New York — The Verge Debates iPhone Duo's 7/10 Score

The Verge gave the iPhone Duo a 7 out of 10 in its review, but the outlet's own staff are not settled on whether that number holds up, according to an Oct. 23, 2026 episode of The Vergecast podcast, published on The Verge.

What score did The Verge give the iPhone Duo?

The review landed at 7/10, a number the show notes describe as not fixed in place from the start of the process. "That wasn't always the score we planned, and it might not be the right score forever," the post states, framing the review as an attempt to assess "a big, new idea about the most popular smartphone in history." Vergecast co-hosts David Pierce and Nilay debate on the episode whether the Duo earned that score, and whether the number should move as the product and its software mature.

By the numbers

• 7/10 — The Verge's published review score for the iPhone Duo.
• Oct. 23, 2026, 5:00 p.m. UTC — publication time of the Vergecast episode discussing the review, per The Verge.

Why might the score not be final?

The hosts' own framing treats the Duo less as a finished verdict than as an open question tied to how the device evolves over time. The episode description notes it is "easy to see how the Duo will improve over time," while leaving unresolved whether it will ever become, in the hosts' words, "the phone for everyone." That distinction — a device that could get better through updates rather than one judged purely on its launch-day hardware — is presented as the central uncertainty hosts are trying to work through rather than a conclusion they reach on air.

What is the debate about the Duo's outer screen?

A specific point of contention raised on the show is the device's second, outer display. The hosts reference Daring Fireball's John Gruber, who suggested the outer screen is "the worst iPhone ever," a characterization the Vergecast hosts weigh directly rather than endorse outright. The show notes present it as a question to be debated — "Is the outer screen... the worst iPhone ever?" — rather than a settled fact, consistent with the episode's broader effort to separate the product's concept from its current execution.

Would the Duo have worked better as an iPad?

The episode's title question — whether the iPhone Duo should have been an iPad — gets taken up directly. The hosts ask whether the device "would be a better product if it started as an iPad rather than an iPhone," and separately whether perception of the device would shift "if it were simply called the iPad Duo." Those are posed as open questions in the source material, not as findings the hosts report having confirmed; the episode notes do not indicate the hosts reach a final verdict on either point.

What else did the Vergecast cover this week?

The same episode moves from the Duo review into other technology stories, according to the show notes. Hosts discuss what they describe as a PHP cybersecurity flaw that affected parts of the web, and what it signals for AI systems and automated shopping agents interacting with retailers. The notes also reference segments on FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, an unspecified Netflix reboot, and what the show calls "some very confusing Gemini news," though the episode description does not provide further detail on any of those three items.

What happens next for the iPhone Duo review?

The Verge's own framing leaves the 7/10 score as provisional rather than final, tied explicitly to how the product changes through future software updates. The source material does not specify a timeline for a re-review or indicate what would need to change for the score to move up or down. The open questions raised on the podcast — about the outer screen, the iPad comparison, and whether the device can appeal broadly — remain, per the episode notes, items the hosts are still working through rather than ones they resolve within the episode itself.

For readers tracking how review outlets evaluate early dual-screen and foldable iPhone concepts, the underlying tension described by The Verge is methodological as much as technical: a launch-day score applied to hardware that outlet staff expect to function differently once software catches up to the concept.