Other 16PM or 17PM?

[stejent]

What would you do?
My phone contract ended in August and I made a mistake because I was feeling bored and I got a z flip 7.
Loved the form factor of the phone, but a few things niggled me and the os overall wasn’t for me any more. (I used to have these phones years ago)
So I went back to my 16PM but was stuck paying a contract for a phone I wasn’t using and the plan wasn’t the best value for iOS. So I was able to do an early upgrade by trading the phone back in.
So I got a 17PM.
Which I love and it’s great.
But I’m missing the titanium of my 16PM and it also feels slimmer in hand and is more durable because of its construction.
We were spoiled with titanium and were trained by apple, since iPhone X, into believing aluminium was an inferior material.
I either need to sell the 16PM or go back to it and gift the 17PM to my partner.
I worry that the 17 will end up with signs of wear more easily. The 16 is a year old and is immaculate. I keep my phones in clear cases. But with the 17 I’m worried that dust getting in the case over time will cause scratches as I’ve seen happen to other phones in the past, despite regular removal and cleaning. The 16 has not suffered from that at all.
I also have an Apple Watch Ultra, which matches the 16PM.
I suffer from really bad decision fatigue.
What would you do? I've set a poll, but some discussion would be much appreciated.

 

[Tsepz]

Stick with the 17 Pro Max, it is how Pro iPhones are going to be going forward.
The vapour chamber and aluminium build help dissipate heat much better which means better performance for future updates.
The upgrade from 8GB RAM (16 PM) to 12GB RAM (17 PM) also means the 17 will probably fair a whole lot better for whatever else Apple has planned in the next few iOS updates. This is one of THOSE model years with some important under the hood upgrades that will be key for longevity, IMO.

 

[shady16]

i actually didnt like the 17 pro max due to the aluminium feel, im aware of the advantages but with how easy it is to scratch or get dinged up i couldn't get over it so i returned mine for an air. i would have went back to my 16 pro max but i had already sent it back so i went to the only model still with titanium for this year

 

[MarkX]

What would you do?
My phone contract ended in August and I made a mistake because I was feeling bored and I got a z flip 7.
Loved the form factor of the phone, but a few things niggled me and the os overall wasn’t for me any more. (I used to have these phones years ago)
So I went back to my 16PM but was stuck paying a contract for a phone I wasn’t using and the plan wasn’t the best value for iOS. So I was able to do an early upgrade by trading the phone back in.
So I got a 17PM.
Which I love and it’s great.
But I’m missing the titanium of my 16PM and it also feels slimmer in hand and is more durable because of its construction.
We were spoiled with titanium and were trained by apple, since iPhone X, into believing aluminium was an inferior material.
I either need to sell the 16PM or go back to it and gift the 17PM to my partner.
I worry that the 17 will end up with signs of wear more easily. The 16 is a year old and is immaculate. I keep my phones in clear cases. But with the 17 I’m worried that dust getting in the case over time will cause scratches as I’ve seen happen to other phones in the past, despite regular removal and cleaning. The 16 has not suffered from that at all.
I also have an Apple Watch Ultra, which matches the 16PM.
I suffer from really bad decision fatigue.
What would you do? I've set a poll, but some discussion would be much appreciated.
View attachment 2574943

Keep the phone that gives you least amount of stress, which in this case for you is the 16 Pro Max. The 17 Pro max for most was an unnecessary upgrade tbh.

The 16 Pro Max is still more than relevant today even at 1 year old.

 

[svish]

What would you do?
My phone contract ended in August and I made a mistake because I was feeling bored and I got a z flip 7.
Loved the form factor of the phone, but a few things niggled me and the os overall wasn’t for me any more. (I used to have these phones years ago)
So I went back to my 16PM but was stuck paying a contract for a phone I wasn’t using and the plan wasn’t the best value for iOS. So I was able to do an early upgrade by trading the phone back in.
So I got a 17PM.
Which I love and it’s great.
But I’m missing the titanium of my 16PM and it also feels slimmer in hand and is more durable because of its construction.
We were spoiled with titanium and were trained by apple, since iPhone X, into believing aluminium was an inferior material.
I either need to sell the 16PM or go back to it and gift the 17PM to my partner.
I worry that the 17 will end up with signs of wear more easily. The 16 is a year old and is immaculate. I keep my phones in clear cases. But with the 17 I’m worried that dust getting in the case over time will cause scratches as I’ve seen happen to other phones in the past, despite regular removal and cleaning. The 16 has not suffered from that at all.
I also have an Apple Watch Ultra, which matches the 16PM.
I suffer from really bad decision fatigue.
What would you do? I've set a poll, but some discussion would be much appreciated.
View attachment 2574943

I would recommend to keep the 17 Pro Max. Newer device, better cameras (including front camera), more RAM (which should be useful in the future at least). The new 17 Pro Max should handle heat better.

I have a 17 Pro Max, and yes I am worried about durability. I use it with a Spigen clear case and I think that should be enough.

Also going forward, all the Pro iPhones will follow the design of the 17 Pro Max and will use aluminium. Overall I would prefer to keep the 17 Pro Max.

 

[ruslan120]

I would argue the 17 Pro Max is inherently flawed and unusable due to its durability - phones must be usable caseless without risk of severe damage (bent frame) from a simple drop. but, I acknowledge that will not apply to everyone, I think phones are too bulky inside a case, and use them caseless.

I switched from a 16PM to the Air initially because “it’s new” and because of the design, and because I never liked the excess of cameras Apple stuck in the iPhone - one lens is enough.

I thought about switching back to the 16 Pro Max for a slightly larger screen and better battery, but the scratch resistance of the front and improved durability of the back keeps me using the Air. design is a massive plus.

but to bring it back to the topic at hand, it’s an indirect answer to your question, but I think it boils down to 16 Pro Max versus air, and if you don’t like the air, the only logical choice is the 16

 

[T5BRICK]

I upgraded from a 14PM to the 17PM, so I missed the Ti iPhones. However I did like the stainless iPhones Apple made.

As far as durability goes, the only iPhones I’ve ever owned they didn’t have any visible marks at upgrade time were my iPhone 7+ and my iPhone Xs Max. At the end of the day it’s a phone, I use a case to protect it from major damage, and I really don’t care that much. It’s so much easier to just use and enjoy.

 

[Andeddu]

I would argue the 17 Pro Max is inherently flawed and unusable due to its durability - phones must be usable caseless without risk of severe damage (bent frame) from a simple drop. but, I acknowledge that will not apply to everyone, I think phones are too bulky inside a case, and use them caseless.

I switched from a 16PM to the Air initially because “it’s new” and because of the design, and because I never liked the excess of cameras Apple stuck in the iPhone - one lens is enough.

I thought about switching back to the 16 Pro Max for a slightly larger screen and better battery, but the scratch resistance of the front and improved durability of the back keeps me using the Air. design is a massive plus.

but to bring it back to the topic at hand, it’s an indirect answer to your question, but I think it boils down to 16 Pro Max versus air, and if you don’t like the air, the only logical choice is the 16

It only takes about 10 minutes on YouTube to disprove your claims, there are plenty of drop tests showing that the 17PM is actually more durable than the 16PM when it comes to serious or critical damage, though it’s a bit more prone to minor cosmetic wear. Personally, I’d much rather have a phone that resists costly damage like cracked glass backs or shattered screens.

 

[shady16]

It only takes about 10 minutes on YouTube to disprove your claims, there are plenty of drop tests showing that the 17PM is actually more durable than the 16PM when it comes to serious or critical damage, though it’s a bit more prone to minor cosmetic wear. Personally, I’d much rather have a phone that resists costly damage like cracked glass backs or shattered screens.

the other side to this is that apple wont cover dents or scratches so if one were to want to get that fixed the glass would have to break. Aluminium was such a mistake this year imo and that is what kept me from staying with my 17 pro max i originally had

 

[shady16]

tbh the differences between 17 pro max and 16 pro max arent big enough to downgrade build quality imo

 

[Tsepz]

It only takes about 10 minutes on YouTube to disprove your claims, there are plenty of drop tests showing that the 17PM is actually more durable than the 16PM when it comes to serious or critical damage, though it’s a bit more prone to minor cosmetic wear. Personally, I’d much rather have a phone that resists costly damage like cracked glass backs or shattered screens.

100% agreed.

Also given the resounding success the 17 Pro range has been, Apple are unlikely to change the 18 Pro design.

I guess we are going to have some folks sticking around on Titanium iPhones hoping they comeback.

I remember people not wanting the Titanium iPhones when 15 Pro launched, they said they would hold on to their 14 Pros, hoping for a return to Stainless Steel, lol…
This chat happens every time Apple changes the build materials.🤭

 

[Cobold]

I would argue the 17 Pro Max is inherently flawed and unusable due to its durability - phones must be usable caseless without risk of severe damage (bent frame) from a simple drop. but, I acknowledge that will not apply to everyone, I think phones are too bulky inside a case, and use them caseless.

You are aware, that iPhones were made of aluminum before the X, don’t you?
I always used them without a care, the 5, the 5s and even the „bent-gate-flawed“ iPhone 6 Plus and NEVER had any issue.

Doing that with my 17 PM as well.

I mean, really. Do you drive tanks as your private vehicle because cars are „so flawed and unusable without being stored at a garage 24/7“? Come on!

 

[ruslan120]

It only takes about 10 minutes on YouTube to disprove your claims, there are plenty of drop tests showing that the 17PM is actually more durable than the 16PM when it comes to serious or critical damage, though it’s a bit more prone to minor cosmetic wear. Personally, I’d much rather have a phone that resists costly damage like cracked glass backs or shattered screens.

Link?

 

[ruslan120]

You are aware, that iPhones were made of aluminum before the X, don’t you?
I always used them without a care, the 5, the 5s and even the „bent-gate-flawed“ iPhone 6 Plus and NEVER had any issue.

Doing that with my 17 PM as well.

I mean, really. Do you drive tanks as your private vehicle because cars are „so flawed and unusable without being stored at a garage 24/7“? Come on!

I’ve fixed numerous phones in college - had a repair business. Fixing the 5’s was a nightmare because of the aluminum frame. The corner would get bent, and then the new screen would not fit so you had to bend the frame back. SS / Ti solved this nightmare.

on the topic of cars - I drive a Cybertruck.


jk, because it’s trash


but bringing those up is kind of off-topic/a strawman argument because in theory, yes, durable cars would also be a terrific upgrade. We can talk about how one accepts that they are a depreciating asset, but that’s neither here or there

 

[Andeddu]

@ruslan120

Drop Test

It’s a 17 Pro vs a 16 Pro. The PM has the exact same design.

 

[Andeddu]

Link?

Do some research and you’ll find the new design is more robust than the older design. Prove me wrong.

 

[Andeddu]

the other side to this is that apple wont cover dents or scratches so if one were to want to get that fixed the glass would have to break. Aluminium was such a mistake this year imo and that is what kept me from staying with my 17 pro max i originally had

Don’t drop your phone or use protection if you’re concerned about superficial damage.

 

[shady16]

Don’t drop your phone or use protection if you’re concerned about superficial damage.

thats due to the new ceramic shield not the aluminium, if they remade the 16 pro with the same ceramic shield it will be more durable or if they just used titanium on the 17 pros

 

[Love-hate 🍏 relationship]

so there really are people who care about those sort of things and favor asthetics over practical advantages.

 

[Andeddu]

thats due to the new ceramic shield not the aluminium, if they remade the 16 pro with the same ceramic shield it will be more durable or if they just used titanium on the 17 pros

That’s true, aluminium is indeed a weaker material, but the 17 Pro’s improved durability comes from the upgraded Ceramic Shield 2 and the reduced use of glass on the back. No one’s claiming aluminium is tougher than titanium, because it isn’t. However, as a complete product, the 17 Pro is more durable than the 16 Pro. And to be clear, we’re not comparing it to some hypothetical 16 Pro with Ceramic Shield 2. Apple has never made such a model. This is strictly a 17 Pro vs 16 Pro comparison.

As I’ve mentioned before, the 17 Pro may show superficial wear more easily due to the softer aluminium, but it’s less vulnerable to serious structural damage thanks to the stronger Ceramic Shield 2 and reduced glass back. Plus, its modular design makes it easier to repair if damage does occur.

 

[shady16]

That’s true, aluminium is indeed a weaker material, but the 17 Pro’s improved durability comes from the upgraded Ceramic Shield 2 and the reduced use of glass on the back. No one’s claiming aluminium is tougher than titanium, because it isn’t. However, as a complete product, the 17 Pro is more durable than the 16 Pro. And to be clear, we’re not comparing it to some hypothetical 16 Pro with Ceramic Shield 2. Apple has never made such a model. This is strictly a 17 Pro vs 16 Pro comparison.

As I’ve mentioned before, the 17 Pro may show superficial wear more easily due to the softer aluminium, but it’s less vulnerable to serious structural damage thanks to the stronger Ceramic Shield 2 and reduced glass back. Plus, its modular design makes it easier to repair if damage does occur.

Actually that depends on what needs repaired if you watch ifixit video it’s more of a pain to completely tear down

 

[Ctrlos]

Easily the 17. If you’re worried about dings and scuffs get the silver model

 

[JSRinUK]

@ruslan120

Drop Test

It’s a 17 Pro vs a 16 Pro. The PM has the exact same design.

Imagine if they had the titanium of the 16Pro and the glass of the 17Pro. That’d be a rugged monster.

 

[zkap]

If I were in OP's position, I would keep the 16PM. Besides the fact that keeping the 16PM means gifting the 17PM to someone else, which is always a nice thing to do, the 16PM is immaculate so durability isn't an issue. Being only a year old, it still has a lot of capability. Besides, if this design is a goner, you won't be able to buy another one, so enjoy the Titanium while you can.

Another reason is that Apple isn't in the habit of changing things quickly, so we can expect aluminum to stay on the Pro line-up for a few years before they change again. This means two things: 1. you will have ample opportunity to eventually upgrade to this new design as it will stick around for a while, and 2. if there is something that can be improved in the design of the 17 Pro, it will be done with the 18 Pro, as Apple has a track record of improving design and fixing mistakes in later versions. So if you wait for the 18 Pro, it will undoubtedly be a better phone in all aspects.

so there really are people who care about those sort of things and favor asthetics over practical advantages.

Of course people care about this. A phone is a part of your overall appearance and presentation, no different than the clothing you wear and the car you drive. If someone prefers the 16PM over the 17PM, that doesn't necessarily mean they favor aesthetics over function, it could also mean that the functional upgrades of the 17PM aren't enough to offset the aesthetical downsides.

as a complete product, the 17 Pro is more durable than the 16 Pro.

Durability is used here as a blanket term, as if the word doesn't span a range of possible issues. Saying that the 17 Pro is more durable because the glass takes longer to break is in fact superficial, because it ignores different people's use cases. Personally, I've been using iPhones since the 3G and I've never had any phone bend, no cracked glass, just the usual scratches and possibly minor dents, depending on the model. So I would be more concerned for those than the glass breaking. It means nothing to me that the 17 Pro needs more drops for the glass to crack if it will be scratched and scuffed and dented more easily, because for me that is durability that I care about. I'm not taking the phone to a construction site or a war zone, something breaking my phone in half is not a concern, but having dented edges because of softer aluminum is very much a concern as I don't want to see that on such an expensive device.

 

[eScenCe]

I asked the same question a couple of weeks before. Same boat. Replacing 14 Pro Max.
I went 17 Pro Max. The 16 was too similar to the 14 & the benefits from the 17 are way better.
As I wanted to buy it w/o contract, the price difference from 200€ (1.2xx 16PM, 1.4xx 17PM) was too close, to buy the "old" phone.