Why Apple Chooses Thin Devices
So why is Apple making things thinner, rather than expanding battery life? Why are they sacrificing headphone ports to push their designs into thinner and thinner dimensions?
The answer is that anyone can make bulky tech with massive battery capacity.
But no one can build devices that are as miniaturized as Apple’s.
Through miniaturization, Apple creates products whose subjective experience of niceness cannot be matched.
However, there are diminishing returns and increasing tradeoffs for thinness.
Previously: Unreliable MacBook Pro Keyboards, The Impossible Dream of USB-C, Removing the iPhone’s Headphone Jack.
5 Comments RSS · Twitter
I... don't know if I buy this argument. Apple's tech gets copied all the time, including how thin it is. Consider ultrabooks. Consider the Pixel 2, it's 7.8mm deep while the iPhone XS is 7.7mm. This article's sole example the triumph of Apple's miniaturization is: the case for the Airpods. I'm not sure anyone has complained about that product sacrificing battery life in order to be smaller.
The argument only works if Apple has either the thinnest devices or largest battery per devices volume. Which Apple fails on both front.
Not being able to engineer better battery life and more features in a reasonably thinner package is a win? Okay then.
