The iPhone Air isn’t selling well so far

• The iPhone Air is a bad deal
• Is there a future for the iPhone Air?

In a way, the iPhone Air is the most radical departure for Apple since 2017’s iPhone X. Not so much because it has a unique form factor; rather, it’s because it’s the first time since the X that Apple has sold a non-budget iPhone that isn’t just a minor variation of another one. The iPhone XR I owned was a scaled-back version of the iPhone XS — likewise, the iPhone 13 may have shipped in Mini, Pro, and Pro Max versions, but the main things separating them were cameras, performance, screen size, and refresh rates. On the outside, you probably wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between a 13 and 13 Pro except for their lenses.

The word from Morgan Stanley analyst Erik Woodring (via MacRumors), though, is that the Air gambit may not be paying off. While demand for the iPhone 17 lineup is reportedly strong, and may even see a production increase, the Air has so far faced “relative weakness,” as Woodring puts it. That’s a vague claim, and sales could always turn around — but anyway you slice it, it’s probably not what Apple wanted to hear, not when it spent so much of its September 9 event singing the Air’s praises.

Frankly, I hope Air sales continue on a downward trajectory. You can probably guess the reasons why, but it’s worth elaborating on them, and whether we’ll see a follow-up Air in 2026.

The iPhone Air is a bad deal

Sending a message to Apple

Recently, I got into trouble in an online comments section by claiming that people “should” buy the iPhone 17 instead of an Air, because the Air is an inherently worse product. As expected, some people rushed to the Air’s defense, arguing that thinness and lightness can be worth as much as any feature. From there, things quickly took a turn. A few people insisted that I had no right to say what other people should value; one person even argued I was “dictating” what people should buy, as if I were putting a gun to someone’s head at the Apple Store.

To make my position clearer, I’m going to say upfront that I’m impressed by the Air as a piece of engineering. Despite it being so thin, it’s remarkably tough, to the point that testers have needed industrial equipment to get it to bend or break. And as Apple was eager to point out during its announcement, most of the “guts” of the phone — such as its processor and storage — are all stuffed into the camera bump (AKA plateau). Most of the frame is dedicated to its lithium-ion battery, and that’s no mean feat.

Let’s get this straight though: extreme thinness and lightness are not that meaningful in 2025. While the Air might be pleasant to hold, I can’t remember the last time I heard anyone, anywhere seriously complain about the size or weight of a smartphone that wasn’t intentionally oversized, like the iPhone 17 Pro Max or the Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra. That’s because smartphones have been both thin and light for a very long time. Even the heaviest iPhones ever, the 13 Pro Max and 14 Pro Max, weighed just 8.47 ounces (240 grams) each. The Air may be noticeably lighter at 5.82 ounces (165 grams), but no one is struggling to hold up a Pro Max unless they’ve got greater concerns at work.

If the Air somehow proves popular in the long run, it’s going to send the wrong message to Apple — that you can charge people more for less and get away with it.

Bigger models may be harder to stuff into a pocket, but that’s owing to screen size more than thickness — which the Air doesn’t solve. The product has a 6.5-inch display, bigger than the 6.3-inch one on the iPhone 17. Apple doesn’t even count the Air’s camera bump when it measures thickness, either. At that part of the device, it’s about 11.32mm — just below the 11.4mm of the iPhone 17’s bump. If you can’t get a 17 in your pocket, chances are the Air will be just as bad, if not worse.

All this would be irrelevant if it weren’t for the Air’s camera tech, battery life, and pricing. Unlike the 17, there’s no secondary ultra-wide camera. You can’t shoot macro photos, let alone tight group portraits or massive vistas. Battery life, meanwhile, is adequate, but still lower than that of every other iPhone in the fall 2025 catalog. So really, you’re paying $200 more than a 17 for something that will be harder to live with. You do get a faster A19 Pro processor, but even that has one less GPU core than the same chip in the iPhone 17 Pro.

Yes, then, the iPhone Air is a bad deal. And if it somehow proves popular in the long run, it’s going to send the wrong message to Apple — that you can charge people more for less and get away with it.

Is there a future for the iPhone Air?

Reply hazy, try again

Unless the current model is a catastrophic failure, I think it’s safe to expect an iPhone Air 2 in 2026. Apple has clearly invested a lot of time and money into the underlying technology, and it’s rare for the company to put that sort of effort into a one-off product. Remember, we got two generations of iPhone mini despite weak sales.

For the Air 2 to be a hit, Apple has two options, as I see it.

The real question mark is 2027. If the Air 1 continues to get a lukewarm response, and/or the Air 2 doesn’t blow anyone out of the water, I could easily see Apple pulling the plug on an Air 3. Indeed, that might not be in the cards anyway — it’s obvious that Apple’s ultimate goal is laying the groundwork not just for a foldable iPhone, but for thinner form factors in general once fewer compromises are necessary. I’m betting that the iPhone 19 (or whatever it’s called) will look similar to the Air, but include triple cameras, considering that Apple’s rivals are already making telephotos standard on their base hardware.

For the Air 2 to be a hit, Apple has two options, as I see it. The first is to give it modest upgrades over the Air 1, but dramatically lower the price, making it at least $100 cheaper than the iPhone 18. The other is to hold onto the current price tag, but bring camera and battery specs up to snuff. In fact, if Apple were to switch to silicon-carbon (Si-C) battery tech, the Air 2’s runtime could potentially crush that of the 18 without any increase in thickness. Of course, the 18 would still reign supreme if it switched to Si-C as well. I’m keeping my ear to the ground for rumors on this one.