>, with the only difference being the camera, which if you care about you go for the Pro model.

Some people may care a little extra for an ultrawide lens and spending more for the cheaper iPhone 16 with 2 lenses of regular + ultrawide is enough for that. Don't have to get the more expensive Pro model.

The Pro model adds a 3rd lens for optical "true" telephoto instead of digitized "fake" telephoto and increases the resolution on the ultrawide.

It's also not clear from from the Apple press release if the 16e has a macro mode. The regular iPhone 16 (not Pro) has macro.

Which is why this came out in February, after most of the sales of the iPhone 16 are done.

Which is also why we will probably see the discontinuation of the regular iPhone 16 this Fall when the iPhone 17 is introduced, with this 16e staying on at the same price for an extra year.

There are a number of other differences besides the camera, a significant one being the lack of MagSafe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43104109

If the only things left to compete on are the camera and frame construction, maybe it's time for the non-pro line to go away.

Apple has no problem with self cannibalization. See the iPod or the iPad with keyboard for example.

This is aimed at the lower end of the market: the pre/postpaid MVNOs and deal hunters. And for kids.

The new modem is interesting. How much power around the world is being wasted because Qualcomm's code sucks? Apparently gigawatts per day.

Deciding between the vanilla iPhone 16 and the 16e here.

I don't see much in favor of the vanilla iPhone 16. Is the extra camera lens useful for anything beyond portrait mode?

Apple C1 modem versus a tried and true Qualcomm modem seems like a big internal difference.

I bought a 16 Pro after the camera on my previous iPhone stopped working. Despite being a camera-led purchase - and I do care about the camera on my phone - I would have bought this 16e in a heartbeat over the Pro.

People love biggest phone for some reason regardless of features.