I found the (expensive!) bullstrap case to be helpful - thin and slippery enough to slide out of a …

I've only broken the iPhone camera once in more than a decade of using iPhones. And that's when I was in IKEA and a box of unassembled furniture fell onto it. If you really want protection, the screen is still more fragile than the camera.

Yeah, super thin phones that require bulky cases have never made sense to me. Why not make tough phones that don't require a case?

Never once used a case in 12+ yrs of iphone ownership and only cracked a screen once. Think there are a lot of people out there like me. Many people are way too anal about an every day utilitarian device.

> you're still going to put it in a fat case to protect the camera. But a thinner phone still means the end result is thinner in a case. I didn't understand the appeal of thin phones until I used them in cases. Average thickness phone + case = bulky phone. Thin phone + case = normal thickness phone. That's what makes them great. It's normal thickness with all the protection.

> I agree with you, you're still going to put it in a fat case to protect the camera. The Apple cases aren't flat on the back. They have a rim around the camera bump (and they create a rim around the front of the phone, too). The rear rim is slightly taller than the lens bezels (not sure if I used the right word there), so they don't touch the surface the phone rests on. I place my phone+case on the desk face-down because the camera bump and the wobble it creates when resting the phone back down triggers some minor irritation for me. The slight rim around the front of the phone keeps the screen from touching the surface. All of this would be nicer if the phone were flat across the back. The metal case and toughened glass mean I don't really need the case most the time. I once dropped an older model onto a concrete floor such that it landed on a corner, shattering the screen, so I'm more …