Too soon? Apple's new iPhone 7 ruffles feathers with Lightning audio, Home button changes

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 125
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    normm said:
    Too soon?


    This is chart is either poorly made or is designed to trick the reader. It's market share by revenue, not units, that have exceeding 50%. Market share by unit sales, which is the important decider when it comes to the end user, is just over 15%.
    Not sure that's correct.  People vote with their wallets.  If Bluetooth is capturing half the amount of money spent on listening, and that amount is growing while the amount spent on wired is shrinking, what more evidence does one need?  Early adopters usually pay a premium, but they also very often indicate a trend that trickles down along with prices.  I was in Target earlier today, saw many wireless sets in the $59-99 range, whereas a year ago $99 was the more prevalent starting price.  Unit market share will soon enough follow revenue market share.
    No, I'm correct. The chart makes an ambiguous statement that refers to revenue.
    Okay, so we can agree the chart is ambiguous, but I didn't argue with that point.  I actually agreed with you on that score.  My argument was against your other point, where you suggested Unit share is the more important indicator.   It's not.
    You're wrong. Your whole point, implied by the graph, was that BT headphones had surpassed wired ones and at 15% it's not the case at all. Apple provides connectivity for a minority of headphone users. I would argue that the graph might look different for iphone users though, maybe it's more than 15%, but the graph you posted is irrelevant, revenue is important for the manufacturers and retailers not the end user
    https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2016/bluetooth-capable-headphone-sales-surpass-non-bluetooth-sales/
  • Reply 102 of 125
    kiowavt said:
    mactodd said:
    You didn't mention charging while listening.

    Yeah, that's a monster deal breaker, for like about 1:1,000,000 people.  Seriously, how often are you walking around, listening to youriPhone while its plugged into a charger?
    Not walking around.  I use my iPhone 6plus as a work phone.  Work calls are directed to it, so I have it on a charging stand with a headset plugged in all day.  Bluetooth not yet ideal for me, and batteries not lasting enough.  The phone can't go without the charge that long and be ready when I need it late day.  Some workdays last 8am to 8pm and longer.  So for now I stick with what I have, and specifically that missing jack is why I can't even consider it.  There will be cases and stands with headphone jacks I am sure, and the measly iPhone dock works but is not sturdy enough for me.  So long term, no, but too many of you are judging from your angle, your own use patterns.  Me, I don't see that the phones need to be quite so slim, but I know beefing it up to have the jack and a larger battery, that getting larger or thicker is never an option for any phone maker.  Anyway, when enough options to use an iPhone 7 are out so I can use it as I do today, well, I will be considering it.  
    Beats makes BT headphones with 40 hours of battery - not enough?

    the AirPods get 5 hours w/ 15 mins recharge for 3 more. and I'm betting you can wear one at a time to have the other charging, so i have a hard time believing it won't suffice for office call jockeys like me.
    I wonder why Apple still hasn't purchased the Beats.com domain? Surely a couple of million bucks for that domain would make more sense than keeping the now outdated "bestsbydre.com" domain.
  • Reply 103 of 125
    lewk said:
    I know a fair number of professional musicians and audio people and they nearly all use iPhones and Macs.  I don't think I've seen a roadie that didn't have an iPhone in the last 4 years and the same for the musicians.  The biggest complaints I've heard so far are about the inability to charge and listen without buying yet another dongle.  When flying all over the world, they often need to be able to charge and listen concurrently for well over 12 hours straight. And since they are sometime composing or editing while on the plane, wireless just doesn't cut it.  The latency issues as well as recharging make it a show stopper.  This is also going to be an issue if Apple removes the headphone jack from the MacBook Pros.

      
    good thing these professional audio engineers working on their iPhones can plug in an adapter and keep working. as audio professions they are certainly no stranger to plugs and adapters.

    meanwhile the rest of non audio engineers who compromise the vast, vast majority of customer use cases now have 2 extra hours of battery, a much better camera, and water resistance. sounds like a win to me.
    edited September 2016 ration al
  • Reply 104 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    I wonder why Apple still hasn't purchased the Beats.com domain? Surely a couple of million bucks for that domain would make more sense than keeping the now outdated "bestsbydre.com" domain.
    I figure they'll eventually have beatsbydre.com redirect to apple.com.
  • Reply 105 of 125
    Soli said:
    and I'm betting you can wear one at a time to have the other charging, so i have a hard time believing it won't suffice for office call jockeys like me.
    That's been confirmed. It also starts and stops audio when you place in your ear and take it out. If you use it only for phone calls you can go 50+ hours straight between both without ever having to charging the holding case.
    it has been confirmed? i know there have been screen shots posted showing each one has its own battery meter onscreen and its been reported that they're identical in functionality, so id be pretty surprised if they didn't work independently. 
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 106 of 125
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    normm said:
    Too soon?


    This is chart is either poorly made or is designed to trick the reader. It's market share by revenue, not units, that have exceeding 50%. Market share by unit sales, which is the important decider when it comes to the end user, is just over 15%.
    Not sure that's correct.  People vote with their wallets.  If Bluetooth is capturing half the amount of money spent on listening, and that amount is growing while the amount spent on wired is shrinking, what more evidence does one need?  Early adopters usually pay a premium, but they also very often indicate a trend that trickles down along with prices.  I was in Target earlier today, saw many wireless sets in the $59-99 range, whereas a year ago $99 was the more prevalent starting price.  Unit market share will soon enough follow revenue market share.
    No, I'm correct. The chart makes an ambiguous statement that refers to revenue.
    Okay, so we can agree the chart is ambiguous, but I didn't argue with that point.  I actually agreed with you on that score.  My argument was against your other point, where you suggested Unit share is the more important indicator.   It's not.
    You're wrong. Your whole point, implied by the graph, was that BT headphones had surpassed wired ones and at 15% it's not the case at all. Apple provides connectivity for a minority of headphone users. I would argue that the graph might look different for iphone users though, maybe it's more than 15%, but the graph you posted is irrelevant, revenue is important for the manufacturers and retailers not the end user
    https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2016/bluetooth-capable-headphone-sales-surpass-non-bluetooth-sales/
    ok 17% not 15% although it doesn't appear to include free headphones, e.g. those given away with the iphone, so i assume the % of people with BT headphones is around 10%
  • Reply 107 of 125
    mrboba1 said:
    You're wrong. Your whole point, implied by the graph, was that BT headphones had surpassed wired ones and at 15% it's not the case at all. Apple provides connectivity for a minority of headphone users. I would argue that the graph might look different for iphone users though, maybe it's more than 15%, but the graph you posted is irrelevant, revenue is important for the manufacturers and retailers not the end user
    Um, try to pay attention. I didn't post the graph. Someone else did. And I made my point very clear about market share by revenue is a key indicator. You seem not to have read that, or you wouldn't be myopically focused on unit market share, as meaningless as it is in the realm of Smartphones.
    This is absolutely correct. The point that the graph showing the 2 lines crossing is irrelevant in a birds eye view. The point should be that the trend for wired headphones is dropping and wireless is increasing. Sit behind the trend and you can make your money for a short period of time, and then die off. If you want to be on the forward edge of trends, you know and use graphs like this showing the future.

    At some point, CRT TVs vs flat screen had this exact same graph. Would you poo-pooers be defending the CRTs? The trend is obvious.
    The CRT/LCD example is a false analogy as they are direct substitutes and both were always compatible with the same devices
    hungoverbaconstang
  • Reply 108 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    Soli said:
    and I'm betting you can wear one at a time to have the other charging, so i have a hard time believing it won't suffice for office call jockeys like me.
    That's been confirmed. It also starts and stops audio when you place in your ear and take it out. If you use it only for phone calls you can go 50+ hours straight between both without ever having to charging the holding case.
    it has been confirmed? i know there have been screen shots posted showing each one has its own battery meter onscreen and its been reported that they're identical in functionality, so id be pretty surprised if they didn't work independently. 
    Yes. Schiller detailed this during the event. 

    edit: Mentioned at around 33 minutes into this clip of the event.


    edited September 2016
  • Reply 109 of 125
    mactodd said:
    You didn't mention charging while listening.

    Yeah, that's a monster deal breaker, for like about 1:1,000,000 people.  Seriously, how often are you walking around, listening to youriPhone while its plugged into a charger?
    The answer to that has to be never, since its physically impossible to "walk around" while your head is tethered to the wall.

    Its laughable the way these people think that these tiny niche use cases should be preserved at the expense of progress and innovation.
    ration al
  • Reply 110 of 125
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,594member
    Soli said:
    paxman said:
    Soli said:
    mac_128 said:
    paxman said:. 

    As far as removing the jack I could not care less. The iPhone headphones will not be compatible with other devices going forward, but what other devices do people use their headphones for these days? I do occasionally use headphones while watching movies on my Mac or iPad but I have many headsets lying around. Usually I share the screen with my wife so we need two headsets and yet there is only one jack. So I use a splitter. Not a problem. My guess is that people will rapidly turn to wireless headphones. For the ones among us that want the wires there are still about a million options. For people like me who want more than one headset to be connected to the same device there is another interesting question - will Apple facilitate multiple headset link-up over Bluetooth?
    That's right. There is not currently a Lightning audio splitter, and though the forthcoming Belkin adapter appears as though it might solve this problem, the website suggests it won't, and only supports one headphone and one charger. 
    You've been informed several times that you can split the fucking audio.
    Belkin charger / splitter cable.
    http://www.belkin.com/us/p/P-F8J198/?clickid=WZU0mcTpVUU1yciyOO2I00b2Ukk1CnxWIwswT00&utm_campaign=Online Tracking Link&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=impactradius&irgwc=1
    That's one partial solution. The solution you'd want if you want to also charge your phone whilst sharing a couple wired headphones.
    You could end up with a long line of adaptors :) I'd opt for the bundled lighting to jack / jack splitter for the time being. 
  • Reply 111 of 125
    Soli said:
    hungover said:
    Sorry but I don't understand the claim that Apple had to ditch the 3.5mm socket so that they could make the phone waterproof.

    Don't the latest Galaxy phones have waterproof headphone sockets (that do not require a rubber bung)?
    1) Removing points of ingress does make it easier to waterproof. Apple even talked about this with the Apple Watch and microphone and speaker ports.

    2) Apple talked about what the internals space and edge "real estate" savings allowed their engineers to do, and this only the beginning. Think of how removing the ODD made way for a truly modern notebook.

    3) Samsung can claim anything they want. A statement of waterproof is a lie. As statement of water-resistance is possible, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected. An IPx7 rating only means they had a device tested that met that qualification, which in the case of a '7' for water-resistance means it can withstand being submerged In fresh water for 30 minutes at a depth of 1M, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected.

    This goes the same for any product by Apple. Keep in mind that any statement of water-proof, water-resistance, or an IP rating is to appeal to the customer (i.e.: marketing), but it doesn't mean the device can handle it. The company could have used an adhesive that will be 95% effective for about 6 months of use and then start to drop at a rate of about 10% per month. They may have also figured out that their customer-based isn't likely to go swimming with the device they're marketing so their risk is low. It's all about the numbers. We see something similar in battery capacity and fast charging, when many vendors use poor batteries that don't hold up well over time. Even Apple has a disclaimer that water damage isn't covered under their warranty, but I doubt they would forego replacing a defective device that was used in the proper way; it's more or less to legally protect themselves from the potential of pushing well past the limits of the device.
    Yes it was sloppy of me to use the term "waterproof" as shorthand for water resistant but Apple succeeded in making the Lightning port water resistant, why not the headphone socket? DED's assertion that the port had to die to make the phone water resistant seems dubious and reads like a half- hearted platitude (made by him and not by Apple)
  • Reply 112 of 125
    kiowavt said:
    mactodd said:
    You didn't mention charging while listening.

    Yeah, that's a monster deal breaker, for like about 1:1,000,000 people.  Seriously, how often are you walking around, listening to youriPhone while its plugged into a charger?
    Not walking around.  I use my iPhone 6plus as a work phone.  Work calls are directed to it, so I have it on a charging stand with a headset plugged in all day.  Bluetooth not yet ideal for me, and batteries not lasting enough.  The phone can't go without the charge that long and be ready when I need it late day.  Some workdays last 8am to 8pm and longer.  So for now I stick with what I have, and specifically that missing jack is why I can't even consider it.  There will be cases and stands with headphone jacks I am sure, and the measly iPhone dock works but is not sturdy enough for me.  So long term, no, but too many of you are judging from your angle, your own use patterns.  Me, I don't see that the phones need to be quite so slim, but I know beefing it up to have the jack and a larger battery, that getting larger or thicker is never an option for any phone maker.  Anyway, when enough options to use an iPhone 7 are out so I can use it as I do today, well, I will be considering it.  
    Beats makes BT headphones with 40 hours of battery - not enough?

    the AirPods get 5 hours w/ 15 mins recharge for 3 more. and I'm betting you can wear one at a time to have the other charging, so i have a hard time believing it won't suffice for office call jockeys like me.
    I wonder why Apple still hasn't purchased the Beats.com domain? Surely a couple of million bucks for that domain would make more sense than keeping the now outdated "bestsbydre.com" domain.
    Ironically beats.com is owned by Akamai, who Apple invested in years ago and who provide a number of services for apple.
  • Reply 113 of 125
    "document scrolling introduced in 2011 on macOS X Lion, which made Macs work more like iPads (scrolling down made the document go down; previously, pulling the scroller down was like pulling down a counterweight attached to your document-elevator via a pulley"

    My dear chap, only noobs leave their Macs to work like iPads. All the uber Mac users make their Macs work like Macs (window-centric vs document centric view -- there is an generally option under System preferences -> Mouse). On a Mac, as you scroll down, you are conceptually meant to be pulling the VIEWING WINDOW down (so you view the bottom of the document). On an iPad, as you grab down,you are pulling the DOCUMENT down (so view the top of the document).
    ration al
  • Reply 114 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    hungover said:
    Soli said:
    hungover said:
    Sorry but I don't understand the claim that Apple had to ditch the 3.5mm socket so that they could make the phone waterproof.

    Don't the latest Galaxy phones have waterproof headphone sockets (that do not require a rubber bung)?
    1) Removing points of ingress does make it easier to waterproof. Apple even talked about this with the Apple Watch and microphone and speaker ports.

    2) Apple talked about what the internals space and edge "real estate" savings allowed their engineers to do, and this only the beginning. Think of how removing the ODD made way for a truly modern notebook.

    3) Samsung can claim anything they want. A statement of waterproof is a lie. As statement of water-resistance is possible, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected. An IPx7 rating only means they had a device tested that met that qualification, which in the case of a '7' for water-resistance means it can withstand being submerged In fresh water for 30 minutes at a depth of 1M, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected.

    This goes the same for any product by Apple. Keep in mind that any statement of water-proof, water-resistance, or an IP rating is to appeal to the customer (i.e.: marketing), but it doesn't mean the device can handle it. The company could have used an adhesive that will be 95% effective for about 6 months of use and then start to drop at a rate of about 10% per month. They may have also figured out that their customer-based isn't likely to go swimming with the device they're marketing so their risk is low. It's all about the numbers. We see something similar in battery capacity and fast charging, when many vendors use poor batteries that don't hold up well over time. Even Apple has a disclaimer that water damage isn't covered under their warranty, but I doubt they would forego replacing a defective device that was used in the proper way; it's more or less to legally protect themselves from the potential of pushing well past the limits of the device.
    Yes it was sloppy of me to use the term "waterproof" as shorthand for water resistant but Apple succeeded in making the Lightning port water resistant, why not the headphone socket? DED's assertion that the port had to die to make the phone water resistant seems dubious and reads like a half- hearted platitude (made by him and not by Apple)
    Why assume that they couldn't? It's easier than other ports to make water resistanrt, but it's still something that requires engineering to address. But that's all besides the point.

    PS: On the topic of water/fluids did you consider that removing a fluid is also important? Who cares how much it's been proofed if the port can become an issue if water stays in there. Lightning is small but shallow and wide, compared to the headphone jack which is a deep silo, in comparison. Could water in their corrode the connectors or cause pressure from heating up when the headphone plug is inserted that makes it a failure point long before Lightning?
    ration al
  • Reply 115 of 125
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    wozwoz said:
    "document scrolling introduced in 2011 on macOS X Lion, which made Macs work more like iPads (scrolling down made the document go down; previously, pulling the scroller down was like pulling down a counterweight attached to your document-elevator via a pulley"

    My dear chap, only noobs leave their Macs to work like iPads. All the uber Mac users make their Macs work like Macs (window-centric vs document centric view -- there is an generally option under System preferences -> Mouse). On a Mac, as you scroll down, you are conceptually meant to be pulling the VIEWING WINDOW down (so you view the bottom of the document). On an iPad, as you grab down,you are pulling the DOCUMENT down (so view the top of the document).
    No. No they don't because pro-users use multitouch trackpads and touch-sensitive mice with precision. 
    baconstang
  • Reply 116 of 125
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,661member
    Soli said:
    hungover said:
    Sorry but I don't understand the claim that Apple had to ditch the 3.5mm socket so that they could make the phone waterproof.

    Don't the latest Galaxy phones have waterproof headphone sockets (that do not require a rubber bung)?
    1) Removing points of ingress does make it easier to waterproof. Apple even talked about this with the Apple Watch and microphone and speaker ports.

    2) Apple talked about what the internals space and edge "real estate" savings allowed their engineers to do, and this only the beginning. Think of how removing the ODD made way for a truly modern notebook.

    3) Samsung can claim anything they want. A statement of waterproof is a lie. As statement of water-resistance is possible, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected. An IPx7 rating only means they had a device tested that met that qualification, which in the case of a '7' for water-resistance means it can withstand being submerged In fresh water for 30 minutes at a depth of 1M, but it doesn't mean your device will not be affected.

    This goes the same for any product by Apple. Keep in mind that any statement of water-proof, water-resistance, or an IP rating is to appeal to the customer (i.e.: marketing), but it doesn't mean the device can handle it. The company could have used an adhesive that will be 95% effective for about 6 months of use and then start to drop at a rate of about 10% per month. They may have also figured out that their customer-based isn't likely to go swimming with the device they're marketing so their risk is low. It's all about the numbers. We see something similar in battery capacity and fast charging, when many vendors use poor batteries that don't hold up well over time. Even Apple has a disclaimer that water damage isn't covered under their warranty, but I doubt they would forego replacing a defective device that was used in the proper way; it's more or less to legally protect themselves from the potential of pushing well past the limits of the device.


    iPhone 7 version S7. Spoiler alert iPhone 7 bested the S7 in a pretty deep immersion test.

    Apple, is, yet again, very conservative in how it rates its water resistance.


    edited September 2016 Dan Andersenration al
  • Reply 117 of 125
    You fail to mention that Apple was late to adopt Bluetooth for its computers and also very restricted in its supported profiles. Until very recently Bluetooth keyboards and mouse didn't work reliable either (apparently lots of driver problems).
    So being relatively early with Bluetooth low energy has its context. Also BLE is developed because of ANT+ that took all of the wireless health market (heart rate monitors, home trainers etc.) and as such had nothing to do with Apple.
    In general Apple seeks to earn as much money as it can and in doing so takes 'political' decisions about the future of its products. This isn't the same as taking technically right decisions and you can expect Apple to do a Bubka when not forced otherwise by its competitors.
  • Reply 118 of 125
    misa said:
    tele1234 said:
    evilution said:
    If you are one of the 30 people who have genuinely charged and listened to music at the same time, buy the dongle.
    This honestly sounds like you are saying "Well, I don't PERSONALLY do it, therefor NO ONE does"

    Have you ever travelled? Ever taking a multi-leg flight or a long car journey? Of course you'll have one end in the charger, one end plugged into headphones. Heck even just driving to work I oftentimes put the charger and the audio jack in. It's a pretty major inconvenience. And wireless headphones, whilst cool and all, are the biggest pain in the butt going. it's just one more thing that needs charged unnecessarily.

    Dude, you sound like someone whining about missing a dvd drive in their MacBook. "I have to lug an external drive and use up a usb port. QQ" How long did that argument last until you invited the future of flash storage and streaming? Same applies to the audio thing. You cry for another year until nothing has an audio jack anymore and you've welcomed the future once again. Wireless headphones are not "cool", it's the new standard. I hardly ever actively charge my BT speaker or wireless headphones. Most of the time they just get left charging on a table until I grab them. It's not a chore, it's an afterthought.

    As far as traveling and charging and listening. I'm sure in a month you'll see backup battery packs that include an audio jack as well. Because if anyone travels as much as you do, they definitely carry backup juice. Build crappy ports into that thing...don't fill my phone with junk I won't ever use. 
    I dare you to stream video while on an airplane. You're comparing two different things.

    iPhone/iPod users fall into two categories: Commuters, and Travelers

    Commuters listen to their phone only while they are in their commute. The size of the battery in the phone supports a one hour commute and an 8 hour work shift. This is fine.

    Travelers listen to their phone all day. If they are driving, they need access to the device's charging ability as well as the ability to have it plugged into the car kit. Apple could have easily solved this by actually having a Analog+Digital FM transmitter built into it, because ALL cars can receive FM radio.
    I stopped reading when you mentioned FM transmitter. What is this, 1996? 
  • Reply 119 of 125
    Wasn't the company "AuthenTec", not "Authentic"?  Whatever happened to proofreading?
    Proofreading? On AppleInsider? Oh, surely you're jesting.

    Also note the reference to "whats next".
    edited September 2016
  • Reply 120 of 125
    mactodd said:
    You didn't mention charging while listening. That's the biggest drawback to using Lightning headphones. Or wireless ones which need to be charged. You give up the functionality of listening on long trips, in a car, plane, train, etc. That's a step back.  At least without third party dongles. Apple should have introduced wireless charging first, so you could listen while staying charged.
    I used to use the 3.5 mm jack in my first car back in the iPhone 3G days, but have long since been using USB. My first car was a 2005 eclipse which didn't even have either option to begin with (auxiliary or USB) in it's stock system. I swapped it out for a cheap aftermarket head unit for $30 which at least gave me an AUX port to plug into, but then later on upgraded my entire sound system and I've been using USB for charging and audio out ever since. At the time it was expensive (only because of the all the speakers, amps, etc. that I wanted), but you can easily get a new head unit these days for $20-$30 that will have the same functionality if you have an older car. Pretty much any car from the last 5 or 6 years (perhaps earlier depending on make) already have a USB port built-in on the stock system that will also do the same thing. I now have a 2015 Mitsubishi Mirage (one of the cheapest cars you can buy, starts brand new for under $13K) that came with a built-in USB port and will charge my phone and pull audio through it.

    There are more options out there than people realize. 
Sign In or Register to comment.