I'm skipping the iPhone 17 (and Air). Here's why.

My iPhone 14 Pro is a solid workhorse of a smartphone, but lately it's been looking a little long in the tooth. The scratches on the screen are becoming more noticeable — when will I ever remember not to put my keys in the same pocket? — and about a week ago, when I dropped it for the umpteenth time, the aluminum casing developed a tiny nick.

Normally, this kind of wear and tear would annoy. But because it happened in September — which as any true Apple fan knows is new iPhone launch month — looking at the nick and the scratches produced a tiny leap in my heart. It's a sign! I should upgrade to the best iPhone that comes next, perhaps the long-rumored iPhone Air. It's bound to have a better camera setup than the 14 Pro ... right?

All of which is to say I was in the target audience for Apple's iPhone 17 launch event. And I was surprised to discover that the iPhone range unveiled made me less likely to upgrade. Neither of the new models I'd consider, the Pro or the Air, is calling to me. In design terms, both seem like a step down, with ugly bumps on the back that Apple is calling a "plateau."

It's an ironic choice of words from a tech giant normally so careful with them. Because it's easy to believe that with these so-called upgrades, the iPhone maker itself has plateaued.

Apple is dividing us into Airheads and Pros

So what's the problem? Assuming you don't want the iPhone 17 base model or the cheaper iPhone SE — and what power user would want to downgrade in their upgrade? — you have two choices, the Air and the Pro. And after assessing the social media reactions, it seems I'm not alone in being turned off by both.

The iPhone Air is beautifully thin, yes. But its actual utility is an inch deep (or in this case, 0.22 of an inch). I can't shake the notion that pulling this out of my pocket would trigger baffled laughter, maybe even snide comments from other iPhone users about being an "Airhead." (See what I mean about Apple making negative use of their names too easy?)

The main reason? The camera. Yes, camera, singular, as in single lens. You don't have to be a tech guru to equate more lenses with better camera quality. That's why the Pro version has three lenses! Even the basic iPhone 17 has two. The Air has the same number of lenses as an SE, even though Apple suggested the "machine learning" would do a lot of heavy lifting in the Air version (read: your photos will now look like AI slop).

That's not the only feature that would make this an airheaded upgrade choice. There's the worse battery life in the Air, which requires the bulk of an extra $99 MagSafe battery to get the same longevity as a Pro. Plus three weirdly pastel metal color options that make the Air look cheaper than it actually is — rare for an Apple product.

Who is the Air for, exactly? Fashionistas who don't want the outline of a bulkier phone to mar their suits or purses so much that they'll plug it in more often? Would-be Insta models who equate "skinny" with "beautiful," despite all real-world evidence to the contrary? Or is it, perhaps, a billionaire's burner?

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

So that leaves the 17 Pro, another iPhone I really wanted to like. It has three 48-megapixel lenses! Only one of my three lenses in the iPhone 14 Pro can match that. It has a Vapor Chamber! That sounds like a dubious dispensary in a strip-mall, but it helps keep its components cool — unlike my 14 Pro, which occasionally overheats when it gets excited and downloads a bunch of app updates at once.

The 17 Pro is undoubtedly faster with its A19 chip (90 percent faster than the 14 Pro, Apple claimed at the event, in a nod to us upgraders). It has more battery life; apparently I could watch 33 hours of video playback on a 17 Pro without ever plugging it in. (I could do 23 hours on the 14 Pro, but the fact that I've never done this speaks to the fact that it's a pretty useless metric.)

All it would have taken to make me upgrade was a decent design. Heck, I would have taken the same design as the iPhone 14 Pro, which packs its three lenses into a neat little off-center square on the back. That square and the Apple logo are the only things on its beautiful deep purple derriere, a masterclass in using negative space.

But there's no way around it. The iPhone 17 Pro design is, in a word many people have already used on social media, just plain ugly. It's a shotgun wedding between the new bulky camera plateau (double the size of the old square, with no discernible benefit) and ... whatever is going on with that credit card shape in the MagSafe area just below it.

Is this supposed to be subliminal advertising for the Apple credit card? Or is the company trying to make us buy its MagSafe wallet cases that defeat the whole purpose of Apple Wallet?

The less said about the 17 Pro color options the better. If you're a huge fan of Halloween and pumpkin spice lattes, the orange might work for you. I might just about be able to enjoy the deep blue. But why would I spend $1,200 plus tax (which is what it would cost to get the equivalent of my current 512GB 14 Pro, minus a trade-in that Apple estimates at a whopping $100) to upgrade an object so I can enjoy looking at it less?

I'd consider upgrading to an iPhone 16 Pro instead — it's still got the square camera box, and the Desert Titanium color intrigues me. But bafflingly, Apple no longer sells the iPhone 16 Pro as of today. (You can still get the iPhone 16 and iPhone 16 SE, but the 17 Pro is your only pro option in the Apple Store.)

So for now, I'm saving my pennies. I'll drop $100 on a new key-free screen for the 14 Pro; I'll sand down the scratchy nick and treat it like a character-building scar. And I'll settle down for the long wait until the iPhone Pro 18 drops in September 2026 — assuming Apple's iPhone design team has risen above its plateau by then.

For more Live Apple Event coverage, follow Mashable's live blog and get real-time updates on the iPhone 17, Apple Watch Series 11, and AirPods Pro 3 launch.