"The design drew inspiration from the concept of “a piece of cloth”
You must log in or register to comment.
A sock with straps for ONLY $229.95!
They know exactly how to price products for the Apple gang, any cheaper and no one would buy.
Like many, I thought for a microsecond that they actually brought out a new phone model that will fit in a pocket.
But no, of course they didn’t. Because why the fuck would anyone want that.
I’m so sick of this trend of trying to make the phone as thin as possible and then the camera bump has prominent as possible, completely negating any benefit. My partner would definitely like a thinner phone and would probably buy a phone that didn’t have the camera bump because it didn’t have any camers, if it meant a thinner phone that would actually fit in her pocket.
Either that or keep the camera bump and just thicken the whole phone out and give me a larger battery and the apparently too big to fit 3.5mm audio jack.
What I don’t get is why they don’t make a model with more battery space to flatten out the back. I would love a phone with 10Ah instead of 3Ah and I already carry a battery pack for this exact reason. The lack of options is super annoying.
Inspired by the concept of “a piece of cloth,"
Looks at URL.
Born from the idea of creating an additional pocket, its understated design fully encloses iPhone, expanding to fit more of a user’s everyday items.
“The design of iPhone Pocket speaks to the bond between iPhone and its user, while keeping in mind that an Apple product is designed to be universal in aesthetic and versatile in use,” shared Yoshiyuki Miyamae, design director of MIYAKE DESIGN STUDIO
Looks at URL.
When stretched, the open textile subtly reveals its contents and allows users to peek at their iPhone display…
This can’t be real. Checks URL again.
Phone Pocket features a singular 3D-knitted construction that is the result of research and development carried out at ISSEY MIYAKE. The design drew inspiration from the concept of “a piece of cloth” and…
iPhone Pocket in the short strap design retails at $149.95 (U.S.), and the long strap design at $229.95 (U.S.).
…What the fuck? This has to be hack or something. There’s no way a human being wrote that article, and didn’t know what they were doing.
it’s so stupid I’m still not convinced it’s real.
“This can’t be real. Checks URL again.”
Dude! I was doing the same thing. I kept thinking, “Is this some new form of prank that hides the url somehow?”
I can’t stop laughing at this comment. I think that’s what we all did!
I did the same, but also double checked the date to make sure this wasn’t some weird April fools that got missed
And with all that piffle, they never actually tell what it’s made from. I assume some kind of acrylic? In which case it will snag and pill like crazy and look complete crap within a month.
I should start knitting these for Christmas gifts.
This was my EXACT experience. How was this not satire?
checks date
not April 1st
Here I thought it was going to be a small screened cheap iPhone and I was excited for a minute.
cheap iPhone
LOL
I mean, they have done it. When I was looking at phones a few years back, it was genuinely a toss up between a Pixel 4a and an iPhone SE. If all you need it to be is a cameraphone, then both were good options.
Even now, the iPhone 16e is a relatively inexpensive phone when considering its featureset, but I would prefer a “mini” or newer SE variant instead.
Compared to other flagships they’re not outrageously expensive
OK? They’re also fuckin’ expensive
I won’t argue that. But they’re not like, uniquely expensive.
I think the problem people have with the iPhone is that all of them are expensive. Whereas Samsung make the A Series and there is the Pixel from Google. If you want to pay extra and get a more expensive phone that’s an option, whereas with Apple that basically isn’t a possibility.
Yep
Although the real budget option is just to buy last year’s models. The iPhones have actually really powerful processors - having one a year or two old that you can get new for really cheap is really not much of a drawback.
Well, they are more expensive, and have more expensive options.
That’s exactly what I was thinking too. Like the an iPhone nano or something. The laugh I let out when I saw what it actually was though, I really needed that today.
Very disappointed that’s not what this was.
Apple users are so fucking stupid.
I bet the $9.95 is the production cost.
Lmao prob move the decimal over 2 spots to the left
Yeah, shoes cost that much to produce. Maybe one decimal.
We’ve come full circle.
Also, I wonder if this is some kind of scheme to park the “iPhone Pocket” name for a bit in case they want to make a phone called that in 10 years.
Full sock-le?
I suppose if they ever make a flip phone with a folding screen that would be a good name for it.
Personally, I’m saving up for the “Apple Stick and Bindle”, the nouveau-hobo accessory of the season.
I thought it was going to be a new form factor iPhone that could fit comfortably in your pocket.
Why in the hell would they make something people want?
-me and my iPhone 13 mini dreading an “upgrade”-
I feel like the people who buy these types of things are trying to fill a hole in their souls.
Oh God I feel dumber having read this. How is this not the onion?! A 3D knitted construction? Really?
So, a knee-high sock with a slit on the side. For $230 US.
“a piece of cloth” huh
borat wearing very little
That was my first thought!
Very nice!
What the actual fuck.
I’ve commented on here before how women’s clothing generally doesn’t have large-enough pockets for smartphones. A lot of modern women’s clothing is form-fitting, and has small pockets.
So either you revise the clothing or add some kind of wearable bag/pocket.
Used to be that women wore dresses, had slits in the skirts that they could reach through, and then had sorta wearable pockets on beneath them. But full skirts are pretty dead now, so:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocket
By the 17th century, pockets were sewn into men’s clothing, while women’s remained as separate tie-on pouches hidden beneath skirts.[5][6]
In the 17th to 19th centuries, women’s tie-on pockets—mentioned in the rhyme Lucy Locket—often carried everyday tools like scissors, pins, needles, and keys.[7][8]: 113
In modern fashion, men’s clothing usually includes pockets, whereas women’s clothing often has smaller or even fake ones, sometimes called Potemkin pockets after the concept of a Potemkin village. A 2018 study by the Pudding found that fewer than half of women’s front pockets could fit a thin wallet, let alone a phone or keys.[9]
When I first ran into this, I thought “well, put the phone in your purse then, dammit, you’re already carrying that for feminine hygiene products”. Problem is that women don’t haul (bulky) purses everywhere — walk into the office, say, set down the purse at the desk, and it’s mostly staying at the desk. I don’t know any women who wear their purses around the house. But they do want to keep the phone available all the time.
And the smartphone is a pretty ubiquitous item to want to carry around now.
So unless women’s clothing changes to have large pockets and somehow deals with not messing up the body’s silhouette or whatever makes that a problem or the smartphone form factor changes (“big smartwatch?”), I expect that people have to wind up with some kind of mini, wearable container. Like this.
I mean, this is a absurdly priced solution, but that’s a fair point.
It’s stupid fashion’s that way. I always thought that when I saw girls sticking phones in their shorts waistbands or whatever.
We should go back to the future:
Or even better, improve it:
And have shorts like that too? I dunno, I’m not a fashion expert, but still.
I mean, I like the Lara Croft thigh holster route, but that might chafe.
And if you’re wearing it the way the male model is, you can probably add an outer shirt or jacket and wear it like an underarm money belt in less-secure environments. I have one of those that I repurposed for carrying a tablet. Looks very similar to this, though not the same brand or type of fabric:
https://www.amazon.com/Multi-Purpose-Anti-Thief-Security-Underarm-Messenger/dp/B077GD5C27
Kind of like a very thin purse with a padded, short strap that’s intended to optionally hide under one’s clothes.
You don’t need something that large to carry a phone, though. The sort of smaller thing that they’re doing here is big enough for that.
Yeah, utility belt/sling over bags!
The thigh holsters seem a bit impractical though. If we’re diving into more fiction fashion, how about the pocketed Normandy crew uniform from ME?
I like those little built-in squares on the thighs.
Oh I’m not at all reacting to the usefulness. I’m reacting to the price of the item. Pockets on women’s clothes are a bit of a disaster.
Eh, I mean, I wouldn’t buy it, but then I wouldn’t buy Apple products in general, as they’re all gonna carry a premium. They sell into kinda a low-end luxury market. I dunno how many people remember back when Apple introduced the white earbuds with the iPod and had a marketing campaign focusing on their color, at a time when headphones were pretty universally a more-subtle black, to make it very obvious that what someone had in their pocket was an iPod.
For some luxury goods, the point is to visibly show the item to others, to demonstrate that you can afford the item, engage in conspicious consumption. Then you get Veblen goods:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good
A Veblen good is a type of luxury good, named after American economist Thorstein Veblen, for which the demand increases as the price increases, in apparent contradiction of the law of demand, resulting in an upward-sloping demand curve.
The higher prices of Veblen goods may make them desirable as a status symbol in the practices of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure. A product may be a Veblen good because it is a positional good, something few others can own.
So people can prefer a higher-priced item, specifically because it lets them show off that they can afford it.
And if you figure that the closest thing to the “phone pocket” is women’s purses, well…that’s historically been a product category that sees a fair number of members that are Veblen goods, a lot of pricey items designed to show that their wearer can afford them. Like, a designer handbag isn’t really any more functional than a far-less-expensive equivalent, yet lots of people buy them.
https://www.hermes.com/us/en/category/women/bags-and-small-leather-goods/bags-and-clutches/
Those are pretty hefty prices for the functionality you’re getting.
If you figure that a phone pocket probably fills more-or-less the same fashion role, then I wouldn’t be surprised if the potential to sell luxury phone pockets is comparable to that to selling luxury handbags.
Apple already kinda sells towards a low-end luxury market, so I expect that Apple’s probably making a not-unreasonable move in trying to feel out whether there’s potential for that among their customer base.
I wouldn’t pay much for a luxury container for a phone, but that’s me. My pockets fit my phone just fine, so I’m not even in the market in the first place. But…doesn’t mean that Apple isn’t making the right move from a business standpoint for them, I think.
EDIT: A quick kagi later, it sounds like the proper industry term is “affordable luxury” rather than “low-end luxury”:
The iPhone 17 was launched in September 2025, during Apple’s traditional event in Cupertino, California. Tim Cook, in turn, emphasized that the model reinforces the company’s strategy of transforming smartphones into symbols of affordable luxury in the global market. Although the price is high for most people, the iPhone 17 is still priced lower than other traditional luxury goods, including designer handbags, sports cars, and Swiss watches.
Since 2007, Apple has established its brand as a benchmark for innovation and prestige. However, in September 2025, the company once again reinforced the idea that the iPhone is the “cheapest rich-people’s item” available on the market. According to Bloomberg, the device has therefore become a gateway for consumers looking to flaunt a globally recognized status item. Thus, it has come to be seen as an affordable alternative to prestige.
does it bother apple that it is compatible with all other phone brands?
Probably not. Can you imagine someone with a non-Apple phone not being willing to buy an iPhone, but being willing to buy one of those?
I cannot imagine anyone getting that phone cumsock to parade around
