Features We'd Love To See In An iPhone Ultra

If the recent leaks and rumors are accurate, Apple is working on bringing an iPhone Ultra to the range as a premium device with every technological advance it can fit inside. It won't replace any of the existing iPhone models. Instead, it will sit atop of the iPhone range, mirroring how the Apple Watch Ultra commands the best technology from the Apple Watch range. That will undoubtedly cost more than the iPhone models and should have new features and hardware that can't be found on any other device.

Apple knows its brand carries a steep premium, and fans are typically willing pay more for additional capabilities. The iPhone 14 Pro and iPhone 14 Pro Max were hard to get hold of between high demand and low production numbers. Now, the market is ripe for a more premium iPhone, if Apple can strike the right balance between cost and meeting expectations. We've read all the rumors about the iPhone Ultra, and we've got some thoughts on them, and on what other premium features Apple could offer to coax the money from our wallets.

Apple will have to use USB-C starting in 2024, because of an E.U. mandate for a standard charging port, which was necessary after the European Commission's efforts for a voluntary consensus failed. While the commission didn't explicitly call out Apple, it's been the main hold-out on the switch to USB-C, preferring to stick with the MFi-certified Lightning connector and accessories.

We'd suggest Apple go further and use USB4-stroke-TB4 as the speed of the port. USB-C only qualifies the connector type, not the data transfer speeds or power handling requirements (although the E.U. has a mandate for the power handling minimums as well). That could mean 20 Gbps transfer speeds from USB 4 or up to 40Gbps transfer speeds if Apple supports the full USB 4 spec and Thunderbolt 4. Data transfer is only one part of the equation here. Moving to USB 4 enables Apple to bring more features to the iPhone Ultra like external monitor use as on the iPad Pro, a more comprehensive range of peripherals, 10 Gbe Ethernet via an adapter, and faster charging speeds.

The iPhone needs to catch up in charging speeds. The current iPhone 14 tops out at 20W fast charging via Lightning, with the iPhone 14 Pro charging slightly faster at 27W, and MagSafe wireless chargers can recharge up to 15W. Any Qi-compatible or MagSafe-compatible chargers can only charge at 7.5W, which is slow compared to the rest of the smartphone industry. When you look at Apple's biggest competitor, Samsung, the Galaxy S23 charges at 25W, with the Galaxy S23 Ultra boasting a 45W charging speed.

That's impressive, but it pales in comparison to what other Android smartphone makers are packing into their devices. OnePlus has a 150W fast charger, using its SuperVOOC charging standard. Xiaomi's sub-brand, Redmi, has a phone with a 210W charger that hits full power in less than nine minutes. These devices use the same lithium-ion batteries that Apple uses with the iPhone. Apple's Battery Health feature can keep an eye out for damaging effects while bringing faster charging speeds to the iPhone Ultra.

If MicroLED isn't ready, or Apple decides it's only going in the Apple Watch, it could add QD-OLED to the iPhone Ultra. The quantum dot-equipped OLED panels come with multiple advantages over the OLED that existing iPhones use. It has a wider color gamut thanks to how well quantum dots reemit energy when excited. The OLED light-emitting layer uses only blue pixels, which give off the highest light energy. Because of that, QD-OLED panels can be brighter than OLED.

The structure of QD-OLED also lends itself well to smartphone screens. The technology has excellent viewing angles, low distortion, color shift, or other unwanted effects at off-axis viewing. It's better at HDR reproduction, as the relative contrast ratio is up to 1,000,000:1. Samsung is one of the leading producers of QD-OLED, and its panels are designed to minimize the reflection of light. That means an iPhone Ultra with QD-OLED would be easier to read even in bright sunlight, from the combination of a more luminous panel and light-rejecting structure.

Flagship devices from Android manufacturers use under-screen fingerprint readers for biometric purposes. While Face ID is the best facial recognition system on consumer devices, the return of Touch ID would be welcome. After all, MacBooks, iPads, and Mac keyboards all have Touch ID integrated, and there is no reason it shouldn't have a home on the iPhone Ultra. The last few years of mask-wearing have shown that Face ID isn't infallible, even if it can now work while masked.

Apple's other solution for avoiding Face ID is using an Apple Watch to unlock your iPhone. That has its own issues, not the least of which is needing to spend hundreds of dollars to quickly unlock your device. Apple has been working on under-screen fingerprint sensors, and the iPhone Ultra would be a highly appropriate device to offer a new sensor to the iPhone range. It would work in conjunction with Face ID, so owners could use the most appropriate biometric method for their situations.

Bringing 3D Touch back to the iPhone range on the Ultra model would be an easy win for Apple. Some users really liked 3D Touch, with its ability to get menus and multitask by varying the pressure of our touches. We once thought the technology was "doomed from the start," but perhaps it was simply too advanced for its time. Now it could flourish. When 3D Touch first came out, the main issue was that it had no standardized ruleset. Developers could use it where they wanted or avoid using it altogether. Apple isn't likely to make the same mistake again, and any resurgence of the pressure-sensitive technology would come with a tightly-scripted set of rules for its use.

3D Touch survived longer on the Apple Watch until it was removed in watchOS 7 and the Apple Watch Series 6. It made more sense on the smaller screen as a second reminder of touch interactions. That physical reminder still lives on in the MacBook touchpad, making it easier to navigate macOS without looking down. It could still make sense if Apple uses non-physical side buttons on the Ultra. We'd also like the ability to use the iPhone Ultra as a wireless touchpad for the Mac, with the same physical feedback. It could then be used as a presentation controller, giving more functionality than the standard iPhone.

Apple already puts its desktop-class M-chips into several iPad models, including the latest iPad Pro. Why not put them into the iPhone Ultra and make it the most powerful chip put into a smartphone? Efficiency might be an issue with the smaller battery size able to fit into an iPhone chassis. Still, Apple could offset this by limiting core frequency or the thermal envelope that the chip can work in. Imagine every Apple device using a common core built around the capable M-chips. That would make it easier for third-party developers and Apple's software team.

It would bring desktop power to the pocket-sized iPhone, enabling creative work to be done anywhere. Video editing with DaVinci Resolve, just like you would on an iPad. Apple could go further, enabling the Apple Pencil to work with the iPhone. That would be just the thing to put the iPhone Ultra head-to-head with Samsung's Galaxy Ultra models, which replaced the Galaxy Note as the only smartphone with the stowable S Pen.