Apple discontinues iPhone Bluetooth Headset

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 75
    nace33nace33 Posts: 94member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NPrtmn4evr View Post


    There will most likely be a new iPhone release in June (not Aug), simply because that's when the first iPhone buyer's two-year contracts are up. These people (who chose not to upgrade to 3G last year), are going to need a newer iPhone than the 3G.



    I don't like this argument, which I have heard Scott Bourne make several times on Macbreak Weekly. Who cares when the contracts are up, you still are going to have to pay to get the new iPhone. People who had the 1st Gen iPhone still got the same deal as new comers when iPhone 3G came out. I just don't see how this"2 year contract is up" thing holds any water in light of this.
  • Reply 22 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    My issue is with people who wear them all the time, throughout the day.



    I think that's the issue everyone has with them. I don't think the critics of headsets here are going after people who use them selectively, particularly those who only use them in the car (though studies have shown there's little safety benefit there, as your brain is distracted the same way you would be if you were holding the phone to your head).



    It sounds like we can all agree that people who wear those things 24/7 are self-important jackasses who, upon meeting them, immediately send the message "you are not as important as the phone call I might get at any second. In fact, you're so unimportant that I can't afford to miss that call at all, and that call is so critical that I'm willing to make myself look like a member of the Borg to make sure I don't miss it."
  • Reply 23 of 75
    I have one and would like to see a thing to go over the top of the ear. I'm always afraid I'm going to loose that thing and not realize it. I would also prefer a soft replaceable ear bud like my old Jabra had.
  • Reply 24 of 75
    With 25 Billion In the bank they should just buy Jawbone, redesign it and rebrand it the iBone and call it a day.
  • Reply 25 of 75
    kbeatkbeat Posts: 47member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tetzel1517 View Post


    I think that's the issue everyone has with them. I don't think the critics of headsets here are going after people who use them selectively, particularly those who only use them in the car (though studies have shown there's little safety benefit there, as your brain is distracted the same way you would be if you were holding the phone to your head).



    It sounds like we can all agree that people who wear those things 24/7 are self-important jackasses who, upon meeting them, immediately send the message "you are not as important as the phone call I might get at any second. In fact, you're so unimportant that I can't afford to miss that call at all, and that call is so critical that I'm willing to make myself look like a member of the Borg to make sure I don't miss it."



    LOL. Yes, I agree with that. I find the headset an absolute must (it's required by law in CA) when I'm driving, or even doing some light work around the office or house, but seeing people sitting at a nice restaurant or worse, a theater, with one on is really, really annoying. That said, I really liked the Apple headset. The range was fine for what I used it for and, as I said, not having to carry an extra charger is really handy.
  • Reply 26 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Maybe Apple realized people look like fools with devices in their ear walking around talking to themselves, trying to look important.



    There was a time not long ago when walking around talking into a cell phone made you look like a self-important fool. Today it's a sight so common that we no longer see it that way.



    Having both hands free is useful, and not only when driving. Unless you spend a lot of time on the phone, there is no need to have the thing in your ear all day. You can just use it when you use it.



    Also, Quadra is right. Radiation from a bluetooth headset is about 2% of what the phone emits. We don't know yet what the long term effects are of this exposure, but lack of knowledge should inspire caution, not carelessness. I'd say a 98% reduction in exposure is a good deal.
  • Reply 27 of 75
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,745member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    There was a time not long ago when walking around talking into a cell phone made you look like a self-important fool. Today it's a sight so common that we no longer see it that way.



    Having both hands free is useful, and not only when driving. Unless you spend a lot of time on the phone, there is no need to have the thing in your ear all day. You can just use it when you use it.



    Also, Quadra is right. Radiation from a bluetooth headset is about 2% of what the phone emits. We don't know yet what the long term effects are of this exposure, but lack of knowledge should inspire caution, not carelessness. I'd say a 98% reduction in exposure is a good deal.



    I don't think the radiation from a BT headset even really registers on most devices designed to measure those levels, if I'm not mistaken. I think the article I posted gives a figure.
  • Reply 28 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Your cell phone is actually not a phone. It's a two-way radio that emits low-powered radiation.



    You're putting that device right against your head. Not a good idea for the long term. And the jury's still out on the exact long-term effects. We're just coming up on the 15-year or so mark where we'll be able to measure incidents of cancer and neurological conditions in relation to using a device placed right to your head that emits radiation. And we're not really talking infinitesimal doses here.



    This debate is now a few years old. And if you don't believe it has relevance, feel free to visit the Faculty of Medicine of any major University. Studies at my alma mater, the University of Toronto (among others) have already concluded that the safest thing to do is to either use the speakerphone, a wired headset, or Bluetooth (which emits radiation that doesn't even register on measuring equipment.)



    I wear a BT earpiece every time I have a cell phone conversation. But I take it off the rest of the time. My issue is with people who wear them all the time, throughout the day. If you get a call, all you have to do is just place it in your ear and take it out after. Nothing difficult about that. But those who are against these devices need to take along hard look at the safety benefits - in terms of driving and in terms of a person's long-term health.



    I may look stupid while wearing one, but my exposure to cell phone radiation (as in, when placed right up to your head) is ZERO. Works for me . . .



    Worth a look:



    http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/31...cer/index.html





    I think having it up to your ear is irrelavent to the radiation damage the radiation is just as strong when the waves ares going in the air to get to your phone. so really i think the point is faulty. every minute of everyday radio waves ares going through you. and if its reported by cnn Im nothing if more scepticle of the whole truth behind this.
  • Reply 29 of 75
    dhkostadhkosta Posts: 150member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Johnny Mozzarella View Post


    With 25 Billion In the bank they should just buy Jawbone, redesign it and rebrand it the iBone and call it a day.



    I love the rebranding suggestion, but Aliph is a privately owned defense contractor. I'm not sure it's for sale.
  • Reply 30 of 75
    parkyparky Posts: 383member
    [QUOTE=lilgto64;1393994]The original iPhone was sold without any contract requirement - of course if you were not already an AT&T customer then you likely got some sort of contract when you switched. [QUOTE]



    You are incorrect. ALL original iPhones sold through AT&T required that the purchaser sign up to a new 24 month contract with them, regardless of if you were an AT&T customer or not.



    Apple and AT&T did NOT sell any phones without contract until very recently.
  • Reply 31 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Maybe Apple realized people look like fools with devices in their ear walking around talking to themselves, trying to look important.



    Ever hear of hands free driving? Typical.....
  • Reply 32 of 75
    ulfoafulfoaf Posts: 175member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Maybe Apple realized people look like fools with devices in their ear walking around talking to themselves, trying to look important.



    "Resistance is futile"

    -Bluetooth Borg



    I agreed with you, until ...



    If you've ever had a phone allowing you to listen to music wirelessly, you won't want anything else. I bought a Sony Bluetooth Adapter & Jabra BT8010 stereo headset for use with my Iphone 3G, and I love it. I guess I'll use the Sony with the old iPod mini when iPhone 3.0 comes out.



    And yes, talking on the wireless headset is easier too, even if you do look like you are self important and talking to yourself ....
  • Reply 33 of 75
    parkyparky Posts: 383member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns View Post


    Ever hear of hands free driving? Typical.....



    The dangerous act of Hands free driving.



    While it may be legal to drive while using a hand free phone it is not safe.



    The argument that it is the same as talking to a passenger has been discounted for a number of reasons.



    A passenger can and does adjust thier conversation with the driver in response to driving and traffic conditions (be it conciously or sub-conciously), afterall they would be affected by the driver being distracted.



    A passenger can mopre readily evaluate the temperament and effect thier conversation is having on the driver i.e are they getting angry, distracted, etc. The passenger can then adjust thier behaviour to minimise the effect on the driver.



    On the other hand the person on the other end of the phone has no such feedback regarding the traffic / driving or mood of the driver, and as such does not change thier behavior to minimise risk in the vehicle. And they are not affected directly by the issues they may be causing in the vehicle. It is all to easy for a conversation on a phone to distract the driver from doing the primary job they should be doing which is driving the vehicle. Arguments, bad news, long discussions which cause the driver to focus on other things than driving can and do cause accidents.



    If you do need to use the phone in the car it should be to answer calls only and then to keep the conversation to the abolute minimum.



    Don't just think about the risk to your life, but the innocents around you.
  • Reply 34 of 75
    cory bauercory bauer Posts: 1,286member
    Maybe they discontinued and recalled remaining stock because for $100, no one ever bought one. Ever. Just like their $100 leather case they had a few years back.
  • Reply 35 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DHKOsta View Post


    I love the rebranding suggestion, but Aliph is a privately owned defense contractor. I'm not sure it's for sale.



    It's just a question of price.
  • Reply 36 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    The dangerous act of Hands free driving.



    While it may be legal to drive while using a hand free phone it is not safe.



    The argument that it is the same as talking to a passenger has been discounted for a number of reasons.



    A passenger can and does adjust thier conversation with the driver in response to driving and traffic conditions (be it conciously or sub-conciously), afterall they would be affected by the driver being distracted.



    A passenger can mopre readily evaluate the temperament and effect thier conversation is having on the driver i.e are they getting angry, distracted, etc. The passenger can then adjust thier behaviour to minimise the effect on the driver.



    On the other hand the person on the other end of the phone has no such feedback regarding the traffic / driving or mood of the driver, and as such does not change thier behavior to minimise risk in the vehicle. And they are not affected directly by the issues they may be causing in the vehicle. It is all to easy for a conversation on a phone to distract the driver from doing the primary job they should be doing which is driving the vehicle. Arguments, bad news, long discussions which cause the driver to focus on other things than driving can and do cause accidents.



    If you do need to use the phone in the car it should be to answer calls only and then to keep the conversation to the abolute minimum.



    Don't just think about the risk to your life, but the innocents around you.



    Agreed. I'd like to add the results of a study performed in France about this:
    • It was found that holding a cellphone while driving increases the risk of accidents by 5.

    • Now the scary finding: it was found that while using a handsfree device such as a bluetooth headset reduced that number, the risk of accident while using a handsfree device is still increased by 3 or 4!!!!!!

    So basically, get off the cellphone. Period
  • Reply 37 of 75
    ivan.rnn01ivan.rnn01 Posts: 1,822member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lordeagle View Post


    Agreed. I'd like to add the results of a study performed in France about this:
    • It was found that holding a cellphone while driving increases the risk of accidents by 5.

    • Now the scary finding: it was found that while using a handsfree device such as a bluetooth headset reduced that number, the risk of accident while using a handsfree device is still increased by 3 or 4!!!!!!

    So basically, get off the cellphone. Period



    True, true. I'm quite sure any cellphone usage in moving car, including hands-free, is now prohibited.
  • Reply 38 of 75
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,949member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    Maybe Apple realized people look like fools with devices in their ear walking around talking to themselves, trying to look important.



    I'm not so ready to jump to conclusions about why someone does something.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lamewing View Post


    I agree. I have spent a decent amount of time in Japan the last two years and NOT ONCE did I see a bluetooth headset for a keitai (cell phone). Texting / email is much more common on phones in Japan, but no matter the reason it is wonderful to see people without those incredibly annoying things stuck in their ears all day long. IMO these things are the height of hubris, unless they are used when driving.



    Isn't fiddling with some gadget in public another form of height of hubris?



    I don't understand why you would be so bothered by the earpieces in other people's ears, it's their ear, not yours. As long as they aren't interfering with you, it seems silly.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mclarenf1 View Post


    Add this to the mix that the headset ROYALLY Sucked!!!! I went through eight replacements and non of them them could keep a connection longer than 5 feet away. I even had one break connection while the phone was in my hand. In every other category the headset was a freakin marvel but it would not stay connected. I have no sympathy that it failed miserably. They should have taken it off the shelves a lot sooner. Currently use the Jawbone 2.0 and it works great. Almost annoyingly so when I am in the bottom of my yard and my headset is upstairs in my office and my audio goes to my headset. Beat that Apple!



    OK, breaking connection really close is unfortunate, but worrying about it at five feet? That seems to be a workable distance. What is your typical use that can benefit from a longer range?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Your cell phone is actually not a phone. It's a two-way radio that emits low-powered radiation.



    You're putting that device right against your head. Not a good idea for the long term. And the jury's still out on the exact long-term effects. We're just coming up on the 15-year or so mark where we'll be able to measure incidents of cancer and neurological conditions in relation to using a device placed right to your head that emits radiation. And we're not really talking infinitesimal doses here.



    The problem is that people get too worked up about it in the absence of shown causality. People got worked up about radio & TV broadcasts, people got worked up about power lines messing up themselves or their livestock, and I don't remember any of that being backed up by anything other than hysteria.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by parky View Post


    The dangerous act of Hands free driving.



    Any form of distraction while driving can be dangerous. There is a distraction when talking to someone else in the car. I think the part that makes cell phones more dangerous is that the person on the other end doesn't get traffic cues that an adult passenger might and hold the chatter when concentration is most important, though children might not notice that.
  • Reply 39 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by talkshowonmute View Post


    I think having it up to your ear is irrelavent to the radiation damage the radiation is just as strong when the waves ares going in the air to get to your phone. so really i think the point is faulty. every minute of everyday radio waves ares going through you. and if its reported by cnn Im nothing if more scepticle of the whole truth behind this.



    Radiation dosage is proportional to the inverse square of distance. If an emitter is twice as far, the power delivered to you is one quarter. If it's 10 times as far, it's 1/100th.



    Radiation going through the air from most sources is thus at very low power levels. A phone right next to your head delivers around one watt to each kilogram of your head (that would be a SAR of 1.0). This is a significant amount of energy with measurable physiological effects on tissue temperature and metabolism.
  • Reply 40 of 75
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    The problem is that people get too worked up about it in the absence of shown causality.



    People also got worked up about smoking: turned out they were right. About the CFC's and the Ozone layer: right again. Lead in gasoline: again. Abestos... I could go on.



    In each case the people who showed early concern were labeled alarmist.



    If you pick and choose your examples you are not going to reach a logical conclusion. The basic principle when you introduce a new chemical to the environment or a new exposure burden to humans should be precautionary.



    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.



    Do you drive into the night with your headlights off? Why not?



    We are driving into the night of chronic microwave exposure. All studies showing no harm are short-term (a decade or less), when we know that cancer is often a 20 to 30 year disease. Some disturbing trends are just now starting to crop up. It's early days, perhaps they are not that significant.



    We don't know, but ignorance is a very poor argument in favor of anything.
Sign In or Register to comment.