Apple unlikely to include Lightning-to-headphone jack converter with 2018 iPhones, analyst...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 56
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.
    Too bad Bluetooth headphones don't sound as good as wired headphones.
    I use Etymotic ER4 on the road and Grados at home and office.

    I never walk around wearing headphones, so wired isn't a problem.

    $10 for an adaptor? Big effin' deal. I bought extras anyway.
  • Reply 22 of 56
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 10,713member
    People complain about too many adapters.
    People complain about not enough adapters.
    People complain.   A lot.
    seanismorrisnetmagellamamacxpresspscooter63StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 56
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member
    It's a digital world. Analog connectors begone already.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 56
    mbenz1962 said:
    My adapter only serves one purpose and that is for Air travel.  I have a pair of BeatsX, but of course they are wireless and have no way to interface with the airplane's entertainment system.  I have an aging pair of Apples In-Ear Headphones that I take on airplanes.  I need the adapter so that I'm not fumbling with one set of headphones (BeatsX) when I'm doing something on my iPhone and another when I'm watching a movie on the seat-back system.  I can easily use the same headphones and just add/remove the adapter as needed.  Other than that, I literally have no use for the adapter and it lives in my travel case that only is packed for trips.
    Delta (and some other airlines) has been improving their in-flight systems to stream most (though not all for some dumb licensing reasons no doubt) of the films/shows to in flight apps.  Eventually streaming will completely replace expensive in-back systems and even this use case will fade away.
    How does the currently bundled adapter help on a plane? The end is a male lightning connector which won’t plug into any flight entertainment system. What you’d need is the opposite of what Apple provides - a female lightning to male 3.5mm headphone jack. I travel a fair bit and in my checking this apparatus doesn’t exist as it would be expensive to create (due to multiple analog/digital/analog conversions as I understand things). Far cheaper to just carry the old 3.5mm EarPods just for the plane. That’s what I do (along with my AirPods). I’d looked at the 12South AirFly but pricing on it is a bit strep in Canada and the reviews haven’t been stellar (unless anyone here has first hand positive experience with it or another brand BT transmitter with 3.5mm jack for use on flights paired to AirPods???)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 56
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    asciinetmagewatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 56
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,581member
    If Apple drops such adapter from iPhone bundle than sell it separate for under $10 and let others allow to make and sell it for under $5. Lightening headphone serves the purpose of wired connection. Hopefully, BT5 adapter will be cheap enough for everyone able to buy.
    edited August 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 56
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,330member
    Rayz2016 said:
    So, a Trillion dollar company won't include the dongle with their newest, most expensive 2018 phones.   I wonder if we will be able to buy it at the Apple store for $39.99?    I see how they have become a trillion dollar company.    Ugh.....it may be time to reevaluate my loyalty to Apple....  
    Wow. You couldn’t even bothered to check the price before creating an account?

    That is some seriously lazy-ass trolling. 

    Hey, at least he stopped at $39.99. I've seen a shitload of Youtube videos by people with a massive subscriber base claiming the dongle is $79.99 to buy. When you have to make shit up to stir up enough outrage towards Apple, you should re-evaluate your life. 
    netmagepscooter63NotsofastStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 56
    Not much more than a month away from the new iPhones and all we know is their sizes? Looks like I won't be upgrading my X this year...there's nothing new so why bother????
  • Reply 29 of 56
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,297member
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    I’m sure Apple has data on this. I hope if they’re removing it from the box it’s because their data shows people weren’t using it and it’s not just to save a few bucks. When people say it’s $9 big deal I find that offensive. Apple’s charging me $1000 for a phone. They can afford to throw in an $9 adapter.
    muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 30 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    mbenz1962 said:
    My adapter only serves one purpose and that is for Air travel.  I have a pair of BeatsX, but of course they are wireless and have no way to interface with the airplane's entertainment system.  I have an aging pair of Apples In-Ear Headphones that I take on airplanes.  I need the adapter so that I'm not fumbling with one set of headphones (BeatsX) when I'm doing something on my iPhone and another when I'm watching a movie on the seat-back system.  I can easily use the same headphones and just add/remove the adapter as needed.  Other than that, I literally have no use for the adapter and it lives in my travel case that only is packed for trips.
    Delta (and some other airlines) has been improving their in-flight systems to stream most (though not all for some dumb licensing reasons no doubt) of the films/shows to in flight apps.  Eventually streaming will completely replace expensive in-back systems and even this use case will fade away.

    I used to do this as well. I use AirPods and Lightning EarPods with my iPhone, but can’t use them with the inflight entertainment systems, as there are no adapters for them. This has been my beef with Apple since they removed the headphone jack. Air travel highlights how Apple did not step up to the plate in these two respects: two people cannot share the same audio signal with BT or Lightning headphones, and Lightning headphones cannot be used with anything else, requiring users to fall back on “old outdated” 3.5mm headphones, often requiring carrying two pairs of headphones to use all equipment desired, including a Mac. Apple has not implemented any low-latency technologies in their BT solutions, ruling out that as a universal method to watch videos on non-Apple equipment.

    i agree that as Airlines increasingly offer individual device streaming, this issue will ultimately go away. I mean, how much does all of those free headphones coast the airlines annually anywa?
    crudman said:
    mbenz1962 said:
    My adapter only serves one purpose and that is for Air travel.  I have a pair of BeatsX, but of course they are wireless and have no way to interface with the airplane's entertainment system.  I have an aging pair of Apples In-Ear Headphones that I take on airplanes.  I need the adapter so that I'm not fumbling with one set of headphones (BeatsX) when I'm doing something on my iPhone and another when I'm watching a movie on the seat-back system.  I can easily use the same headphones and just add/remove the adapter as needed.  Other than that, I literally have no use for the adapter and it lives in my travel case that only is packed for trips.
    Delta (and some other airlines) has been improving their in-flight systems to stream most (though not all for some dumb licensing reasons no doubt) of the films/shows to in flight apps.  Eventually streaming will completely replace expensive in-back systems and even this use case will fade away.
    How does the currently bundled adapter help on a plane? The end is a male lightning connector which won’t plug into any flight entertainment system. What you’d need is the opposite of what Apple provides - a female lightning to male 3.5mm headphone jack. I travel a fair bit and in my checking this apparatus doesn’t exist as it would be expensive to create (due to multiple analog/digital/analog conversions as I understand things). Far cheaper to just carry the old 3.5mm EarPods just for the plane. That’s what I do (along with my AirPods). I’d looked at the 12South AirFly but pricing on it is a bit strep in Canada and the reviews haven’t been stellar (unless anyone here has first hand positive experience with it or another brand BT transmitter with 3.5mm jack for use on flights paired to AirPods???)
    See above clarificarion. I don’t see any reason why a Lightning headphone to 3.5mm adapter can’t exist, Certainly not price alone. It also doesn’t have to be complicated ... Apple could easily design a DAC bypass such that the adapter sends the analogue signal straight to the transducers if they wanted to. It may be cheaper to carry an old pair of EarPods, but not as convenient, and does nothing for someone who has invested in a high quality pair of Lightning headphones. And carrying two such bulky pair of headphones is especially really impractical.

    Add to that, Apple BT headphones can’t be used with BT transmitters with inflight video since Apple doesn’t incorporate any low-latency technology for use with anything other than Apple devices which essentially buffer the audio to account for latency issues and maintain video sync. My solution has been to buy an Aptx LL transmitter, and receiver, which allows me to plug into airline video systems and use any wired headphones I like (including noise cancelling models), while freeing up the seating area from a tangle of wires. If the passenger in the middle seat needs to get out while I’m watching a movie, I don’t have unplug anything. Now all that cost me about $50, and I have to keep two extra devices charged, but the convenience is worth every penny. 
    mbenz1962
  • Reply 31 of 56
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,437member
    So can someone who is paying $800 for a smart phone afford a $10 adapter? Absolutely, but I agree with others and find it a bit galling that after selling a phone for $800 to $1000 with higher profit margins than any other company in the industry, Apple nickels and dimes their customers for a dongle to maintain basic functionality. It's not unlike paying $600 for a hotel room and then getting charged for the newspaper or wifi. 

    As much as people protest, the 3.5mm jack is still an industry standard. Even Apple tacitly admits this by keeping the jack on iPads and MacBooks. I forgot my headphones when flew a few months ago. Delta didn't have any lightning headphones but thankfully I could use the airline headphones in my 6s. On top of that, the airline infotainment system had a 3.5mm jack; there was no bluetooth and there is no lightning to 3.5mm adapter that I'm aware of. 

    If people don't need the adapter, that's fine, but there are plenty that do. I think a better approach would be to offer an adapter for free when you buy your phone. If you need it you can get one. If you don't need it then you don't have another piece of trash laying around.
    tokyojimu
  • Reply 32 of 56
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,190member
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    I’m sure Apple has data on this. I hope if they’re removing it from the box it’s because their data shows people weren’t using it and it’s not just to save a few bucks. When people say it’s $9 big deal I find that offensive. Apple’s charging me $1000 for a phone. They can afford to throw in an $9 adapter.
    I've had my iPhone 8 Plus for almost a year and I don't think I've used mine once. It's still in the box. I had an iPhone 6s before that and I never used the headphone jack either. If I happen to need phones (which is very rare), I just use the lighting ones that came with my phone.

    I suspect some of this is because of the success of AirPods and other popular bluetooth earbuds/headphones. While yes, not everyone has them, like you said, Apple must have data that shows they can pull it off.

    Yes, people are gonna bitch up a storm when it happens and it will be exactly that..."Apple is just nickel and dime'ing everyone". And, I bet 9/10 of those bitching never use the damn thing anyways. 
    edited August 2018 netmagebigbillygoatgruffStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 56
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    I’m sure Apple has data on this. I hope if they’re removing it from the box it’s because their data shows people weren’t using it and it’s not just to save a few bucks. When people say it’s $9 big deal I find that offensive. Apple’s charging me $1000 for a phone. They can afford to throw in an $9 adapter.
    1. It's a few bucks times how ever many millions of units they will sell.  That's a lot of money.
    2. Your threshold for what you find offensive is awfully low.
    3. Do you need it?  Would you use it?  You make it sound like this is an "it's a matter of principle" issue.
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 56
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,190member
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    I’m sure Apple has data on this. I hope if they’re removing it from the box it’s because their data shows people weren’t using it and it’s not just to save a few bucks. When people say it’s $9 big deal I find that offensive. Apple’s charging me $1000 for a phone. They can afford to throw in an $9 adapter.
    1. It's a few bucks times how ever many millions of units they will sell.  That's a lot of money.
    2. Your threshold for what you find offensive is awfully low.
    3. Do you need it?  Would you use it?  You make it sound like this is an "it's a matter of principle" issue.
    1. To put that in perspective, say the adapter cost $9 and Apple sells 50 Million iPhones. Thats $45 Million worth of adapters....per quarter! So $180 Million per year just in that little dongle itself assuming Apple always sells 50 Million iPhones which we all know they sell way more in the holiday quarter. That's not chump change to any company, especially when you add it up over time, and when you have data that shows most don't use it.

    Its also the last straw with cord cutting which I think is the direction Apple is trying to go with its iOS side of things.  Apple has given folks plenty of time to get replacement headphones/earbuds. Its not like they just flat out dropped the headphone jack and said well screw everyone...go out and get new headphones/earbuds now with a single release. Hasn't it been like 2-3yrs now?
    edited August 2018 watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 56
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.
    What a "nice" social post. Well maybe it is not about cost, but bluetooth pushing now is plain wrong for simple reason: tjis standard is still weak and unreliable at best. Also DAC converters are low quality. Enjoy your phone calls if they are not disrupted by other bloototh users (you should know from signal theory that nbandwidth and number of channels is limited so in crowded places like NYC you will get either lower quality sound or disruptions and there is no way to escape this unless increasing frequencies which is not easy from technology perspective). That is also reason why one may consider wired that does not have any of these limitations in crowded areas and it is constant high quality provided DAC is high quality like DragonFly. On the other hand if like garbage music with high loudness and no detail then sure go Blutooth and some cheap stand earphones that look cool.
  • Reply 36 of 56
    mavemufcmavemufc Posts: 326member
    So, a Trillion dollar company won't include the dongle with their newest, most expensive 2018 phones.   I wonder if we will be able to buy it at the Apple store for $39.99?    I see how they have become a trillion dollar company.    Ugh.....it may be time to reevaluate my loyalty to Apple....  
    why would you need one anyway?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 56
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,190member
    mavemufc said:
    So, a Trillion dollar company won't include the dongle with their newest, most expensive 2018 phones.   I wonder if we will be able to buy it at the Apple store for $39.99?    I see how they have become a trillion dollar company.    Ugh.....it may be time to reevaluate my loyalty to Apple....  
    why would you need one anyway?
    Exactly! Unless you have some killer headphones that you refuse to replace that use the headphone jack then you don't need it! 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,032member
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.
    I don't know if they do collect that data, but I know it's possible. They adapter has its own DAC with an ARM chip so they could easily keep diagnostic data every time the adapter is inserted or timestamps it's inserted and removed.

    Personally, I can't use Apple's EarPod-designs, but instead of keeping them in the box since you never need tor return them when using iUP (iPhone Upgrade Program) I keep them in my car and one in my backpack because every now and then, albeit rarely, someone will mention they lost their headphones or they broke theirs yada yada yada. It's more about not liking perfectly good items not going to waste than proactive altruism, TBH.

    I gave AirPods a try because the ergonomics for the outer ear was slightly different from EarPods but they still weren't comfortable so I hope they offer an in-ear AirPods option that doesn't require me to buy Beats with connected ear-pieces. I've been using AfterShokz bone-conducting headphones for about 5 years now and I love them. They're great for jogging and even certain types of work when you still need audible situational awareness.

    I do still have a pair of wired headphones—Apple's in-ear phones. I've had many pairs of these but have only ever paid for them once, even though there were at least 2 generations of this product. Apple had a great—but wasteful!—policy of replacing the entire headphones if even once of the grommets that fit inside your EAM (aka: earhole) were too rip or get lost. They only had 3 different sizes so I don't understand why they didn't just send each store a small container of them.

    I've had several other in-ear phones over the years that inarguably sounded better than Apple's in-ear phones, but in terms of cost-to-sound Apple's product was great, the cord was shorter which meant it got tangled less (I'm above average height), plus they felt very comfortable; but even after all that you can't be the aforementioned service.

    That was a long prologue to say that I put the Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter only wired headphones almost 2 years ago and haven't taken it off since. The snap makes me think Apple make it extra tight so it won't easy fall off and that the Lightning connection will come off before the 3.5mm connect if the wire is pulled.

    I'm sure this isn't as convenient for those that use their wired headphones on their Mac because there's no Lightning port, but I think that's a fringe issue more than anything else. Even now the Apple Watch, which has no ports, is outsell the Mac in units, according to Horace Dediu.



    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.

    I'm with you on removing the PSU, which I think makes two of us.

    I have so many extra 5W PSUs that have never been out of the iPhone box. They make the box later and heavier, which adds cost for shipping and storing, and of course the PSU adds cost, but most important is that they contain materials that aren't good for landfills. It's an all around waste.

    I've been using the 12W(?) iPad PSUs for iPhone charging for years now and I have too many of them, too.

    Now that inductive charging is on the iPhone this may finally be a reality in a few years after all their PSUs move to support USB-C and come with Lightning-to-USB-C cables. The beauty of Qi inductive charging pads is that they will remain in place with each new device and customers aren't likely to expect Apple to include one with every device. 

    Kind of like buying a case, screen protector, or some other accessor with your iPhone I think we will see the PSU become an option item in a few years time. The cable will likely remain as that's cheap and do wear out, unlike PSUs, but I think even that will go away in time.

    The most complex issue may be moving from USB-A to USB-C cables. The solution may be to offer a USB-C(f)-to-USB-A(m) adapter for a few generations (like with the current headphone adapter) once the PSU is removed so that those that still have, say, older Macs or WinPCs can still do wired restores with new devices and still use older PSUs. This will undoubtedly piss off a lot of people.

    I don't foresee a price change, but instead see the savings in the one area get applied to making the device better. I still expect Apple to maintain their margins and everything points to the current iPhone price points being very agreeable to the majority of users as noted by the increased ASP from years past.

  • Reply 39 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,032member
    macxpress said:
    mavemufc said:
    So, a Trillion dollar company won't include the dongle with their newest, most expensive 2018 phones.   I wonder if we will be able to buy it at the Apple store for $39.99?    I see how they have become a trillion dollar company.    Ugh.....it may be time to reevaluate my loyalty to Apple....  
    why would you need one anyway?
    Exactly! Unless you have some killer headphones that you refuse to replace that use the headphone jack then you don't need it! 
    If you really have killer headphones you'd probably want to invest in Creative's upcoming audio adapter for $150. Yes, that Creative. They still exist.

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,032member
    macxpress said:
    Soli said:
    anome said:
    slurpy said:
    I was going to to post a sarcastic "so a trillion dollar company won't include.." meme post, but I see some idiot beat me to it, in a serious fashion. Any rational person knows this has little to do with cost, and everything to do with Apple's minimalism, both in terms of packaging and product use, and drive to push forward bluetooth adoption.

    Who is cheaper, the company that doesn't include a $6 adapter in the box with their $800 phone that the majority of people will never need, or the user that won't spring for the $6 adapter if they need it?

    It's kind of obvious this was going to happen at some point. This year is 2 years since they got rid of the headphone jack, I suspect most people who need an adapter already have one.

    Based on anecdotal evidence AirPods are a fucking major hit, BT headphones in general are popular, and anyone that doesn't have those seems to be using Apple's EarPods which will still likely come with the iPhone for those that are fine with the included wired headphones.

    I'd rather the cost of the increasingly useless adapter be put toward better components in the iPhone itself.
    Is it possible for Apple to collect data and know how often people actually use the adapter?  Those data would almost certainly match the anecdotal evidence about the popularity of BT options.  It would be interesting to know how many of the people who don't already have an adapter (new to the iPhone or upgrading from an older iPhone) would be affected in a tangible way.

    I would like to see them offer an option to buy the phone only--no headphones, no adapter, no charging cable, and no power brick.  It's wasteful.  A whole lot of us have multiples of those things laying around already.  Lower the price by $50 or give an Apple or iTunes gift card in lieu of that stuff.
    I’m sure Apple has data on this. I hope if they’re removing it from the box it’s because their data shows people weren’t using it and it’s not just to save a few bucks. When people say it’s $9 big deal I find that offensive. Apple’s charging me $1000 for a phone. They can afford to throw in an $9 adapter.
    1. It's a few bucks times how ever many millions of units they will sell.  That's a lot of money.
    2. Your threshold for what you find offensive is awfully low.
    3. Do you need it?  Would you use it?  You make it sound like this is an "it's a matter of principle" issue.
    1. To put that in perspective, say the adapter cost $9 and Apple sells 50 Million iPhones. Thats $45 Million worth of adapters....per quarter! So $180 Million per year just in that little dongle itself assuming Apple always sells 50 Million iPhones which we all know they sell way more in the holiday quarter. That's not chump change to any company, especially when you add it up over time, and when you have data that shows most don't use it.

    Its also the last straw with cord cutting which I think is the direction Apple is trying to go with its iOS side of things.  Apple has given folks plenty of time to get replacement headphones/earbuds. Its not like they just flat out dropped the headphone jack and said well screw everyone...go out and get new headphones/earbuds now with a single release. Hasn't it been like 2-3yrs now?
    I agree with your assessment from Apple perspective and your math is correct, but you should account for a reasonable potential market.

    With people that already have adapters from previous iPhone since the removal of the 3.5mm jack, buyers of headphones with Lightning adapters (MFi), those willing to use the included EarPods, and those that are using BT headphones I think we're done to just a few million adapters.

    This, however, is surely a larger market than they currently have for aftermarket adapter sales which means it could allow the price to be lower due to economies of scale, but then we also need to consider that since they're currently including it with most iPhones being sold the cost of the adapter is being folded into each iPhone sale which also adds to economies of scale which could mean a rise in price after it's removed from each iPhone box in order to maintain the same profit margin even if unit sales increase for the adapter.

    Surely none of us here have any info on this to say what it will be one way or the other, but my best guess is that Apple will keep the price at $9 regardless of how the chips fall on this adapter. There will already be a backlash once they remove it.
    watto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.