lorin schultz
About
- Username
- lorin schultz
- Joined
- Visits
- 150
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 2,660
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 2,771
Reactions
-
Apple should keep Lightning for now, but USB-A has to die
I don't disagree with most of what you wrote, and applaud both you taking the time to explain and your visionary view of how things could be.ascii said:
Because with digital transmission you don't just have a raw signal being sent but can have an entire protocol defined.
That said, some potential benefits are outweighed by practical realities. I'd like to address some of those, partly just to play Devil's Advocate, but also to illustrate how trying to make something better can actually make it worse.
That's true, but can you think of any examples of how auto-configured multichannel playback would benefit a user holding an iPad? Are you going to watch a Dolby Atmos movie on an iPad? Does the potential for inter-device operability outweigh the benefits and convenience of a quick and easy analog audio connection?ascii said:The computers in the phone and speaker can talk to each other and describe each others capabilities, so that the phone knows how many speakers there and their configuration and what the best quality signal they can handle is.
1. I'm not convinced that digital offers enough additional resistance to transmission errors over analog to make it universally preferred. If it were as bulletproof as pundits claim, I wouldn't have skips, pops, or bursts of digital noise in some of the songs I've ripped from CD. It doesn't take much to break cross-checking.ascii said:[...] once the transmission starts there can be error correction and retransmission, errors are very easy to detect in digital data.
2. Real-time error correction requires buffering, and therefore throughput delay (or what is commonly mislabelled "latency"). Unless the audio output somehow communicates that delay time to the video system, and the video system is capable of compensating for that delay, audio and video will go out of sync. There may also be ramifications for real-time audio production, like in the cases of iPhones or iPads being used as instruments or personal monitor mixers for performers.
What level of detail can not be accurately transmitted over two or three feet of wire? The sound of atoms banging into each other? Ultrasonics? Is it worth trading the benefits of the headphone jack for the ability to transmit sounds no one can hear? Even the crappiest wire on the planet exceeds the capability of the best transducers.ascii said:There could also be digital compression to a higher quality signal than could otherwise we sent over a thin wire.
No argument that what you describe is theoretically superior. The question for me is whether the ACTUAL BENEFITS outweigh the inconvenience, cost, and complication imposed by that approach. There are many, many, many more cases of a headphone jack being not only better-than-adequate but also much more cost-effective and convenient than there are examples of how the user will genuinely benefit from moving digital conversion and amplification out of the iDevice. And, more specifically, the Apple-supplied dongle doesn't achieve those objectives anyway. And it adds another layer of power consumption.ascii said:Yes, a signal must ultimately be converted to analog to be heard, but digital transmission is so much more powerful/flexible than a raw analog signal that this conversion should be pushed as far downstream as possible. Ideally right at the speaker, but at least after any kind of transmission through wires or air.
-
Here are the five biggest iPad Pro problems, because no device is perfect
He said he can edit video on an IPHONE. Did you just overlook that or does the iPhone actually support the Pencil now?macplusplus said:
There is Pencil for that.lorin schultz said:
"Easily," yes. Accurately, no. Fine adjustments are difficult using a finger on a small screen.lowededwookie said:
[...] I can edit video on an iPhone just as easily as using iMovie on the Mac
I did watch the Keynote and I didn't get that impression. To me it looked like just using one possible application among many as an example. Assuming I misunderstood and that really is Apple's sole intent, it seems like a whole lotta tech, effort, and expense for not much payoff.macplusplus said:
If you'd watched the Keynote you'd know or you already know that the reason to attach a 4K monitor to iPad Pro is to follow iMovie edits in real time 4K, since the iPad's own display is not 4K.
-
Here are the five biggest iPad Pro problems, because no device is perfect
1. That slows my files transfers to the speed of the WiFi connection. And I get another device that needs to be kept charged. Yay.crosslad said:Here’s how to solve your problems:
1 External Drive support - use a WiFi Drive
2 Lack if mouse - use the Apple Pencil
3 Headphone jack - use a dongle or a device with a usb c jack. 3.5 headphone jacks have gone from mobile devices
4 Overpowered - come on, rendering a video in less than half the time is a problem. It will also future proof the iPad.
5 Storage - see 1
2. Use a pencil while the iPad is positioned semi-vertically on the keyboard, and/or while viewing the image on that external monitor the iPad now supports? I wish you luck making it work in either of those obvious scenarios.
3. If I use a dongle to feed the sound system, where will I connect the cable for the projector?
-
Here are the five biggest iPad Pro problems, because no device is perfect
"Easily," yes. Accurately, no. Fine adjustments are difficult using a finger on a small screen. One's choices are endless re-zoom operations or accepting edits that are "in the ballpark."lowededwookie said:
[...] I can edit video on an iPhone just as easily as using iMovie on the Mac
The fact that a task is possible on a phone or tablet does not mean it's automatically equivalent to a laptop or desktop in terms of ease-of-use, speed, workflow (particularly within a facility where one's work is part of a chain), or any other productivity measure. iPads have opened up a new form of computing that is better than a laptop for some things. That's awesome in itself. It doesn't mean that it's better than -- or even equivalent to -- previously existing input and interaction methods for some kinds of work.
Besides, even putting all that aside, the iPad Pro's marketing includes using the keyboard stand and an external monitor. Both make touch a less effective control method than using a mouse. -
Apple should keep Lightning for now, but USB-A has to die
I'm curious why you want the headphone jack removed? What advantage do you perceive from that?ascii said:I think we should focus on getting rid of analog ports (the headphone jack being the only remaining one) and going all digital.
Headphones are analog. They have transducers in them. At some point before the speaker, the signal MUST be converted to analog and amplified.
The phone or tablet already has a digital-to-analog converter and an amplifier. Removing the headphone jack doesn't mean they can be removed too, because they're required for the speaker(s) on the device itself. By removing the headphone jack, those parts of the chain have to be duplicated in the form of a dongle hanging inelegantly on the outside of the device, instead of just using the parts that already exist, tucked neatly inside the device.
On devices with only one "digital" port like a phone or tablet, removing the headphone jack means that any wired audio connection ties up the port so it can't be used for anything else. That complicates some really common uses cases, like using the device in the car. With only a Lightning port on the phone I can either charge or listen to it, not both, unless I add a dongle that does nothing more than duplicate parts that are already inside the phone!
None of this is insurmountable. Adapters and wireless alternatives exist. I just don't see how they offer any ADVANTAGE. They add cost, require charging additional devices, and are less convenient. How is this BETTER than just leaving the headphone jack where it is/was?
