I hate that so much. Isn't 4 supposed to be like Haswell when it comes to the power draw of Bluetooth stuff? But isn't there something else preventing audio from running correctly over 4? Like… APT-X doesn't work or something? I know nothing about this stuff yet, only that I need a pair of wireless headphones.
Unfortunately new standards take time, most electronic devices do not yet support the new standard and so the tech companies do not have enough incentive to move on up the tech ladder.
Bluetooth headphones that come with a wire to charge - Check
Bluetooth headphones with a microphone and volume button - Check
Yep, all of the above is already out in the wild. What are they sending out for a patent, the fact that it's white and has an Apple logo?
I've used a few Bluetooth headsets with my iPhone and none have them have lived up to the quality of wired headsets. Lag waiting for audio to start, occasional dropouts, sound quality not as good, can't be recharged easily on the go, etc.
If Apple can come up with a way to make wireless headsets as good as wired ones, then they deserve a patent IMO. Maybe not this exact patent, but for whatever technology they invent to eliminate the flaws in the current designs.
A new segment on AI: Troll Logic...
1) Power consumption has absolutely no baring on how long a battery will last for a given capacity. For example, you need a battery as large as Ty one in the iPhone to get the same duration out of a different device (or accessory) even if it uses significantly less power.
You're the one complaining no BT headphones carry a charge long enough- not me.
How do you expect that to be accomplished? Magic?
It's unbelievable that so many posters are assuming Apple is catching up to what was available many years ago. Let's remember that Apple has offered BT in their iDevices and Macs for many years now. Let's also remember that BT power has been very high so that wireless headphones are not only clunky but don't last very long.
Yep, it's unbelievable how many people comment on Apple's invention without even bothering to read it.
It's not about a Bluetooth headset - or even a wireless headset per se. Rather, it's about a cabled headset where you can 'break' the cable in the middle and use it without cable when you wish - and then later reconnect the cable to recharge the headset. I've never seen anything that does that.
That said, I'm not sure how useful it's going to be. When I run, I don't have any problem with my over the ear headphones.
Yep, it's unbelievable how many people comment on Apple's invention without even bothering to read it.
It's not about a Bluetooth headset - or even a wireless headset per se. Rather, it's about a cabled headset where you can 'break' the cable in the middle and use it without cable when you wish - and then later reconnect the cable to recharge the headset. I've never seen anything that does that.
That said, I'm not sure how useful it's going to be. When I run, I don't have any problem with my over the ear headphones.
When people have mentioned that they want the 30pin connector/dock connector to be MagSafe I've always disagreed with that but stated something like that for the headphones would be great. I get my cord caught often. I'd love for it to pop off more easily without ripping out of my ears. I never did concise of them still working after that happened. I would love to have a pair of these, providing they are in-ear phones.
FUD. I've had Altec Lansing wireless stereo headphone for over 2 years now which are both durable and not "clunky".
Where do you expect an iPhone size battery to fit in your wireless headphones in order to keep that long a charge ?
For a name having Sheldon in it, you are incredibly stupid. The patent clearly describes how the iDevice can power up and recharge the headset when connected. Plus, Bluetooth devices dont have cellular, display and other stuff so they dont have iPhone level power requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek
Bluetooth headphones - check
Bluetooth headphones that come with a wire to charge - Check
Bluetooth headphones with a microphone and volume button - Check
Yep, all of the above is already out in the wild. What are they sending out for a patent, the fact that it's white and has an Apple logo?
Check the article again, The patent is clearly for the magsafe style connection which can power up, recharge and route audio to the headsets when connected. That isnt present in any current bluetooth headset.
Bluetooth 4.0 is for sporadic bursts of data, not a constant stream that listening to music would require. When used in that regard, BT4 offers no greater energy savings than other flavors of Bluetooth (at least that's my understanding).
Agreed that Bluetooth 4 LE (Low Energy) isnt for audio streaming, and it is not the point here. The easy way of charging the headsets through the iDevice is a lot better and convenient than finding a power outlet and not being mobile at that time.
For a name having Sheldon in it, you are incredibly stupid. The patent clearly describes how the iDevice can power up and recharge the headset when connected. Plus, Bluetooth devices dont have cellular, display and other stuff so they dont have iPhone level power requirements.
I was replying to a faux BT claim. You can't read yet I'm stupid?
Sounds like your name has more emphasis on space and very little on rays.
It's unbelievable that so many posters are assuming Apple is catching up to what was available many years ago. Let's remember that Apple has offered BT in their iDevices and Macs for many years now. Let's also remember that BT power has been very high so that wireless headphones are not only clunky but don't last very long.
If my headphones don't last about as long as my iPhone between charges and require s a completely separate charging unit then I won't use them because it's too much trouble for day to day use. If there are any such models on the market I haven't seen them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
FUD. I've had Altec Lansing wireless stereo headphone for over 2 years now which are both durable and not "clunky".
Where do you expect an iPhone size battery to fit in your wireless headphones in order to keep that long a charge ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
I was replying to a faux BT claim. You can't read yet I'm stupid?
Sounds like your name has more emphasis on space and very little on rays.
What was so faux about SolipsismX's post? Care to clarify?
If you meant to say that Solipsism's idea that only clunky headsets can support iPhone-level battery life, then I agree with you. If you meant that iPhone size batteries are required to keep that long a charge, then thats what I was aiming at.
What was so faux about SolipsismX's post? Care to clarify?
If you meant to say that Solipsism's idea that only clunky headsets can support iPhone-level battery life, then I agree with you. If you meant that iPhone size batteries are required to keep that long a charge, then thats what I was aiming at.
I could see using the natural capabilities of the TRRS port and an in-line chip (like the new dock connector) that communicate to an iOS device that these Bluetooth capable headphones are attached. Queue it as a device profile and auto-pair with BT when the cables physical contact has been broken.
With a little anticipatory software and the speed increase in BT 4.0, they may be able to get lag to an almost imperceptible level.
Hopefully these will work better for "active" users than their new headphones for the iPhone 5 which are useless for outdoor exercise. I've used their default headphones for years for biking without issue. Nothing special but fine for the purpose. But after a brief attempt to use the new ones am back to the old ones. This new front air channel they added basically acts like a big wind tunnel when outside and even with the volume cranked up all I could here was what sounded like a hurricane in my ears, on a calm day, while biking.
Those earbuds are still going to fall out and the wires will break. I've been using Arriva headphones which stick an iPod shuffle on the back of my head for years. Running, climbing trees, jumping are no problem. No wires, simple and cheap, no bluetooth microwave radiation penetrating my skull. I'm just a Mac developer and bicyclist with several fruit trees. Here's a picture: http://arriva.com/shuffle/index.html. I have no connection to Arriva other than being a customer.
I have the same headphones and use a headband or head tie to keep it secure while doing sprints. However, instead of listening to music, I use it as an audio stopwatch. I made recordings where I call out the count every ten seconds, and every second at prescribed intervals and at the end so I can hear my splits and final time without having to look down at my watch or reaching over to press a button.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I hate that so much. Isn't 4 supposed to be like Haswell when it comes to the power draw of Bluetooth stuff? But isn't there something else preventing audio from running correctly over 4? Like… APT-X doesn't work or something? I know nothing about this stuff yet, only that I need a pair of wireless headphones.
Unfortunately new standards take time, most electronic devices do not yet support the new standard and so the tech companies do not have enough incentive to move on up the tech ladder.
This is an area that Apple generally leads in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek
Bluetooth headphones - check
Bluetooth headphones that come with a wire to charge - Check
Bluetooth headphones with a microphone and volume button - Check
Yep, all of the above is already out in the wild. What are they sending out for a patent, the fact that it's white and has an Apple logo?
I've used a few Bluetooth headsets with my iPhone and none have them have lived up to the quality of wired headsets. Lag waiting for audio to start, occasional dropouts, sound quality not as good, can't be recharged easily on the go, etc.
If Apple can come up with a way to make wireless headsets as good as wired ones, then they deserve a patent IMO. Maybe not this exact patent, but for whatever technology they invent to eliminate the flaws in the current designs.
How do you expect that to be accomplished? Magic?
Yep, it's unbelievable how many people comment on Apple's invention without even bothering to read it.
It's not about a Bluetooth headset - or even a wireless headset per se. Rather, it's about a cabled headset where you can 'break' the cable in the middle and use it without cable when you wish - and then later reconnect the cable to recharge the headset. I've never seen anything that does that.
That said, I'm not sure how useful it's going to be. When I run, I don't have any problem with my over the ear headphones.
When people have mentioned that they want the 30pin connector/dock connector to be MagSafe I've always disagreed with that but stated something like that for the headphones would be great. I get my cord caught often. I'd love for it to pop off more easily without ripping out of my ears. I never did concise of them still working after that happened. I would love to have a pair of these, providing they are in-ear phones.
Can low power BT work we'll with a steady 320kbps audio? (I know iTS tracks are 256kbps)
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
FUD. I've had Altec Lansing wireless stereo headphone for over 2 years now which are both durable and not "clunky".
Where do you expect an iPhone size battery to fit in your wireless headphones in order to keep that long a charge ?
For a name having Sheldon in it, you are incredibly stupid. The patent clearly describes how the iDevice can power up and recharge the headset when connected. Plus, Bluetooth devices dont have cellular, display and other stuff so they dont have iPhone level power requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek
Bluetooth headphones - check
Bluetooth headphones that come with a wire to charge - Check
Bluetooth headphones with a microphone and volume button - Check
Yep, all of the above is already out in the wild. What are they sending out for a patent, the fact that it's white and has an Apple logo?
Check the article again, The patent is clearly for the magsafe style connection which can power up, recharge and route audio to the headsets when connected. That isnt present in any current bluetooth headset.
Duh.
Agreed that Bluetooth 4 LE (Low Energy) isnt for audio streaming, and it is not the point here. The easy way of charging the headsets through the iDevice is a lot better and convenient than finding a power outlet and not being mobile at that time.
I was replying to a faux BT claim. You can't read yet I'm stupid?
Sounds like your name has more emphasis on space and very little on rays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It's unbelievable that so many posters are assuming Apple is catching up to what was available many years ago. Let's remember that Apple has offered BT in their iDevices and Macs for many years now. Let's also remember that BT power has been very high so that wireless headphones are not only clunky but don't last very long.
If my headphones don't last about as long as my iPhone between charges and require s a completely separate charging unit then I won't use them because it's too much trouble for day to day use. If there are any such models on the market I haven't seen them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
FUD. I've had Altec Lansing wireless stereo headphone for over 2 years now which are both durable and not "clunky".
Where do you expect an iPhone size battery to fit in your wireless headphones in order to keep that long a charge ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by iSheldon
I was replying to a faux BT claim. You can't read yet I'm stupid?
Sounds like your name has more emphasis on space and very little on rays.
What was so faux about SolipsismX's post? Care to clarify?
If you meant to say that Solipsism's idea that only clunky headsets can support iPhone-level battery life, then I agree with you. If you meant that iPhone size batteries are required to keep that long a charge, then thats what I was aiming at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Can low power BT work we'll with a steady 320kbps audio? (I know iTS tracks are 256kbps)
Bluetooth 4 LE mode supports ~200 kbps, so nopes it wont support 320 kbps audio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy#Bluetooth_technology_vs_NFC
1. Yes
2. Sarcasm
Cool. Append the /s tag for due sarcasm
I could see using the natural capabilities of the TRRS port and an in-line chip (like the new dock connector) that communicate to an iOS device that these Bluetooth capable headphones are attached. Queue it as a device profile and auto-pair with BT when the cables physical contact has been broken.
With a little anticipatory software and the speed increase in BT 4.0, they may be able to get lag to an almost imperceptible level.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Can low power BT work we'll with a steady 320kbps audio? (I know iTS tracks are 256kbps)
Ooh. All my stuff is lossless…
Originally Posted by spacerays
Bluetooth 4 LE mode supports ~200 kbps, so nopes it wont support 320 kbps audio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy#Bluetooth_technology_vs_NFC
Looks like buying Bluetooth 2.1 headphones remains the way to go…
So! Sennheisers, anyone? How do they fare? Or maybe something of similar quality but in a more streamlined and compact shell?
I have the same headphones and use a headband or head tie to keep it secure while doing sprints. However, instead of listening to music, I use it as an audio stopwatch. I made recordings where I call out the count every ten seconds, and every second at prescribed intervals and at the end so I can hear my splits and final time without having to look down at my watch or reaching over to press a button.