iPhone 16e review: The most expensive cheap iPhone yet

Date:

Share:

[ad_1]

iPhone 16e review: The most expensive cheap iPhone yet

A more expensive cheap phone

Assessing the iPhone 16e is a challenge. It’s objectively a good phone—good enough for the vast majority of people. It has a nearly top-tier screen (though it clocks in at 60Hz, while some Android phones close to this price point manage 120Hz), a camera system that delivers on quality even if it lacks special features seen in flagships, strong connectivity, and performance far above what you’d expect at this price.

If you don’t care about extra camera features or nice-to-haves like MagSafe or the Dynamic Island, it’s easy to recommend saving a couple hundred bucks compared to the iPhone 16.

The chief criticism I have that relates to the 16e has less to do with the phone itself than Apple’s overall lineup. The iPhone SE retailed for $430, nearly half the price of the 16. By making the 16e the new bottom of the lineup, Apple has significantly raised the financial barrier to entry for iOS.

Now, it’s worth mentioning that a pretty big swath of the target market for the 16e will buy it subsidized through a carrier, so they might not pay that much up front. I always recommend buying a phone directly if you can, though, as carrier subsidization deals are usually worse for the consumer.

The 16e’s price might push more people to go for the subsidy. Plus, it’s just more phone than some people need. For example, I love a high-quality OLED display for watching movies, but I don’t think the typical iPhone SE customer was ever going to care about that.

That’s why I believe the iPhone 16e solves more problems for Apple than it does for the consumer. In multiple ways, it allows Apple to streamline production, software support, and marketing messaging. It also drives up the average price per unit across the whole iPhone line and will probably encourage some people who would have spent $430 to spend $600 instead, possibly improving revenue. All told, it’s a no-brainer for Apple.

It’s just a mixed bag for the sort of no-frills consumer who wants a minimum viable phone and who for one reason or another didn’t want to go the Android route. The iPhone 16e is definitely a good phone—I just wish there were more options for that consumer.

The good

  • Dramatically improved display than the iPhone SE
  • Likely stronger long-term software support than most previous entry-level iPhones
  • Good battery life and incredibly good performance for this price point
  • A high-quality camera, especially for the price

The bad

  • No ultra-wide camera
  • No MagSafe
  • No Dynamic Island

The ugly

  • Significantly raises the entry price point for buying an iPhone

[ad_2]

Source link

━ more like this

Sends shares Q1 2026 business update and product progress

Sends reported Q1 2026 updates sharing news on digital cards, app redesign, ClearBank integration, and fintech industry recognition. Sends, a fintech platform operated by Smartflow...

We swipe our phones all day, and scientists just ranked which ones are the most tiring

We all know staring at your phone for hours isn’t great for mental health. But what about your fingers? Previously, researchers couldn’t measure...

Two suspects have been arrested for allegedly shooting at Sam Altman’s house

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman's house may have been the target of a second attack after San Francisco Police Department arrested two suspects for...

You Can Soon Buy a $4,370 Humanoid Robot on AliExpress

Listing consumer electronics on the internet's large ecommerce marketplaces is a key step in “democratizing” the products, allowing them to be purchased by...
spot_img