I hope it works better than the AirPlay connection between iPhones and AppleTVs - constant cut outs when using spotify. Replaced the AppleTV with a Google Chromecast and all the problems went away.
I have both too and have more issues with my Chromecast. I'm at the point in which I am swapping out the Chromecasts for Apple TV 3rd Gens (except for the main living room, which is 4th gen).
Bluetooth-like, as in proprietary? For $20 one can purchase QY8 Bluetooth wireless earbuds on Amazon. They are spectacular, especially considering the cost! No reason to reinvent the wheel. I doubt the audio quality on Apple's "new" pods will be discernibly better. But I suspect the cost will be 10x+ more. Try the QY8 folks. Returnable if not to your liking.
Yeah I have them. They are junk. That's why they are $20. I bought them for use while mowing the lawn since I don't want to damage any decent pair of headphones.
If that's what you find to be high quality, you're not the market for the product Apple is making.
I expect to see lots of these little white things laying about, I will bet people will loose these things like crazy. Interesting to read that Apple is maybe doing a unique solution for audio verses using the Bluetooth standard. Audio sync with Video is a problem with Bluetooth and Apple most likely know this.
I've found with iOS 10, most Apps seem to "correct themselves" when it comes to this issue. Sometimes there will be sync issues, but most of the time it seems to fix itself and suddenly become in sync. Where it used to be unusable, in iOS 10 I don't notice the a/v sync issue any longer.
But yes, I imagine this to be one of the big things Apple will want to perfect with their own solution.
I would love to use the earbuds. But alas, the things never fit my ear. Always falls out. Sigh.
I wonder if they would fall out less if they weren't tethered to a cord that was heavier than the buds themselves, and constantly being tugged by the phone?
The exact reason why the headphone port was removed in the first place. Stagnation and lagging sales and no more support from long term contract phone sales (all US carriers dropped their plans). Only way to profit is to steal and create waste. Remove port. Require new headphones. Cash in on Apple/Beats forced wireless product push & licensing fees to additional acc. vendors making compatible/branded products. Most of which, including the "high end" is just cheap future apple landfill e-waste made in Taiwan and China and not remotely "high end" (ex: Beats = price point vs. pro and other "pro-sumer" headphones, not even remotely a comparison. They're garbage. People are spending on brand only, not quality). Lastly, ensure wireless communication is proprietary so that 3rd party vendors can't just make generic bluetooth headsets.
DISGUSTING.
"... own-brand Bluetooth headphones targeting the high-end market, with Beats positioned in the midrange market," Kuo wrote. He did not give any potential indication of pricing.
Worst case scenario (fingers crossed): Apple brand AirPods: $349 Beats brand pods: $249
With its own custom "Bluetooth-like" chip, Kuo believes Apple could use proprietary low-power wireless communications for other functions beyond headphones, including smart home accessories and an intelligent automobile.
If this is true, then the Bluetooth v5 spec just isn't good enough for Apple. (Unless "Bluetooth-like" means "Bluetooth-compatible.")
Bluetooth v5 devices are supposed to roll out later this year, featuring: "quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity" (Full Wikipedia post: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth#Bluetooth_v5 )
So they're choosing yet another proprietary method... Sigh.
So Apple is going to make wireless headphones that don't suck... Sigh.
I'm really tired of the idiots we have to suffer through. I really think they offer nothing to the discussion at all.
Apple says, "we can do better" and then they do...and the idiots complain OH WHY YOU GOTTA BE PROPRIETARY.
Agreed. Provided that new iPhones and other devices going forward (Apple Watch, iPads, etc) continue to also support standard Bluetooth, so that any BT headphones can be used (and I don't know why they would do otherwise), I don't see what the big complaint is. Does anyone expect an Android user to purchase Apple's high end AirPods, where such a proprietary wireless protocol would be an issue? It is like all of the complaining that the Apple Watch is tethered to an iPhone, and thus limited to only the iPhone user base - as if a Samsung user would have any interest in a first generation Apple Watch.
And in this (potential) model, where standard BT remains, but Apple ALSO provides its proprietary solution, you can be damn sure that Apple at least believes they will provide a better experience. Otherwise no one will buy them.
We will know in 24h, but if beats pricing is midrange I'm scared of the high end pricing
I was hoping that the "Airpods" were going to be somewhat affordable. This article makes it sound like they will be out of reach for anyone except the 1%.
you can't be serious. consumer electronics such as Apple's is very much in the "affordable luxury" category.
Will these "high-end" buds fit my ears? None of Apple's have so far.
comsumer electronics such as ear buds are a generalist product -- what works for most people most of the time. if your ears are outside that zone then you need to find a different solution (and they exist).
custom-designed wireless chip that will be "Bluetooth-like,"
Maybe kinda like how lightning is "USB-like".
I guess one nice "feature" of taking this approach is that Apple can charge accessory makers a fee for using their tweaked implementation of bluetooth.
Hopefully there's actually some benefit to consumers of this customized bluetooth....
to suggest Apple designs products for licensing costs first and user benefit second or not at all, is to reveal that you don't understand Apple.
I hope it works better than the AirPlay connection between iPhones and AppleTVs - constant cut outs when using spotify. Replaced the AppleTV with a Google Chromecast and all the problems went away.
That is not Apple's problem. That is your problem.
My experience thus far is that all Apple stuff works just fine, but PEOPLE do not. What was likely happening was that you were using Spotify over wireless internet while using something like bluetooth speakers. Which is stupid.
Which leads us back to the article about a proprietary bluetooth-like thing for headphones. Geezus freaking hell Apple. Do not go down this road paved with skulls and death.
Bluetooth must be an absolute failure because game consoles no longer want to use it for their controllers, microsoft and logitech don't use it for their game controllers, mice or keyboards, and audio systems in cars prefer CarPlay over USB, not wireless. Just what exactly supports bluetooth?
Any intelligent person out there knows, for FACT, that you want to limit the amount of wireless cruft you have operating because they all operate in the same ISM bands. So that means, wherever possible. You use USB mice, USB keyboards, Wired GigE Ethernet, and you run regular copper wire to your speakers. No batteries, no wall warts. Anyone who buys bluetooth speakers or bluetooth headphones is an fool who paid extra money for a worse experience..
With its own custom "Bluetooth-like" chip, Kuo believes Apple could use proprietary low-power wireless communications for other functions beyond headphones, including smart home accessories and an intelligent automobile.
If this is true, then the Bluetooth v5 spec just isn't good enough for Apple. (Unless "Bluetooth-like" means "Bluetooth-compatible.")
Bluetooth v5 devices are supposed to roll out later this year, featuring: "quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity" (Full Wikipedia post: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth#Bluetooth_v5 )
Not necessarily. Apple sits on the BT SIG, so they developed BT 5. I've been saying ever since that article came out that Apple is in a position to implement BT 5 products ahead of everyone else, since they know the specs, and that they would likely create their own chips rather than waiting for anyone else to implement the new specs that got released too late to make it into the iPhone to buy it from them. So what we'll see is a BT 5 chip, possibly with a custom "draft" protocol which Apple will likely try to steer into the BT 6 specs with their position on the board, just like Apple has been an instrumental partner in USB & USB-C. There's absolutely no need to go proprietary here if they want to push the wireless standard, just like they pushed USB originally.
The exact reason why the headphone port was removed in the first place. Stagnation and lagging sales and no more support from long term contract phone sales (all US carriers dropped their plans). Only way to profit is to steal and create waste. Remove port. Require new headphones. Cash in on Apple/Beats forced wireless product push & licensing fees to additional acc. vendors making compatible/branded products. Most of which, including the "high end" is just cheap future apple landfill e-waste made in Taiwan and China and not remotely "high end" (ex: Beats = price point vs. pro and other "pro-sumer" headphones, not even remotely a comparison. They're garbage. People are spending on brand only, not quality). Lastly, ensure wireless communication is proprietary so that 3rd party vendors can't just make generic bluetooth headsets.
DISGUSTING.
Mentally lazy Troll you are; you should go back to humping your sexy Android OS device that has a considerably shorter life cycle than any Apple iPhone.
There was never a USB Type C connector before Apple showed USB.org the way with the Lightning Port, and even now, it is smaller and perhaps even better in mechanical performance than type C. Now there's somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion Apple mobile devices using the Lightning port. Sure, companies pay a licensing fee to incorporate Lightning compatibility into their products, but it's a great market to be in, especially compared to Android OS device accessories
Even with Apple (likely) adding a proprietary layer on to it's BT modem in the iPhone 7 to give improved audio performance, Bog standard BT devices will still work without issue and adding a Lightning connector to a set of headphones is relatively low cost, unless your comparing it to bargain basement accessories that you yourself are likely fond of.
The exact reason why the headphone port was removed in the first place. Stagnation and lagging sales and no more support from long term contract phone sales (all US carriers dropped their plans). Only way to profit is to steal and create waste. Remove port. Require new headphones. Cash in on Apple/Beats forced wireless product push & licensing fees to additional acc. vendors making compatible/branded products. Most of which, including the "high end" is just cheap future apple landfill e-waste made in Taiwan and China and not remotely "high end" (ex: Beats = price point vs. pro and other "pro-sumer" headphones, not even remotely a comparison. They're garbage. People are spending on brand only, not quality). Lastly, ensure wireless communication is proprietary so that 3rd party vendors can't just make generic bluetooth headsets.
DISGUSTING.
troll nonsense, I hope you get deleted.
they will come with headphones so you don't need to buy anything. other makers sell plenty of options so it's not an apple-hardware-only conspiracy.
Comments
Apple says, "we can do better" and then they do...and the idiots complain OH WHY YOU GOTTA BE PROPRIETARY.
So what? I want Apple to keep going beyond and delivering the best quality available. Not fitting ideas into boring tired "standards".
Your complaint is boring.
If that's what you find to be high quality, you're not the market for the product Apple is making.
But yes, I imagine this to be one of the big things Apple will want to perfect with their own solution.
I wonder if they would fall out less if they weren't tethered to a cord that was heavier than the buds themselves, and constantly being tugged by the phone?
I know, that wasn't what you meant.
Apple brand AirPods: $349
Beats brand pods: $249
If this is true, then the Bluetooth v5 spec just isn't good enough for Apple.
(Unless "Bluetooth-like" means "Bluetooth-compatible.")
Bluetooth v5 devices are supposed to roll out later this year, featuring:
"quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity"
(Full Wikipedia post: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth#Bluetooth_v5 )
Agreed. Provided that new iPhones and other devices going forward (Apple Watch, iPads, etc) continue to also support standard Bluetooth, so that any BT headphones can be used (and I don't know why they would do otherwise), I don't see what the big complaint is. Does anyone expect an Android user to purchase Apple's high end AirPods, where such a proprietary wireless protocol would be an issue? It is like all of the complaining that the Apple Watch is tethered to an iPhone, and thus limited to only the iPhone user base - as if a Samsung user would have any interest in a first generation Apple Watch.
And in this (potential) model, where standard BT remains, but Apple ALSO provides its proprietary solution, you can be damn sure that Apple at least believes they will provide a better experience. Otherwise no one will buy them.
comsumer electronics such as ear buds are a generalist product -- what works for most people most of the time. if your ears are outside that zone then you need to find a different solution (and they exist).
My experience thus far is that all Apple stuff works just fine, but PEOPLE do not. What was likely happening was that you were using Spotify over wireless internet while using something like bluetooth speakers. Which is stupid.
Which leads us back to the article about a proprietary bluetooth-like thing for headphones. Geezus freaking hell Apple. Do not go down this road paved with skulls and death.
Bluetooth must be an absolute failure because game consoles no longer want to use it for their controllers, microsoft and logitech don't use it for their game controllers, mice or keyboards, and audio systems in cars prefer CarPlay over USB, not wireless. Just what exactly supports bluetooth?
Any intelligent person out there knows, for FACT, that you want to limit the amount of wireless cruft you have operating because they all operate in the same ISM bands. So that means, wherever possible. You use USB mice, USB keyboards, Wired GigE Ethernet, and you run regular copper wire to your speakers. No batteries, no wall warts. Anyone who buys bluetooth speakers or bluetooth headphones is an fool who paid extra money for a worse experience..
There was never a USB Type C connector before Apple showed USB.org the way with the Lightning Port, and even now, it is smaller and perhaps even better in mechanical performance than type C. Now there's somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion Apple mobile devices using the Lightning port. Sure, companies pay a licensing fee to incorporate Lightning compatibility into their products, but it's a great market to be in, especially compared to Android OS device accessories
Even with Apple (likely) adding a proprietary layer on to it's BT modem in the iPhone 7 to give improved audio performance, Bog standard BT devices will still work without issue and adding a Lightning connector to a set of headphones is relatively low cost, unless your comparing it to bargain basement accessories that you yourself are likely fond of.
they will come with headphones so you don't need to buy anything. other makers sell plenty of options so it's not an apple-hardware-only conspiracy.
go cry somewhere else.