It wasn't that the batteries were "substandard". I'm sure they were the same technology and quality as the standard iPhone 12 and 13 batteries. It's just that they were compressing the same hardware into a smaller form factor and, therefore, a smaller battery.

The only thing that used less power on the mini was the smaller screen, but that doesn't save enough power to make up for a physically smaller battery.

As a 12 mini user daily since it came out in 2020, I've only just now started to hit any noticeable battery dip (~85% after almost 5 years usage). It's still pretty solid on a daily basis. On very rare occasions, the smaller battery has required charging before evening due to excessive photos taken and/or nav without a plug. FWIW, I will probably replace the battery by end of year, or next, and keep it going as long as I can... I refuse the massive "normal" phone size.

The SE has always seemed, to me, a way to repurpose older iPhone components into a more modern shell, which is why the SE line has been replace by the 16e. 16e uses iPhone 13 dimensions.

As per my source, the iPhone 13 outsold both the Pro and Pro Max together, so no the cameras could not have been the reason:

> Combined, all four iPhone 13 models made up 71 percent of iPhone sales, with the standard 6.1-inch iPhone 13 responsible for 38 percent of sales. The iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max weren't quite as popular as the iPhone 13, but sold much better than the iPhone 13 mini.

In fact, the iPhone 13 alone sold more (38%) than the iPhone 13 Pro and iPhone 13 Pro Max combined (30%). The plain old 13 was the most popular SKU, because no, most people do in fact not spend more for an added telephoto camera only a specific few have a true need for. The regular non Pro iPhone has across most years been the best seller, because it is a solid middle ground for the vast majority of people, making it the best basis for a small SKU to have any hope of succeeding. A 13 Pro Compact would have absolutely sold as poorly, maybe even worse than the 13 mini, considering both Pros did not outsell the regular 13 by itself. But even if a 13 Pro Compact had sold twice as well as the 13 mini (a very generous assumption considering it would have been 300usd more expensive), that would still be only 6% of total sales, a drop in the bucket.

Lastly, there are the Xperia 5s and there have been the Zenfones, both having better battery life than their large competitors, both being as (un)popular as Apples efforts.

Again, I like small smartphones, I'd love there to be a significant market for them. There simply is no way to look at the data and claim there is one beyond a tiny niche that a company such as Apple cannot realistically serve.

Apple tried converting their most successful SKU into a small smartphone. That failed to sell even a tenth of its large brother, despite being 100usd cheaper.

Sony literally scales their flagship down and gives it better battery life. Not really a success either.

ASUS made their own, fully dedicated line of compact smartphones which again, had better battery life than most large competitors and even included a 3.5mm jack, getting a second niche of customers to bolster sales. They too saw so few sales that they were forced to pivot to gigantic phones.

No matter what conditions, no matter how favorable, the same result.

My wife would have paid more as well. She still has her 13 because it's the smallest available smartphone. Unfortunately the new flip phones are a bit too thick for now.