iPhone 1 (2G) vs. iPhone 17 Pro Max: Look at 18 Years of Progress

[ksec]

https://www.macobserver.com/news/iphone-1-2g-to-iphone-17-pro-max-look-at-18-years-of-progress/

[ksec]

The actual iPhone 2G and 3G is bigger than iPhone 4. With 3G being slightly wider than 2G. If we had fitted latest technology screens on that body with same aspect ratio as current iPhone. We would get an 5.85" iPhone 3G size but slightly taller.

Since it is so thick at 12.3mm I am pretty sure we could fit a battery that is even larger than iPhone Air.

[6510]

Progress should be measured against competitors. It is much more impressive if one can get or stay ahead (on one spec). If you are falling further and further behind you are not making progress.

[peterdstallion]

The technological progress is astonishing. But so is the societal degradation that came with it.

[rbanffy]

It's a shame Apple doesn't have an entry-level phone at a constant price. OTOH, $599 is not that off if we think about inflation.

[manoDev]

Inflation adjusted, the iPhone 17 price would be equivalent to $799 — almost double the $499 price of the iPhone 1 at launch.

[dpark → manoDev]

The iPhone 17 price is $799 on the Apple website right now. What inflation adjustment?

[manoDev → dpark]

The model mentioned in the article (17 Pro Max) is mentioned having $ 1199 launch price.

[dpark → manoDev]

Sure but it hardly seems fair to compare the current top of the line to the original model in terms of cost. Feels like comparing the Model T to modern cars and then noting that a Ferrari is so much more expensive even adjusted for inflation. The Pro Max is not the entry level.

The article might have been better to compare the standard iPhone 17, but I think they were making a point about tech and not price.