Users were quick to pan the Air’s feeble camera, tinny audio, and underwhelming battery. At $100 more than the iPhone 16 Plus it replaces, you’d expect some innovation rather than fewer features and a wafer-thin form factor that apparently took priority over everything else. It's so thin it should come with a warning label: do not breathe near the screen.

Meanwhile, the rest of the iPhone 17 lineup is on back order for weeks, while the Air is still available faster than a Gen Z TikTok trend. In other words, no one wants it, and Apple’s warehouse workers are probably using them as drink coasters.

Even in China, where Job’s Mob normally sells anything with a glowing fruit on it, the Air is too pricey to qualify for government subsidies. That honour goes to the cheaper iPhone 17, which offers better battery life and speakers, and costs $280 less.

IDC analyst Nabila Popal admitted the Air “was a marketing hit rather than a sales hit” and credited it for creating “a buzz” not seen in years. Buzz is apparently defined as endless social media threads complaining about getting less for more.

CEO Tim Cook naturally claimed he’s “thrilled” with how the iPhone has been received, though he didn’t clarify which one.

The Air might be an “engineering marvel,” thinner than a wetsuit and boasting performance rivalling that of old desktop Macs. As someone who had to use an old desktop Mac that regularly caught fire and had to slip home in the afternoons to write stories on my PC, that is not a good comparison.

Shrinking it might have been what the marketing department wanted. Still, it meant gutting the features people actually want: one speaker, one rear camera, no ultrawide or telephoto, all for a considerable price tag.

By early next year, analysts expect Apple to slash Air production by 80 per cent. At this rate, Apple will have to stop saying “Think Different” and more “Think Again.”