4 strategic reasons I’m waiting for the iPhone 18

Based on early reviews, Apple seems to be off to a good start with the iPhone 17, 17 Pro, and iPhone Air. I think the vast majority of people should skip the Air, but if size and weight take priority for you over camera tech and battery life, you might be happy. Opinions could shift in a few months, yet I doubt it. That might even be an ideal time to buy, assuming you can find a refurbished model or a third-party discount.

But, I’m skipping this generation. Partly it’s because of a tight budget, but even if I were flush with cash, I might choose to wait anyway. The iPhone 18 lineup seems like it might have more value for me, regardless of which model I switch to from my iPhone 16 Pro. Here are a few reasons why I’m going to wait.

Apple’s camera tech is poised to make a big(ger) leap

Expect the best on the Pro, of course

There are some camera upgrades in the current generation. The iPhone 17 has a 48-megapixel ultrawide, and the 17 Pro has a 48-megapixel telephoto — in both cases, bumps from 12-megapixel sensors. All three of the new phones have an 18-megapixel Center Stage (front) camera, able to adjust automatically for group shots.

When you dissect the situation, though, there’s room for improvement. The 17 Pro’s optical zoom is only good up to 4x, past which you’re into digital zoom, i.e. cropping. The regular 17 is behind rivals like the Pixel 10 in that it lacks any telephoto option, and the iPhone Air has a single wide-angle camera — it can’t even take macro shots.

There’s a Jukan rumor that Apple is switching to a three-layer stacked image sensor from Samsung for at least one of its cameras, a move that could potentially reduce noise and improve dynamic range. But the company probably won’t stop there — I’m expecting it to boost the 17 Pro’s telephoto quality at higher ranges, and add some sort of telephoto to the base 17, even if it’s the old 12-megapixel unit.

Meanwhile, I doubt Apple will be able to get away with a single-camera system on the Air 2 — it needs to offer some sort of meaningful upgrade beyond a faster processor.

There isn’t enough of a performance boost in the iPhone 17

I’m looking for more than incremental changes

Credit: Apple

It’s pretty telling that if you use the performance comparison drop-down on the official iPhone 17 Pro webpage, you can’t match the product against anything in the iPhone 16 lineup. It’s not hard to see why — even versus the 15 Pro, the 17 Pro has just 20% better CPU performance, and a 50% boost in graphics. I might notice some slight gains over my 16 Pro, but it’s hard to imagine them being meaningful outside of playing 3D games. That’s something I’d rather do on my laptop or Steam Deck, anyway.

There’s been diminishing returns in iPhone performance for a while now. While jumping from an iPhone 6s to an XR had a noticeable impact for me, the leap to an iPhone 13 was far less dramatic, and I rarely notice any improvement on my current device outside a few individual apps. You only need so much horsepower to run most iPhone software — often, you’ll gain more from upgrading to 5G than a new Apple processor.

I’m not even sure that the 18 Pro’s A20 Pro chip will advance that much. But it may be the minimum I need to feel like I’m getting my money’s worth.

Apple might finally switch to silicon-carbon batteries

Crossing my fingers for the Air

There haven’t been any rumors to this effect, but I’d be surprised if there isn’t at least one iPhone 18 with silicon-carbon (Si-C) technology. If you’re unfamiliar, Si-C is an evolution of the lithium-ion batteries we’re used to, simply providing better energy density. But that alone can have a dramatic effect and allow phone makers to shrink their phones and retain the same capacity. Or, maybe even keep sizes the same while extending runtime. A number of devices are already using Si-C batteries, such as the OnePlus 13, which can outlast an iPhone 16 Pro Max despite being lighter and cheaper.

For a brief time, it was even speculated that Apple might take advantage of this for the iPhone Air. It didn’t, and the results were predictable; while the phone can last through a normal day, you get noticeably weaker battery life than the iPhone 17. If nothing else, Apple needs to overcome its conservatism to make the Air 2 a more practical device.

That seems plausible, but I’m less convinced that Apple will switch to Si-C for the iPhone 18 and 18 Pro. The 17 and 17 Pro already last long enough next to most competitors, and if there’s one thing Apple’s allergic to, it’s increasing the cost of parts when customers will be content with something cheaper. It’s why base iPhones were stuck with 60Hz panels long after many Android phones had switched to 90 or 120Hz.

The next iPhones may be even tougher

Durability counts

Apple is always ramping up the durability of its products, and to some of us, that matters a great deal. It’s one of the reasons I upgraded from an Apple Watch Series 6 to an Ultra 2 last year — my main hobby is weightlifting, and I wanted the reassurance that my watch wouldn’t break or scratch prematurely because I banged it against a machine or barbell. It’s also nice to know that if a wearable can survive scuba diving, sweat and showers should be trivial.

The most obvious upgrade would be tougher Ceramic Shield glass on the front, and in the case of the iPhone 18, the extension of Ceramic Shield to the back. Less likely but not impossible is a waterproofing enhancement from IP68 to IP69 — while the iPhone 17 series can be submerged to a depth of six meters (about 20 feet) for 30 minutes, IP69 devices are rated against high pressures and temperatures. You can, in theory, hose one down if you drop it in the mud. There aren’t many IP69 phones yet, but the list is growing.

As for dent and scratch protection, that’s a wild card. Apple could find a way of strengthening its aluminum and titanium shells, which I’d certainly appreciate, since my second hobby is riding electric unicycles. Nothing’s going to save my phone in a high-speed crash, but I’d like to know that everything will be fine at bicycle speeds.