Apple looking into hybrid wireless headphones for "active" users

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,105member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    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.

  • Reply 22 of 42
    auxioauxio Posts: 1,959member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by saarek View Post


    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.

  • Reply 23 of 42
    solipsismx wrote: »
    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.


    :lol: You're the one complaining no BT headphones carry a charge long enough- not me.
    How do you expect that to be accomplished? Magic? :lol:
  • Reply 24 of 42
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 25 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jragosta wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 26 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    jason98 wrote: »
    It's been a year since iPhone 4S release with Bluetooth 4.0 support and stil there is NO freaking headsets on the market, not a single one!

    Can low power BT work we'll with a steady 320kbps audio? (I know iTS tracks are 256kbps)
  • Reply 27 of 42

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post





    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 ? image


     


    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 View Post


    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.

  • Reply 28 of 42
    unicronunicron Posts: 154member
    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).
  • Reply 29 of 42


    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.

  • Reply 30 of 42
    isheldonisheldon Posts: 570member
    spacerays wrote: »
    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? :lol:
    Sounds like your name has more emphasis on space and very little on rays.
  • Reply 31 of 42

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    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 View Post





    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 ? image


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post





    I was replying to a faux BT claim. You can't read yet I'm stupid? image

    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.

  • Reply 32 of 42

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post





    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

  • Reply 33 of 42
    isheldonisheldon Posts: 570member
    spacerays wrote: »



    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.

    1. Yes
    2. Sarcasm
  • Reply 34 of 42


    Cool. Append the /s tag for due sarcasm ;) Chillo

  • Reply 35 of 42


    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.

  • Reply 36 of 42
    rbryanhrbryanh Posts: 263member
    Love the Nubian Goddess. Why isn't she on iWorship?
  • Reply 37 of 42
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member


    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    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 View Post

    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?

  • Reply 38 of 42
    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.
  • Reply 39 of 42
    tiptontipton Posts: 54member
    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.
  • Reply 40 of 42
    ivinceivince Posts: 74member
    This seriously can not come soon enough..
Sign In or Register to comment.