The iPhone 16e launched earlier this week, but it’s far from what we had initially thought of it. For starters, it is not a successor to the iPhone SE (2022).
The changes to the design weren’t exactly unexpected, and through a series of leaks over the several past months, we were persistently reminded of the overhaul the iPhone SE would undergo. Despite setting our expectations already, the iPhone 16e was able to drive some strong reactions, mostly disappointment, at launch. The $600 price tag and cutbacks in some seemingly crucial areas were the likely culprits.
I, personally, set out with a mission to count its flaws, carefully comparing it with the other iPhones you can buy for the same price. But after clearly observing my thoughts and clearing out my biases, I feel the iPhone 16e is an entirely different phone — not a new SE. And for this reason, it deserves a fair chance, especially for what it offers rather than what it lacks. So, here are the reasons, why, despite wanting to hate the iPhone 16e, I failed.
I’d rather pass on the ultrawide camera
I test dozens of phone cameras each year as part of my job. When I do, it becomes imperative to test every camera unit on the phone, and gauge its quality against the others. But when I’m shooting photos for myself, I rarely find myself willingly choosing for the ultrawide camera.
There are a few reasons for that. First, most phones, irrespective of their price, cheap out on the quality of the ultrawide camera while focusing on the primary and the telephoto cameras. Take for instance the 12MP ultrawide angle camera on the regular iPhone 16. It not only has a lower resolution count than the 48MP main camera, but the sensor inside is also physically smaller. That immediately leads to less sharp images, with losses mounting as we subject the camera to lower light.
Secondly, ultrawide cameras have evolved the least in recent years. One pressing issue that brands have shied away from fixing is the wonky perspective. This makes the images look unnatural, and I would rather limit my span of view than slaughtering scenic views for the sake of accommodating more.
It’s not entirely useless, especially since autofocus on the iPhone 16’s ultrawide-angle camera enables macro mode. But giving up on the feature is a compromise I’m willing to make at that price.
What concerns me more about the iPhone 16e’s camera is the lack of the same features as the base iPhone 16, primarily, the improved photographic styles we saw as part of the iPhone 16 series. Instead, the iPhone 16e gets the older version, which is limited and must be set from system settings instead of within the camera, making the whole process less intuitive.
As for the actual camera quality, I would want to try the camera first before doling out a verdict.
Lack of mmWave and UWB doesn’t bother me
With the iPhone 16e, Apple moved away from using Qualcomm’s 5G modems to using its in-house C1 chip. While Apple claims the new modem leads to lower battery drain while hitting triple-digit megabit speeds, the C1 is effectively less capable than the Qualcomm X71 modem that powers the iPhone 16 and the 16 Pro. The most evident disadvantage of the new modem is that it lacks support for mmWave spectrum, which uses higher frequency waves and, in theory, allows for faster data transfer rates, even in densely packed regions.
The lack of mmWave can seem a deal-breaker until you learn about its limitations. The high frequency spectrum has a shorter range than traditional sub-6GHz networks, and, therefore, requires a larger number of substations to keep the network running. This eventually leads to higher operational expenses, which is why most careers in the U.S., besides AT&T, have invested in lower frequencies, primarily focusing on the mid-band spectrum, which is a subset of the sub-6GHZ spectrum. If you’re outside the U.S., chances are most careers haven’t even deployed their networks in the higher bands.
So, while mmWave has practical advantage — especially if you’re chasing Gigabit speeds on your 5G connection, you would probably be fine if the iPhone 16e runs at 200Mbps instead — I know I would be.
The other key feature missing from the iPhone 16e is a dedicated chip for ultra wide band (UWB) that is otherwise present on all phones since the iPhone 11. UWB is a short communication tech that operates at frequencies lower than other wireless communications like Wi-Fi, which makes it immune to interference. On the iPhone specifically, UWB helps with faster AirDrop connections and precisely maneuvering to AirTags or other Apple devices through the Find My app.
It’s unquestionably groundbreaking, but it’s still not indispensable. Unless you live in a smart home where UWB helps you with your digital keys or have dozens of Apple devices where you are tired of waiting for the right device to pop up on the AirDrop menu, I would say UWB is not that big of a deal. And if you’re an Android user who has only one foot into the Apple ecosystem, you probably don’t need to worry about it.
Perhaps, when I witness a future where UWB becomes more dependable while we rely on machines to interact with each other without human discretion, I would change my stance on UWB. Until then, I am perfectly fine without it.
I’m not too particular about wireless charging speeds
Apple has particularly outraged a lot of people by skipping MagSafe from the iPhone 16e. That means while the new iPhone has wireless charging, it lacks magnets that can be used to anchor it to a wireless charger or attach a panoply of accessories such as wallets. That also means wireless charging is limited to a paltry 7.5W instead of 25W as on the rest of the iPhone 16 series.
Although it was initially speculated that Apple ditched MagSafe to ensure magnets do not interfere with the new modem’s performance, the company refuted this. The only other reasonable explanation for omitting magnets was so Apple could cut manufacturing costs. If you think of it like that, it does seem outrageous.
However, if you’re like me and mostly top up your iPhone with a cable instead, the lack of MagSafe isn’t a deal-breaker. Further, case manufacturers have stepped up and circumvented the need for internal magnets by offering MagSafe-compatible cases for older iPhones or even Android phones without MagSafe — Samsung being the latest one to skip internal magnets yet support the faster Qi2 wireless charging standard, and there are plenty of affordable options, too, to bring MagSafe-like functionality to any phone, not just the expensive ones.
In essence, using a case instead of relying on MagSafe has one major drawback, i.e., you don’t get access to the fastest wireless charging speeds. But in all honestly, I’m not among those who will be bogged down by this. That’s because I use the magnetic charging functionality mostly while at my desk or sleeping. In both scenarios, the objective is not to charge the phone but utilize MagSafe — primarily for the iPhone’s StandBy mode. So, my requirements can be fulfilled by simply using a case, even without inherent MagSafe support on the iPhone 16e.
Apple Intelligence makes it worth it
Despite its shortcomings in other areas, the iPhone 16e comes with an A18 processor from Apple. It isn’t identical to the eponymous chip that runs iPhone 16 and 16 Pro phones, but uses a slightly less powerful CPU. Despite that, the A18 is equipped to run Apple Intelligence and Visual Intelligence, and that is enough to get me hyped up for the phone.
It’s worth arguing that Apple Intelligence has been underwhelming — it’s current applications are limited to cleaning up your notes and emails and offering (wild) summaries of notifications. But I feel hopeful for its applications a few years later — assuming anyone who buys the iPhone 16e would keep it for a few years. I primarily envision Siri maturing into a truly intelligent assistant and future versions of iOS getting actually good at predicting your next steps and making the experience truly enhanced with AI — beyond regurgitating a sequence of words it learned from somewhere on the internet. It would be especially exciting to see how Apple Intelligence — or AI, in general — makes technology more personalized and useful for people who don’t truly enjoy fiddling with it.
Not the best $600 phone, but…
As someone who gets to access the latest and the best technology — mostly for free — as part of my job, I have developed a general sense of aversion to gadgets that are short of the best. But I reckon these may not fit the broader audience.
While there’s no questing that the iPhone 16e is full of compromises, it sells the dream of making features like Apple Intelligence and the latest iOS experience accessible to plenty more people who just want a good and functional phone that lasts several years. Yes, it’s not the most compelling phone for $600 — you’ll find much better options such as the OnePlus 13R, which offers brilliant value, a brighter display, significantly better battery. But if you want an iPhone — one that you would want to stick with for years, the iPhone 16e is highly compelling.
If you want to buy your first iPhone to experiment, there’s probably no better phone than this one.