iPhone 16E and the death of the small iPhone

Apple: 

Apple today announced iPhone 16e, a new addition to the iPhone 16 lineup that offers powerful capabilities at a more affordable price. iPhone 16e delivers fast, smooth performance and breakthrough battery life, thanks to the industry-leading efficiency of the A18 chip and the new Apple C1, the first cellular modem designed by Apple. iPhone 16e is also built for Apple Intelligence, the intuitive personal intelligence system that delivers helpful and relevant intelligence while taking an extraordinary step forward for privacy in AI.

Wired:

The iPhone 16e isn't for me. If you're an avid tech enthusiast and Apple fan, it's probably not for you either. 

This is why I think a used iPhone 15 Pro is the way to go for an iPhone at this price. You get far more “Pro” features at nearly the same price as the 16e, even in “mint” condition. The iPhone 16e is a perfectly reliable iPhone. It just isn't good value.

Forbes: 

It’s official: the small smartphone is dead — put to rest by Apple and its newly launched iPhone 16e.

In theory, the 16e would have been a strong candidate for the small phone category. Small phones are a risk, and it seems even the world’s most influential phone-maker didn’t think it was worth the squeeze. So instead, we get yet another 6.1-inch device — the same size as the iPhone 16.

The iPhone 16E seems like a nice phone, but in the context of the past and contemporary offerings it really doesn't make any sense. The 16E replaces the SE, a device targeted at people who want small phones with essential feature sets for a cheap price. The Apple experience without the Apple tax. I myself was planning to upgrade to the next SE, which I assumed would have features like FaceID and the old notch, a decent camera (without all the multi-camera fuss of the Pro line), decent performance, for a solid price, like the old one. Though I was ready to bite on a new SE, this 16E doesn't really make sense for me, and I'm just not sure if it makes sense for anyone. It's missing some nice-to-have features (MagSafe, ultra-wide-band chipset, great camera, etc.), which would be fine for the budget-conscious SE buyer, except it's $100-$200 more expensive than the price of the outgoing SE when you factor in reasonable storage. It's the size of a regular iPhone 13 Pro or 14 Pro, which is not a small phone by any means, despite replacing the SE, a dedicated small phone. It uses a novel modem (C1), which is great and all, but I don't think people trying to get a simple Apple experience via an SE replacement will want to beta test Apple's completely untested new hardware. I guess I'm just left wondering who this phone is for. It's not good value, and it has an incomplete feature set for almost any kind of buyer.

Jason Snell (via Michael Tsai):

So much for a “low-cost” iPhone. At $599, the iPhone 16e is the cheapest new iPhone you can buy, but its starting price is 40 percent higher than the $429 iPhone SE. There’s been a lot of talk about the iPhone SE being an important phone for Apple to use in emerging markets that are much more price sensitive, but after this move, it’s hard to imagine that such a strategy is still in effect. 

The size wars are over, and we lost. For a lot of people, the iPhone SE was a proxy for “a smaller iPhone.” But it never was, really—it was just an older phone design, and since all smartphones have gotten larger over time, that meant that the iPhone SE was smaller. Those days are over—the 16e is just the same size as an iPhone 16. As someone who bought and loved an iPhone 13 mini, let me say it: The days of the tiny iPhone ain’t never coming back. I know, I know, but the market has spoken, and it turns out that bigger phones just sell better. Fans of smaller phones are just going to be unhappy, and I’m sorry about it, but that’s where we are.

 

Previously on this blog:

•  Biden declines to veto Apple Watch ban 
•  Build-up to the Apple Watch ban decision 
•  Zero-day Webkit vulnerability (CVE-2023-23529) affecting Apple ecosystem 

Biden declines to veto Apple Watch ban

The Hill:

President Biden has upheld an International Trade Commission (ITC) ruling that could result in an import ban on the Apple Watch, according to AliveCor, a medical device company that has accused Apple of patent infringement.

The administration’s decision to uphold a potential ban on imports of the tech product sets the stage for a high-stakes legal battle.

Following the most recent ITC ruling, Apple hired the former chairwoman of the ITC to lobby on its behalf, in an apparent effort to secure a presidential veto. 

The dispute dates back to 2018, when Apple launched Apple Watch models with built-in electrocardiogram sensors, forcing AliveCor to cancel sales of its heart monitoring accessory. AliveCor said that it first shared its technology with Apple in 2015 in an effort to secure a partnership.

The Verge:

“We applaud President Biden for upholding the ITC’s ruling and holding Apple accountable for infringing the patents that underpin our industry-leading EKG technology,” AliveCor CEO Priya Abani said in a statement sent to The Verge.

Back in December, the ITC issued a final determination that Apple had infringed on AliveCor’s wearable EKG tech. If enforced, that would mean that Apple would no longer be able to import Apple Watch with EKG capabilities into the US for sale.

Biden’s decision doesn’t mean every Apple Watch from the Series 4 to the Apple Watch Ultra (excluding both generations of the SE) is about to disappear off shelves.

However, AliveCor isn’t the only medical tech company that’s seeking an import ban on the Apple Watch via the ITC. Masimo also sued Apple for allegedly infringing on five of its pulse oximetry patents.

That lawsuit is also still in the works but recently an ITC judge ruled in Masimo's favor.

CNET:

The Biden administration on Tuesday declined to overrule a US International Trade Commission decision that the Apple Watch had infringed health monitoring patents from medical device company AliveCor. As a result, the tech giant could face an import ban of its infringing Apple Watches, depending on how appeals work out.

Apple, for its part, said in December that it expects to prevail in the case because AliveCor's patents had been found invalid. It plans to appeal the ITC's decision to federal court. 

Build-up to the Apple Watch ban decision

PhoneArena:

Last month an International Trade Commission (ITC) judge ruled that Apple infringed on a patent owned by medical device maker AliveCor with the blood oxygen feature on the Apple Watch. 

While Apple was cleared of infringing on four other AliveCor patents, the one patent that Apple got busted for using without permission could lead to an import ban that would block shipments of the Apple Watch from entering the U.S.

9to5Mac:

Back in 2015, right after Apple Watch was released, AliveCor created a special Apple Watch band with ECG sensors to showcase the potentials of this technology. The company even shared the technology with Apple hoping to secure a partnership agreement.

However, that partnership never happened, and in 2018 Apple introduced Apple Watch Series 4 with its own ECG sensor built into the watch.

Apple (via 9to5Mac):

At Apple, our teams work tirelessly to create the best products and services in the world, with technology that empowers users with industry-leading health, wellness and safety features. While we firmly disagree with the ITC’s decision today, we are pleased that the exclusion order has been put on pause, consistent with past precedent. The patents on which AliveCor’s case rest have been found invalid, and for that reason, we should ultimately prevail in this matter.

The Hill:

Apple is boosting its lobbying might as President Biden nears a decision next week on whether to block a potential Apple Watch ban. The apparent effort to win over the White House is the latest lobbying push by Apple, which leans on former congressional staffers and federal officials to relay its message in the nation’s capital. “Apple has unlimited resources. They’re gonna go after everyone they can get and that’s what they’re doing,” said Priya Abani, CEO of AliveCor. “We are just a startup.”

The Mountain View, Calif., startup, which employs around 150 people, first shared its wearable electrocardiogram (ECG) sensor with Apple in 2015. AliveCor told The Hill that it believed that it had a good relationship with the Silicon Valley giant and went on to sell an ECG accessory for the Apple Watch. But in 2018, Apple launched an Apple Watch with a built-in ECG sensor and made third-party heart monitoring software incompatible with the product, forcing AliveCor to cancel sales of its product.

Various app developers and startups have accused Apple of “Sherlocking,” where the Silicon Valley giant monitors an innovative technology, then copies it once the use case is demonstrated, rather than pay startups to license their technology. 

If Biden upholds the ITC ruling, litigation would continue, while a veto would ensure that an Apple Watch ban will not take place. Startups are closely watching Biden’s decision, given that the president has railed against powerful companies for using their market dominance to crush competition, Abani said.

Zero-day Webkit vulnerability (CVE-2023-23529) affecting Apple ecosystem

SecurityWeek:

Apple on Monday announced the release of updates for macOS, iOS and Safari, and they all include a WebKit patch for a new zero-day vulnerability tracked as CVE-2023-23529.

In response to these types of attacks, Apple last year announced Lockdown Mode, a feature that should significantly limit the ability to use sophisticated exploits against its customers. 

Apple:

Impact: Processing maliciously crafted web content may lead to arbitrary code execution. Apple is aware of a report that this issue may have been actively exploited.

HackerNews:

WebKit flaws are also notable for the fact that they impact every third-party web browser that's available for iOS and iPadOS owing to Apple's restrictions that require browser vendors to use the same rendering framework.

Also addressed by the company is a use-after-free issue in the Kernel (CVE-2023-23514) that could permit a rogue app to execute arbitrary code with the highest privileges.

Credited with reporting the issue are Xinru Chi of Pangu Lab and Ned Williamson of Google Project Zero. Apple said it resolved the vulnerability with improved memory management.

The updates are available for the following devices:

iPhone 8 and later, iPad Pro (all models), iPad Air 3rd generation and later, iPad 5th generation and later, and iPad mini 5th generation and later

Macs running macOS Ventura, macOS Big Sur, and macOS Monterey\

From a message I received from my institution:

Apple released emergency security updates on Monday 02/13/2023 to address (among other things) a zero-day vulnerability tracked as CVE-2023-23529, which pertains to a WebKit confusion issue that could be exploited to trigger OS crashes and gain code execution on compromised devices.