Review iPhone The 16e is undoubtedly one of the article highlights of this spring in our magazine. This is because it is one of the most anticipated products of the first half of this year and at the same time one of the most controversial iPhones, which Apple has introduced in recent years – at least judging by the various discussion forums and comments addressed to this phone. But is the criticism justified, whether it revolves around the price or technical specifications?
You might be interested in
This is exactly the question I've been asking myself every day for the past two weeks, and I've been interested in the answer to it perhaps even more than I am in the iPhones introduced in the fall. So if you're wondering whether it's really iPhone 16e worthy of criticism, or is there a treasure hidden in it, sit back and get started on its review.
A look you know
Apple has relied on the years-tested design in the form of a square body consisting of an aluminum frame in combination with a glass back and, of course, the front. So if you like this style of iPhones, you will be satisfied. If not, in the end, you have no choice but to either reach for models released before 2019 (or the iPhone SE 2020 or 2022), or simply accept this appearance. It doesn't seem like he wants to change it. Apple deviate in any significant way in the foreseeable future, apart from speculation about the enlargement of the rear photomodules of the iPhone 17 and the like.
However, what personally bothers me a little about the appearance of the iPhone 16e is the fact that their edges are not rounded like the iPhone 15 (Pro) or 16 (Pro). This is a small thing to some extent, but if he wanted to Apple to unite and named his innovation as iPhone 16e, as another piece from the 16 series, I would kind of expect it to opt for a design element that is typical for this series. Moreover, objectively, iPhones with slightly rounded edges hold better in the hand than those with sharp edges. But it is true that the grip probably does not need to be addressed as much, since most of us hide the phone almost immediately after unpacking it and initially setting it in the cover.
Gallery
In a way, it is also strange to me that Apple decided iPhone 16e presented in only two colors variaAlthough they are really impressive and look better in person than in photos, in recent years it seemed that the color "limitation" was over and Apple is not afraid to experiment in this direction. But here he returned to the era of the iPhone X, which also had only two color options variant, which may annoy some people. However, this limitation must be taken into account.
I got my hands on the white one specifically for testing. varianta, which looks very elegant, clean and overall fresh. But I had the opportunity to thoroughly examine the black one, which is significantly darker than in the product photos and I would say that this is why the phone has such a "more holistic" impression. The frames around the display blend nicely with the rest of the body, which creates a rather interesting effect of a one-piece device. So I think that you will definitely not miss out on either one. The matte glass back in combination with the precisely machined aluminum frame looks really cool.
The display (couldn't) have been better
However, what doesn't look so great, or at least it may be for some users, is the display. Apple bet on the new 6,1" Super Retina XDR display with a resolution of 2532 x 1770 px at 460 ppi, contrast of 2:000, P000 support, True Tone, HDR, or perhaps maxwith a maximum brightness of 800, or 1200 with HDR. On paper, this is a display known from the iPhone 14, which actually loses to the display of the basic iPhone 16 only in brightness, which in the case of the basic "sixteen" is up to 2000 nits.
If you're wondering if it's noticeable, I'd personally say that it's not. The readability of the display in sunlight or under bright artificial light is still very good, and you'll usually only notice that it could be better when you open it next to the iPhone 16e. iPhone with higher display brightness and you have a perfect side-by-side comparison.
Many users criticize Apple for using only a display with a fixed 16Hz refresh rate for the iPhone 60e, when practically all of the competition is already betting on 90 or 120Hz even for cheaper smartphones. For example, the recently introduced Samsung Galaxy A56 as a mid-range for 11 CZK also offers 990Hz as a base model, and the same applies to its predecessor A120. But I would like to say here that nothing other than 55Hz could be expected from the iPhone 60e, given that the same refresh rate is also offered by the iPhones 16 and 2024 Plus, unveiled in September 16. The new 16e logically could not get a better display than these models, since it is in the hierarchy Applu under them.
Is it generally acceptable to use a 60Hz panel on lower-end iPhones, and by extension all others? Apple Everyone has to evaluate the products themselves in the right way. But to be honest, I don't really think so, simply because I think some standards should be maintained across the entire market, and the display refresh rate is one of them. ProWhether you like it or not, a display with a 120Hz refresh rate simply looks better because everything it displays in motion is smoother overall and you'll enjoy even "stupid" scrolling better.
I understand that, as usual, a lot of experts will come to me in the comments, claiming that 120Hz is not visible, that the human eye does not perceive this refresh rate, that there is no difference between 120Hz and 60Hz, and so on. However, I stand by the fact that the difference is really huge and once you start using a 120Hz display, whenever you get your hands on a 60Hz device, it almost feels like it's broken. It's always easier to get used to something better than something worse, but of course you have to have access to something better.
On the other hand, I have to say that, regardless of everything above, I understand to some extent why it wouldn't find its way into the iPhone 16e anyway. This is a phone that is aimed at less demanding users and they simply don't care about something like that, just like they don't care about a lot of other things. So, installing similar gadgets on this model would probably be quite unnecessary, although for the 16 (Plus) series I think it would be better. ProMotion should definitely have been.
The use of a cutout in the display instead of a more modern one also sparked great discussion. Dynamic Islandu. But here too I ask myself whether this decision on the part of AppIs it really based only on an effort to save money, or is there something bigger behind it? Sure, saving money in production Apple I definitely wanted it, but again I wonder if the cutout in the display isn't a better choice for undemanding users, because it's simply a "black spot" with zero need for interaction with it, so it's completely understandable in the end.
That's it Dynamic Island it requires some interaction with the user and can be annoying for the less technically savvy, because they simply won't understand how to use it. However, from the perspective of a technology fan, I would of course see the iPhone 16e Dynamic Island much better, because it would advance the usability of the phone in a rather interesting way.
I would like to briefly mention the bezels around the display, which look very narrow in the product photos, but in reality they appear quite wide. It is simply seen that although Apple trying to disguise the novelty behind iPhone 16(e), was born from the iPhone 14, which is precisely what the thickness of the frames corresponds to. The aspect of reusing older parts that were not used for the iPhone 14 or can be produced more cheaply than those for the latest iPhones is definitely tangible here.
However, the iPhone 16e display does not deserve only criticism, as it may seem from the previous paragraphs. Its display capabilities are really great and whether you watch videos, view photos or just surf the Internet, you will be thrilled with its color rendition, sharpness and finesse. The viewing angles are also absolutely great and the touch response is of course a joke. The absence of a more interesting display refresh rate is all the more frustrating, Always-on whether Dynamic Islandu. In the first two cases, however, this is understandable given the possible cannibalization of more expensive iPhonech 16 and 16 Plus, in the third it is to some extent a purely economic move.
Gallery
Performance that's not just about phone speed
That is iPhone The 16e is a direct successor to the iPhone SE, as indicated by the fact that it Apple It uses the same chip as the basic iPhone 16 introduced last year. Almost. Apple The A18 in the iPhone 16e offers a 6-core CPU and "only" a quad-core GPU instead of the five-core offered by the A18 in the iPhone 16. All of this is complemented by a 16-core Neural Engine, 8GB of RAM, and 128, 256, or 512GB.
On paper, the phone's specifications are impressive, and I have to say that in real life, they will appeal to you just as much. You will not notice the one missing graphics core at all, and in terms of speed, the phone is comparable to the iPhone 16. ProWhether you need to run demanding applications or are a fan of AAA games, know that you will have everything you need. iPhone It starts quickly, reliably and without hesitation. Moreover, I don't think it gets particularly hot, which is definitely good news.
However, the use of the A18 chip in combination with 8GB of RAM is great news not only in terms of the performance of the phone itself, but also in terms of software support. It is clear that the use of these componeThis predetermines that the iPhone 16e will receive the same long-term software support as the significantly more expensive iPhone 16 or 16 Pro. After all iPhone The 16e starts at 16 CZK, while iPhone 16 for 23 CZK and iPhone 16 Pro even to 29,990 CZK. Despite the large price differences, you are assured that iPhone The 16e will receive software updates for the same length of time as the significantly more expensive 16 Probecause it has the same amount of RAM and only a slightly weaker processor.
For me personally, the length of software support is an absolutely crucial factor for the iPhone 16e, which is quite possibly even more important than for the iPhones 16 or 16 ProIn my opinion, the new 16e is primarily intended for less demanding users or companies, where there is no pressure for new features and where, on the contrary, long battery life, a good camera, and overall reliability of the phone are positively perceived.
This is what determines iPhone 16e for many years of use and it will be even more pleasing that this will be possible without any problems thanks to the long software support, which can now be estimated to be up to 2030 or 2031. And if it manages to launch in the European Union in some more interesting form in the future, Apple Intelligence (a more interesting form is the support of Czech, since without it there is Apple Intelligence as such largely unusable), the A18 with 8GB RAM combination will be even more perfect.
The camera will entertain you, but it will also deceive you.
Although Apple The iPhone 16e is not being talked about as a direct successor to the SE series, but the fact is that this model has more than enough similarities to it. One of them is the rear camera, which is only a single lens. Apple specifically opted for the Fusion (wide-angle) camera with a resolution of 48MPx and an aperture of f/1,6, which has optical image stabilization, night mode support, and 2x optical zoom, which, however, does not work as a true zoom, but "only" as a crop of a 12MPx photo from a 48MPx photo. In general, it can be said that the wide-angle camera is on paper (meaning according to the specifications visible on the official website) different from the one used Apple for iPhones 16, almost no different.
But don't be fooled. Initial analyses have revealed that Apple The iPhone 16e camera uses a significantly smaller sensor than the iPhone 16, which will inevitably affect how much detail, light, and overall scene "data" the camera can capture. Just for fun, the sensor should be the same as the one in the iPhone XNUMX. Apple used in 48MPx ultrawide-angle lens of the iPhone 16 Pro, so it's definitely not an old piece of hardware. However, if you've taken any photos with this camera, you'll know that there's still a lot of noise and other artifacts in the photos. However, the iPhone 16e has apparently managed to eliminate this with a lot of software.
You might be interested in
I've been trying to test the camera as much as possible over the last two weeks to see how much worse or different it is compared to the iPhone 16 and 16 ProAnd after two weeks of photoshooting, I have to say that although it is different, it doesn't have to be completely detrimental.
If you remember my iPhone 16 review Pro, or rather the iPhone 16, you may recall my words about these models taking photos "differently" between generations. It's not entirely true to say that they take better or nicer photos, because that's not entirely true. Their uniqueness lies mainly in how realistically they can capture a given scene. It is a fact that reality is not always as pretty as software-edited photos from iPhones 15 (Pro) and older, but if you're looking for the closest possible capture of reality, iPhones 16 and 16 Pro They are – dare I say – masters in this regard. Even though their photos may not be to everyone's taste.
Gallery
Apple However, he decided not to go in this direction with the iPhone 16e and created the camera of this model more in the spirit of older iPhones. The result of his efforts is more than interesting - with this model you are often able to take more visually pleasing pictures than you can capture on a iPhone 16 or 16 Pro. They are less detailed due to the smaller sensor, but you will honestly only notice this when you zoom in on more complicated structures in the photos. However, visually, the photos from the iPhone 16e are really not wrong, which is notonec may actually be the error.
When I've been "clicking" next to each other in the last few days iPhonem 16e, 16 Plus and 16 Pro, I've become increasingly aware that while what I see on the iPhone 16e's display looks great, I'm a little annoyed that it's actually more bombastic than reality. In other words, the blue sky in the photo looks beautiful, but when you take a photo, I think you want to capture the moment exactly as it is, not as it could be.
You might be interested in
This may sound strange, but for me personally, taking pictures iPhone 16e is almost too brilliant. However, I believe that it is his ability to always take a practically perfect photo that his target group will ultimately appreciate. Probecause if someone is not technically or photographically skilled, they only care about taking a nice photo and don't care about the things around them. And that's Apple for iPhone 16e it will allow.
Moreover, for the first time ever, a phone from the SE series, which the 16e fits into only nominally, has received support for night mode for photography. But here too, you will encounter certain pitfalls related to the use of a smaller sensor. This is because it captures less light and therefore needs more software assistance. This is reflected in the fact that taking photos in night mode takes longer than on the iPhones 16 (Pro) longer (when the same scene is shot for them for, for example, a second, while iPhone 16e needs three) and at the same time the resulting photos are again more "expelled" by the software. Here too, they sometimes look more pleasing to the eye, however, it must be taken into account that this is at the expense of a certain naturalness.
Gallery
What I like about the iPhone 16e's night mode is how it works with artificial street light in the frame. This will of course affect the resulting image in some way, but fortunately, there are no longer bright outlines around lamps or other light sources, as was the case before. Reduction of significantly bright objects in otherwise black images in the AppSo, it has really improved in recent years, and thanks to that, the iPhone 16e camera is also great for this type of photography.
You might be interested in
Here too, we can of course talk about adding a wide-angle camera ultrawidescreen would be nice and iPhone This would make the 16e a slightly hotter product again. However, even in this case, it is necessary to take into account that any improvements that would be taken from the iPhone 16 (Plus) could harm their sales, which is simply Apple cannot afford. So there is no point in lamenting that the iPhone 16e's photo system consists of only one rear camera, just as there is no point in complaining about why the basic iPhone 16s don't have a telephoto lens. Apple Holt has a camera strategy set up somehow and any deviation can cause a sales disaster.
You might be interested in
Battery life and charging as the stars of the evening
I must say quite frankly that if I iPhone The 16e is even more impressive than its camera, and that's its battery life, which is simply fantastic. When Apple when introducing the phone, he announced that it was iPhone with the longest battery life among all 6,1" models introduced so far, I thought the reality would be quite interesting considering that his words are usually based on laboratory measurements.
I didn't pay much attention to the first tests posted on YouTube, because for me they are always quite sterile and just miniThey simulate normal phone use. ProWell, let's face it, we probably won't be watching videos on a streaming platform on our mobile phones for hours at a time. So I decided to test the battery life with the best test I know - everyday life.
ProSince my workdays are mostly the same, the easiest test for me is always to start using the phone under test as my primary device and just work with it as I'm used to. So I swapped it for a few days. iPhone 16 Pro za iPhone 16e, with the fact that I handled all phone calls and emails through it, took photos through it, used it in the car for CarPlay, sometimes played on it, surfed the internet and so on.
To give you the best idea – I get about 200 notifications on my phone every day, I make about 2 hours of calls, I handle about 20 messages and reply to 10 emails. Of course, there are some fun things like reading articles on the internet before going to bed, watching videos on YouTube in my free time, and so on. When I'm driving, I usually CarPlay It runs for about an hour. As for the connection, I'm on WiFi most of the day in the office, and on 5G outside.
With this style of use, I iPhone 16 Pro usually in the evening it reports around 20% battery remaining on average. However, with the iPhone 16e, I got around 35% battery remaining in the evening in the same mode. So the endurance is really great for me and I have to bow down to it even as the owner of a higher series. With less active use, you will definitely be able to charge the phone once every three days, which is quite a bargain these days.
In connection with battery life, I would like to mention one funny thing that happened to me while testing the phone. When I measured the time it took to charge the phone from 0 to 100 %, it was sometimes quite a problem to discharge the phone in a reasonable way. I usually used to play many hours of 4K videos on YouTube, where I turned the display brightness to full to maximize consumption and at the same time not have to deal with it much. However, even with this style of use, the phone would not discharge and I fell into a bit of despair. Proso that it can last me 8 hours of continuous video playback over WiFi 100% The brightness of the display after I turned on the video at a charge level of 35% is simply a letdown for me. Apple So he really worked with stamina.
When it comes to charging, you have two options – namely wired and wireless charging. In the case of wired charging, there is of course support for fast charging, which can be done using a 20W adapter. iPhone charge from 0 to 50% in 30 minutes. In my case, using a more powerful (specifically 100W adapter) I got to an even more pleasant 30% in 58 minutes, while the phone took 100 hour and 1 minutes to charge to 45%. I wrote about this test in more detail in my older article.
Of course, there was also a test of wireless charging, which some users consider to be the main drawback of the new product. It does not support MagSafe 1 and 2, so you can charge it with maxat least 7,5W instead of the more pleasant 15W or 25W. But does it actually matter? Honestly, I don't think so. You can charge this model to full even with a 7,5W charger.onem in a solid 2 hours and 46 minutes, while iPhone 16 Pro with MagSafe support you will charge only slightly faster. If you are more interested in charging issues, I have prepared an article for you below.
You might be interested in
Although I was quite surprised by the absence of MagSafe when it was introduced, after two weeks of testing I have to say that I'm starting to understand why the phone is missing it. It's simply because its added value is actually quite small, as it really only consists of slightly faster charging and the ability to attach magnetic accessories directly to the phone.
But what are we going to lie to ourselves about, the vast majority of us wear them anyway iPhone in a cover through which to supply MagSafe to the iPhone 16e can be done now. And if you then charge via magnetic the charger pinned over the cover of your iPhone 16e 20 minutes faster or slower, I think it doesn't really matter. Proso if you want to charge quickly iPhone, cable is still the best way.
Please do not interpret the previous lines as meaning that AppI support and agree that from his point of view it made sense to save those few cents for the magnets in the body of the iPhone 16e. Of course, I still think that you shouldn't save on this thing just because it's really just a couple of magnetic plates. Rather, I want to say with the previous lines that I probably understand how you could Apple to allow this thing at all. It must be clear to him that the novelty does not completely lose MagSafe in the end.
Praise then Apple for replacing the iconic iPhone 16e Lightning The USB-C port is of course inappropriate, given that it was pushed to this step by the European Union. However, I will not forbear saying that it is simply great when electronics have a single charging port and I do not have to carry around multiple types of cables because I MacBook, AirPods and iPhone I'll make do with one. I almost think it's a shame the European Union didn't come up with this regulation sooner.
Other interesting facts: C1 will please, the absence of the U chip will not please
iPhone 16e is the first product with its own 5G modem straight from the factory Applu. Its development took many years, and several times, according to leaked information, it even looked like it would be completely scrapped. Nakonebut that's how it is nesthello and the Californian giant was able tooneto clearly show what we have been working on intensively in recent years.
Although he did not provide much information about the C1 modem, in a press release revealing iPhone However, 16e described it as an extremely energy-efficient modem, which is true considering the battery life I got even when using 5G. If I were to evaluate the speed or stability of the connection, in the places where I normally move around with iPhonem 16 Pro, I had the same signal and speed on my iPhone 16e with C1. I can't assess how the modem performs in places with worse signal, because 5G is very well-developed in my area.
If there's one thing that owners of older iPhones will definitely get used to quickly and really like about the 16e model, it's the action button, which can be "programmed" to perform a number of actions, including launching the flashlight, the Home app, voice recording, Shazam, a magnifying glass, a certain shortcut, and so on. Although this isn't exactly new in the world of iPhones, it's great that Apple This element was transferred here because it makes operating the iPhone 16e more enjoyable, faster, and simpler in an interesting way. It's exactly the kind of little thing that's nice to have available.
What is not entirely pleasing, on the other hand, is the absence ultraa U1 or U2 broadband chip, which would allow owners of these models to, for example, use Apple Car Key for unlocking and starting the car, but most importantly, thanks to this little thing, they could fully use AirTags. Their local search, where you can literally find them to the nearest centimeter through the Find interface, is dependent on the U1/U2 chip, and it's a shame that it's not compatible with iPhonem released in 2025, nothing like this is available. After all, the U1 chip was also included in the 2019 iPhones, which can now be found new for under CZK 10. So this doesn't make any sense to me.
Personally, I find the deployment of WiFi 6 debatable, given that iPhones 16 and 16 Pro they have the WiFi 7 standard. Of course, I understand that the target group of the iPhone 16e probably doesn't really want super-fast internet, but I think that this particular model is a phone that many people will probably buy knowing that they will use it for another 6 years or simply until it completely "dies". And it's quite a shame that when WiFi 7 really spreads to homes, shops, andancbatteries and so on, iPhones 16e will be limited in this regard. But as I say, I don't think that their owners will be particularly concerned about the speed of wireless.
Summary: Criticism is out of place
I am very aware of what has been written and said about the iPhone 16e in the comments not only under our articles, in discussion forums or on social networks. I am mainly referring to the criticism of the high price combined with compromises in the technical specifications of the phone. However, I must say that although I also had quite embarrassed feelings about the iPhone 16e after its presentation, after two weeks of testing I must say that in my opinion this is a very successful phone that offers Applu sense. He found a really tasty recipe for iPhone, which can offer a lot, can surprise you in many ways and is available at a solid price.
Yes, we can discuss why it's not cheaper or whether it doesn't make sense to buy it instead. iPhone 15, or rather some second-hand Pro model. However, I think that it is actually not possible to answer this question in general, because when choosing a new phone, it is always extremely important to consider what you actually expect from it.
iPhone For example, the 16e can offer you really generous battery life, excellent performance, a great, albeit simple, camera and, what may be key for many people, software support corresponding to the remaining "sixteen" iPhones, which simply cannot be guaranteed with older models. So if all this is important to you, then you iPhone 16e will not disappoint. But if it is more important to you, for example ultrawide-angle camera or similar things, you won't find any luck here.
I personally wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to current owners of SE models, as well as to owners of basic iPhones 12, 13 and quite possibly even 14. For CZK 16,990 you really get a lot, and I'm honestly convinced that it's even more than you expect after first looking at the phone's technical specifications. And I say this as someone who has been using iPhones of the series for years. Pro.
Especially for Mobil Pohotovostand you will get iPhone 16e for only CZK 12, or for CZK 490 x 536 months, just upgrade from your existing device.
I'm sorry, but anyone who justifies this device is probably from another universe.
But the device has a few things that are simply good, and combined with long software support, it's not a bad phone. But I completely understand that it may seem that way without trying it, because it seemed that way to me too.
Just go to the store. But what do you want to try on things that are missing there? For the few things it has and the software support is miniThe price is a bit overpriced. The specifications can give you an idea. But as a corporate device it's probably ok.
You can't really test the Super Hold in a store, and the camera is no different. But of course, it's not a device for everyone, that's for sure.
Meter Steam "Think Different“OUT(er) SPACE ;)
According to the YT channel review Maxtech's new C1 5G modem in 16e unfortunately has a SIGNIFICANT DROP in Data Flows when Signal is Weak compared to Qualcomm 5G in 16e - A demonstration is in the video.
..btw, for the same $599 (0,5k higher here, i.e. 17,5k) you can have not only a M4 WITH SOMETHING ELSE IN PERFORMANCE Mac mini 10c CPU + 10c GPU with 16 + 256 GB ETC. – 16e then DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A GOOD BUY AT ALL ;)
...as for the Notch, despite all its flaws and age, the iP14 is STILL THE BETTER CHOICE in my opinion :)
Otherwise, the current EMOTIONAL 'budget' Ideal is 15Pro, REASONS chooses 15.
15Pro can't be found, 14 has lightning, so only 15. 16e is in other words "something like iphone.
So many years with the Great Lightningoh and suddenly it's a Deal-Breaker :D
Lightning It was great with the iPhone 5, but after the introduction of USBC it stopped making sense. ProA friendly solution is difficult today.
As long as RED is possible [ Kampak is lost to us (PRODUCT)RED ?! ] 14k with 256GB for ( on iP ;) Very Nice 17,5k, Lightning No problem :)
A new 14-inch model for 15 is clearly the best buy.
ProSo anyone who switches from any older model has lighting toonewhich at home, in the car, at work, accessory, so it's nothing
Like basically what is USB-C for?
Wireless charging, andcloud wireless, and car radios and aftermarket radios can also be used carplay wirelessly
I can't think of a good use for USB-C.
K, I quote: The readability of the display in the sun or under bright artificial light is still very good...
At maxThe screen only has 800 nits (it can't get more even in Auto mode, GSM Arena measured 799) I ENVY YOUR SUPEREYES...
It's a shame that even the FAR cheaper competition is LONG AGO SOMEWHERE ELSE... ...and in 120Hz ;)
I don't know about you, but have you noticed the readability of the display on the iPhone 12? Pro bad? Or significantly worse than it is now? Certainly not me and yet it has an IP 12 Pro same brightness as 16e.
Even in its time, i.e. in 2020 Display 12Pro It wasn't the Peak with its 802 nits (..and still only at 60Hz...), even the much cheaper S20 FE had at least 823 at the time...
Today I HAVE a Poco X7 Pro with the current price under 8,7(!)k, and please, even with 12(!!)/512(!!!)GB + D8400U :))) GSMArena measured 1265(!!!) nits, which I don't think there's anything to add ;)
..actually IT IS: even with 1920Hz PWM!
Where are the iPhones in this parameter?! :(((
..S20 FE those 823 nits only at 120Hz ;)
…for Poco (by Xiaomi) as well as All Others, 120Hz is OF COURSE A LONG TIME AGO !!! :)))
….it also has a pretty good AI in CZ :)))
which Xiaomi launched for the first time on the 14T/Pro already at the end of September 24 ;)
I bought it right after it was released and I'm very satisfied.
So you are Tim's IDEAL CUSTOMER ;)
The question is whether there is anything to congratulate on...
So the phone is fine for me, I didn't have high expectations but what I found out when I got home is that it doesn't support USB connection to the TV... And that's a big fail for me... I only found out between the lines that it's the only one iPhone with USB c which does not have tv/momitor support.