So, what's the consensus, here? I think that the transition to wireless is the way to go, but if they sell lightning headphones they must include a lightning port on Macs as well.
Lightning on PCs is not required, as long as Apple adds a lighting to jack adapter to the iPhone Box – which they most likely would do, so people can use lighting headphones on their PCs as well.
Do you honestly think that that approach is even remotely acceptable? More adapters? That's not ok for the average human, at all.
Apple Lightning EarPods (included) Apple Lightning-to-3.5mm Adapter ($19) Apple Bluetooth AirPods ($79)
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
I'm pretty sure you're misreading "people".
What "people" are going to do is use whatever comes with the iPhone, and not miss a beat.
What some people will do, is buy Apple's or any of a thousand other Bluetooth options, if they haven't already.
What hardly anybody will do, is spend the rest of eternity using adapters for their sad headphone collection.
So, what's the consensus, here? I think that the transition to wireless is the way to go, but if they sell lightning headphones they must include a lightning port on Macs as well.
Lightning on PCs is not required, as long as Apple adds a lighting to jack adapter to the iPhone Box – which they most likely would do, so people can use lighting headphones on their PCs as well.
They are not going to include the adapter. It will be an optional purchase. Quite frankly, not everyone needs the adapter...quite frankly, most do not need the adapter. The phone will ship with Lightning EarPods.
Apple isn't going to giveaway an expensive adapter that most recipients simply do not need. You way overestimate how Apple cares about whether or not you can use their Made-Specifically-For-iPhone EarPods, with PCs. Or even Macs.
It's not even debatable. Just run the numbers. How many iPhone 7 will ship? How many of those people even own a Mac? 5%? 10%? They're gonna give away hundreds of millions of adapters to people without Macs? Possibly without PC's at all? If you think so, you simply don't know Apple...or you don't know how to separate your needs from the rest of the world.
Typical Apple. Removing ports and adding adapters. When Apple decided to remove optical drives that at least made sense. The removal of optical drives made room to do one of two things make a device considerably thinner or add space for a larger battery. Any benefit of removing a 3.5mm jack is negated by having to use an adapter.
90% only use Apple earbuds anyways, don't need a 3.5 mm jack --- piss on the other 10%(and all there existing hardware and plus the can buy the special adapter for $$)
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
If you don't like the inconveniences of an all-electric high-technology Tesla...then consider a 2015 Hybrid. If you don't like the inconveniences of a glass-surface stove top...then consider a gas range.
If you don't like the inconveniences of the iPhone 7...then consider the iPhone 6S, 5SE or iPhone 6SE (?).
...because that's what people with brain cells (and other priorities in life) do.
Or you can continue complaining about something that really isn't worth complaining about. ...your choice.
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
Exactly! Can you blamer them/us?
What practical advantage would a regular user get from the transition? Nothing, just more upsell.
You guys are in good company. Congratulations, rogifan_new.
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
Exactly! Can you blamer them/us?
What practical advantage would a regular user get from the transition? Nothing, just more upsell.
I can't think of any if Apple just takes the existing EarPods and makes them lightning. If they're pushing wireless then put wireless buds in the box. User experience is more important than those precious margins. It's not like Apple is struggling to make profits and they're swimming in cash.
Lightning on PCs is not required, as long as Apple adds a lighting to jack adapter to the iPhone Box – which they most likely would do, so people can use lighting headphones on their PCs as well.
Do you honestly think that that approach is even remotely acceptable? More adapters? That's not ok for the average human, at all.
Apparently for some people adapters are just fine and if it means Apple can squeeze another $20-$40 out of customers even better because hey that just means more profits for Apple.
90% only use Apple earbuds anyways, don't need a 3.5 mm jack --- piss on the other 10%(and all there existing hardware and plus the can buy the special adapter for $$)
If you don't like the inconveniences of an all-electric high-technology Tesla...then consider a 2015 Hybrid. If you don't like the inconveniences of a glass-surface stove top...then consider a gas range.
If you don't like the inconveniences of the iPhone 7...then consider the iPhone 6S, 5SE or iPhone 6SE (?).
...because that's what people with brain cells (and other priorities in life) do.
Or you can continue complaining about something that really isn't worth complaining about. ...your choice.
And if Apple reports a drop in sales because people don't want inconvenience they want superior user experience you'll say? If Apple wants to push wireless then put wireless headphones in the box. Don't replace something ubiquitous with something proprietary.
Apple Lightning EarPods (included) Apple Lightning-to-3.5mm Adapter ($19) Apple Bluetooth AirPods ($79)
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
no they wont, because that doesnt make any damned sense -- they could up-sell you on wireless buds today. better than the crap in the box, right? except people dont care, because most people just use whats in the box. it will continue to be the same.
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
Exactly! Can you blamer them/us?
What practical advantage would a regular user get from the transition? Nothing, just more upsell.
you dont know that. none of us do -- until apple announces what the advantages are. until then, youre just frothing at the mouth based on ignorance.
Typical Apple. Removing ports and adding adapters. When Apple decided to remove optical drives that at least made sense. The removal of optical drives made room to do one of two things make a device considerably thinner or add space for a larger battery. Any benefit of removing a 3.5mm jack is negated by having to use an adapter.
no it isnt. i dont have any plans to use an adapter whatsoever. none. thus, ill reap only the benefits of the change, whatever they may be.
What practical advantage would a regular user get from the transition? Nothing, just more upsell.
I can't think of any if Apple just takes the existing EarPods and makes them lightning. If they're pushing wireless then put wireless buds in the box. User experience is more important than those precious margins. It's not like Apple is struggling to make profits and they're swimming in cash.
you still dont get it. it almost certainly has little to nothing to do w/ lighting or wireless headphones, and almost certainly to do w/ what more they can accomplish in the very close confines of the iphone. whether that be new bi-directional communication w/ headphone accessories, added space for components, waterproofing (and not like the fake, failed waterproofing by Samsung which surprise, isnt waterproof), etc...
its not about selling you some damn headphones. jesus. wake up.
I don't doubt you're right but the message people will get is Apple removed the headphone jack to upsell people on wireless earbuds. I think people are getting tired of the constant upsell.
no they wont, because that doesnt make any damned sense -- they could up-sell you on wireless buds today. better than the crap in the box, right? except people dont care, because most people just use whats in the box. it will continue to be the same.
This is different though. These are proprietary headphones that only work with iOS devices. It will force people to either buy an expensive adapter or have another set of headphones for all the devices they have that don't have a lightning port. That's a pretty shitty user experience.
I can't think of any if Apple just takes the existing EarPods and makes them lightning. If they're pushing wireless then put wireless buds in the box. User experience is more important than those precious margins. It's not like Apple is struggling to make profits and they're swimming in cash.
you still dont get it. it almost certainly has little to nothing to do w/ lighting or wireless headphones, and almost certainly to do w/ what more they can accomplish in the very close confines of the iphone. whether that be new bi-directional communication w/ headphone accessories, added space for components, waterproofing (and not like the fake, failed waterproofing by Samsung which surprise, isnt waterproof), etc...
its not about selling you some damn headphones. jesus. wake up.
Aside from making the phone more water resistant (no phones are waterproof) I would argue people will care way more about the headphone jack being gone than any of these other so-called benefits. Maybe if there's a significant improvement in battery life but that doesn't seem likely.
no they wont, because that doesnt make any damned sense -- they could up-sell you on wireless buds today. better than the crap in the box, right? except people dont care, because most people just use whats in the box. it will continue to be the same.
This is different though. These are proprietary headphones that only work with iOS devices. It will force people to either buy an expensive adapter or have another set of headphones for all the devices they have that don't have a lightning port. That's a pretty shitty user experience.
I'm sorry, where is it written that Apple does (or should) give a shit about you using the included Made-For-iPhone earbuds with other devices? I can firmly state that this is not priority for them, nor should it be, and that really shouldn't require any explanation.
Nevermind the fact that the current EarPods, which have more features besides just sound throughput, are NOT fully compatible with most other devices.
I doubt if it's good idea. Well, saving $ on components to bring 3.5mm audio output will be a lot to Apple, though. I remember that how much Samsung Elec. made an effort to cut the numbers of screws bolts in their notebooks computers in 90's and they said it will save lots of money for production. Especially saving money on A/D converter chip in iPhone can be significant. (3.5mm audio is analog, while bluetooth and lightning audio out is digital.)
However, this will bring interesting topic to people who use iPhone to broadcast, record audio for interviewing and so on. Recently I had a chance to search what kind option there were for recording better audio, and shotgun mics, condenser mics, wireless mics.. all of them used 3.5mm audio jack. To people who already have those will need to buy a new one if they upgrade their iPhone to the new one without 3.5mm audio out port. If they want to use one mic/audio device requiring 3.5mm with other phones like Android should buy an another one with 3.5mm audio plug. To manufacturer it can be good and bad at the same time. This change can spur people to buy a new mics and audio devices, so to manufacturers it can be good chance to increase their revenue. On the other hand, it can be bad because they can't get benefit of economies of scale. So, cost for producing such audio devices can rise.
So.. which is better to customers?
Apple has interesting issue with this also. USB-C is already being adopted by other Android phones. MacBook uses USB-C. Probably MacBook Pro can have USB-C ports also. USB-C is small enough for iPhone... then.. why should they keep the two standard? Ligthing and USB-C? If they choose only one, for example, USB-C, those audio devices can be hooked up with iPhone and Mac ( and iPad). Are they going to ditch lighting port for USB-C? Or they will wait for a few years until customers replace their peripherals using Thunderbolt (mini display port) to USB-C (with Thunderbolt 3 protocol) and then ditch lightning port on iDevices with USB-C eventually?
[...]Clearly the advantage is that it will provide lossless audio quality. I'm hardly disappointed with the size or the functionality, however I would have preferred they kept the legacy audio jack as well since I own some really expensive headphones and once you plug in an adapter it would obviously be quite a bit longer overall.
Explain to me how this 'Clearly... will provide lossless audio quality.'
I don't understand this "will provide lossless audio quality" from the video. Why isn't that possible with the audio components being inside the device instead of in the cable? Even the iPod Shuffle has allowed you to playback ALAC (Apple's Lossless Audio Codec) for many, many years.
If the video means to say that the 3.5mm audio jack is only capable of playing back audio at 16-bit, and the Lightning cable will allow for 24-bit, I don't see 1) how that will be useful with the included EarPods, 2) how this changing anything since the removal of the 3.5mm jack doesn't affect this ability already possible with Lightning port headphones with the MFI program, and 3) what Lossless has to do with it as the quality of the audio in terms of the bit rate and the codec are independent of each other.
Well, saving $ on components to bring 3.5mm audio output will be a lot to Apple, though.
1) You really think their motivation is simply to save the cost of 3.5mm headphone jack?
2) All the other components are just being moved into the headphone cable so no cost savings there; in fact, one could argue that this make these components more costly for being in the cable end. We can get into those reasons if you'd like.
3a) There is also a cost for using a male Lightning port connector on ALL headphones included with EVERY iPhone instead of the much simpler 3.5mm jack that has been around for more decades than either of us have been alive. That along makes me think this will have a higher direct cost.
3b) Because the Lightning port is a complex connector there is more chance for it to stop working properly between the chips and connector in the headphone connector. I'm guessing that the 3.5mm connector gets plugged/unplugged considerably more than one does with charging, and I still get Lightning cables that wear and need to be replaced because the contacts wear a bit too much, which will have a cost for Apple if these need to be replaced more often under warranty.
Comments
That's not ok for the average human, at all.
What "people" are going to do is use whatever comes with the iPhone, and not miss a beat.
What some people will do, is buy Apple's or any of a thousand other Bluetooth options, if they haven't already.
What hardly anybody will do, is spend the rest of eternity using adapters for their sad headphone collection.
They are not going to include the adapter. It will be an optional purchase. Quite frankly, not everyone needs the adapter...quite frankly, most do not need the adapter. The phone will ship with Lightning EarPods.
Apple isn't going to giveaway an expensive adapter that most recipients simply do not need. You way overestimate how Apple cares about whether or not you can use their Made-Specifically-For-iPhone EarPods, with PCs. Or even Macs.
It's not even debatable. Just run the numbers. How many iPhone 7 will ship? How many of those people even own a Mac? 5%? 10%? They're gonna give away hundreds of millions of adapters to people without Macs? Possibly without PC's at all? If you think so, you simply don't know Apple...or you don't know how to separate your needs from the rest of the world.
If you don't like the inconveniences of a glass-surface stove top...then consider a gas range.
If you don't like the inconveniences of the iPhone 7...then consider the iPhone 6S, 5SE or iPhone 6SE (?).
...because that's what people with brain cells (and other priorities in life) do.
Or you can continue complaining about something that really isn't worth complaining about.
...your choice.
You guys are in good company. Congratulations, rogifan_new.
And if Apple reports a drop in sales because people don't want inconvenience they want superior user experience you'll say? If Apple wants to push wireless then put wireless headphones in the box. Don't replace something ubiquitous with something proprietary.
its not about selling you some damn headphones. jesus. wake up.
Aside from making the phone more water resistant (no phones are waterproof) I would argue people will care way more about the headphone jack being gone than any of these other so-called benefits. Maybe if there's a significant improvement in battery life but that doesn't seem likely.
Nevermind the fact that the current EarPods, which have more features besides just sound throughput, are NOT fully compatible with most other devices.
I remember that how much Samsung Elec. made an effort to cut the numbers of screws bolts in their notebooks computers in 90's and they said it will save lots of money for production. Especially saving money on A/D converter chip in iPhone can be significant. (3.5mm audio is analog, while bluetooth and lightning audio out is digital.)
However, this will bring interesting topic to people who use iPhone to broadcast, record audio for interviewing and so on.
Recently I had a chance to search what kind option there were for recording better audio, and shotgun mics, condenser mics, wireless mics.. all of them used 3.5mm audio jack. To people who already have those will need to buy a new one if they upgrade their iPhone to the new one without 3.5mm audio out port. If they want to use one mic/audio device requiring 3.5mm with other phones like Android should buy an another one with 3.5mm audio plug.
To manufacturer it can be good and bad at the same time.
This change can spur people to buy a new mics and audio devices, so to manufacturers it can be good chance to increase their revenue.
On the other hand, it can be bad because they can't get benefit of economies of scale. So, cost for producing such audio devices can rise.
So.. which is better to customers?
Apple has interesting issue with this also.
USB-C is already being adopted by other Android phones. MacBook uses USB-C. Probably MacBook Pro can have USB-C ports also.
USB-C is small enough for iPhone... then.. why should they keep the two standard? Ligthing and USB-C?
If they choose only one, for example, USB-C, those audio devices can be hooked up with iPhone and Mac ( and iPad).
Are they going to ditch lighting port for USB-C?
Or they will wait for a few years until customers replace their peripherals using Thunderbolt (mini display port) to USB-C (with Thunderbolt 3 protocol) and then ditch lightning port on iDevices with USB-C eventually?
I hate this game.
If the video means to say that the 3.5mm audio jack is only capable of playing back audio at 16-bit, and the Lightning cable will allow for 24-bit, I don't see 1) how that will be useful with the included EarPods, 2) how this changing anything since the removal of the 3.5mm jack doesn't affect this ability already possible with Lightning port headphones with the MFI program, and 3) what Lossless has to do with it as the quality of the audio in terms of the bit rate and the codec are independent of each other.
1) You really think their motivation is simply to save the cost of 3.5mm headphone jack?
2) All the other components are just being moved into the headphone cable so no cost savings there; in fact, one could argue that this make these components more costly for being in the cable end. We can get into those reasons if you'd like.
3a) There is also a cost for using a male Lightning port connector on ALL headphones included with EVERY iPhone instead of the much simpler 3.5mm jack that has been around for more decades than either of us have been alive. That along makes me think this will have a higher direct cost.
3b) Because the Lightning port is a complex connector there is more chance for it to stop working properly between the chips and connector in the headphone connector. I'm guessing that the 3.5mm connector gets plugged/unplugged considerably more than one does with charging, and I still get Lightning cables that wear and need to be replaced because the contacts wear a bit too much, which will have a cost for Apple if these need to be replaced more often under warranty.