I see this said all the time but I think people underestimate what an extra few millimeters of thickness would feel like in the hand. Both in terms of grip-ability and weight. I would reckon if people actually got to use a device like that they'd quickly realize they don't want to use it in their day to day.

The iPhone 14 Pro was noticeably heavy, but the switch to titanium the following year made the 15 Pro feel way lighter. The only difference was 206 grams -> 187 grams, but you'd swear it was 25% lighter.

Okay but in this scenario there would still be a slimmer/lighter iPhone to buy, so what's the problem?

The apple watch ultra is thicker and overall bigger than the regular one in the name of better battery life, and people that don't need that buy the regular one. Win win!

The Apple Watch Ultra is thicker but still within reason for a thing you wear on your wrist. For a thing you're pulling in and out of your pockets and is already straining people's pinkies at their current sizes, I can't imagine a phone that's as thick as the camera protrudes being at all usable by a normal person's measure. The iPhone 16 Pro is advertised as 8.25mm thick. The camera bump is an extra 4.3mm, so flattening it out would make the thing 12.55mm thick. Spread across a big 149.6mm x 71.5mm body, or in the Pro Max case, 163.0mm x 77.6mm, you're adding a lot of mass.

Now I'm curious to do the math.

The iPhone 16 Pro's volume (not counting camera bump, you don't hold that in your hand anyway) is 149.6 x 71.5 * 8.25 = 88,245.3mm^3

Bumping the thickness to 12.55mm you end up with 149.6 x 71.5 * 12.55 = 134,239.82mm^3

A 52% increase in volume.

In the Pro Max you'd go from 104,352.6mm^3 to 158,742.44mm^3

The iPhone Minis sold millions of units and Apple still determined it wasn't enough to justify existing. I'd bet a big brick iPhone would be far more niche. I'd certainly like to see one and hold it in my hands but I think you can see why Apple wouldn't go for that.

iPhone 5(s) was peak case design imo and the last to have a flush camera iirc. The 12 and 13 mini were close, but still had the bump.

My personal favorite would be that style with modern chips and a full glass display. Basically an updated mini without a camera bump.

They'll never make this though because the minis proved the market is tiny.

Well, take this as a data point of one. I hate thin phones. It's like holding a dull knife. It's not comfortable. There's a reason OXO and other brands started making utensils with THICKER handles. They feel better to many people (me included)

I also don't care about weight, up to a point. No phone I've owned in the last 25 years has felt too heavy.

>Both in terms of grip-ability and weight.

It will be much more grippier and easier to hold. The weight part is very subjective of course.

I'm not comfortable with lighter models for example and always have to buy a case simple to feel the phone in my hand.

I guess many people hold a thick device like that - iPhone with a case, battery case, etc.

I promise you I would love and worship a phone like that every single minute of my life. :-)

But yeah, I know you are right and the market has spoken. I accept this however begrudgingly.

I'll do you one better, how about the camera is not flush but recessed so it is less likely to be the thing that gets smashed?

This. I wish it was flush - typically it's actually protruding.

I've seen one guy attach an ECG lead to the back so that he could lay the phone down without the camera part touching the surface. As a bonus you could spin the device on it.

They don't make it protruding as a design choice. There's a bunch of room needed under there in order to take the incredible photos that phones are capable these days. Google what those lens modules look like under the bump.

The choice is in the rest of the phone. Recall the context:

> if they made a phone where the camera bump is made flush by adding thickness elsewhere to match, filled with extra battery

Or smeared with hand grease

Pixel 9a is probably the closest to what you're describing on the market today.

I love the wide camera bump of the Pixels. It means the phone sits solid on the table without rocking and serves as a nice ledge on the bad for holding it. I wouldn't mind if the phone was thicker for extra battery but the bump is actually a plus in my book.

https://intl.redmagic.gg/products/redmagic-10s-pro is what you want (I have the 9S and absolutely love it)

> 23,000 RPM fan

Phones should not have fans.

I kinda like it. I'm not much of a mobile gamer, so mine only comes on to prolong battery health when the battery is fast-charging. The next model is said to gain water and dust resistance too as well as keeping the active cooling fan: https://www.gsmarena.com/redmagic_11_will_boast_a_world_firs...

I will most likely upgrade to an 11S around this time next year. The other factors that drew me to it were the huge (6500mAh) battery, a real analog headphone jack (used daily with my Etymotic ER4XR), and no dumbass notch cut out of the screen.

Which is such a shame because the Pixel 1 was exactly what they are describing. It was a physically perfect phone. It had no camera bump and the front screen wasn't bulging up past the sides so you could drop it without shattering the screen.

Could you just buy a case that adds the thickness to get rid of the bump? Much cheaper and easier than waiting on apple to do it.

> the camera bump is made flush by adding thickness elsewhere

Cant a case do this for you?

You can do it with a case, but a case with a battery in it is even thicker.

I'd be at least INTERESTED in seeing what my iPhone 15 Pro Max would look like without a case and with a built-in battery that made it not have a camera hump.

I will wholeheartedly agree I'd prefer the aesthetics of what apple produces versus what it looks like inside a case.

I wonder if an aftermarket shell and battery could achieve this.

why not get a battery attachment case/snapon

why can't apple just my ridiculous combo of wants that represents 0.2% of the market???