Fascinating. So we're really going to have earphones that can only be used on iOS devices, not Macbooks.
Are we going to see lightning ports on Macbooks now?
Why does that even matter?
I can't stand when people just assume that because 1 thing has always been possible, that this one thing needs to be maintained for eternity.
How much do you really think Apple cares about the ear buds that ship with iPhone being used on Macs? Enough to make an adapter. That's it. In the next year Apple will ship 200 million sets of Lightning EarPods with iPhone, and about 16 million Macs. Not even remotely on the same planet.
For me the point is that we had a standard with rather good quality, specs, size, etc and what's the deal for changing it? Water resistant, really? Thickness, really? (With the horrible camera hump)
I think it is all about making more money. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple have a new wireless audio streaming protocol that will be lossless, which they will do the usual spin with on why it's better than lossy Bluetooth. Then they won't have to pay aptX to use their lossless BT codec. That way they will get royalties from every headphone manufacturer who want to make a lightning compatible wired headphone and from those that want to make wireless earbuds and headphones that use the new protocol - ka-ching. They will also sell the 3.5mm adapter for everyone else who want's to use anything legacy - ka-ching.
This is the Gionee Eliife S5.1. It is 5.2mm thick - 1.9mm thinner than an 6S. It still manages to have a 3.5mm headphone jack. It came out in 2014.
I don't think phones need to be even this thin. There would have to be structural strength issues and I would suspect such phones probably have to rely on the inherent strength of the screen glass.
So it's quite clear the 3.5mm jack is not an impediment to making a phone thin. Oppo make an even thinner phone, the R5, which doesn't have a 3.5mm jack and comes with a micro USB dongle, much like Apple's equally inelegant 'solution'.
Phone manufacturers keep doing this thin thing but in a survey of phone users the most important feature is battery life.
You are missing the forest for the trees. It has nothing to do with the 3.5mm opening on the edge of the device, and everything to do with 150x that the volume the internal hardware consumes.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
Fascinating. So we're really going to have earphones that can only be used on iOS devices, not Macbooks.
Are we going to see lightning ports on Macbooks now?
Most likely, yes. There are many reasons this makes sense, but only one matters here. Apple is trying to build an ecosystem of hardware and software that works together. No matter how few Macs they may sell compared to the iPhone, they are not going to sell a customer a new iPhone, with a new set of expensive Beats Lightning connected headphones, and a new MacBook that requires an adapter to use those new headphones, just to switch back and forth between them. It's going to be hard enough to explain there's no headphone jack requiring those new Lightning or wireless headphones in the first place, now they need an adapter too?
Whatever new wireless audio upgrades Apple introduces to make wireless headphones of equal quality to the wired ones they are replacing, there's one thing they probably won't significantly improve and that's battery life or the need to recharge them. In which case, all wireless headphones will have an optional cable to connect when the battery runs out. And that cable will be Lightning with an iPhone. So even if a customer buys a set of Beats wireless headphones with their new iPhone and Mac, at some point they're probably going to plug them in using a cable. That's already bad enough as an admission that wireless isn't as good as wired, but to add insult to injury, they'll have to have a separate cable or an adapter if they want to use it on their new Mac too.
I think it is all about making more money. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple have a new wireless audio streaming protocol that will be lossless, which they will do the usual spin with on why it's better than lossy Bluetooth. Then they won't have to pay aptX to use their lossless BT codec. That way they will get royalties from every headphone manufacturer who want to make a lightning compatible wired headphone and from those that want to make wireless earbuds and headphones that use the new protocol - ka-ching. They will also sell the 3.5mm adapter for everyone else who want's to use anything legacy - ka-ching.
This is the Gionee Eliife S5.1. It is 5.2mm thick - 1.9mm thinner than an 6S. It still manages to have a 3.5mm headphone jack. It came out in 2014.
I don't think phones need to be even this thin. There would have to be structural strength issues and I would suspect such phones probably have to rely on the inherent strength of the screen glass.
So it's quite clear the 3.5mm jack is not an impediment to making a phone thin. Oppo make an even thinner phone, the R5, which doesn't have a 3.5mm jack and comes with a micro USB dongle, much like Apple's equally inelegant 'solution'.
Phone manufacturers keep doing this thin thing but in a survey of phone users the most important feature is battery life.
You are missing the forest for the trees. It has nothing to do with the 3.5mm opening on the edge of the device, and everything to do with 150x that the volume the internal hardware consumes.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
You have mentioned the volume thing at least three times previously that I can recall. The volume the socket takes up works out at being a fraction of a percent of the overall volume (0.28% of the volume of a 6S), which is negligible and inconsequential. There is no point making a flagship phone thinner unless you can get a leading edge camera module that is equally thin - which you can't without employing folded optics and such which have not appeared in phones yet, that I am aware of. Samsung realised this and made the S7 thicker than the S6, pretty much eliminating the camera bulge the S6 had and they but in a much higher capacity battery. Have you noticed an outpouring of criticism of the the S7 because they made it thicker and with a massive increase in battery life, particularly in the case of the Edge version?
Maybe, but let's remember that Apple needs to move the DAC and amp onto the cable, or get real clever with a special chip to keep it inside the iPhone but allow it to dynamically switch from analog to digital signaling depending on what Lightning cable is connected. I'm wishing for the latter, but the former is by far the most likely. As for the styling, for cheap, included EarPods, that seems just fine to me.
Audeze has a nice Lightning cable for their headphones, and they placed everything (DAC/AMP/DSP) inside the portion of the cable that has the buttons. Since it's already there, and taking up space, it makes sense to put the extras there as well, instead of inside the connector at the iPhone.
It's certainly technically possible, as noted by the Audeze's EL-8 Titanium headphones, but there are a a great number of reasons why this isn't feasible for the cheap, included headphones with a 2016 smartphone.
If you compare the cable width for the EL-8's flat cable to their in-line controls, and then consider this for Apple's included EarPods, I'm not sure that's a good idea just based on the size alone. Then consider the cost of $800 to a retail cost of $30. Let's even bump that up to $50 for the new Lightning EarPods and account for nice reduction in cost due to economics of scale, I just don't see Apple being able to best Audeze for the size of the in-line controller. On top of that, the Lightning connector for the EL-8 is pretty big, that could just be for durability, something which Apple certainly doesn't seem to make a priority with what I consider throwaway headphones.
Er, there's this little technology called Bluetooth that makes these earbuds obsolete, not to mention this little thing called airplanes which requires a mini RCA jack to access inflight entertainment. This isn't well thought through, at all, which is what I've come to expect from Tim Cook's Apple.
Er, there's this little technology called Bluetooth that makes these earbuds obsolete, not to mention this little thing called airplanes which requires a mini RCA jack to access inflight entertainment. This isn't well thought through, at all, which is what I've come to expect from Tim Cook's Apple.
1) Why are wired headphones obsolete because BT exists? We can say they are obsoleting, but the most recent data has them at only 17% of all headphone sales (and I'm not sure that includes bundled headphones, which are still wired for the majority of bundles for many, many years to comes even after it becomes prudent for Apple to include BT headphones with each iPhone sale).
2) I'm pretty sure you're much more likely to see the 2-prong headphone jack on a commercial flight, than a standalone 1/8th inch 3-conductor (left audio, right audio, and ground) jack.
Er, there's this little technology called Bluetooth that makes these earbuds obsolete, not to mention this little thing called airplanes which requires a mini RCA jack to access inflight entertainment. This isn't well thought through, at all, which is what I've come to expect from Tim Cook's Apple.
This could be a "bet the company" decision. If the iPhone7 is a hit then Apple will reap big rewards from licensing lightning connectors to ear phone makers. If consumers are turned off by the lack of the 3.5 plug, Apple could see Samsung and other manufacturers reap the reward.
For now I'll only upgrade to the SE and think that many people will make the SE Apple's biggest volume seller this year.
You are missing the forest for the trees. It has nothing to do with the 3.5mm opening on the edge of the device, and everything to do with 150x that the volume the internal hardware consumes.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
You have mentioned the volume thing at least three times previously that I can recall. The volume the socket takes up works out at being a fraction of a percent of the overall volume (0.28% of the volume of a 6S), which is negligible and inconsequential. There is no point making a flagship phone thinner unless you can get a leading edge camera module that is equally thin - which you can't without employing folded optics and such which have not appeared in phones yet, that I am aware of. Samsung realised this and made the S7 thicker than the S6, pretty much eliminating the camera bulge the S6 had and they but in a much higher capacity battery. Have you noticed an outpouring of criticism of the the S7 because they made it thicker and with a massive increase in battery life, particularly in the case of the Edge version?
as has been said so many times that I can't believe you're unaware of it and are instead trolling as usual -- it's obviously not about the thinness since the iPod touch is thinner with the jack, but about the internal volume. the jack is one of the larger components, it's not insignificant.
Er, there's this little technology called Bluetooth that makes these earbuds obsolete, not to mention this little thing called airplanes which requires a mini RCA jack to access inflight entertainment. This isn't well thought through, at all, which is what I've come to expect from Tim Cook's Apple.
utter nonsense. in flight entertainment ports is the feeaking last of anyone's priorities, including the airlines. get an adapter or use the freebies on the plane. also, it's not a mini RCA jack. mini phono.
tim cooks Apple is doing better than Jobs' by every quantifiable metric. the critical whining had remained constant, however.
You are missing the forest for the trees. It has nothing to do with the 3.5mm opening on the edge of the device, and everything to do with 150x that the volume the internal hardware consumes.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
You have mentioned the volume thing at least three times previously that I can recall. The volume the socket takes up works out at being a fraction of a percent of the overall volume (0.28% of the volume of a 6S), which is negligible and inconsequential. There is no point making a flagship phone thinner unless you can get a leading edge camera module that is equally thin - which you can't without employing folded optics and such which have not appeared in phones yet, that I am aware of. Samsung realised this and made the S7 thicker than the S6, pretty much eliminating the camera bulge the S6 had and they but in a much higher capacity battery. Have you noticed an outpouring of criticism of the the S7 because they made it thicker and with a massive increase in battery life, particularly in the case of the Edge version?
Maybe so and maybe there isn't much volume to be saved but look at the tear down of the 6S. There is a gap of about 2mm between the Lightening connector and the taptic engine because of the headphone connector. The battery could be 2mm longer if the headphone connector wasn't there.
With it gone they could also use taptic engine/ speaker like in the watch and use the space the speaker now uses to bring the motherboard lower in the device and make more room at the top for camera or speakers.
Fuck 52 year old standards that hold progress back.
Do you also support the EU’s bullshit law forcing all phones to use MicroUSB? Now that USB-C exists, an entirely new law will have to be written or no one will be able to update their phones. Or we could just not HAVE such a law entirely and let technological progress dictate use.
You have mentioned the volume thing at least three times previously that I can recall. The volume the socket takes up works out at being a fraction of a percent of the overall volume (0.28% of the volume of a 6S), which is negligible and inconsequential. There is no point making a flagship phone thinner unless you can get a leading edge camera module that is equally thin - which you can't without employing folded optics and such which have not appeared in phones yet, that I am aware of. Samsung realised this and made the S7 thicker than the S6, pretty much eliminating the camera bulge the S6 had and they but in a much higher capacity battery. Have you noticed an outpouring of criticism of the the S7 because they made it thicker and with a massive increase in battery life, particularly in the case of the Edge version?
Maybe so and maybe there isn't much volume to be saved but look at the tear down of the 6S. There is a gap of about 2mm between the Lightening connector and the taptic engine because of the headphone connector. The battery could be 2mm longer if the headphone connector wasn't there.
With it gone they could also use taptic engine/ speaker like in the watch and use the space the speaker now uses to bring the motherboard lower in the device and make more room at the top for camera or speakers.
This image I quickly clipped and threw some line on seems to fit your argument.
I don't see the Lightning connector getting any more stubby considering it'll likely be supporting USB 3.0 and will then need to have internal pins on both sides of the connector, like in the larger of the iPad Pros. This may be why there are now rumours for an unmoving, touch-sensitive Home Button with haptic feedback, and why it feels like they've been holding off including USB 3.0 and the double-pin-out in their iPhones.
If Apple is going through all this trouble to sell people on better DACs they better actually release lossless audio with Apple Music.
And honestly, if we're being honest, Apple already has a GREAT DAC built into the iPhone. One of the best for a mobile device actually, and probably better than most computers too. I'm not seeing how you improve audio by leaving the construction of DACs to the headphone manufacturer. I'm sure the lightning earpods will have a good setup, but earpods are well...earpods. All Apple has done here is add complexity to their device, and that's not consumer friendly.
I agree with you on the lossless audio, it's long overdue on Apple products. And from what I've read the DACs in current iPhones are capable of lossless up to 24bit 48/96 kHz, but that capability is crippled by Apple's current software setup.
If Apple is going through all this trouble to sell people on better DACs they better actually release lossless audio with Apple Music.
And honestly, if we're being honest, Apple already has a GREAT DAC built into the iPhone. One of the best for a mobile device actually, and probably better than most computers too. I'm not seeing how you improve audio by leaving the construction of DACs to the headphone manufacturer. I'm sure the lightning earpods will have a good setup, but earpods are well...earpods. All Apple has done here is add complexity to their device, and that's not consumer friendly.
I agree with you on the lossless audio, it's long overdue on Apple products. And from what I've read the DACs in current iPhones are capable of lossless up to 24bit 48/96 kHz, but that capability is crippled by Apple's current software setup.
Rip your CD's in Apple lossless and the existing DACs will be healed. You won't hear a difference, though.
You have mentioned the volume thing at least three times previously that I can recall. The volume the socket takes up works out at being a fraction of a percent of the overall volume (0.28% of the volume of a 6S), which is negligible and inconsequential. There is no point making a flagship phone thinner unless you can get a leading edge camera module that is equally thin - which you can't without employing folded optics and such which have not appeared in phones yet, that I am aware of. Samsung realised this and made the S7 thicker than the S6, pretty much eliminating the camera bulge the S6 had and they but in a much higher capacity battery. Have you noticed an outpouring of criticism of the the S7 because they made it thicker and with a massive increase in battery life, particularly in the case of the Edge version?
as has been said so many times that I can't believe you're unaware of it and are instead trolling as usual -- it's obviously not about the thinness since the iPod touch is thinner with the jack, but about the internal volume. the jack is one of the larger components, it's not insignificant.
If they move the DAC to headphone: Which DAC will be used by the speaker? And iPhone will no longer be an iPod cause it cant play sound without earphones with DAC
Comments
Why does that even matter?
I can't stand when people just assume that because 1 thing has always been possible, that this one thing needs to be maintained for eternity.
How much do you really think Apple cares about the ear buds that ship with iPhone being used on Macs? Enough to make an adapter. That's it.
In the next year Apple will ship 200 million sets of Lightning EarPods with iPhone, and about 16 million Macs. Not even remotely on the same planet.
By the way, are you saying that Elife otherwise competes with the flagship iPhone with 1:1 parity in performance, hardware and function? If so, you should dump your Apple stock and invest in them, because according to you Apple is removing the 3.5mm Jack that is so widely used worldwide, in order to gouge its customers, so it would be hard to imagine anyone staying with Apple when they can get everything the Apple flagship offers, Even thinner, and with a headphone jack.
Whatever new wireless audio upgrades Apple introduces to make wireless headphones of equal quality to the wired ones they are replacing, there's one thing they probably won't significantly improve and that's battery life or the need to recharge them. In which case, all wireless headphones will have an optional cable to connect when the battery runs out. And that cable will be Lightning with an iPhone. So even if a customer buys a set of Beats wireless headphones with their new iPhone and Mac, at some point they're probably going to plug them in using a cable. That's already bad enough as an admission that wireless isn't as good as wired, but to add insult to injury, they'll have to have a separate cable or an adapter if they want to use it on their new Mac too.
If you compare the cable width for the EL-8's flat cable to their in-line controls, and then consider this for Apple's included EarPods, I'm not sure that's a good idea just based on the size alone. Then consider the cost of $800 to a retail cost of $30. Let's even bump that up to $50 for the new Lightning EarPods and account for nice reduction in cost due to economics of scale, I just don't see Apple being able to best Audeze for the size of the in-line controller. On top of that, the Lightning connector for the EL-8 is pretty big, that could just be for durability, something which Apple certainly doesn't seem to make a priority with what I consider throwaway headphones.
2) I'm pretty sure you're much more likely to see the 2-prong headphone jack on a commercial flight, than a standalone 1/8th inch 3-conductor (left audio, right audio, and ground) jack.
If consumers are turned off by the lack of the 3.5 plug, Apple could see Samsung and other manufacturers reap the reward.
For now I'll only upgrade to the SE and think that many people will make the SE Apple's biggest volume seller this year.
tim cooks Apple is doing better than Jobs' by every quantifiable metric. the critical whining had remained constant, however.
get real.
With it gone they could also use taptic engine/ speaker like in the watch and use the space the speaker now uses to bring the motherboard lower in the device and make more room at the top for camera or speakers.
I don't see the Lightning connector getting any more stubby considering it'll likely be supporting USB 3.0 and will then need to have internal pins on both sides of the connector, like in the larger of the iPad Pros. This may be why there are now rumours for an unmoving, touch-sensitive Home Button with haptic feedback, and why it feels like they've been holding off including USB 3.0 and the double-pin-out in their iPhones.