A month after the iPhone 17 Pro launch, HackerNoon readers weighed in—and the verdict’s mixed. One in three voters praised the AI-powered front camera, while others dismissed the phone as “refined but uninspired.” Across the web, sentiment mirrors this fatigue: fans admire Apple’s polish but want bolder innovation. Polls on Polymarket and Kalshi show only 4% expect a foldable iPhone in 2025, though 70% anticipate one by 2027. In short: Apple’s still leading, but people are ready for a surprise.A month after the iPhone 17 Pro launch, HackerNoon readers weighed in—and the verdict’s mixed. One in three voters praised the AI-powered front camera, while others dismissed the phone as “refined but uninspired.” Across the web, sentiment mirrors this fatigue: fans admire Apple’s polish but want bolder innovation. Polls on Polymarket and Kalshi show only 4% expect a foldable iPhone in 2025, though 70% anticipate one by 2027. In short: Apple’s still leading, but people are ready for a surprise.

What Do iPhone Users Want Next?

2025/10/30 01:41

Welcome back to 3 Tech Polls, HackerNoon's brand-new Weekly Newsletter that curates Results from our Poll of the Week, and 2 related polls around the web.

Thanks for voting and helping us shape these important conversations!

This week, we’re talking about iPhones — Apple’s latest flagship, the iPhone 17 Pro, and what users expect from the smartphone pioneer moving forward.

About a month after Apple released its latest flagship, we decided to find out how our readers feel about the newest entry from a company that critics accuse of marketing ‘basic’ features as ‘breakthroughs’.

This Week’s Poll Results (HackerNoon)

What's the most eye-catching new thing about the iPhone 17 Pro?

iPhone 17 Pro just dropped and it’s wild. The screen hits 3000 nits — you can actually use it outside. Every rear camera is 48MP now, even the zoom one, so 8x optical shots look insane. Front camera? 18MP with AI that follows your face like it’s in love with you. Battery lasts 33 hours of video. No more “low battery” panic at 9 PM. A19 Pro chip stays cool under pressure, and it starts at 256GB. Oh, and it comes in Cosmic Orange — yeah, it’s loud on purpose.

1 in 3 respondents (33 %) voted for the upgraded 18 MP front camera with AI auto-framing as the standout feature.

Not everyone’s impressed, though.

Others were more blunt:

\ While the camera dominated attention, a noticeable share of readers said they were more intrigued by the all-aluminum redesign in new colors like Cosmic Orange, which many described as Apple’s most confident aesthetic move in years. Others leaned toward the ProRes RAW video and 40× zoom, praising the phone’s creative potential for filmmaking, even if it still “feels more like refinement than reinvention.” A smaller but vocal group highlighted the 12 GB RAM upgrade, arguing that sustained performance finally puts iPhones on par with flagship Androids.

If our readers’ responses are anything to go by, Apple’s newest flagship may be as refined as ever. But refinement alone isn’t cutting it, not anymore. And that sentiment isn’t limited to HackerNoon readers. Across the web, people are wondering whether Apple is still willing to surprise us.

:::tip Weigh in on the Poll Results here.

:::

\

Around the Web: Polymarket Pick

Will Apple release a foldable iPhone in 2025?

Current odds: 4% Chance

As the image below illustrates, odds dropped sharply after the iPhone 17 was released, considering Apple’s predictable release cycle. Up until that point, users held out hope for something a little more…imaginative from the Cupertino giant.

Around the Web: Kalshi Pick

When will Apple announce foldable iPhone?

Current odds:

  • Before 2026 - 4%

  • Before 2027 - 70%

\ With the 2025 release cycle already behind us, attention has shifted to 2026. Roughly 70 % of respondents on Kalshi now expect Apple to finally give in to market pressure and enter the foldable smartphone space before 2027.

Across all three polls, the sentiment is clear: users think the new iPhone 17 is solid — but they’re hoping to see braver moves in the next cycle from the trillion-dollar smartphone pioneer.


We want to hear from you!

That’s it, folks! We’ll be back next week with more data, more debates, and more donut charts!

In the meantime:

:::tip Vote on this week’s poll: What’s more likely to disrupt Hollywood first?

:::

\

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Share Insights

You May Also Like

Pavel's humanity, and Ton's challenges

Pavel's humanity, and Ton's challenges

I really like what Pavel mentioned about not using a mobile phone. Essentially, this is an "information fasting" approach to the challenges of information overload, contrasting with the "food fasting" that everyone loves using apps. One is metaphysical, the other is physical, but ultimately, both affect the mind and body, influencing hormones like cortisol. Now and in the future, attention is the scarcest resource. Being able to freely disconnect from electronic devices is a luxury, a freedom with its own barriers. Pavel is also an extreme craftsman. The advantage of being a craftsman is that you can lead a small team to create a killer app. However, the limitation is that Telegram, as the largest instant messaging software outside of China and the US, cannot become another Tencent platform. This same culture has also influenced its Web3 project, TON. By the way, let me talk about my close observation of TON over the past four years as the first Chinese institutional investor in the world. 1. The wrong technological path was taken. TON's stubborn insistence on using C++ seems like a kind of technological purist obsession. Historically, Russians have repeatedly taken the wrong turn on the "data technology tree": the Soviet Union failed to adapt to the transistor revolution, became obsessed with vacuum tube performance optimization, and missed the entire chip wave. They often overemphasize performance and control, but neglect the ecosystem and development experience. TON's SDK, toolchain, and documentation ecosystem lack standardization, making the development threshold too high; this is not a syntax problem, but a problem of lacking platform thinking. 2. Uneven ecological composition. Currently, it's basically only Russians and Chinese who are active, but resource allocation is clearly biased towards the Russian-speaking region. This is something everyone is already familiar with. 3. Oligopoly. Funding, traffic, and narrative resources within the ecosystem are concentrated on a few "top" companies/projects. Everyone knows they must curry favor with the "top" teams, but mid-tier projects are severely squeezed out. There is also a long-term power struggle between foundations and the oligopolistic "top" companies, resulting in constant internal friction. 4. Failure to accept oneself. Accepting and reconciling with oneself is crucial for any individual or organization. Only on this basis can you face yourself honestly and leverage your strengths while mitigating your weaknesses. However, TON seems obsessed with pitching to Musk, persuading American investors, and getting to the White House. The truth is, no matter how hard it tries, in the eyes of others, TON remains a public chain with a Russian background. In contrast, BNB didn't try to play the "American" role. Instead, it first became the most popular chain in the Eastern Time Zone, simultaneously creating a sense of FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) among Westerners, before smoothly expanding internationally—a much more effective approach. 5. The story of "adoption for 1 billion users" has been told for four years, and it's still just a story. Pavel keeps telling a grand story of "connecting Telegram's 1 billion users with the blockchain world," but this story has yet to truly materialize. The reason isn't that the vision is false, but rather structural constraints: In order to survive and ensure Pavel's personal safety (in recent years, Pavel has become increasingly obsessed with his physical safety, given several incidents, including the recent events in France), Telegram must maintain a "superficial" separation from TON to avoid crossing regulatory red lines; this separation prevents TON from ever truly integrating with Telegram's ecosystem. Even stablecoins like USDE have maintained a supply of only a few hundred million—indicating that the story is grand, but the reality is small. TON possesses the perfectionism of engineering geeks, yet lacks the warmth of ecological collaboration; it has a massive entry point, but is hampered by regulatory realities; it has its own advantages, but has not yet reconciled with itself. It has a narrative and ideals, but these need to be transformed into a sustainable balance of systems and incentives. I wish the TON ecosystem will continue to improve.
Share
PANews2025/10/30 14:00