Home
News
You are here

Apple just handed Samsung and Google an easy win with the iPhone 16e... or did it?

By Adrian Diaconescu

Published: Feb 20, 2025, 7:01 AM

3comments

$599. Five hundred and ninety-nine. US. Dollars. That's not how much some new Chinese Android flagship costs, but rather the US starting price of Apple's first-of-a-kind iPhone 16e. More accurately, the excessive starting price of Apple's surprisingly branded sequel to 2022's third-gen iPhone SE.

Now, let me just begin my little opinion article today by acknowledging the fact that criticizing Apple's pricing strategy is a tale as old as time. Practically every new iPhone since... forever has been denounced for not adapting to the ever-shifting consumer needs and industry trends, and yet time and time again, the Cupertino-based tech giant managed to turn seemingly uncompetitive and overpriced devices into huge box-office hits.

Will that be the case for the just-announced iPhone 16e as well? Perhaps, but only because Apple's biggest rivals are out there inexplicably fumbling their own budget high-end handset plays.

Hey Samsung, where's our Galaxy S25 FE?

Are you excited about the undoubtedly imminent arrival of the ultra-thin Galaxy S25 Edge? Well, I'm not. That's because I have more and more reasons to believe that thing is going to cost north of $1,000 and only hit a handful of global markets in limited numbers, thus wasting precious resources that could instead be used to help Samsung reclaim its world shipment crown.

I realize the Galaxy S24 FE is not even six months old yet, but if the company can (allegedly) take inspiration from the unannounced iPhone 17 Air and accelerate the S25 Edge's development to beat Apple to the skinny flagship punch, moving the launch of the next Fan Edition smartphone up by a few months to give the iPhone 16e a run for its money shouldn't be that big of a problem.

The inexpensive Galaxy S24 FE should receive a sequel... yesterday for Samsung to challenge Apple's iPhone 16e. | Image Credit -- PhoneArena

Unfortunately, I'm not aware of a single Galaxy S25 FE rumor or leak, which strongly suggests a September 2025 release is currently our best case scenario for the S24 FE's sequel. In the meantime, of course, Samsung is widely expected to roll out the Galaxy A56 5G mid-ranger, which will unquestionably undercut the iPhone 16e... and underwhelm us all in pretty much every conceivable way.

I just can't see a device with a middling Exynos 1580 processor stealing many customers from the Apple A18-powered iPhone 16e... despite the latter's numerous obvious flaws that include a totally unremarkable design (for the $600 price point), single rear-facing camera, the absence of MagSafe charging support, and even less-than-stellar 5G speeds in certain US areas.

Yes, the latter two weaknesses are definitely a little nitpicky, but given the iPhone 16e's arguably excessive price tag, these are the kind of small details that could add up and weigh in favor of a superior Samsung option. Too bad that option doesn't really exist.

Hey Google, why does the Pixel 9a look so bland?

Whether you love or hate the Pixel 8a's protruding camera bar, there's no denying that distinctive visual element helps Google's latest budget 5G phone stand out among its peers and rivals. As such, it's certainly a little disappointing (for me, at least) to see the upcoming Pixel 9a prepare to ditch that component in favor of a more... generic rear camera module.

Generic feels like the best way to describe the Pixel 9a's design as a whole, and while that's absolutely true for the iPhone 14-inspired 16e as well, it's pretty clear that Google is the underdog here, and the underdog needs to impress with bold choices and eye-catching elements to... move up from its underdog status.

I'm not saying the Pixel 9a is ugly, but it just looks... unremarkable in these recently leaked renders. | Image Credit -- WinFuture

Alas, the Pixel 9a doesn't sound all that special when you consider its key specs and features either, but if Google manages to keep its starting price locked at $499, I can totally see this thing making life just a tiny bit difficult for Apple.

Of course, Apple could have effortlessly avoided this potential trouble in one of two simple ways. The iPhone 16e could have started at $499 instead of $599 (let's be real, that was an absolutely realistic thing to expect), or the iPhone 14 could have lived on at a reduced price of $499 instead of dying a sudden and somewhat unexpected death yesterday.

At the end of the day, however, I think I blame Samsung and Google just as much as I blame Apple for overpricing the iPhone 16e and eliminating not one and not two but three options in the company's 2025 product lineup. That's what happens when Apple doesn't feel enough heat from the competition. Hopefully, this is going to end up costing the Cupertino-based tech giant... somehow, or else we might see a $699 iPhone 17e with a lazy iPhone 15-inspired design released next.

View Full Bio

Adrian, a mobile technology enthusiast since the Nokia 3310 era, has been a dynamic presence in the tech journalism field, contributing to Android Authority, Digital Trends, and Pocketnow before joining PhoneArena in 2018. His expertise spans across various platforms, with a particular fondness for the diversity of the Android ecosystem. Despite the challenges of balancing full-time parenthood with his work, Adrian's passion for tech trends, running, and movies keeps him energized. His commitment to mid-range smartphones has led to an eclectic collection of devices, saved from personal bankruptcy by his preference for 'adequate' over 'overpriced'.