Apple was hoping for the third time being the charm after the disappointing sales performance of both the iPhone mini and iPhone Plus.
So far, headlines about the iPhone Air’s popularity have prompted an enormous sense of déjà vu. Nikkei says there’s “virtually no demand” for the handset and the analyst Ming-Chi Kuo is anticipating production being cut back by 80%.
At least unsold units don’t take up so much space on the shelves, I suppose. Which is more than can be said for the boxes of unloved Vision Pro headsets.
Still, a flop is a flop. And it’s been such a flop, DigiTimes reports, that Chinese OEMs such as Xiaomi and Vivo have cancelled their own plans to make super-thin handsets. Considering everyone usually follows Apple’s design decisions (even after initially mocking them!), sales must be really bad.
But this isn’t just about Apple’s inability to sell a fourth flavor of iPhone. Samsung also introduced the super-thin Galaxy S25 Edge earlier this year, and it’s struggling just as hard.
What do both of these phones have in common? Most obviously, there’s the svelteness. In the battle of the tape measures, Apple scores a narrow victory with a thickness of 5.64mm thick against Samsung’s 5.8mm, but frankly these are the kinds of differences that can’t be measured at a glance.
We’re assured that this thinness is what consumers want, and that may be true in the abstract sense. But as soon as the real-world compromises float into view, people end up voting with their wallets and buying something better for less.
The cost of thinness
That’s because, beyond thinness, the Galaxy S25 Edge and iPhone Air have quite a few other things in common, and all of them negative. In short: cut-back feature sets, smaller batteries and an asking price that I’ll charitably call “optimistic” rather than my first and ruder choice of adjective.
Let’s tackle them in order. First up, the cut-back features. If it weren’t for the arrival of the iPhone 16e earlier in the year, this would be the first numbered Apple handset since the iPhone 8 to feature a single rear camera. Other cuts include a single speaker in the earpiece, no physical SIM tray and one fewer GPU core in the A19 Pro chip compared to the Pro models. Oh, and it doesn’t run as fast due to weaker heat management, too.
While the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge sacrifices less for the ultra-thin dream, it is still the only member of the Galaxy S25 family not to feature a telephoto lens — arguably the most useful camera of the lot. So once again, you’re paying more for less in every sense of the phrase.
In terms of stamina, a thinner phone means less space for battery capacity. To be entirely fair to Samsung here, the Galaxy S25 Edge’s 3,900mAh cell is only 100mAh less than the regular S25, so I’ll give it a pass, but Apple doesn’t get the same get out. The iPhone Air packs a measly 3,149mAh battery, compared to the iPhone 17’s 3,692mAh. The Pro models, meanwhile, clear 4,000 and 5,000mAh respectively.
Battery life is so much weaker, in fact, that Apple introduced the MagSafe battery pack if you’re prepared to add an extra $99 at checkout (itself a bit mad when the best portable chargers can be had for a fraction of that.)
If you were to add that $99 battery pack on, by the way, you’d be spending a total of at least $1,099. The same asking price as the far better specced iPhone 17 Pro. The Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge costs the same $1,099, without a battery pack, just $200 less than the Galaxy S25 Ultra.
This is a ludicrous asking price, no matter how well either phone slips unnoticed into the pocket of a pair of skinny jeans (something, I must reluctantly concede, that isn’t of great relevance to me).
Go big, or go home (to charge)
I actually find the iPhone Air and Galaxy S25 Edge’s disappointing sales reassuring. People are picking substance over style, and that gives me heart.
As someone who used one of the pre-iPhone smartphones in the mid 2000s, I can safely say that current models are plenty thin enough, and any attempt to trim off a few more millimetres before battery technology has caught up is an exercise in self-sabotaging diminishing returns.
We’re largely in a good place now, and most people have come to terms with the fact that the 30-day phone batteries of the 90s are a thing of the past. Now everything charges with USB-C, that’s really not a problem. I can reach no fewer than five USB-C cables without even getting up from my desk (this isn’t actually that helpful, given my iPhone is the last generation to use Lightning, but you get my point).
A few years ago, there was an ill-fated campaign to promote smartphones with the stamina of 90s feature phones. The result was monstrosities like the 18,000mAh Energizer phone: a handset that looked like a laptop power bank with a screen attached, proving that it’s not just the ultra-thin of the market that goes off the deep end from time to time.
Apple and Samsung’s regular flagships come with sensibly sized batteries that will go the distance — especially the Galaxy S25 Ultra and iPhone 17 Pro Max — but for people who hate time wasted at the charger, the freshly released OnePlus 15 is the answer. It comes with a huge 7,300mAh battery that can go three days on a single charge, and charges from flat to full in half an hour thanks to the bundled VOOC charger.
But really, any other iPhone, or anything from the list of the best Android phones will do the job nicely. Keep buying them, and before you know it, ultra-thin phones will go the way of HD DVD, Sony Glasstron and other overpriced, memorable tech flops. Bring it on.
