Pro & Contra: Do we need a cheap iPhone again?

The 500 euro-iPhone is history: with the 16e Apple has said goodbye to the mid-class segment in smartphones, although the competition is getting stronger there. Doesn't it also need a more affordable model from Apple?

PER

The iPhone 16e replaces the cheaper SE, but takes over the position of the iPhone 14 – also in terms of price. In my eyes, the newcomer is certainly more attractive in my eyes than the previous year's generation, which Apple has so far led to the program for 700 euros.

But that doesn't change the fact that the iPhone has completely said goodbye to the mid -range market overnight. Apple is currently consistently showing customers who want to put a maximum of 500 euros on the table for a smartphone for a smartphone. This also applies to everyone who prefers a compact iPhone.

Buyers are willing to “properly stretch out for an iPhone,” postulated company boss Tim Cook two years ago to financial analysts and is now properly putting it on. So far, the invoice seemed to be open: the expensive pro and Max models are torn from the hand of the manufacturer. But iPhone sales stagnate, albeit at a very high level. And many customers have had to stretch uncomfortably at several other corners in the past two years: from supermarket shopping to living and energy costs.

Now it will be shown whether Apple is still winning iPhone new customers with this risky high-price strategy-or losing price-conscious buyers to Android. There has long been a wide range of rock-solid 200 to 400 euro devices, which are inferior to the specifications of the 16E and even outbid them.

Apple is absolutely able to build first-class budget hardware: the Mac Mini M4 and the MacBook Air M4 show this impressively, there have never been such good entry models. Tablet buyers also find solid hardware for less than 400 euros at Apple. Only the iPhone users have to stretch properly, but maybe it tears some customers. (LBE)

Contra

To clarify this: I find the iPhones all very expensive and the impression for one or two memory doubles is outrageous. Nevertheless, I can do without something like an iPhone SE and understand why the manufacturer said goodbye to it in favor of an iPhone 16e.

Apple had a dilemma when deciding on the facelift: Should the product become as cheap as possible or the hardware powerful enough – also for Apple Intelligence? They chose the latter. The 16E brings an iPhone to the essential (even if Apple does not officially derive the “E” from “essential” in contrast to Samsung). It delivers the essential functions in the usual top quality. Only a camera module, but at the highest level. With emergency in the display, but that as a 6.1-inch oled. Thanks to the great agreement with the siblings, all iPhones of a generation with future iOS functions should be similarly compatible.

Compared to a solid 200 euro android, iPhone SE was far too expensive. Then either choose a general overhauled device, the more environmentally friendly and understandable option for everyone who does not want to put 700 euros or more on the table. Because you know what you get: very good, but not the latest and best technology. Or spend even more for a real top phone. In any case, I don't need an expensive entry-level iPhone that only offers half the Apple experience. I want the full experience. (Tre)

Who is right? Discuss!

Finally at Pro & Contra: Should Apple Intelligence summarize messages?