I'm OK with the audio jack removal as a departure from old tech and so. However, using EarPods while charging seems like it'll be not possible at all. That's an important compromise in my use case: charging my phone while I listen to music/podcasts at the office.
I really doubt the bundled adapter will allow simultaneous charge and using the headphones, so I guess I'll have to wait for the phone to charge before I can listen to music at work. It's a rather small annoyance, but we use to resist change until we're 'forced' to.
I guess this shake in use habits will be worth it, with improvements such as better water resistance and sound quality (though I doubt the latter will be quite noticeable with Apple's earbuds).
This is an absolutely idiotic concern. I'm sorry if that offends you but it is.
Do you really think Apple hasn't thought about his problem? The simplest solution is a lightning passthrough plug on the charging cable included in the box. Apple is already doing this with various Lightning docks and dongles now. All they need is a more streamlined solution for the headphones. Another option is including a Lightning port on the charging brick along with the USB port. Not as convenient, but still a simple solution in the box.
WTF is with people saying they have to "carry" the dongle as if it will be separated from the headphones. If you can remember to bring your headphones then you're fine. I would bet the port interface for the 3.5mm jack is a little more snug than a usual jack so that it's even less likely to fall out (not that it's ever been a problem before).
I am in awe of all the angst and gnashing of teeth over the possibility that Apple may be phasing out a (literally!) nineteenth century connector technology.
If you could travel back in time and walk into Edison's lab at Menlo Park in 1880, carrying a set of earbuds with the 3.5 mm jack, they would immediately know exactly what it is. They'd marvel at the miniaturization, but that's only because they'd have quarter-inch jacks on hand for comparison.
Go to 9to5Mac, everyone is losing their shit over an adapter. Fighting with each other and everything. Quite hilarious. Use it or don't, it's that simple. Plus, if Apple didn't include it, these same people would still be bitching. I swear, pleasing Apple "fans" these days seems to be harder and harder.
My opinion is that an adapter will not be included. Apple has never, to my knowledge, included any adapter when it switches ports. My iMac 14,2 did not include a Thunderbolt-> Firewire adapter when Apple got rid of Firewire. When the iPod went from Firewire to USB there was no adapter. Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port. The idea is to firmly nudge user to the new port, not enable them to stay put. There will indeed be an adapter but it will not be included free. You will have to buy one separately. Only a few days before we find out who’s right.
The original MBA included both DVI and VGA adapters simply because MicroDVI was basically only used by Apple. Also, I'm pretty sure the early 17" PowerBooks (the ones that introduced FW800) included a FW800 to FW400 adapter in the box.
Threre are too many examples to remember. They also included, not just adapters, but connectors with long cables for USB-A and FW-400 with the iPod after they launched iTunes for Windows. The USB-A was to connect to WinPCs, but since most still had USB 1.0, which means no power, the FW400 was used to plug into a PSU for charging.
Do I have to stop listening using headphone when I need to charge it? (put aside wireless charging)
This reminded me of ipod radio, listen to radio or charge, choose one.
This sure does have the stink of plausibility on it.
It sure does seem that Apple is creating a significant marketing challenge for themselves.
Including the adapter would pretty much extinguish the complaints.
Wrong! The cost of the dongle is almost irrelevant. It's the fact that you will never have it with you when you need it, and it's overall inelegance that offends me. It seems acceptable on paper, but in the real world it sucks. I had a win CE phone that required one and the end result was I could not use it to listen to music.
I'm just not seeing the real world problem here. It is not going to affect me because:
1. When I'm out and about, I'll either be using the included Lightning EarPods, or a set of Bluetooth earbuds (maybe Apple's AirPods if they come to fruition). 2. When I'm at home, and serious about listening to music, I'll use my Phillips Fidelio Lightning headphones that I've already had for a year, because I care about high quality music and being able to listen to it on my iPhone, something you simply can't get out of the 3.5mm port. 3. If I really wanted to connect a crappy old pair of analog headphones, I'll have the Adapter.
Just like every legacy technology in my house, there is an adapter to connect it to a more modern device.
I guess the vocal minority that is so indignant over this issue hasn't come to accept/realize that their analog headphones are actually antiquated, crappy tech, that has been replaced.
Dude, read your use case and guess how many people do things this way. In this case you are the vocal minority, literarily.
You get way more precise sound from a pair of $300 hi-fi analog headphones connected to the DAC inside your phone or computer than combining those two parts in one product. Lightning headphones are just analog headphones with a cheap microDAC/amp combo chip attached to their cable. What really matters now is that some people are willing to pay $300 for a $150 package. That's why all consumer headphone companies are so happy with the decisions made by who's also the largest headphone company in the world.
I'm seeing posts on Twitter pretty much confirming this rumor. Lightning earbuds and an adapter in the box. Boy Apple sure does love it's adapters. I'm surprised they're throwing it in the box and not charging extra for it. They better have a good marketing pitch for why proprietary lightning headphones are better than the current ones. I'm not sure making the phone more water resistant is good enough ( if that's even why they're doing it).
Your posts are like old cheese in a refrigerator...always sitting in the back of the lunchmeat drawer, but nobody's interested in taking a bite.
You don't really need the bullet points as to why dropping the jack makes long-term sense, do you?
You don't really need an explanation that providing lightning headphones and an adapter is making it very easy for people to transition, do you?
It only makes long term sense to the kool-aid drinkers who think anything Apple does is the right thing to do.
sour grapes nonsense. it makes sense to people who understand how Apple rolls.
it confounds people who don't and never will. not coincidentally, those people aren't running the largest, most successful, most profitable public company on earth. instead they're just stating how they think things suck, over and over and over...
I'm OK with the audio jack removal as a departure from old tech and so. However, using EarPods while charging seems like it'll be not possible at all. That's an important compromise in my use case: charging my phone while I listen to music/podcasts at the office.
I really doubt the bundled adapter will allow simultaneous charge and using the headphones, so I guess I'll have to wait for the phone to charge before I can listen to music at work. It's a rather small annoyance, but we use to resist change until we're 'forced' to.
I guess this shake in use habits will be worth it, with improvements such as better water resistance and sound quality (though I doubt the latter will be quite noticeable with Apple's earbuds).
I just don't buy this argument at all. There is no reason to charge and listen to music via wired earbuds at the same time. None. iPhone is rated for 24 hours of music playback.
Why are you not charging your phone at night and arriving to work with a fully charged phone?
When you're iPhone is 1 1/2 years old and its battery won't hold a charge for longer than 30 minutes, you'll understand.
OMG. Please...no more adapters. I'm drowning in a pile of them now.
How is technology going to move forwards if you never can change anything because of old standards? The adaptors are there so you can use your old externals after alternatives are introduced. I expect that most users will use bluetooth headphones soon, so why not get rid of the old analogue plug, and include an adapter for those that insists on using their old headphones? A win-win situation in my book.
The problem is that Lightning is proprietary. It's proprietary for charging, now it'll be proprietary for listening to music. USB-C is going to eventually be the standard across Android for both, and Apple is going to have yet another FireWire on its hands. Beats may be the only one left in the end selling headphones/earphones with Lightning, all the others will go USB-C. And even Beats will have to make USB-C versions if they want to sell to anyone other than Apple customers.
I'm seeing posts on Twitter pretty much confirming this rumor. Lightning earbuds and an adapter in the box. Boy Apple sure does love it's adapters. I'm surprised they're throwing it in the box and not charging extra for it. They better have a good marketing pitch for why proprietary lightning headphones are better than the current ones. I'm not sure making the phone more water resistant is good enough ( if that's even why they're doing it).
My opinion is that an adapter will not be included. Apple has never, to my knowledge, included any adapter when it switches ports. My iMac 14,2 did not include a Thunderbolt-> Firewire adapter when Apple got rid of Firewire. When the iPod went from Firewire to USB there was no adapter. Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port. The idea is to firmly nudge user to the new port, not enable them to stay put. There will indeed be an adapter but it will not be included free. You will have to buy one separately. Only a few days before we find out who’s right.
OMG. Please...no more adapters. I'm drowning in a pile of them now.
How is technology going to move forwards if you never can change anything because of old standards? The adaptors are there so you can use your old externals after alternatives are introduced. I expect that most users will use bluetooth headphones soon, so why not get rid of the old analogue plug, and include an adapter for those that insists on using their old headphones? A win-win situation in my book.
The problem is that Lightning is proprietary. It's proprietary for charging, now it'll be proprietary for listening to music. USB-C is going to eventually be the standard across Android for both, and Apple is going to have yet another FireWire on its hands. Beats may be the only one left in the end selling headphones/earphones with Lightning, all the others will go USB-C. And even Beats will have to make USB-C versions if they want to sell to anyone other than Apple customers.
Right, sure. Just like nobody makes cases for each new model of iPhone. There's just no market for third-party manufacturers of things that go with proprietary Apple stuff.
My opinion is that an adapter will not be included. Apple has never, to my knowledge, included any adapter when it switches ports. My iMac 14,2 did not include a Thunderbolt-> Firewire adapter when Apple got rid of Firewire. When the iPod went from Firewire to USB there was no adapter. Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port. The idea is to firmly nudge user to the new port, not enable them to stay put. There will indeed be an adapter but it will not be included free. You will have to buy one separately. Only a few days before we find out who’s right.
They have included an adapter:
6 pin to 4 pin Firewire adapter.
With what machine(s) did they ship this adapter? I ask because I don't recall Apple ever using a 4-pin FireWire.
My opinion is that an adapter will not be included. Apple has never, to my knowledge, included any adapter when it switches ports. My iMac 14,2 did not include a Thunderbolt-> Firewire adapter when Apple got rid of Firewire. When the iPod went from Firewire to USB there was no adapter. Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port. The idea is to firmly nudge user to the new port, not enable them to stay put. There will indeed be an adapter but it will not be included free. You will have to buy one separately. Only a few days before we find out who’s right.
They have included an adapter:
6 pin to 4 pin Firewire adapter.
With what machine(s) did they ship this adapter? I ask because I don't recall Apple ever using a 4-pin FireWire.
3rd Gen iPod. They also included a set of earbuds, power adapter, a dock, a soft draw string bag, a well made clip on holster/case, 30 pin - firewire cable, and a really good wired remote / headphone cable extender. Then they invented iGreed.
I have never found anything that took the 4 Pin Firewire. My best guess is that some Windows laptops might have had such a port.
With what machine(s) did they ship this adapter? I ask because I don't recall Apple ever using a 4-pin FireWire.
Then they invented iGreed. [...] I have never found anything that took the 4 Pin Firewire.
It's greedy not to include an adapter in every sale that hardly anyone uses but that the customer is paying for?
My best guess is that some Windows laptops might have had such a port.
Sony created a 4-pin version of the IEEE 1394 standard known as i.LINK. The reduction to 4-pins removed the ability to power the peripheral. Later this port interface became an option for the IEEE 1394 standard. At the time, Sony was very popular in the "PC" business.
I'm seeing posts on Twitter pretty much confirming this rumor. Lightning earbuds and an adapter in the box. Boy Apple sure does love it's adapters. I'm surprised they're throwing it in the box and not charging extra for it. They better have a good marketing pitch for why proprietary lightning headphones are better than the current ones. I'm not sure making the phone more water resistant is good enough ( if that's even why they're doing it).
My opinion is that an adapter will not be included. Apple has never, to my knowledge, included any adapter when it switches ports. My iMac 14,2 did not include a Thunderbolt-> Firewire adapter when Apple got rid of Firewire. When the iPod went from Firewire to USB there was no adapter. Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port. The idea is to firmly nudge user to the new port, not enable them to stay put. There will indeed be an adapter but it will not be included free. You will have to buy one separately. Only a few days before we find out who’s right.
Well then, let me update your knowledge...I have received adapters with my Apple purchase on at least three occasions. When I purchased my first MacBook Pro it came with a video adaptor to allow the DVI-I port to connect to a VGA monitor. My second Mac mini also came with a video adaptor (although I forget the exact conversion it was making). Also, when I purchased Apple's sport case for the very first iPod shuffle it came with a headphone jack adapter to allow non-Apple headphones to connect to the shuffle through the case.
One difference for some of these cases is that the adapter was to allow you to connect an essential component to your Apple device, without which major functionality would be lost. Your example of not including a Thunderbolt-FW is not the same because there really weren't that many people who needed FW connectivity. And even those who had FW devices, in most cases those devices were hard drives which also had USB ports so the impact was minimized.
One could argue that when Apple switched the iPod from FW to USB that they did include an adapter but it was built into the iPod...you could still use an old FW-dock cable/device to charge the iPod which was probably the more important function. It wasn't until later generations of iPods that FW support was dropped completely. So Apple provided a transition period before completely abandoning FW so you didn't instantly lose all of your investment in accessories. (Besides, to the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing as a FW-USB adapter, so Apple couldn't have included one if they wanted to.)
Finally, as far as "Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port"... Consider that the vast majority of headphones people own are analog, including some fairly expensive ones, you aren't "nudging" them to a new port, you are shoving them into having to purchase all new, and likely more expensive, headphones because a digital-only option is completely useless to them without an adapter. Including a 25-cent part in the box to address this is pretty much a no-brainer. Then you drop the adapter from future versions of the iPhone after consumers and headphone manufactures have had time to adapt (no pun intended).
Comments
Do you really think Apple hasn't thought about his problem? The simplest solution is a lightning passthrough plug on the charging cable included in the box. Apple is already doing this with various Lightning docks and dongles now. All they need is a more streamlined solution for the headphones. Another option is including a Lightning port on the charging brick along with the USB port. Not as convenient, but still a simple solution in the box.
This is is not rocket surgery.
Go to 9to5Mac, everyone is losing their shit over an adapter. Fighting with each other and everything. Quite hilarious. Use it or don't, it's that simple. Plus, if Apple didn't include it, these same people would still be bitching. I swear, pleasing Apple "fans" these days seems to be harder and harder.
How could the industry move to Lightning? It's a proprietary solution. The industry will be moving to USB-C and BT for headphones.
Dude, read your use case and guess how many people do things this way. In this case you are the vocal minority, literarily.
You get way more precise sound from a pair of $300 hi-fi analog headphones connected to the DAC inside your phone or computer than combining those two parts in one product. Lightning headphones are just analog headphones with a cheap microDAC/amp combo chip attached to their cable. What really matters now is that some people are willing to pay $300 for a $150 package. That's why all consumer headphone companies are so happy with the decisions made by who's also the largest headphone company in the world.
Profits first!
Hint: there are at least 2 methods.
it confounds people who don't and never will. not coincidentally, those people aren't running the largest, most successful, most profitable public company on earth. instead they're just stating how they think things suck, over and over and over...
When you're iPhone is 1 1/2 years old and its battery won't hold a charge for longer than 30 minutes, you'll understand.
The problem is that Lightning is proprietary. It's proprietary for charging, now it'll be proprietary for listening to music. USB-C is going to eventually be the standard across Android for both, and Apple is going to have yet another FireWire on its hands. Beats may be the only one left in the end selling headphones/earphones with Lightning, all the others will go USB-C. And even Beats will have to make USB-C versions if they want to sell to anyone other than Apple customers.
6 pin to 4 pin Firewire adapter.
I have never found anything that took the 4 Pin Firewire. My best guess is that some Windows laptops might have had such a port.
Sony created a 4-pin version of the IEEE 1394 standard known as i.LINK. The reduction to 4-pins removed the ability to power the peripheral. Later this port interface became an option for the IEEE 1394 standard. At the time, Sony was very popular in the "PC" business.
One difference for some of these cases is that the adapter was to allow you to connect an essential component to your Apple device, without which major functionality would be lost. Your example of not including a Thunderbolt-FW is not the same because there really weren't that many people who needed FW connectivity. And even those who had FW devices, in most cases those devices were hard drives which also had USB ports so the impact was minimized.
One could argue that when Apple switched the iPod from FW to USB that they did include an adapter but it was built into the iPod...you could still use an old FW-dock cable/device to charge the iPod which was probably the more important function. It wasn't until later generations of iPods that FW support was dropped completely. So Apple provided a transition period before completely abandoning FW so you didn't instantly lose all of your investment in accessories. (Besides, to the best of my knowledge, there is no such thing as a FW-USB adapter, so Apple couldn't have included one if they wanted to.)
Finally, as far as "Including a 3.5mm adapter would defeat the entire purpose of moving to a digital port"... Consider that the vast majority of headphones people own are analog, including some fairly expensive ones, you aren't "nudging" them to a new port, you are shoving them into having to purchase all new, and likely more expensive, headphones because a digital-only option is completely useless to them without an adapter. Including a 25-cent part in the box to address this is pretty much a no-brainer. Then you drop the adapter from future versions of the iPhone after consumers and headphone manufactures have had time to adapt (no pun intended).