New photos show possible Lightning-equipped EarPods for Apple's 'iPhone 7'

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 48
    slprescottslprescott Posts: 763member
    I'm ready to move on.  We moved past the 5.25" disk, the 3.5" disk, the CD-ROM drive, the CRT... and we'll move past the 3.5mm earphone jack.  Last year I switched to BT earbuds (Jaybird) and have been extremely happy.  If eliminating the 3.5mm jack creates space in the iPhone chassis for something of higher value (more battery, better speakers, etc.), I consider that a net gain.
    xmhillxpatchythepirateTurboPGT
  • Reply 22 of 48
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,277member
    I don't understand why Apple would remove the 3.5mm headphone jack. I like to charge my iPhone while it's plugged into my Marshall Stanmore speaker. I know I could connect via Bluetooth, but I don't want to listen to degraded sound quality. There is no question Bluetooth quality has improved drastically, but it's still inferior to wired sound. 
    aylk
  • Reply 23 of 48
    xmhillxxmhillx Posts: 112member
    mackymoto said:
    Would this mean that you can't charge the phone AND have ear/head phones plugged in at the same time? When is Apple going to stop restricting usefulness for the sake of one less millimeter in thinness? The phone is thin enough. I don't hear ANYONE saying I'm not going to buy the phone because it's too darn thick. UGH!!
    That's a good point.

    We'll have to see what actually happens.
    But a possible solution to that predicament is wireless charging from a distance. Where your devices are constantly charging within 15 feet or whatever from a dock.
    Or Bluetooth earphones.
    I understand the drawback for Bluetooth is having to "constantly" recharge them. That's true. Battery life gets longer and longer, so that's a consolation although eventually you still need to recharge. But it wouldn't be so bad with wireless charging from a distance.
    I'm imagining Apple is heading that way now, so that when wireless charging from a distance comes out (in a couple years?), they'd be more suited for the change.
  • Reply 24 of 48
    gunner1954gunner1954 Posts: 142member
    TurboPGT said:
    Apparently the new tip hovers in mid air too.
    Looks like the earbuds, including tip, are sitting on a glass surface as evidence by the reflections and the 'depth' of the wood beneath, thus resulting in the appearance of the tip hovering in air. Also appears that someone took off the white outer shell of the tip to get at the circuitry.
  • Reply 25 of 48
    aylkaylk Posts: 54member
    Looking forward to the future when instead of all wired headphones having the same standardized jack that works in all audio devices, we now have segregated wired headphones that have different connectors that only work in their respective ecosystems /s
    I think the future you want is coming, but it won't be wired at all - it's going to be wireless.  Frankly, the fact that we're not already there yet is surprising, especially considering how many wireless speakers are on the market.  It's like manufacturers just dropped the ball on pushing through problems (battery life, size, connectivity, price and sound quality) with but a handful of options to really chose from in BT headphones.
    Oh BT wireless! So many advantages compared to the analog jack! Everything we've always wanted! Lower quality Bluetooth sound, the super convenient process of pairing and unpairing when moving from phone to computer to car, another device to charge, plus more batteries to dump on landfills! Can't wait!
  • Reply 26 of 48
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    mackymoto said:
    Would this mean that you can't charge the phone AND have ear/head phones plugged in at the same time? When is Apple going to stop restricting usefulness for the sake of one less millimeter in thinness? The phone is thin enough. I don't hear ANYONE saying I'm not going to buy the phone because it's too darn thick. UGH!!
    This has nothing at all to do with thinnness. Please take a look at the iPod touch for confirmation. 
  • Reply 27 of 48
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    I don't understand why Apple would remove the 3.5mm headphone jack. I like to charge my iPhone while it's plugged into my Marshall Stanmore speaker. I know I could connect via Bluetooth, but I don't want to listen to degraded sound quality. There is no question Bluetooth quality has improved drastically, but it's still inferior to wired sound. 
    I agree 100%.  I don't like the move either.  I keep think there must be some aspect to this change we don't know yet.
    aylk
  • Reply 28 of 48
    jmgregory1jmgregory1 Posts: 471member
    aylk said:
    I think the future you want is coming, but it won't be wired at all - it's going to be wireless.  Frankly, the fact that we're not already there yet is surprising, especially considering how many wireless speakers are on the market.  It's like manufacturers just dropped the ball on pushing through problems (battery life, size, connectivity, price and sound quality) with but a handful of options to really chose from in BT headphones.
    Oh BT wireless! So many advantages compared to the analog jack! Everything we've always wanted! Lower quality Bluetooth sound, the super convenient process of pairing and unpairing when moving from phone to computer to car, another device to charge, plus more batteries to dump on landfills! Can't wait!
    I didn't say BT, but wireless. And there are great BT out there now with AptX codec. To think that wired will live on indefinitely is foolish at best. Wireless is the future, and things like the new BT5 standard will drive further adoption as performance increases and many of the current issues are addressed. 
    edited June 2016
  • Reply 29 of 48
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    ireland said:
    I think the future you want is coming, but it won't be wired at all - it's going to be wireless.  Frankly, the fact that we're not already there yet is surprising, especially considering how many wireless speakers are on the market.
    I love wired headphones as they never require charging, can never run out of a charge and to a certain quality of manufacturing standard they will be better value at checkout. You'd be surprised the % of folks who like wired headphones for these reasons.
    Or you can buy a pair of BT headphones with an optional cable and plug into a Lightning port or 3.5mm jack anytime they run low on power.

    mackymoto said:
    Would this mean that you can't charge the phone AND have ear/head phones plugged in at the same time? 
    Seriously!? Do you really think Apple didn't think of this, or thought of this and did it anyway? 
  • Reply 30 of 48
    So They are keeping the Horrible Design of the headphones that fall
    out of your ears ??? 
    Nobodys making good decisions over there anymore ....
    Oh I guess they will fix that in 2018 

  • Reply 31 of 48
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,291member
    apple ][ said:
    Frankly, the fact that we're not already there yet is surprising, especially considering how many wireless speakers are on the market.  
    It's not surprising to me, because the majority of wireless is still inferior to wired.

    Wireless is obviously more convenient, since there are no wires, but wireless still has one big issue, and that is latency. High latency is pure crap and absolutely terrible. I'll choose wired over wireless any day, if the wireless has latency. :#

    Agree:


    As for the latest tech for bluetooth audio:
    http://www.aptx.com/howitworks2
    aptX® has revolutionised the Bluetooth® Stereo listening experience by significantly reducing the bit rate without affecting audio quality or introducing latency issues.
  • Reply 32 of 48
    apple ][ said:
    I don't buy the "higher quality sound" argument.

    Those Apple earbuds are not exactly super expensive, high quality earphones to begin with. Lightning connector or not will have virtually no impact on the sound quality.

    And people won't be able to charge their devices while using headphones now? That seems kind of stupid.

    Maybe the next iPhone supports wireless/ contactless charging!
  • Reply 33 of 48
    bonobobbonobob Posts: 309member
    xmhillx said:

    But a possible solution to that predicament is wireless charging from a distance. Where your devices are constantly charging within 15 feet or whatever from a dock.
    If Apple managed to design a wireless charger that would work from 15 feet, you would be extremely unhappy with your monthly electric bill.
  • Reply 34 of 48
    chazbcnchazbcn Posts: 26member
    My main concern is: how are we going to charge the iPhone while using lighting earbuds? I'm curious about how Apple will solve that in case they're effectively removing the standard headphone jack. Otherwise, I don't have a problem with it.
  • Reply 35 of 48
    palegolaspalegolas Posts: 1,330member
    anome said:

    The connector looks completely different to the connector on the Apple Lightning cable, or the audio jack on the Apple Ear Pods for that matter. Doesn't necessarily mean it isn't genuine, but it's lacking key elements of Apple's current cable design.

    I don't know if Apple's planning to ditch the 3.5mm jack, it's not implausible, but I don't think this specific unit is something they would ship.

    Yeah, my first thought was that it looks too big and somewhat off ballance in terms of design. But I think one has to expect a size increase, due to more technology being packed into it. I mean, there's gotta be like a little audio interface in there, basically. and since it's gonna be in a lot of pockets around the world, rounded edges sort of makes sense too. The clean cut hard edges on Apple's current connectors are not that pocket friendly, imo.
    The lack of charge-while-listening is unfortunate though.. For this to work they'd have to make dual lightning connector.. or wireless charging.

    In the long run I think they're betting on Bluetooth though, lightning accessories being the solution for compatibility with wired headphones. I have no idea if most people are actually already using wireless headphones over wired headphones. That might very well be the case.
  • Reply 36 of 48
    wonder how good this would sound seeing as the port only carriers a digital signal. that mean they would have to include a D/A converter in the casing. smallest chips i see is still fairly big and limited at 20bits.
    aylk
  • Reply 37 of 48
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    apple ][ said:
    I don't buy the "higher quality sound" argument.

    Its not something for you to buy or not buy. Facts are facts.
    edited June 2016
  • Reply 38 of 48
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    I don't understand why Apple would remove the 3.5mm headphone jack. I like to charge my iPhone while it's plugged into my Marshall Stanmore speaker. I know I could connect via Bluetooth, but I don't want to listen to degraded sound quality. There is no question Bluetooth quality has improved drastically, but it's still inferior to wired sound. 
    So get a speaker that doesn't require you to plug in 2 separate things.

    In fact, these types of speakers with lighting audio/charging have existed for a long time now. Whatever you're using is dated.
  • Reply 39 of 48
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member

    chazbcn said:
    My main concern is: how are we going to charge the iPhone while using lighting earbuds?
    You won't.
    And no one will care.

    Do I really need to mockup an image of a person with their head tethered to the wall to illustrate how completely ridiculous the idea is?
  • Reply 40 of 48
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member



    Pardon me while I don't give shit about Apple "doing anything about this".
    xmhillxredefiler
Sign In or Register to comment.