I don’t like raking people over the coals, so I’ll keep this as brief as possible.

After my piece questioning whether Apple’s edge-to-edge iPhone would be named the “iPhone Pro,” I showed it to Gruber, who replied with this:

A better camera system would make it a better professional tool. So would longer battery life. So would a better display.

Subsequent to this speculation, the D22 has been announced, and it’s called the iPhone X. Let’s look at the three things that would have made “iPhone Pro” a valid name according to the tweet above.

  1. The camera didn’t pass the test. To quote The Verge, “You get the same primary camera as what’s in both the iPhone 8 Plus and iPhone X.”
  2. The battery didn’t pass the test. To quote the aforelinked article, the iPhone Plus “has the best battery life of all three new models.”
  3. The display did pass the test. This is indisputable. However, I stand by my contention that screen quality does not actually help you do your job better. This third point is consequently mute.

If the iPhone that has the best camera and the best battery life deserves to be called the iPhone Pro, then the iPhone Plus should be called the iPhone Pro. Here’s where it gets fascinating. On a recent episode of The Talk Show, Gruber contended that “Pro” as used by Apple is equivalent to “Luxurious.” I don’t buy this. It’s not true for Apple Watch, and it’s not true for iPhone. Arguably, the iPhone that’s most suited to solve professional needs is the iPhone Plus, not the iPhone X, because of the Plus’ superior battery life. But how many business people who need an iPhone for work are going to buy an iPhone Plus versus an iPhone X? I bet the majority of them are going to get the iPhone X. If they don’t, they’re going to at least wish that they could.