The Thin Line Between Innovation and Compromise: Should Phones Be Thinner?

BY MUFARO MHARIWA
2 days ago
5 min read

This year, all we’ve heard about is thinness. Long gone are the days when companies would proudly tout their phones as durable, efficient, or packed with features. Now, the ultimate selling point is how slim a device can be. From the Oppo Find N5 to the rumored iPhone 17 Air, the tech world seems obsessed with shaving millimetres off their gadgets.

But here’s the question: is thinness really what users want? Sure, a sleek device looks impressive in a keynote, but does it hold up in everyday life? The pursuit of thinness has led to some groundbreaking designs, but it’s also come with its fair share of compromises, some of which leave users scratching their heads. Let’s explore.

The MacBook Air: A Thinness Success Story

When Apple unveiled the MacBook Air in 2008, it didn’t just launch a laptop. It launched a revolution. Steve Jobs famously pulled it out of a manila envelope, and suddenly, thinness became the gold standard for portable tech. The MacBook Air wasn’t just slim; it was a statement. It redefined what a laptop could be, and consumers couldn’t get enough.

What made the MacBook Air a success wasn’t just its sleek design. It was how Apple balanced thinness with functionality. It was lightweight enough to carry anywhere, yet powerful enough to handle everyday tasks. The premium feel of its aluminium chassis made it feel like a luxury item, and its portability set a new benchmark for laptops everywhere.

Fast forward to today, and the MacBook Air isn’t just a success story. It’s Apple’s best-selling laptop. With each new edition, Apple has refined the formula, adding better displays, faster processors, and improved battery life, all while keeping that iconic slim profile. The introduction of the M1 chip took things to a whole new level, proving that thinness doesn’t have to come at the cost of performance.

Apple’s Thinness Expansion: The iPad

After the MacBook Air, Apple didn’t stop at laptops. They took their thinness obsession to the next frontier: tablets. Enter the iPad. When the first iPad launched in 2010, it wasn’t just a bigger iPhone. It was a sleek, portable device that felt like holding the future in your hands. And, of course, it was thin.

Over the years, the iPad has become a masterclass in balancing thinness with functionality. The iPad Pro, in particular, has pushed the boundaries. In 2024, Apple proudly announced it as the thinnest device they’ve ever made. It’s a marvel of engineering, but more importantly, it works. The iPad’s slim design enhances its portability without sacrificing performance or usability. Whether you’re sketching, streaming, or working on the go, the iPad proves that thinness can be a strength—when done right.

But not every device has been so lucky. While the iPad thrives as a thin and light tablet, Apple’s pursuit of thinness hasn’t always been a win.

Thinness Gone Wrong: The 2015 MacBook and iPhone 6

Not every thin device is a triumph. Sometimes, the pursuit of slimness leads to compromises that leave users frustrated. Take the 2015 MacBook, for example. Apple pushed thinness to the extreme, creating a laptop that was undeniably sleek but came with some glaring flaws.

The 2015 MacBook’s keyboard was so shallow it felt like typing on a piece of cardboard. It also had just one port, which meant dongles became a necessity. And let’s not forget the battery life, which left users scrambling for chargers far too often. The 2015 MacBook was a cautionary tale: so thin that it sacrificed usability, leaving many wondering if Apple had gone too far.

Then there was the iPhone 6. When it launched in 2014, it was Apple’s thinnest iPhone yet. But that thinness came at a cost. The infamous “Bendgate” scandal saw users complaining that their phones were bending under normal use, like being kept in a pocket. Suddenly, durability became a major concern, and the iPhone 6 became a symbol of how thinness could backfire.

The Evolution of Tech: Silicon-Carbon Batteries and Titanium Casings

As tech companies continue to chase thinness, they’ve also made some incredible advancements in materials and engineering. Silicon-carbon batteries, for example, promise higher energy density, meaning devices could last longer without needing to be thicker. Titanium casings, on the other hand, offer a rare combination of strength and lightness, making devices more durable without adding bulk.

These innovations could have been a game-changer. Imagine a world where companies use these breakthroughs to prioritise battery life and durability over shaving off another millimetre. Instead of chasing thinness, they could focus on making devices that last all day, survive drops, and still feel premium.

But here’s the twist: instead of using these advancements to improve functionality, many companies have used them to make devices even thinner.

Modern Thin Devices: Oppo’s Foldable

If you want to see how far the thinness obsession has gone, look no further than Oppo’s ultra-thin foldable. This device is a feat of engineering, boasting a design so slim it feels like holding a piece of paper. When folded, it’s barely thicker than a standard smartphone, and when unfolded, it transforms into a tablet that’s impressively lightweight.

What makes Oppo’s foldable stand out isn’t just its slim profile—it’s the clever use of silicon-carbon battery technology. Unlike traditional batteries, silicon-carbon offers higher energy density, meaning Oppo can pack more power into a thinner frame without sacrificing battery life. It’s a rare example of thinness and functionality working hand in hand.

That said, thinness still comes with trade-offs. While the battery life is solid, the overall durability of such a slim device remains a concern. Foldables already face challenges with hinges and screens, and making them thinner doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in their long-term resilience.

Oppo’s foldable is undeniably impressive, but it also highlights the fine line between innovation and practicality.

The Rumored iPhone 17 Air and Galaxy S25 Edge

The thinness race shows no signs of slowing down, and two rumoured devices are proof of that: the iPhone 17 Air and the Galaxy S25 Edge. Both are said to push the boundaries of slim design, but they’re taking very different approaches.

Let’s start with the iPhone 17 Air. Rumours suggest it could be the thinnest iPhone ever, with Apple reportedly using aluminium to achieve its ultra-sleek profile. But that thinness comes with compromises. Early leaks hint at fewer camera modules, which could mean sacrificing some photography capabilities. There’s also talk that MagSafe might be axed to save space, leaving fans of the magnetic ecosystem disappointed.

Then there’s the Galaxy S25 Edge. Samsung is no stranger to thin devices, but leaks suggest this one could be their slimmest flagship yet. The S25 Edge is rumoured to feature a redesigned frame and improved battery tech, but like the iPhone 17 Air, it raises concerns about durability and usability.

So, Does Thinness Really Matter?

Let’s be honest: no one has ever looked at their phone or laptop and thought, “You know what this needs? To be thinner.” Yet, here we are, with tech companies bending over backwards to shave off another millimetre. Thinness has been marketed as the ultimate symbol of innovation and premium design, but is it really what users want?

Thinness has been marketed as the ultimate symbol of innovation and premium design, but is it really what users want?

What people actually care about are things like battery life, durability, and functionality. A thicker device with a longer-lasting battery or a more robust build would likely win more fans than one that’s paper-thin but fragile or impractical. The MacBook Air showed us that thinness can work when done right, but the 2015 MacBook reminded us that it’s not always worth the trade-offs.

And here’s the reality: even if this ultra-thin trend takes off, it might not matter in the end. The moment most people get a new phone, they slap it into a case—adding back the thickness that manufacturers worked so hard to eliminate. So, what’s the point of chasing thinness if it’s just going to be undone by a case?