What is more positive about it is just that there’s no interest or money factor.

I do think it is ultimately an effort to shorten upgrade cycles. Lower the monthly payment enough and keeping the same payment will look appealing to many customers.

From a positive perspective, I think it’s preferable to trade-in programs if you were planning to do that sort of thing, and I think it wrestles a little bit of control back from carriers who have been very aggressive about upgrade deals that end up locking people in (even though there’s no “contract,” the effect is the same, since you lose your bill credits if you switch providers before the term is up).

Slightly mixing up programs there - the initial statement ("your loan will be closed") applies to customers of the current "iPhone Upgrade Program" which is now being replaced by the new lease program via Klarna.

The new program, at the end of the initial lease term, will switch to an extended 6 month month-to-month lease; then at the end of that if you have still not acted, Klarna will charge the remaining buyout amount.

> For an iPhone 17 Pro 256GB with a purchase price of $1099 (excluding taxes and any trade-in credit), the typical monthly payment is $31.99 (excluding taxes and any trade-in credit) for a 24-month lease term and $45.99 (excluding taxes and any trade-in credit) for a 12-month lease term.

Riding out a 12 month term, you'll have paid in $551.88. Buyout at that point is $547; ride out the next 6 months month-to-month another $45.99/mo and Klarna will then ding you $271 and close it all out. I assume this is how they're going to avoid any kind of possible "paying more than the cost of the phone" shenanigans from a perpetual lease.

Agreed, there is very little happening from generation to generation. Yes, the 17 Pro had a redesign and better thermals, but was very boring otherwise. I don't really see why non-enthusiasts with a 14/15/16 Pro would upgrade.

The 17 was a good step up, but it's hard to cheer for finally getting a 120Hz display, while 300-400 Euro Android phones had them for a few years already.

The iPhone Air was the only really interesting model. But with only one camera and high introduction price, I don't think it was a failure in the market. Samsung had a similar problem with the S25 Edge - fewer cameras, but priced near the Ultra (the Air/Edge are a steal at the current pricing of 880/520 Euro, if you can live with the battery life).

I'd love to see more actually meaningful features. While the Samsung privacy display of the S26 Ultra may not have been perfect the first iteration, it's a innovative feature that is useful to a lot of people. (No, a privacy screen protector is not the same, I want to see most apps with the full flagship display glory.)

Another issue is that the pricing barely gets reduced over the year, while you can already get an S26 for just over 600 Euro.

They’re introducing it because most people are short-term thinkers and would be happy in many cases (10%-25%) to lease. No matter how many times you say don’t do it.

11 Pro iPhone user…

If you don't mind me asking, why do you buy one new phone every year?

The next few upgrade cycles for Apple will be about enabling AI functionality through an increase in ram. So if people want AI, they’ll have to get a new phone.

Makes sense here, then. Apple is primarily a luxury fashion company.

Yup, exactly like luxury cars no longer are status symbols because they're leasable.

Why are capitalists doing this? I thought it wall all CuLtUrAl MaRxIstS??

If anything, I think the terms for this are almost too good. You never end up paying more than the cost of purchasing the device outright if you decide to keep the device. And considering it can have a term of up to 30 months (24 month lease, with 6 months more before you're charged the remaining cost of the device), you've just gotten a zero percent interest loan for 30 months. That's actually cheaper than buying it outright at the start of the term due to inflation. I seriously cannot see a downside to this program on the consumer's end if they end up keeping the device.

If the customer is the sort of person that upgrades yearly then it reduces hassle: no extra effort for valuing a trade-in or selling to a third party. It affects these customers the most because they might be able to recoup more in a third party sale in exchange for effort on their part.

Oh no, I get to pay $11/month (after trading in my 15 Pro Max) with 0% interest for a new iPhone 17 and return it for another new one in a couple of years, or buy it outright at the end (and own it.) I'm such a sucker.

What about it is BS? I don't see any issue with leasing things if it does make me happier.

What exactly does "heavy use" mean? My MacBook Pro is now in its fourth year of daily development work. It doesn't show any kind of wear. So far I don't see any reason to replace it in the years to come. If nothing major changes I think I'll get another four years out of it.

Untrue to say they don’t last, our M1 macs 6 years later are still very usable. However your point is very true for corporates, staff always want a refresh regardless if the laptop is good enough or not.

These personal plans make sense for people who want the latest and don’t like the hassle of reselling

I have a seven-year-old MacBook Air that is like new and runs just as fast today as it did the day I bought it. Battery lasts acceptably and it’s a joy to use.

Small businesses won't go for this program because it isn't a true lease, it's a loan.

>macbooks only really last a few years under heavy use anyway

What?

[dead]