Technologies
Apple’s 2024 iPhone SE Might Not Be Released After All
Apple may have sacked plans for its cheapest phone as its Pro line rises in popularity.
An iPhone that provides almost the same performance as the iPhone 14 for roughly half the price sounds like a great idea, right? Apparently not. If analyst Ming-Chi Kuo is to be believed, Apple may scrap the next version of its wallet-friendly iPhone SE, which was expected to arrive next year.
“The supply chain has received instructions from Apple indicating that the production and shipment plans for the 2024 iPhone SE 4 have been canceled rather than delayed,” Kuo wrote in a Medium post on Jan. 6.
If Kuo’s predictions are correct, only Apple knows the reasoning behind the cancellation. But research and media reports suggest there may be a very simple answer. More expensive iPhone models tend to be more popular, possibly leaving little incentive for Apple to continue pursuing cheaper phones like the iPhone SE.
Apple didn’t immediately respond to CNET’s request for comment.
The third-gen iPhone SE, which debuted in March, starts at $429 and is essentially an iPhone 8 stuffed with the guts of an iPhone 13. CNET’s Patrick Holland called it a “mind-blowing value” in his iPhone SE (2022) review, but he also highlighted missing elements that make it feel dated, like its lack of a full-screen design or night mode for the camera.
Previous generations of the iPhone SE took a similar approach; the 2020 version essentially had the same design but had the iPhone 11’s chip. The 2016 model had the body of an iPhone 5S with the processor of an iPhone 6S. A rumored fourth-gen iPhone SE was expected to adopt a new design similar to the iPhone XR, according to YouTube personality and gadget leaker Jon Prosser.
To understand why Apple may have canceled its next iPhone SE, consider the changes Apple recently made in its iPhone 14 lineup. In a departure from the prior two years, Apple did not release a cheaper “Mini” version of its new flagship iPhone in 2022. Instead, it released a larger version of the regular iPhone 14 called the iPhone 14 Plus, which is $100 more expensive than the regular $799 iPhone 14, raising the barrier to entry for shoppers.
This change followed reports from Nikkei Asian Review and Kuo (via MacRumors) that Apple would scrap the iPhone Mini in 2022, with the former adding that the Mini model didn’t resonate with consumers. Taken together, the elimination of the Mini and reports that next year’s rumored iPhone SE may have been axed could indicate that Apple is pivoting away from releasing smaller, cheaper iPhones.
But Gene Munster, managing partner for tech investment firm Loup and a longtime Apple analyst, doesn’t see it that way. He believes the iPhone SE still plays an important role in Apple’s lineup because of its low price.
“It’s still, I think, the best bang for your buck when it comes to an iPhone,” he said.
Evidence suggests that more expensive iPhones tend to be top sellers, which might help explain the shift. The average selling price of an iPhone rose 7% year over ear in the third quarter of 2022, according to Counterpoint Research. The market research firm also reported in June that Apple dominated the global market for premium phones with a 62% share in the first quarter of 2022. It’s important to note that Counterpoint defines premium phones as devices that cost $400 and higher, meaning the third-gen iPhone SE would fall into that category since it starts at $429. The report, however, did say that Apple’s growth in the premium category largely came from the iPhone 13 lineup.
The pricier iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max also appear to be the stars of Apple’s new smartphone lineup so far. The Information reported that Apple cut production of the iPhone 14 Plus within two weeks of its launch, while research firm Trendforce says Apple boosted production of the iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max. Kuo also said on Twitter in September that the iPhone 14 Pro Max was responsible for about 60% of Apple’s order increase for the Pro lineup, hinting that Apple’s most expensive new iPhone is also its most popular. A November 2022 report from Wave7 Research also said 38 out of 39 surveyed carrier service representatives said they didn’t have in-store inventory of the iPhone 14 Pro or Pro Max.
The iPhone SE, meanwhile, has only accounted for roughly 5% to 8% of quarterly US iPhone sales over the past two years, said Josh Lowitz of Consumer Intelligence Research Partners. When looking at total volumes for the newest iPhone models in a given year, the Pro versions typically account for 35% to 40% of sales, while the iPhone SE makes up about 20%, according to Munster.
Carrier discounts have also made it easier to snag high-end phones at cheaper prices, especially when trading in an old device, as my colleague Eli Blumenthal pointed out following the iPhone 13’s launch. Many US shoppers also pay for their phones in monthly installment plans through carriers, which can make higher prices easier to swallow. Both of those factors can make the case for buying a less expensive iPhone with fewer features all the more challenging.
“Because you’re paying over such a long period of time … the $100 price difference, or even a $200 price difference, isn’t that much per month,” said Lowitz.
At the same time, Samsung has seen success in the market for lower-priced phones. Its Galaxy A phones, which typically cost hundreds of dollars less than its flagship Galaxy S phones, accounted for 58% of Samsung’s smartphone unit sales in 2021, according to Counterpoint Research data previously provided to CNET. Samsung’s Galaxy A phones have modern features not found on the iPhone SE, such as a camera with multiple lenses and larger screens, although they often run on less powerful processors than Samsung’s pricier phones.
The notion that Apple may have canceled the 2024 iPhone SE raises questions about the future of the SE line in general. Apple extended the SE branding to the Apple Watch in 2020 for the first time and launched a sequel to that product in September.
The fact that Apple had brought the SE line to another product had made it seem like a more permanent fixture in Apple’s lineup. But if Kuo’s insight turns out to be accurate, the iPhone SE’s days may be numbered. And once you take a closer look at how Apple’s smartphone lineup has changed and the data around phone shipments, it’s easy to understand why.
But Munster isn’t convinced that cheaper iPhones like the SE are going away for good. Having a more affordable option makes it easier for Apple to achieve its broader goal of bringing more customers into its web of products and services.
“I think that plays an important role,” he said. “I don’t think Apple’s giving up on that price point.”
Technologies
China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration
European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.
BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.
The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.
Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.
However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.
Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.
European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.
Technologies
Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge
Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.
Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.
Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.
The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.
Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield
Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.
In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.
Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.
If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.
But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.
There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.
That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.
Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.
CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.
“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.
AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.
GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.
Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.
In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.
And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.
The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.
For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.
Technologies
Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network
Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.
Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.
Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX
Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.
Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.
Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.
What is Starshield and how does it function?
Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.
SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.
In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.
SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.
On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.
How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?
While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.
Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.
Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.
SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.
-
Technologies4 years agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies5 years agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 years agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies5 years agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 years agoThe number of Сrypto Bank customers increased by 10% in five days
-
Technologies5 years agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies5 years agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies5 years agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow
