I spent nearly a decade with iPhones until I switched to the Google Pixel 6a in 2022, and have not looked back. Android sucked me in. But I was curious about how the Apple experience has changed since I left, so I decided to go back to iOS with the iPhone 16e.
Apple’s latest is the exact iPhone I wanted three years ago, leaps and bounds ahead of the iPhone SE it replaces. It’s not a ‘budget’ phone, but it’s far from being a flagship, too.
Among its rivals, it holds up exceptionally well in benchmarks, but has significant tradeoffs compared to some phones that are half its price.
Having been out of Camp Apple for so long, I’ve seen what it’s like on the other side – and coming back, I’m both impressed and puzzled with the hands-on experience.
There is an assured certainty and comfort when the manufacturer has complete control over an ecosystem – ie, having hardware, software, cloud and content management (via apps like Home and Music) talk to each other seamlessly. And when this comes from Cupertino, it’s more about the experience rather than the performance of the device.
It’s also why the Google Pixel range remains my most recommended Android family of devices, and that’s despite Samsung offering better tech on all fronts and at all price points – Google’s range feels more like Apple. The Pixels feel more mastered and uniform: again, because it’s about the experience rather than the performance.
The iPhone 16e makes the experience more accessible than the standard range, offering shaved-off specs at a lower (but still considerable) price.
So turning to the iPhone 16e, knowing how comfortable I’ve gotten with the Android ecosystem, I’m left asking if this is enough. Many of the spec choices are baffling, but others are still ones that I wish more Android manufacturers would learn from.
An Androider’s take on the iPhone 16e
I’m impressed with how well Apple continues to make all this stuff simply work together – from FaceID biometrics to allowing purchases and app downloads, to the instantly recognizable and understandable Home, Lock and Control Center screens, they all make for an experience that’s instantly operable.
Performance is in line with the base iPhone 16 (which I consider to be Apple’s best handset in years) and far ahead of similarly positioned Android phones. It’s great for a mixed use of gaming, social media, messaging and note-writing.
Coming from Android, I’m also drawn to the simplicity. The cuteness of FaceTime, the ability to share contacts with a tap of an NFC sensor between iPhones, and the more user-friendly approach to home screen customization (focused on colors instead of palettes) give off a great feeling of coziness. It’s cute, it works, and it’s fun!
What on Earth is up with this screen, though? 60Hz on such a pricey unit, and the same goes for the standard iPhone 16. This is grating as I don’t like the scrolling and app-opening experience.
That makes the 16 and 16e seem like they perform worse than they do, and look less smooth than much cheaper Androids.
There’s nothing stopping these phones from operating a 120Hz display like the Pro counterparts, apart from Apple’s unwillingness to provide such screens. It breaks the seamlessness I referred to earlier.
Moving on: something I’ve been quite jealous of while using an Android phone has been Apple’s Action Button. I love the idea of an extra button with customizable functionality, but I’m not sold on its usability. I wish it had more than just a ‘hold to open’ trigger, but rather more like the stand-by button that works with a single or a double press.
I still appreciate the Action Button though. An extra physical control on Android handsets would enable so much flexibility, say to quickly open a messaging app, use Google Lens, or quickly pull up your favorite contact list.
Finally, and this is a gripe specific to the iPhone 16e, but only offering a single camera at this price point feels like a huge step backwards for Apple. There are competing phones available at half the price of this handset that have two lenses, enabling more impressive zoom capabilities or greater detail up close.
Don’t get me wrong; the iPhone 16e can produce great photos, but a native zoom that maxes out at 2x is meager compared to what the Pixel 8a and Galaxy A56 are capable of – at a lower price point.
‘e’ is for…
When I first saw this phone’s name, I assumed that the ‘e’ meant ‘essential’. There’s no official word from Apple on what it means, but I think I may have hit the mark.
Firstly, it’s price tag – while still expensive, it strips back some non-essentials from the premium range but includes the Apple A18 chip, an IP68 resistance rating, an extremely impressive 30-hour battery life, and even Apple-specific features like its advanced biometric FaceID sensor and Action Button. In other words, the ‘essentials’.
It fits the sweetspot between the now grandfathered SE and the base model 16 – more expensive than the former but offering the essentials of the latter, probably filling a crucial marketshare goal. I can absolutely see it being a hit in markets like India, where Apple has only just managed to become one of the country’s top five smartphone brands.
Paradoxically restrictive and freeing, the iPhone 16e is a comfortable phone. It’s the right pick if you’ve been holding out for an entry-level device to upgrade to in the Apple family, but it’s not great value if you’ve broken out of the Apple ecosystem.
At this end of the phone market, Apple has the competitive edge on raw benchmarking performance – but its rivals are far less expensive with cameras easily outpacing the single lens on the iPhone 16e.
Performance benchmarks be damned, the Samsung Galaxy A56 and Google Pixel 8a feel much more general purpose and suitable for day-to-day use, with more impressive cameras to boot. Not to mention the larger screens on both.
It’s an awkward spot for Apple to place such a great phone – it’s more powerful, but it’s not as practical as cheaper rivals. That said, it will be a brilliant handset to pick up on sale, otherwise its standard price is perhaps a little too high.
