The best sounding headphones I ever owned was a gaming/voip type headset that included a mic. It connected to my Mac by USB. The sound was simply amazing. The headset itself was only around $50 but the sound it gave easily rivaled those $300 headsets to my ears. They were very large and heavy but also very comfortable for very extended use. Impractical to use outside of a home though. No reason why lightning would not also deliver that crisp and clean sound as well. I really don't use headphones very much anymore. I bought a stereo bluetooth set for the beach and they performed very well but I just don't like to wear any headphones for very long. I recently bought a bluetooth speaker that is very loud and gives a really good sound and now prefer to use this instead at the beach or pool. I think lightning headphones are a great option as long as they continue to also offer the traditional port at least for a few more years to give people time to transition. I doubt people that paid several hundred dollars for headphones would be too happy if they suddenly became obsolete. Unless Apple could also make a 3.5>lightning adapter and if that is possible they could remove the 3.5mm port immediately.
Maybe I am in the minority but I don't see the need to continually go thinner. If Apple made the next iPhone 1mm thicker and explained that extra thickness allowed for a larger battery and an extra 2 or 3 hours of battery life I would be very pleased.
Bad idea and not feasible. Lightening is still too expensive, many people have incompatible headphones they paid a lot of money for, Lightening has gained virtually no traction in the marketplace, the plugs fall out at the slightest jarring...I could go on and on. This is one of those "upgrades" Apple should not try to cram down our throats.
I don't believe for a second Apple has any intention of implementing this. This article is speculative fiction.
Allowing the lightning connector to serve as a headphone jack is a neat trick for a tiny device that may not have room for 2 connectors. It doesn't necessarily follow that larger devices like phones and tablets and laptops that do have room would dump the standard phone jack.
Apple sometimes takes bold leaps that other companies would dream of. They often turn out to be excellent moves (such as dropping floppy disks, dropping optical drives, and changing to the lightning connector). So I'm inclined to say "There is no way that Apple would do this, ... so they just might." I, for one, think the lightning connector is great and a huge improvement over the original (and way, way better than any of those little USB options).
1) There is nothing preventing a simple adapter being used for 3.5mm headphones to work.
But first it needs to exist. Please point us to one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
2) In what way is the Lightning connector expensive? In what way has it not gained traction in the marketplace? It sounds like you're confusing Thunderbolt with Lightning.
There are licensing fees for third-party accessory manufacturers, some of whom do not wish to pay to get access to the approved Lightning chip. So they create knockoff adapters without the Apple approved chip which leads to a pile of Lightning adapters that do not have full functionality (often in direct contrast to advertised capabilities) and thus low scores in product reviews (like Amazon.com).
I've purchased four inexpensive Lightning adapters from a nearby bricks-and-mortar store, all of which claimed both charging and data syncing compatibility. Only one worked, and it still throws an annoying "This cable or accessory is not certified and may not work reliably with this iPhone" notification every time I plug it in, even though it actually does work. The other three I returned.
Walk into the store and look at how many clock radios and sound docks don't have a lightning connector. At one point everything had a iPod dock connector. The licensing of the dock connector was a good source of revenue for Apple. Going to the lighting connector for audio would make every headphone manufacturer license the connector or knock it off and get sued. I think Apple is just exploring revenue options. If it provides better sound in the long run I'm for it. And I'm sure third party manufacturers would be for it too. I would need to re-buy or adapt most connectors I have. There's a good revenue stream there for third parties too. Plus just like the dock connector you go back to Apple compatible only products.
If they do this, I have no doubt they would include an adaptor (and probably charge $19 or even $29 for the thing).
I think they would likely include an adapter for free with an iPhone or iPod. This would be a really major change and including a free adapter would help mitigate the criticism. I doubt an adapter would cost very much since you are only carrying audio which is a lot less complicated than a video or data signal. Perhaps one other reason for this move is that Apple eventually wants to make a waterproof iPhone and the headphone jack is a hard one to protect from water. Since Apple controls lightning, maybe they already have a plan to protect that port from water. Could this be the real reason why they want to transition to lightning?
I think they would likely include an adapter for free with an iPhone or iPod. This would be a really major change and including a free adapter would help mitigate the criticism. I doubt an adapter would cost very much since you are only carrying audio which is a lot less complicated than a video or data signal. Perhaps one other reason for this move is that Apple eventually wants to make a waterproof iPhone and the headphone jack is a hard one to protect from water. Since Apple controls lightning, maybe they already have a plan to protect that port from water. Could this be the real reason why they want to transition to lightning?
They didn't, that I recall, include a free 30 pin to lightning adapter when they made that change so I'm doubtful.
Outlined in orange? Darn, the jack is already so small we can't even see it¡
Kidding aside, I think this is great news. The possibilities are vast, and Apple gets to keep on making the iPhone even thinner. And with the current Broadcom chip which has an FM radio on board they may just add an antenna to their headphones and 3rd party can follow that lead. Good news.
I think the first picture
shows the millimeter or so that can be 'recovered' If you remove the 3.5mm receptacle. on an 7.6 mm device... that's serious (15% thinner) space.
I'm not certain that slimmer is better (thinking of the iPhone's number 2 use... camera and number 3 concern... battery life), but it definitely allows that option to be pursued. And given how people orgasmed over the size/weight changes between the 4s and the 5 (20% thinner), making an iPhone 6 that is both thinner and lighter than the 5s, with a larger screen and better battery life... yet another major differentiator. Samsung is still thicker than the 5s, and this would be even more...
I'm not that keen on losing the adaptor... I could see apple 'giving away' a dongle adaptor on the iPhone 6 line, to help smooth the transition (It's interesting to note they moved the 3.5mm 2 years ago ... to get us used to the location?)
Just make a lightning to headphone jack adapter and u can use all ur current headphones. It won't be THAT bad.
And Apple have already done something similar to this with the FM radio remote, which connected to iPods via the Dock connector, and had a 3.5mm pass-through to headphones.
If Apple made a similar dongle with Lightning connector on one end, and headphone clicker/microphone and a 3.5mm port on the other, then you get the best of all (wired) worlds. They'd definitely need to package one with every iPhone though, not sell it as an extra dongle.
The biometrics could be key. Imaging headphones measuring your pulse rate, O2 sat, etc. Wearable sensors loose traction with users over time because they get in the way if they are big, and are easily lost if they are small.
Headphones are the original wearable, and Beats made bulky ones cool. That's why I think Beats could have been a mHealth wearables play for Apple.
Yeah, this. Do it. BT and or lightning are way more than sufficient. It's time. And I hate those damn fool earbuds, I only use in emergencies.
Imagine the new 1984 commercial with hammer girl wearing wireless earphones and an iPod to replace the reimagined one with the iconic earbud wires. "{Ditching the 3.5" connector will make o]ur enemies ... talk themselves to death, and we will bury them with their own confusion. We. Shall. Prevail."
The biometrics could be key. Imaging headphones measuring your pulse rate, O2 sat, etc. Wearable sensors loose traction with users over time because they get in the way if they are big, and are easily lost if they are small.
Headphones are the original wearable, and Beats made bulky ones cool. That's why I think Beats could have been a mHealth wearables play for Apple.
I'm not too worried as there will certainly be vendors who provide alternative ways to accomplish what you want. For example, there are bluetooth headphone adapters available now where you can plug your 3.5" headphones and listen to your [BT device]. Or, someone will bring to market a lightning to 3.5" adapter for those who prefer it. Hopefully this would force Apple to be a bit more amenable to working with 3rd party portable DAC/Amp producers as well as they haven't been since the lightning connector was initially announced.
The market will eventually provide everything people are clamoring about with regards to this switch.
I would say this and/or Bluetooth-only earbuds might well be under long-term consideration as an unlikely option they are keeping in mind for some possible future, but nothing more, and I don't think it will happen until Bluetooth (more likely than Lightning) is far more entrenched, available from many sources, reliable, and quality-sounding than it is now.
Remember that this company "takes up space" with a physical mute switch that most other companies fail to provide. They ARE willing to take up space with things people want!
And people want a lot of choice in headphones. And Apple knows it: they have a whole table of precious footage devoted to them in their stores.
Plus, the old wired connection saves Apple money on bundling their earbuds.
Plus, people wire their devices to car stereos and home entertainment systems using the headphone jack.
Plus, some people integrate their devices into basic music production and DJ-type uses via that jack.
CONCLUSION:
We will see high-end Lightning headphone options, and they may be great, but they will NOT be forced on us!
Comments
Maybe I am in the minority but I don't see the need to continually go thinner. If Apple made the next iPhone 1mm thicker and explained that extra thickness allowed for a larger battery and an extra 2 or 3 hours of battery life I would be very pleased.
It would use the same port, requiring pass-through adapters if you want to listen a charge at the same time. There would be no 2nd Lightning port.
Correct, it would be similar to the existing Lightning Digital AV Adapter with a pass-through Lightning port for charging.
I don't believe for a second Apple has any intention of implementing this. This article is speculative fiction.
Allowing the lightning connector to serve as a headphone jack is a neat trick for a tiny device that may not have room for 2 connectors. It doesn't necessarily follow that larger devices like phones and tablets and laptops that do have room would dump the standard phone jack.
Apple sometimes takes bold leaps that other companies would dream of. They often turn out to be excellent moves (such as dropping floppy disks, dropping optical drives, and changing to the lightning connector). So I'm inclined to say "There is no way that Apple would do this, ... so they just might." I, for one, think the lightning connector is great and a huge improvement over the original (and way, way better than any of those little USB options).
I'd rather have mag-loc headphone cables.
...Unless Apple could also make a 3.5>lightning adaptor....
If they do this, I have no doubt they would include an adaptor (and probably charge $19 or even $29 for the thing).
1) There is nothing preventing a simple adapter being used for 3.5mm headphones to work.
But first it needs to exist. Please point us to one.
2) In what way is the Lightning connector expensive? In what way has it not gained traction in the marketplace? It sounds like you're confusing Thunderbolt with Lightning.
There are licensing fees for third-party accessory manufacturers, some of whom do not wish to pay to get access to the approved Lightning chip. So they create knockoff adapters without the Apple approved chip which leads to a pile of Lightning adapters that do not have full functionality (often in direct contrast to advertised capabilities) and thus low scores in product reviews (like Amazon.com).
I've purchased four inexpensive Lightning adapters from a nearby bricks-and-mortar store, all of which claimed both charging and data syncing compatibility. Only one worked, and it still throws an annoying "This cable or accessory is not certified and may not work reliably with this iPhone" notification every time I plug it in, even though it actually does work. The other three I returned.
Note that one cannot disable this alert message.
Walk into the store and look at how many clock radios and sound docks don't have a lightning connector. At one point everything had a iPod dock connector. The licensing of the dock connector was a good source of revenue for Apple. Going to the lighting connector for audio would make every headphone manufacturer license the connector or knock it off and get sued. I think Apple is just exploring revenue options. If it provides better sound in the long run I'm for it. And I'm sure third party manufacturers would be for it too. I would need to re-buy or adapt most connectors I have. There's a good revenue stream there for third parties too. Plus just like the dock connector you go back to Apple compatible only products.
If they do this, I have no doubt they would include an adaptor (and probably charge $19 or even $29 for the thing).
I think they would likely include an adapter for free with an iPhone or iPod. This would be a really major change and including a free adapter would help mitigate the criticism. I doubt an adapter would cost very much since you are only carrying audio which is a lot less complicated than a video or data signal. Perhaps one other reason for this move is that Apple eventually wants to make a waterproof iPhone and the headphone jack is a hard one to protect from water. Since Apple controls lightning, maybe they already have a plan to protect that port from water. Could this be the real reason why they want to transition to lightning?
I think they would likely include an adapter for free with an iPhone or iPod. This would be a really major change and including a free adapter would help mitigate the criticism. I doubt an adapter would cost very much since you are only carrying audio which is a lot less complicated than a video or data signal. Perhaps one other reason for this move is that Apple eventually wants to make a waterproof iPhone and the headphone jack is a hard one to protect from water. Since Apple controls lightning, maybe they already have a plan to protect that port from water. Could this be the real reason why they want to transition to lightning?
They didn't, that I recall, include a free 30 pin to lightning adapter when they made that change so I'm doubtful.
Outlined in orange? Darn, the jack is already so small we can't even see it¡
Kidding aside, I think this is great news. The possibilities are vast, and Apple gets to keep on making the iPhone even thinner. And with the current Broadcom chip which has an FM radio on board they may just add an antenna to their headphones and 3rd party can follow that lead. Good news.
I think the first picture
shows the millimeter or so that can be 'recovered' If you remove the 3.5mm receptacle. on an 7.6 mm device... that's serious (15% thinner) space.
I'm not certain that slimmer is better (thinking of the iPhone's number 2 use... camera and number 3 concern... battery life), but it definitely allows that option to be pursued. And given how people orgasmed over the size/weight changes between the 4s and the 5 (20% thinner), making an iPhone 6 that is both thinner and lighter than the 5s, with a larger screen and better battery life... yet another major differentiator. Samsung is still thicker than the 5s, and this would be even more...
I'm not that keen on losing the adaptor... I could see apple 'giving away' a dongle adaptor on the iPhone 6 line, to help smooth the transition (It's interesting to note they moved the 3.5mm 2 years ago ... to get us used to the location?)
Just make a lightning to headphone jack adapter and u can use all ur current headphones. It won't be THAT bad.
And Apple have already done something similar to this with the FM radio remote, which connected to iPods via the Dock connector, and had a 3.5mm pass-through to headphones.
If Apple made a similar dongle with Lightning connector on one end, and headphone clicker/microphone and a 3.5mm port on the other, then you get the best of all (wired) worlds. They'd definitely need to package one with every iPhone though, not sell it as an extra dongle.
Wearable sensors loose traction with users over time because they get in the way if they are big, and are easily lost if they are small.
Headphones are the original wearable, and Beats made bulky ones cool. That's why I think Beats could have been a mHealth wearables play for Apple.
http://wp.me/p4G7H2-3E
Yeah, this. Do it. BT and or lightning are way more than sufficient. It's time. And I hate those damn fool earbuds, I only use in emergencies.
Imagine the new 1984 commercial with hammer girl wearing wireless earphones and an iPod to replace the reimagined one with the iconic earbud wires. "{Ditching the 3.5" connector will make o]ur enemies ... talk themselves to death, and we will bury them with their own confusion. We. Shall. Prevail."
Wearable sensors loose traction with users over time because they get in the way if they are big, and are easily lost if they are small.
Headphones are the original wearable, and Beats made bulky ones cool. That's why I think Beats could have been a mHealth wearables play for Apple.
http://wp.me/p4G7H2-3E
The market will eventually provide everything people are clamoring about with regards to this switch.
Remember that this company "takes up space" with a physical mute switch that most other companies fail to provide. They ARE willing to take up space with things people want!
And people want a lot of choice in headphones. And Apple knows it: they have a whole table of precious footage devoted to them in their stores.
Plus, the old wired connection saves Apple money on bundling their earbuds.
Plus, people wire their devices to car stereos and home entertainment systems using the headphone jack.
Plus, some people integrate their devices into basic music production and DJ-type uses via that jack.
CONCLUSION:
We will see high-end Lightning headphone options, and they may be great, but they will NOT be forced on us!
No need to panic.
How can you enjoy the full internet experience without a 3.5 mm plug?
/s
lol - time to buy stock in some company that will make Lightning-to-3.5 standard jack adapters.
Although for Apple, makes total sense as far as their quest to simplify and slim down on weight and cost, and free up internal real estate.