hand-sewn raw denim made in the EU/US jeans are minimum $500. and i'm talking non-designer. just fair wages and good materials.
Yeah, that is wild. I can't imagine spending that kind of money on pants.
I don't necessarily believe that a priori spending $500 on a pair of pants is irrational, but I really struggle to imagine any pair of pants being worth that much money
Maybe he's amortizing them.
He says they've lasted ten years, so that's $50/year.
If they last another ten, that's $25/year.
Oh, great. Now I've invented Pants-as-a-Service.
Pro-tip. You can buy them used for a significant discount to rrp.
Don't rule out until you've tried it. High end clothing (not just brand name, but real advanced stuff) is pretty amazing in how it makes you feel. I'm inclined to spend on anything I interact with, and clothes is pretty big interaction.
Sure, but you need to have a certain level of wealth before even considering it. $500 is a ridiculous sum for a pair of trousers. I've had €80 or €120 Levi's at one point when I had a bit more expendable income but they only lasted me two years. I'm back on affordable jeans now (when outside, when inside it's pajama pants all the way lmao), I think they're €30 or so.
I'm sure the branded ones are "better" but is it to scale with the price? Are Levi's 4x as good as cheap ones? Are these Steve Jobs ones 16x as good?
i don't think anyone is saying you should save up to buy $500 pants. you buy them if it's a rounding error of your bank statement
I am wondering what you call consumption that feeds $499 designer margins on polyester like that, while so many people can barely afford to scrape by day to day.
Income inequality is a phrase that pathologizes what appears to be a universal truth. In all types of economic and political systems (after we left the forest, and probably while we were still in the forest), some people have been desperately poor while other people are not. What would be interesting is a single counterexample of sustained "income equality."
That said, our current degree of inequality and the particular way it is distributed seems to be unusual and remarkable. But pointing to someone having a hard time is, IMO, not a critique of that.
Yes, yes ... It's the same as it ever was, only so much more so!
Beyond just critiquing the disparity here, I feel like the psychology that treats capital in such a frivolous way, shifting it about already privileged pockets of society, rather than apply it to any sort of material good is rather abhorrent. That's just my take.
I got excited until I saw they cost $600? Once in a while I'm reminded we exist in very different universes. Still trying to justify splurging on common projects 2 years later.
in my experience as a tech guy who got into fashion and then after several years went back to not caring: Sneakers are the product category with the least differentiation in value-for-money between the high end (especially designer, but also not-designer-but-still-expensive like common projects) both in terms of aesthetics and quality/durability. You're paying $300 more for a 10% better product. Jeans, outerwear, knits, boots, you can more easily justify that cost
Big fan of the Homme Plisse stuff but I do wish it wasn’t polyester.
It is a nice way to wear essentially a fancy pair of joggers while people assume you’re being somewhat smart though.
Have you tried Costco pants? They're pretty good.
Sorry but 500 eur for polyester pants? Not even cotton?
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/hs8p2zm/a/iphone-pocket-b...
https://media.gq-magazine.co.uk/photos/5f8efdba9b357099d70a9...
Suspiciously missing if the color shown in the press release, the one closely resembling the one Borat is using.
If you change the "Size" on the store page from "Long" to "Short", the yellow is there. https://www.apple.com/shop/product/hs8r2zm/a/iphone-pocket-b...
yeah, but i can't wear the short one.
I like!
https://images.macrumors.com/t/h94LDq8hcQZUYyGkE_wGSaDm1bE=/...
https://cdn.motor1.com/images/mgl/9mQnP0/s3/fiat-multipla-19...
I saw it too before clicking the second link!
Damn you! Can't unsee it now. ;)
lol I came here to post this too - perfect
I’m so glad there are some people willing to pay over $200 for “a piece of cloth” which I assume is a translation issue but it sounds uninspired- who knew your inspiration for a bag could be the material that most bags are made of?
I especially like how it’s sized to fit almost any iPhone ever made. So not only are you getting a bag made of cloth, for over $200 it’s not even custom fitted!
Anyway, this product isn’t for me. I suppose enough other people will buy it.
Edit: I suppose the short version is under $200 but my sentiment hasn’t changed. Perhaps I’m even more cranky now that increasing the length of the strap costs $80. That’s the same level of rip-off that Apple charges for increased SSD storage on their Macs.
I bought my current phone for $94 brand new. It can communicate with other devices over the air through literal magic. It has 2.5 million tiny lights, each independently controlled to be any color I want. It knows where I am anywhere on the planet. Through it, I can access an essentially infinite pool of entertainment, hail life-saving emergency services, perform monetary transactions, acquire food, etc.
This piece of cloth is twice the price and it can't even make phone calls.
Surely you understand things like economies of scale, surplus inventories, etc.?
Not to mention, "number of lights" or "ability to communicate through the air" has no real bearing on its value, clearly.
This is like complaining about the $400 Hermès band. The "iPhone Pocket" is obviously a luxury item from a high end designer, of course it's going to be expensive.
It's kind of hilarious to me when the tech world collides with the high-end fashion world. On the one hand, I get how absurd this seems from a tech perspective. On the other hand, dropping a couple hundred dollars on a fashion item that will be trendy for a season among a certain group... it's no different from any other high-end fashion accessory. It's just that the two worlds so rarely overlap.
You can see just from this thread how the tech world reacts to the fashion world.
The fashion world's biggest sellers are handbags and shoes, which are practical purchases and tend to feature pretty intricate design details. This is a Speedo for a phone, and it makes Apple's already over-the-top descriptions of its products sound even more absurd.
HN commenter logic: 'if I don't understand it, this is clearly wrong'
'If someone doesn't spend money irrationally like I spend money irrationally its bad'
There is indeed a blind spot.
Apple is a fashion company when you think about it
Had to make sure it wasn't April 1st.
When I clicked the link, seeing it so high on the FP, I was 100% convinced they were finally re-releasing + rebranding the Mini.
Then I saw what it was, and was like “ah it’s an April Fools joke — but wait, it’s not April 1st”.
So now I can only assume people are upvoting it because it’s so ridiculous?
Are there people (on HN) that seriously think this is a good idea/are considering getting one of these hideous things?
You're literally describing my thought process, but I thought it was an older April 1st joke resurfacing.
At this point, you may as well get a powerpack for a mini and put it in one of these slings, you could have a crazy powerful machine in your "sock-et" sling thing here...
When the iPhone Air was just another huge phone...but thinner...smh. Apple should put up some page to check interest level in a smaller phone, and with enough interest, go manufacture it. If it is more expensive because economies of scale don't work out, but they create one that is small yet powerful, that's what I would buy at premium, because apparently compactness is a luxury.
> The design drew inspiration from the concept of “a piece of cloth”
I'm not convinced this wasn't an April Fools joke accidentally released early.
And they say you can “create your own personalized color combination”. This is just literally just the pairing of the phone color and whatever color you pick for the bag. Who calls this a customized color combination?!
It's an out of season April fools joke.
Checked the ULR twice
Suttle joke?
For all intensive purpose's their one in the same.
With all the things going on in the world, you also had to do this. All of it at once. You’re a monster.
Well played!
I'm still not convinced it isn't.
Let's wait until black friday and re-assess
It reads like satire until you hit the part where it costs $229 and realize... nope, this is 100% real
Its showing as $149 for me.
Which still feels outrageous for what is basically a knitted scarf.
There are 2 different sizes.
There's a long and a short one. The long one costs $80 more than the short one. Jesus.
Whenever in doubt about your product’s acceptance, just jack up the price and keep a straight face.
Surely it's satire! looks around in amazement
It might be dumb, but at least it's expensive.
This looks like it would make basic interaction with your phone highly cumbersome. It also looks like an easier target for thieves.
The classic is two guys on a moped in Marseilles. The passenger cuts a pedestrian purse strap (or iPhone strap) and they vanish.
One could embed an invisible security cable, but then...
There will be tons of cheap clones in 3...2...1....
I'm sure there will be, will be interested in how many people who want cheap clones want ... that.
I'm not sure there's a sure crossover of big numbers.
My mom knitted a bag for my niece's iphone in 2024, so there already was a trend.
This was one of my first thoughts. Could have knock-offs made for probably $10 landed cost, and put them on Amazon for $99.
> It might be dumb, but at least it's expensive.
Just realizing that the reverse could be a selling point for a phone here: It might be expensive, but at least it's dumb.
Haha, before looking at the price, I joked "I'm not going to buy this if it's only $99 or less."
I sure didn't get disappointed.
It gets really difficult to parody apple (and some of their customers) when they do things like this.
They themselves are the best at doing it, really.
I sincerely believe one day we'll get an official release of one of those Airpod straps: https://www.yahoo.com/news/hilarious-accessory-reminds-us-at...
A phone brand that rich people buy selling overpriced designer items?
Apple should experience the same surge of collective excitement everyone felt when they first saw the headline "iPhone Pocket," followed by the crushing disappointment of discovering it's just a grocery bag for your iPhone.
For those surprised by the cost, this is an Issey Miyake product, and the price is in-line with that. It's no different than the $800+ Hermes leather Apple Watch straps.
Also made in Japan
I'm as big a weeb as anyone but this is a textbook example of:
>thing >:(
>thing, Japan :O
I was out with my young coworkers and was absolutely baffled to see a bunch of them with slings for their phones. That was the only time I’d heard of such a thing until now. I kinda thought I’d drunkenly hallucinated it.
I was just talking to my wife about this, literally 5 minutes ago. I just moved from the 13 mini to the Air and am hating that it doesn't comfortably fit in my jeans, to the point where I might go return it today. My young cousin was wearing her iPhone on a cross body sling, and I was commenting that we've gotten to the point where the phones are so big that you need bags or extra things to carry it comfortably.
For the demographics whose mainstream clothing includes no or very small pockets, this has been true for many years.
Absolutely, and the lack of decent pockets on women's clothing is probably a large reason I can no longer buy a computer I can fit in my jeans.
To a contemporary person their smartphone is probably the single most functionally important object they carry with them. People have always modified their clothes around common items, and then those modifications become subject to fashion trends and then eventually tradition themselves. Think like briefcases and wallets, but also japanese inro, european snuffboxes, decorative scabbards, etc.
This is more like an ancient and near universal practice being applied to a modern tool, rather than a totally new thing in itself.
For sure, I had that thought as well, that clothing is evolving alongside the things people are needing to carry.
But, for me, it does seem like we're going in a functionally poorer direction. Just a few years ago I could have a computer I could fit in my pocket. I can't buy that anymore. The fact that people are selling modifications to these devices (cross body slings, cases with those weird pop up things on the back so you can hold it one handed) to me means we've missed the mark on design. For more than a decade we had a great one handed computer that'd disappear into my pocket. No longer.
I was hoping this would be the announcement of a mini iPhone.
Instead they’re selling larger pockets because normal pockets aren’t big enough for large phones.
Reminds me of the iPod Socks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
That was actually quite a nice product, though. And 6 for $29 was pretty good.
Note that it's $49 when adjusted for inflation
People were home knitting them anyway at the time. Some still do.
> The socks were jokingly presented by Apple CEO Steve Jobs as a "revolutionary new product"
I still use an iPod Sock with my current iPhone
> iPhone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted construction
What does that mean? What would be an example of 2D knitted construction ?
Ha, I bet the muggers/phone thieves will have a field day.
I find it interesting that anybody is that surprised. Remember, this is the company that overcharges for SSDs (no they're not magical super SSDs that only Apple can make)/extra ram.
They charged $1000 for a monitor stand that's pretty much just a thin block of aluminium.
I guess it works as a really expensive lasso/strangulation device.
I assume the sort of person who buys this walks from the chauffeured car door to the door, not down a regular high street.
> iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95 (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
My Nana doesn't charge nearly enough for her crocheting.
Nana's been lowkey running a luxury accessories brand this whole time
Honestly… was having a conversation with my aunt about this last week. Knitting, crocheting, and quilting are all high-skill activities and no one charges enough for it.
I used to joke that I made some of the most expensive socks in the world: 20 hours per pair, and I’m a run-of-the-mill IT ops person in western Europe - do the math.
I have decided to up the cost by taking up fleece processing and hand spinning. Even on the wheel, it takes another twenty hours to clean, comb, and spin enough wool for a pair of socks.
If I were doing this for income, I’d definitely get faster at all the steps.
As I pick up more of the steps in making clothes, it’s mind-boggling how cheap even “luxury” clothes like the 500 EUR pants discussed above, much less my sturdy midrange jeans (Tom Tailor, 60 EUR, pockets that hold an iPhone 13 mini, even in a ladies’ cut), are.
The vast majority of people making handcrafted do not charge enough for their items. If they did, nobody could afford them. Most items are priced based on the cost of the material with little consideration to the time to make them. I have a friend that is a very skilled knitter, but for large items like blankets and sweaters, there are weeks of effort involved. When broken down, "kids in Chinese factories" make more per hour.
The great thing is that this type of person will tell you they are not in it for the money. As long as they can "buy more string" with the proceeds (or whatever their materials are), they are quite happy.
> Most items are priced based on the cost of the material [...]
If that, in my experience.
"I've got some wool going spare" is a common anecdote.
This is a prime example of the fact that ultimately prices are set by what people will pay, the cost of the item is functionally irrelevant.
see also: half of apple's product
Prices fall when supply exceeds demand.
Labor is easiest to underpay when passion/fun gets involved.
Do they also sell Replacement Wool for $10/inch?
Only if you're an Apple authorized service provider.
Fashion statement. Plus it is a Limited edition release. Plus it is weird. Plus it is apple. Price seems right.
Apple Mankini by Borat.
Wait this thing is like $150? It's got all of like $2 worth of yarn and plastic.
A sucker is born every minute, clearly.
Seeing all the nerd brains of HN implode trying to understand this. This is what happens when the tech and fashion worlds overlap for a moment.
No one can convince me a $229 sock to hold your phone is comprehensible to the average person, nerd brain be damned
my conclusion is that designer fashion is not for average people
see also apple watch hermes $500 watch straps (https://www.apple.com/shop/watch/bands/apple-watch-herm%C3%A...)
or (non-apple) LV purses, $5000+ https://us.louisvuitton.com/eng-us/women/handbags/all-handba...
or LV phone strap, "Contact Us" https://eu.louisvuitton.com/eng-e1/products/monogram-phone-s...
it's just status symbol
some rich people like it
some rich people think it's dumb and targeted at those with ego issues
These are normal items, just expensive
A $10 fanny pack from Uniqlo or H&M looks better than this thing and is also more practical (can carry other stuff, keys, wallet, etc)
https://static.standard.co.uk/2023/01/19/10/uniqlo%20header....
I found the reddit ManyBaggers recently and there is a cottage industry of high-end bags that seem incredibly made for the price that are in no way luxury products.
I'm still waiting for them to collaborate with Levi's to bring iPhone sized pockets to women's jeans.
Or maybe iPad-sized pockets: https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/igotabigasspocket-ipad-jeans-1...
Honestly, that would be the most genuinely useful Apple fashion collab yet
And like this product, it has a Steve Jobs tie-in. His on-stage uniform was Issey Mikaye turtlenecks and Levi’s 501s.
Wasn‘t Borat wearing one of those like 20years ago?
> Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth”
Ugh
Its just a stiff translation of a marketing term. If you look up 一枚の布, you'll see a bunch of Miyake's clothes, where the whole gimmick is that they have no seams. A better translation probably would have been "inspired by the concept of seamless design"
That makes much more sense, even "a seamless piece of cloth" would have been much less ridiculous.
A more literal one-to-one translation would be "one sheet of cloth", which also would have been better.
Wait, it really does say that in the article. Wow.
Thats the point where I started double checking for april fools
This will make theft so much easier as compared to normal trouser pocket. It's more of a style thing I guess.
Back when Steve Jobs was at Next, Apple released the Duo Dock. Instead of plugging your laptop into a docking station, you put it in a slot like a giant 3.5" floppy. It was different, sure, but I still don't know what design problem it solved.
This is today's Duo Dock, isn't it?
> I still don't know what design problem it solved.
It supported a CRT so you could have your laptop under your display without needing to spend desktop space for a laptop off to the side.
I’d love to out my laptop into a slit and take it out later ? This “bag” though seems like an insult considered I still liked the smaller iPhones.
Looks like the swimsuit from Borat
Absolutely. They missed a great opportunity to call it the Apple CockSock.
> Material: Nylon (14%), Polyester (85%), Polyurethane (1%)
Its crazy they didnt even use any expensive materials to maybe somewhat justify the price.
Just the cheapest stuff you can get away with.
I legit had to do a double take and ensure this wasn’t an old April fool’s post. The concept… odd but whatever. The price…
> the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.
Their level of innovation is inspiring. I knew my grandmother was ahead of her time. Apple just proves it.
Saw this earlier today and legitimately thought it was satire, especially when I heard the price. Turns out it's real?
I would prefer if we flipped it, "Pocket iPhone", and got an iPhone that fit in a normal pocket.
This is the best idea since having a charging port on the bottom of a mouse. Finally, a product we can source from the US completely.
"3D-knitted"
Do others knit in the 2-dimensional space?
If you listen closely, you can hear Taps playing.
Pairs well with pieces from the Apple collection https://archive.org/details/apple-collection-1986-1987/page/...
Stylistically it looks like something that goes with a very specific style of clothing and only that.
Drug dealers are going to be as upset at their style being stolen by hipsters as sailors were when hipsters decided that tattoo's were cool.
Every knitter on the planet is simultaneously thinking, "$150 for a rib stitch tube with a slit that I could make a clone of in one sitting? Dang."
This pattern repeats itself in "high" fashion quite a lot. Simple, ridiculous things that are relatively trivial to make, yet massively expensive due to hype/brand/fomo. I guess it wouldn't exist if people didn't pay for it, but it also shows how people don't value craftsmanship so much as status symbols.
Show them two identical products, one from Apple, one from Auntie down the street, and they'll pick Apple and tell you the other is inferior.
I'm sure theirs is better than anything I could make myself in all sorts of little ways. I'm just not sure it would be $140 better.
On the other hand, if I did make one for myself (which I won't - one purse is enough) it would probably have a 2-color brioche stitch or something like that for more visual interest.
hoping for game boy pocket...
The next product Apple will unveil will be an iPhone case made of human fingernails from those who have tried to climb this K-shaped economic ladder and failed. It'll be a steal at only $500 a pop.
Not for me.
But my partner is a fashion designer and was just this morning working through studying 3D knitting technique.
So I wonder if this will lead to more 3D knitted products.
That’s a nice piece of cloth. I would worry about it getting damaged. I wonder if they will sell a case for it.
I wonder if it supports the $19 Polishing Cloth (https://www.apple.com/shop/product/mw693am/a/polishing-cloth).
I built some of the first apps on the App Store. Top twenty navigation app. Won an ADA.
Still, my pocket is my iPhone pocket.
Until they release something the size of the X or smaller, I’m sticking with my iPhone 13 Mini or eventually going for a Razr style Android.
Every year they release something, I go check it out. My love for Apple dies a bit more.
Finally, Apple have invented the bag.
No, Apple has never had to be the first to invent. They wait, and they don't release until they get it right. /s
haha who came here because expecting a mini/small iPhone like the SE? :-D
I never thought this will be a reality but here we are https://scoopertino.com/apple-blasts-into-supermarkets-with-...
Shark jumped.
How about making phone that fits into a normal pocket?
Bwuh, I thought they had a new name for a smaller iPhone, but it’s just a bag.
And the ghost of Steve Jobs Wept...
When I saw this I thought it was April 1st for a moment.
Reminds me of the thong Borat wears.
FWIW, the designer behind these also created Job's turtlenecks.
Were those also made mostly out of polyester?
Did anyone else think/hope it was a new actually tiny iPhone?
> beautiful way to wear and carry
I strongly disagree with that statement.
Worst of all is that it's polyester, basically a piece of plastic. I hope this product fails just because of that.
Like many, I was disappointed this wasn't a new iPhone mini.
$30 for a pack of six iPod socks always seemed like a horrible value to me in the mid-2000s. I'm not denying they were fun and whimsical, but as cases, they didn't protect your iPod or allow you to use it while inside them. It felt like a rip-off two decades ago, and these are 30-46 times more expensive per-sock.
I know Apple does things like this to position themselves as a luxury brand and as a shareholder I still do not buy the idea stunts like these are what's best for the company. At best, a small segment of the target demographic will see this as a curiosity at the cost of further damage to Apple's reputation. People will see this as further proof Apple is more concerned with products and services which rip off their customers and developers, as opposed to providing real value.
I will be the first to welcome Apple bringing back some semblance of fun and whimsy into their product line-up, and this is not the way to do it.
Phone tote bag that goes hard with world's thinnest phone.
Who is the target group for this?
I thought this satire at first.
Steve would have fired everyone involved in this stupidity.
Steve was a noted fan of Issey Miyake
>3d knitted construction
This genuinely has to be a gag.
This does look like a gag to me too, but 3D knitting technology is interesting. I have a pair of carbon-plate marathon race shoes made with 3D knitting. They're very light and very comfortable, with stretch in some axes and stiffness in others as needed, no seams but form-fit around my foot in compound curves.
Instead of making the thing out of 2D pieces of fabric, even stretchy knit fabric, and sewing those planar shapes together into something 3D, they made this as one continuous knit object that adds and drops stitches to give it shape without seams. The machines and programs that manipulate the yarn and partial garments, tying knots at crazy speeds to create something 3-dimensional out of something 1-dimensional, are just astonishing. Equally astonishing is the fact that with two sticks and their hands, it's not that challenging for a human knitter to do the same. I think that "knit a sock" is one of the most challenging tasks to give a humanoid robot.
They bought a bunch of 3D knitting machines to make Vision Pro headstraps, and since that isn't selling I guess they're using the excess capacity to make iPhone socks.
You can briefly see them in this ad: https://x.com/tim_cook/status/1748337010191077462
It certainly has that dual use.
I don't want to kink shame anyone, but I'd be concerned about getting all of that fuzzy caught in someone's throat. Unless I missed the version made of silk.
no https://us.isseymiyake.com/collections/pleatsplease
no, it's a whole garment knitting technique
> Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth”.
Could this be some sort of joint venture? In other words, is Apple being paid to promote this in some way?
I realize this is a “limited edition” item but it seems to me as being way off brand.
apple x designer fashion has been around a while https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-hermes/
It feels like a relic from the iPod Nano era
The answer to your question is in the article :)
Formerly known as a "purse".
So iPod Socks[0], but with a strap?
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
Does it fit an android phone or is it immediately ejected from the pocket with gusto?
Ejecting with gusto would be gouache. The Android phone is simply shamed into dropping out of the sleeve.
Do you perhaps mean gauche, as in socially awkward verging on unacceptable or is there a connection to art supplies I'm missing here?
EDIT: or perhaps your phone "helpfully" autocorrected something wrong, as mine did.
The bag will turn blue
this voids the warranty
This is gonna launch first in Taipei (among other stores) and looks a lot like the bags people use to carry their boba tea in here. It's a bit expensive for a drink bag though.
I do not mean to be crass, but some of the ones that are carrying an iPhone bear more than a passing resemblance to a human vagina.
They could just make a device that fits in a regular pocket. Most phones are too big now.
I was kinda hoping for new HomePods today, if rumors are to be believed, but instead I get this.
Apple's been heading down the toilet since Cook took over, now they've morphed into a parody of themselves.
Hey, any of y'all want one in hand-spun, natural-colored wool (as in, as it was shorn from the sheep) yarn?
I thought this was an april fools.
Wait it’s not April?
You're not familiar with the internationally recognized Day of the Joker every 11/11?
Wow did they really make it so you can't just pick-up and use the screen?
There are thousands of sub 10$ case strap-attachments which make it easy to both use and not drop your phone while wearing it around your neck.
Imagine milking your phone out of this every time there is a notification... What a joke
Y'all remember iPod Socks?
This feels like a step backwards and if it were released on April 1st would be indistinguishable from a prank.
If only they spent these resources on bringing “slide over” back to iPad in its original form.. :(
This looks kinda lame. I already have a pocket for my phone, it’s my.. pocket. Or I can throw it in any other pouch if I don’t have pockets.
> I already have a pocket for my phone, it’s my.. pocket.
As Steve Jobs intended.
(Like, really. I think the original "one more thing" presentation was also so powerful became he could just casually pull some next-gen tech out of his pocket)
On the bright side, it looks as if you could also use it as a decent slingshot.
Is this intended as a serious product? Can’t quite tell
250$ for a sock…
The pricing is insane. I could see $30-50 for premium materials and design.
Yes, it's designer sock with a famous fashion designer's name on it.
A slingshot, A blind fold, A pocket -- Steve Jobs never said that.
Aww. I was hoping for a super mini flip or foldable low-power minimalist iPhone, but it's another weird Apple hipster fashion accessory. Very disappointing.
Did a pickpocket design this?
Do your iphones hang low Can you swing them to and fro...
Might just have my mum knit me a custom one.
True story: when I got the iPhone 5 the first case i used was a home made fabric slip. Fashion really does come and go in cycles.
Makes me think og Borat.
OMG
$229.95
A smaller phone just means you'll spend less time on it. That's not a desirable outcome for anyone except the customer.
I clicked hoping they’re making a small iPhone again like the SE was.
I look around at people with the smaller phone and wish we had a newer model. Whatever happened to this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af0gtsjfy7E
The small iPhone is like the Cadillac Ciel. So many would buy it if they could, but they can’t so they won’t.
It’s a thneed!
$5 on Aliexpress next week
Top of the market
The long strap version is too short on that model. Purse straps hang to hip level for a reason. Hanging at the hip makes reaching in substantially more ergonomic.
Also lmao at the photo of the little bag strapped to the other larger bag. Yo dawg, I heard you like bags.
Also they're super ugly. But I guess that's "subjective".
Unironically utterly brilliant.
I don't have an iPhone and will not get one at least until Google kills ReVanced, nor would I ever get a sock for my phone but wow, I fully expect this to be hit. Not only in this collaboration, it will spawn a thousand copies as well.
Everything about this is perfect. The Japanese origin, the idea, high tech manufacturing (single cloth, 3d knitted, whatever), the cheap material, the timing... I am in awe. The kind of shock and awe that militaries aim to deliver.
Apple has ingested a million tiny current trends of craftsmanship, story telling, accessorizing, ground them into this magnificent triumph of corporate capitalism. This is why commies never even stood a chance.
Quote: “ Inspired by the concept of ‘a piece of cloth.’” Is this some kind of joke? If it were April 1st I’d assume the whole article is meant for comedic effect.
An Apple Thneed
This is actually Apple doing this? What is going on there?
iPhones are hefty these days, so it could double as a weapon.
Is it April already!?
I take the pants that have insufficient pockets to a tailor, and ask them to extend the depth of the phone pocket. You can even ask them to do the extension in phone size if you want to restrict its movement in your pocket. On average I've needed about a 3" extension which both restricts lateral phone movement, and also carries it low enough on my thigh that the phone doesn't pinch into my hip when I sit down.
$30 or so later you'll have an integrated Pholster and don't have to carry another thing around with you. For $200 you should be able to update all the pants you have that lack a proper pocket. This is also an incredibly easy thing to sew yourself, by hand, while you watch TV. $30 for a tailor to do the first pair to give you a template to follow, $50 at a craft store will get you some decent scissors, needle, thread, and a yard of whatever material you like. You'll butcher the first pair of pants, but the second, will be better and the third will be perfect.
"Wear an iPhone"... It's increasingly difficult to love this company.
I’m not trying to be glib here, but this genuinely looks like something a satirical blog might post.
I’m not a product or UI/UX designer but when you have to design a new, ridiculous way to carry a phone your company’s manufacturing and selling, I’d have thought that’s your sign to focus on making it less awkward to carry. “Think different”, indeed.
I clicked hoping for a smaller iPhone and I’m very disappointed that it’s just a sock to stuff my current oversized one into
It’s an iPhone Socket!
This just screams that Apple has jumped the shark to me. First of all, they're selling a knitted scarf for putting your phone in, which... what?
> Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth”
Groundbreaking.
> iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95 (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
Just... good luck, guys.
It's a high-end fashion partnership, like the Hermès watches.
You could probably argue that high-end fashion is in a constant state of jumping the shark.
But the Hermes watch was at least an Apple watch with some Hermes branding and accessories. This is just... a sock.
I'm not sure how an Hermès branded watch accessory is different than an ISSEY MIYAKE branded iPhone accessory.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication -- Leonardo da Vinci
"A piece of cloth" is referring to Miyake's preexisting fashion line of clothes without seams, 一枚の布.
I’m not concerned; we’ve been here before with iPod Socks [1].
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Socks
Well, I stand corrected.
April fools came early for 2026
The iPhone Pocket is a pocket for your iPhone and not a pocket-sized iPhone??? Unbelievable. So disappointing.
The CookSleeve™
welcome back, iPod socks.
Early April Fools joke?
Products like these wouldn't need to exist if we just let women have pockets.
Who is “we?” Why are you preventing women from having pockets? I’m certainly not.
And yet, they lack pockets.
Mysteries abound.
if women actually bought clothes with pockets, vendors would sell them. there is no secret conspiracy against pockets for women
I invite you to talk to literally any woman.
Cringe.
"Crafted in Japan, iPhone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted construction that is the result of research and development carried out at ISSEY MIYAKE."
How would a 2d knitted construction look like? Lmfao.
"The design of iPhone Pocket speaks to the bond between iPhone and its user"
I have so much to say about that sentence that I cannot seem to say anything.
I had to check the address a few times to make sure this isn't a satire page, and I'm still not convinced it isn't
lol 230$ for a sock ..
As silly a product as this is, the fact that it made it to the front page of Hacker News makes it a bigger deal than it actually is.
It's not like it's sitting on Apple's frontpage. It's not some major product announcement. To get to the `/newsroom` page where the product was listed, you have to literally scroll to the bottom of https://apple.com and click a tiny link.
I will however comment on the price and utter lack of functionality. This product is utter garbage--a total niche for art goblins (said lovingly).
Correct. The fact this made it o the front page is because the economy in the US is horribly K shaped.
> iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95 (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
Really? Lot's of value there...
Like a new OnePlus Nord N30 5G is around $250, and Samsung Galaxy A16 approximately at $200. And Samsung Galaxy A14 5G is between $120 to $160.
dear god, this is stupid…
Doubles as the sock outfit for the next Red Hot Chili Peppers tour.
Best storage design out of Apple since the iRack:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcjLEwZqcQI
I wonder if it fits an iBrator:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP9Ef_KQTTI
More accurate to call it the iPhone Purse.
Meanwhile, can I have multi-message selection back in (iPad) Mail? Whoever decided to axe that feature apparently has a spam-free inbox.
This company has become such a joke. Maybe Apple should start being concerned about building computers that Just Work well again rather than continuing to flounder after Cook's obsession with bad fashion.
I suppose the underlying message here is that, if you can no longer innovate, shill overpriced purses instead.
I may be missing what you’re after for ipad mail but isnt it under the “...” then “select” to select multiple messages?
One of the most innovative companies in the world......supposedly.....and they come out with this.
"Users can create their own personalized color combinations with iPhone Pocket and iPhone."
You don't think that's innovative?
Pffff... No AI? Who need it? Even my shower gel is AI already.
This is yet another sign of the K Shaped economy. While I am homeless through no fault of my own, people can buy a $200 sweater pocket for their iphone.
This is an old story, and it does not end well.
> Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth,”
Is this satire?
Wow, that's a little tone deaf. I was hoping for a small iPhone, They're so big now we make dedicated bags... F
I respect Apple.
It takes a lot of skill, talent and dedication to pull out a massive rip-off bullshit like this and have millions of fools buying it.
Apple doing Balenciaga shit
That was my first though. After "wait, it's not April 1st yet".
Balenciaga would be an oversized black latex condom.
They literally sell a $400 Hermes apple watch band
``` Apple Canton Road, Hong Kong
Apple Ginza, Tokyo
Apple Jing’an, Shanghai
Apple Marché Saint-Germain, Paris
Apple Myeongdong, Seoul
Apple Orchard Road, Singapore
Apple Piazza Liberty, Milan
Apple Regent Street, London
Apple SoHo, New York City
Apple Xinyi A13, Taipei ```
Couldn't hack it in Apple Plaza, Kansas City, huh?
"Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth,”"
I had to check that if wasn't April 1st
edit: holy shit, $150 for an iphone sock
Reminded me of the IKEA floor mat knit lol
EAZZY MISTAKE /s
How about no.
LOL. Sorry. really. LOL.