I want to love Apple’s new iPhone Air, but the iPhone 17 is a better deal

My husband is a gadget enthusiast. He’s already on his second folding smartphone — a Galaxy Z Flip7 — after having a Motorola Razr when it first came out. I’m more of a “convince me” kind of gadget lover. If I see a reason to get excited, I’m in. Otherwise, I’ll stick with what I’ve got until I have a reason to upgrade. I still remember when Apple came out with Touch ID to end password fatigue. I bought one immediately.

I’ve been in the Apple ecosystem for more than a decade because my work computer is a Mac and having my phone and Watch all work together is both practical and helpful. Yes, that’s the definition of the Apple moat. But I wouldn’t consider myself a fangirl. For the record, my personal computer — meaning the one I bought myself for non-job-related uses — is an HP Spectre on Windows. And I love it.

So, I’m still using an iPhone 13. As much as I like how hubby’s phone fits so nicely in a pocket, I prefer practicality over novelty. But my phone’s battery and touchscreen are aging, and it doesn’t have a chip powerful enough to run the promised Apple Intelligence AI future. So it’s time for an upgrade.

Today, I was within a heartbeat of preparing to preorder the new iPhone Air. It looked like the best of all worlds to me: bigger screen yet small enough to fit in my small hand, best chip, and only $200 more than a 17, but still cheaper than a Pro. I’ve never been a Pro user. I don’t film Hollywood-esq movies, have no social media-creator hobbies, so I’ve always opted for the better price.

But as I dive into the specs, the iPhone 17 looks like a better deal.

In the Air’s favor, it has a 6.5-inch screen, compared to the 17’s 6.3-inch, yet is lighter to hold. It also has the A19 Pro chip, rather than A19 chip. But oddly, this isn’t the same Pro chip that’s in the Pro phone. It has a 6-core CPU with a 5-core GPU. That’s similar to the A19 in the 17. (The Pro model has a 6-core CPU and 6-core GPU.)

The 17 beats the Air on battery life, too, promising 30 hours of video playtime versus the Air’s 27 hours, according to Apple. And while another $99 will buy a battery pack for the Air, bringing battery life up to 40 hours, that pack defeats the purpose of a lighter, thinner phone.

The Air is using a new and interesting computational photography camera, meaning camera features powered by software. This allows a single lens to act like multiple lenses — including a delightful new feature that allows simultaneous front and rear camera shots. That’s good for filming reactions to the world and would be fun to own! But the Air lacks the 48-megapixel Fusion Ultra Wide lens the 17 has.

The Air’s storage options are far better — up to 1TB — but for a price. The 1T option costs $1,400, which makes it only $100 less than a 1T storage on a Pro at $1,500.

All in all, as much as I want to love the larger-screen, lighter Air, if I were to treat myself and get a higher-end phone, I’d just go ahead and buy a Pro.

If the Air becomes Apple’s folding phone, as some suspect, I may ditch my 17 for a stunning folding iPhone at that point. Until then, for regular Joe users like me, the 17 still seems like a better deal.