Expect iPhone 7 w/ Similar design and removed headphone jack this fall, Major changes next year for the 10th year Anniversary

[suicidalfranco]

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Oh boy, it's the deaf leading the deaf right now.

1) That did not prove your point that a pair of headphones with a lightning connector will sound better than all other analog headphones (remember that this was your original claim).

2) That only "proves" that the particular pair of headphones used in those videos might be better when using the Lightning cable, but that in and of itself does not prove that the Lightning connector is better than 3.5mm.

 

 

The reason why I put "proves" in quotations is because those videos does not prove anything. They are completely useless. The reason why I say that is because they did not do any type of blind test. Nobody who knows the first thing about scientific tests will take that video as real evidence.

 

He even says that you need to bump up the volume to max to get a decent volume in the MacRumors video. That means the headphones are very hard to drive, but if you used an external AMP (such as the one already built in to the headphones) then they would most likely sound a lot better (possibly as good as with the Lightning cable plugged in). Audeze could have made it so that the built in AMP was used regardless of whether or not you used Lightning or 3.5mm, but for some reason they made it so that it's only used with Lightning.

funny enough: the DAC and AMP are in the inline cable, no wonder that on the jack side it has less power since you effectively remove the AMP when switching input type. Add a CMOY amp when using the jack and i bet it will be the exact same.

Just checked the thread over Head-Fi to see what they have to say about it, for the most it's meh when compared to other similarly priced headphones, and only strength is the better DAC and AMP combo in the cable compared to the iPhone's DAC. 

 

edit: forgot to had the link to the head-fi thread:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/790578/audeze-el-8-titanium

 

[suicidalfranco]

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

Maybe, maybe not but my original point still stands, phone amps can't drive high end headphones but digital outputs like lightning and type c can

check again:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/785335/lg-v10-hi-fi-audio-quality-review-on-serious-audio-performance

 

If Apple uses sub par DACs, that's apple way of doing things. Other manufacturers have been offering better for a long time, the DAC and AMP combo in the V10 is, in comparison, pretty much identical to what you'll find on the Cypher cable that comes with the Audeze ones you posted earlier with the advantage that the DAC on V10 can be used with any pair of cans in existence under the sun, even the high impedance ones (>30Ω). And yes, i'm a happy owner of the V10, and the sound experience is so good that i flat out stopped carrying the fiio amp i used to take with the iPhone i previously had.

[Nowak]

The Verge of all places had a good article explaining why dropping the 3.5mm jack is a bad idea. I'd link it, but I'm on mobile right now.

 

Also, what if you want to charge your phone while listening to music on it? Can't do that with just one USB-C port for audio and charging.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

Context. 3.5mm (below) set compared to lightning set on iPhones specifically. 

 

The reason why I said "Really good" is because I was talking about Bluetooth alternative which for some reason everyone thinks is shit

 

Now suppose you are an audiophile and can't stand Bluetooth then get lightning pairs which would be better than the 3.5mm one (ok, I guess I called 3.5mm as analog set which is an unintentional mistake)

 

Guess I called it analog because 3.5mm is analog connection while lightning is digital

Hold on now. That is not what you said at all. I will quote you again:

21 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

If you want really good headphones, though get a lightning one and it will be better than every other analog set

Again, I think the reason why you said this was because you don't know the first thing about audio and thought that "digital is much better than analog. Just look at HDMI vs VGA!". You even make the HDMI vs VGA comparison in your post. This is nothing like comparing VGA vs HDMI.

If you were talking about Bluetooth vs Lightning then why bring up "every other analog set"? Neither Bluetooth nor Lightning is analog. You were clearly talking about 3.5mm vs Lightning, and said that any headphones with a Lightning connector will sound better than any 3.5mm headphones. There is no other way to interpret what you said, and it is extremely wrong.

 

 

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

Yes and hence the advantage. Higher grade headphones working better with lightning (or type c) than 3.5mm jack

What advantage? If your conclusion is that high end headphones will work better with Lightning than with 3.5mm then you're wrong. The conclusion should be that some high end headphones will work better with a high power amp than the built in one. There is nothing stopping anyone from building an amp into the headphones and use 3.5mm.

 

 

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

You could make, but you aren't reputed nor you are multiple people with no influence on each other. They're listening and theyre judging independently and theyre reporting it, exactly what they do with all their videos including Linus

Yes, and that is not a good way to do tests. If you look at the video I linked you will understand why. It makes about as much sense as saying "Linus likes orange, therefore orange is the best color. Blue is just not as good".

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Maybe, maybe not but my original point still stands, phone amps can't drive high end headphones but digital outputs like lightning and type c can

Again, you don't understand the first thing about audio. It is not the "digital outputs like lightning and type c" that drive the high end headphones. It's the amp. The exact same amp can be built into headphones with a 3.5mm headphone jack too. Want an example? The Audio-Technica ATH-OX7AMP. The Blue Mo-Fi. Beats by Dr Dre. There are plenty of 3.5mm headphones with built in amps. It is not exclusive to headphones with lightning other or digital connectors.

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Also this is getting old and boring so let's shift topic on something else rather than complaining about something that's inevitable IMO

It's inevitable that we will move from a really good connector to one that will have a huge amount of drawbacks and basically no benefits? You're giving up before the battle has even begun. But we will surely lose the battle if we let ill-informed people like you spread misinformation.

 

 

But even IF it was better to use USB-C or Lightning for headphones, it still does not make sense to remove the 3.5mm jack. There is nothing stopping Apple from just doing what they are already doing and have both connectors. That way you can choose. Do you want to use Lightning headphones or do you want to use 3.5mm headphones? The choice is yours! If your are arguing about space savings then let me remind you that the difference is very, very small. You will not notice a big bump in battery size, nor will you see a big reduction in thickness (unless you want an even more protruding camera module).

 

 

1 hour ago, suicidalfranco said:

funny enough: the DAC and AMP are in the inline cable, no wonder that on the jack side it has less power since you effectively remove the AMP when switching input type. Had a CMOY amp when using the jack and i bet it will be the exact same.

Oh so that's why the amp isn't used when you use the 3.5mm connector. Because it's built into the cable you swap out.

[RedRound2]

28 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Hold on now. That is not what you said at all. I will quote you again:

 

Again, I think the reason why you said this was because you don't know the first thing about audio and thought that "digital is much better than analog. Just look at HDMI vs VGA!". You even make the HDMI vs VGA comparison in your post. This is nothing like comparing VGA vs HDMI.

If you were talking about Bluetooth vs Lightning then why bring up "every other analog set"? Neither Bluetooth nor Lightning is analog. You were clearly talking about 3.5mm vs Lightning, and said that any headphones with a Lightning connector will sound better than any 3.5mm headphones. There is no other way to interpret what you said, and it is extremely wrong.

Sigh, again you interpreted me wrong

Never said digital is better than analog!! HDMI vs VGA was just to prove that I know the difference between analog and digital signals. Never claimed digital was better!!!! 

Quote

What advantage? If your conclusion is that high end headphones will work better with Lightning than with 3.5mm then you're wrong. The conclusion should be that some high end headphones will work better with a high power amp than the built in one. There is nothing stopping anyone from building an amp into the headphones and use 3.5mm.

Again, you don't understand the first thing about audio. It is not the "digital outputs like lightning and type c" that drive the high end headphones. It's the amp. The exact same amp can be built into headphones with a 3.5mm headphone jack too. Want an example? The Audio-Technica ATH-OX7AMP. The Blue Mo-Fi. Beats by Dr Dre. There are plenty of 3.5mm headphones with built in amps. It is not exclusive to headphones with lightning other or digital connectors.

I admit I wasn't fully aware that dacs and amp work also with analog hence I retract on that claim

Power! Much more power can be delivered through lightning than 3.5mm jack. Plus additional features involving data can only and only be transferred through lightning and type c

Quote

It's inevitable that we will move from a really good connector to one that will have a huge amount of drawbacks and basically no benefits? You're giving up before the battle has even begun. But we will surely lose the battle if we let ill-informed people like you spread misinformation.

We're not moving connector. They're making it wireless, which is supposed to happen with everything eventually. 3.5mm existed for a while and that's the sole reason inhibiting alternatives like bluetooth. Again, it's inevitable this will happen and people will soon forget it. If Apple's going to get rid of it, they're surely not going to bring it back unless I guess no development for alternatives happens which is highly unlikely

Quote

 

But even IF it was better to use USB-C or Lightning for headphones, it still does not make sense to remove the 3.5mm jack. There is nothing stopping Apple from just doing what they are already doing and have both connectors. That way you can choose. Do you want to use Lightning headphones or do you want to use 3.5mm headphones? The choice is yours! If your are arguing about space savings then let me remind you that the difference is very, very small. You will not notice a big bump in battery size, nor will you see a big reduction in thickness (unless you want an even more protruding camera module).

Again never said lightning was the alternative, you just blew up my small point for audiophiles into this meaningless conversation

[RedRound2]

1 hour ago, suicidalfranco said:

check again:

http://www.head-fi.org/t/785335/lg-v10-hi-fi-audio-quality-review-on-serious-audio-performance

 

If Apple uses sub par DACs, that's apple way of doing things. Other manufacturers have been offering better for a long time, the DAC and AMP combo in the V10 is, in comparison, pretty much identical to what you'll find on the Cypher cable that comes with the Audeze ones you posted earlier with the advantage that the DAC on V10 can be used with any pair of cans in existence under the sun, even the high impedance ones (>30Ω). And yes, i'm a happy owner of the V10, and the sound experience is so good that i flat out stopped carrying the fiio amp i used to take with the iPhone i previously had.

Yes I'm aware of phones with better audio coming out, but only two I'm aware of V10 and HTC 10. It doesn't seem to be a very popular trend for some reason

Apple uses the regular ones which most phones use i guess

[suicidalfranco]

28 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Yes I'm aware of phones with better audio coming out, but only two I'm aware of V10 and HTC 10. It doesn't seem to be a very popular trend for some reason

Apple uses the regular ones which most phones use i guess

Not only those two (and the G5 also does, and HTC has decent ones since the One S), you Have Sony that has been doing it since the Xperia Z3, Huawei puts decent one even on their mid end line of phones, Oppo, ZTE... 

You have a vast catalogue when it comes to phones with good DACs in them and it's really hard to go wrong

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

Sigh, again you interpreted me wrong

Never said digital is better than analog!! HDMI vs VGA was just to prove that I know the difference between analog and digital signals. Never claimed digital was better!!!! 

Well you might not have said "digital is better than analog" in those exact words, but a lot of your post implies that digital is better than analog for audio. Posts like these:

On 6/21/2016 at 7:52 PM, RedRound2 said:

3.5mm jack have served us all well, but the fact that it's still analog and takes up tonnes amount of precious space in a smartphone is what makes it old tech.

 

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

I admit I wasn't fully aware that dacs and amp work also with analog hence I retract on that claim

Well you were right about a DAC not working with an analog input (hence the name digital-to-analog) but yeah, amps work with analog signals. In fact, you can't feed an amp a digital signal. It has to be analog (you can't amplify ones and zeros to make the volume louder). So in the Lightning headphones you linked earlier, the signal gets sent from the phone, to the DAC in the cable which converts the digital signal to an analog, and then sends it to the amp which amplifies the signal, making it strong enough to drive the headphones.

 

If Audeze just took the exact same cable with the DAC and amp combo in it, then tore out the DAC, and swapped out the Lightning plug for a 3.5mm jack then it would probably sound just as good as with the Lightning cable.

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Power! Much more power can be delivered through lightning than 3.5mm jack. Plus additional features involving data can only and only be transferred through lightning and type c

Doesn't the Audeze use a battery? In any case, the 3.5mm headphone jack can deliver more than enough power to drive even the highest end headphones. It is not the 3.5mm jack that is the limiting factor in the case of the Audeze, it's the amp in the iPhone that just wasn't designed for it.

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

We're not moving connector. They're making it wireless, which is supposed to happen with everything eventually. 3.5mm existed for a while and that's the sole reason inhibiting alternatives like bluetooth. Again, it's inevitable this will happen and people will soon forget it. If Apple's going to get rid of it, they're surely not going to bring it back unless I guess no development for alternatives happens which is highly unlikely

Okay, so you think 3.5mm headphone jacks is the sole reason why Bluetooth audio hasn't taken off? You don't think it's because of the various issues relating to Bluetooth profiles and codecs, and Bluetooth in general not being that suitable for high fidelity audio?

Bluetooth audio is a mess. It just adds a bunch of extra, unnecessary encoding and decoding stages which just degrades the quality while also wasting CPU cycles and power.

 

Even if we assume that all the issues with Bluetooth profiles and codecs gets solved tomorrow, and all existing hardware gets replaced, what will we end up with? We will end up with a pair of headphones that:

• We will constantly need to recharge
• Does not support plug-and-play (need to go though the Bluetooth pairing process)
• Uses more power
• Is more prone to interference
• and in the very best use case scenario will sound exactly the same as 3.5mm, but they will never sound better.

All that to save a pretty insignificant amount of space inside the phone and to not have to use a cable.

 

I really don't see any legitimate reason to remove the 3.5mm headphone jack. Especially not since you can already use Bluetooth if you want. It's just that it's such a bad idea that people don't even bother.

 

 

3 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Again never said lightning was the alternative, you just blew up my small point for audiophiles into this meaningless conversation

So you are saying that you want 3.5mm to be replaced by Bluetooth. Here is a wild idea: Why not give customers the option to use whichever one they like? Bluetooth and 3.5mm are not mutually exclusive. If you want to use something wireless then you already have the option to do so. The reason why most people don't bother is because of the long list of drawbacks it has, compared to the benefits which even firework accident victim could count on one hand.

 

Hey while we're at it, why not remove the display? "It's the only way to make text-to-speech apps advance faster. Do you really think we are going to stare at handheld rectangular screens in 300 years?". See how silly it sounds?

[suicidalfranco]

30 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Doesn't the Audeze use a battery? In any case, the 3.5mm headphone jack can deliver more than enough power to drive even the highest end headphones. It is not the 3.5mm jack that is the limiting factor in the case of the Audeze, it's the amp in the iPhone that just wasn't designed for it.

the cans themselves are passive, the Cypher (that's how they called they're inline DAC AMP) is powered directly by the phone

[ChineseChef]

16 hours ago, DPersonalized said:

Leaked image of an iPhone 12 viewed directly from the side:

 

I will admit it, I spent way to long trying to see the image, thinking my computer at work just wasn't loading it correctly.

[jaggysnake57]

i just dont get it. what advantages are there to removing the jack? 

[Dabombinable]

1 minute ago, jaggysnake57 said:

i just dont get it. what advantages are there to removing the jack? 

None-that's just it.

[MrDynamicMan]

Issues with this:

 

USB C and lightning are both not round. This might lead to some issues with extra stress on the PCB and the wire.  (had a couple mini B and lightning connectors die because of of the hard angle between the connector and the wire wearing down the rubber sheathing of the chord often leading to buying a new power chord. 

 

What about cheap IEMs?  It could be expensive to have everything requiring Bluetooth and a battery, and still be decent. 

 

What about charging? You couldnt have two thing plugged into one port. And adding another USB c port really makes removing it pretty obsolete. 

 

TL:DR the current 3.5 jack works really well, and this seems like a publicity stunt more than a good design choice. 

[MrDynamicMan]

On 21/06/2016 at 8:49 PM, RedRound2 said:

Yes it does, but not power efficiency of chips and on board devices. The jaybird bluebuds X is as good as most wired headphones. But the simple fact is many people just use their mobile headphones which are at best average. If you want really good headphones, though get a lightning one and it will be better than every other analog set

Source? 

"every other analog headphone."

So we're including all the $2000+ audiophile cans?. Lol. Yet another sweeping unprovoked statement. 

[RedRound2]

14 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Well you might not have said "digital is better than analog" in those exact words, but a lot of your post implies that digital is better than analog for audio. Posts like these:

Wrong choice of words

Quote

Well you were right about a DAC not working with an analog input (hence the name digital-to-analog) but yeah, amps work with analog signals. In fact, you can't feed an amp a digital signal. It has to be analog (you can't amplify ones and zeros to make the volume louder). So in the Lightning headphones you linked earlier, the signal gets sent from the phone, to the DAC in the cable which converts the digital signal to an analog, and then sends it to the amp which amplifies the signal, making it strong enough to drive the headphones.

Yes, I know. I actually know these stuff from physics point, but never really thought of it when I was typing it down

Quote

If Audeze just took the exact same cable with the DAC and amp combo in it, then tore out the DAC, and swapped out the Lightning plug for a 3.5mm jack then it would probably sound just as good as with the Lightning cable.

 

Doesn't the Audeze use a battery? In any case, the 3.5mm headphone jack can deliver more than enough power to drive even the highest end headphones. It is not the 3.5mm jack that is the limiting factor in the case of the Audeze, it's the amp in the iPhone that just wasn't designed for it.

it doesn't apparently. Also as I said before lightning can handle data which can enable a lot more features like stop music when you remove headphones in the future.

Quote

 

Okay, so you think 3.5mm headphone jacks is the sole reason why Bluetooth audio hasn't taken off? You don't think it's because of the various issues relating to Bluetooth profiles and codecs, and Bluetooth in general not being that suitable for high fidelity audio?

Bluetooth audio is a mess. It just adds a bunch of extra, unnecessary encoding and decoding stages which just degrades the quality while also wasting CPU cycles and power.

No I don't think. You say there are a lot of stuff and there may be (don't know much about this stuff), except I've never faced any issue using bluebuds X and it was way better than samsung earplugs I used to use before. Again I'm not an audiophile but bluetooth seems to handle well enough for most people

Quote

Even if we assume that all the issues with Bluetooth profiles and codecs gets solved tomorrow, and all existing hardware gets replaced, what will we end up with? We will end up with a pair of headphones that:

• We will constantly need to recharge
• Does not support plug-and-play (need to go though the Bluetooth pairing process)
• Uses more power
• Is more prone to interference
• and in the very best use case scenario will sound exactly the same as 3.5mm, but they will never sound better.

All that to save a pretty insignificant amount of space inside the phone and to not have to use a cable.

• I recharge my buds once a week overnight and I use it around an hour a day 5-6 days a week. I don't have a problem with it and I actually find it much better as I don't have cables running around me
• You only have to pair it once
• It does, but maybe a max of 5% in my daily use
• I've never had interference issues like you claim to be the biggest problem
• The ones I have (which i got for $89) sounds better than what 90% of people use and if you want better (which is when I would class you as an audiophile) you can very well use the adapter or lightning headphones with extra features
• Not insignificant, in terms of phone dimension and size. Do you realize how small components are. We'll see what Apple does with the extra space

 

Quote

 

I really don't see any legitimate reason to remove the 3.5mm headphone jack. Especially not since you can already use Bluetooth if you want. It's just that it's such a bad idea that people don't even bother.

Go ask general population about Bluetooth earbuds and they'll be like, whatever. Yes Bluetooth buds have been there for a while now and since these days it's also as good, there it's time we eliminate wires. Say what you want about apple ditching it, but I stand on my original point especially since I've had the liberty to own such a nice pair of buds

Quote

So you are saying that you want 3.5mm to be replaced by Bluetooth. Here is a wild idea: Why not give customers the option to use whichever one they like? Bluetooth and 3.5mm are not mutually exclusive. If you want to use something wireless then you already have the option to do so. The reason why most people don't bother is because of the long list of drawbacks it has, compared to the benefits which even firework accident victim could count on one hand.

We should have kept CD drives. Options right? and all those legacy tech we abandoned. I don't know if you've realized this but many people still use external CD drives as they can't download from the internet due to data cap in many parts of the world.

Quote

Hey while we're at it, why not remove the display? "It's the only way to make text-to-speech apps advance faster. Do you really think we are going to stare at handheld rectangular screens in 300 years?". See how silly it sounds?

Not a very good example, but we are already kinda skipping to it in the home automation department with Alexa and Google Home only Apple giving a real option to control things with an Home app. 

And anyways, not many people like to get the attention of every single person in 10m radius when using his phone

2 hours ago, MrDynamicMan said:

Source? 

"every other analog headphone."

So we're including all the $2000+ audiophile cans?. Lol. Yet another sweeping unprovoked statement. 

I've clarified this with a long argument with Lawlz. I meant is you can get better power delivery (hence powering more powerful dac & amp) and features if you buy a lightning or type c set instead. And analog is referring to 3.5mm jack not that lightning headphones are digital

[Dabombinable]

2 minutes ago, RedRound2 said:

Wrong choice of words

Yes, I know. I actually know these stuff from physics point, but never really thought of it when I was typing it down

it doesn't apparently. Also as I said before lightning can handle data which can enable a lot more features like stop music when you remove headphones in the future.

No I don't think. You say there are a lot of stuff and there may be (don't know much about this stuff), except I've never faced any issue using bluebuds X and it was way better than samsung earplugs I used to use before. Again I'm not an audiophile but bluetooth seems to handle well enough for most people

• I recharge my buds once a week overnight and I use it around an hour a day everyday. I don't have a problem with it and I actually find it much better as I don't have cables running around me
• You only have to pair it once
• It does, but maybe a max of 5% in my daily use
• I've never had interference issues like you claim to be the biggest problem
• The ones I have (which i got for $89) sounds better than what 90% of people use and if you want better (which is when I would class you as an audiophile) you can very well use the adapter or lightning headphones with extra features
• Not insignificant, in terms of phone dimension and size. Do you realize how small components are. We'll see what Apple does with the extra space

 

Go ask general population about Bluetooth earbuds and they'll be like, whatever. Yes Bluetooth buds have been there for a while now and since these days it's also as good, there it's time we eliminate wires. Say what you want about apple ditching it, but I stand on my original point especially since I've had the liberty to own such a nice pair of buds

We should have kept CD drives. Options right? and all those legacy tech we abandoned. I don't know if you've realized this but many people still use external CD drives as they can't download from the internet due to data cap in many parts of the world.

Not a very good example, but we are already kinda skipping to it in the home automation department with Alexa and Google Home only Apple giving a real option to control things with an Home app. 

And anyways, not many people like to get the attention of every single person in 10m radius when using his phone

I've clarified this with a long argument with Lawlz. I meant is you can get better power delivery (hence powering more powerful dac & amp) and features if you buy a lightning or type c set instead. And analog is referring to 3.5mm jack not that lightning headphones are digital

You and a few other people still don't realise this-its stupid to get rid of the 3.5mm audio jack as there is no replacement that is better. Bluetooth has been an option for audio since at least 2006 (my Toshiba Tecra M5 had bluetooth Audio-ultraportable workstation laptop) but its not used by most people due to the limitations of it (mainly sound quality, battery life and the battery life the bluetooth headset/earbuds)-so it still hasn't replaced the 3.5" jack. CD got replaced by DVD then Blueray because they improved greatly on the previous standard with higher data rates and storage capacities. Also, Apple is the manufacturer that is well known for poor battery life span (as they last 2-3 years at most) and not allowing expandable storage on any device as well as making it a right royal PITA to get files of their devices-they aren't a good example).

[RedRound2]

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

You and a few other people still don't realise this-its stupid to get rid of the 3.5mm audio jack as there is no replacement that is better. Bluetooth has been an option for audio since at least 2006 (my Toshiba Tecra M5 had bluetooth Audio-ultraportable workstation laptop) but its not used by most people due to the limitations of it (mainly sound quality, battery life and the battery life the bluetooth headset/earbuds)-so it still hasn't replaced the 3.5" jack.

How many times do I have to repeat myself?!!!

I have bluebuds X and I don't have any kinds of problem you claim. Watch the review of it and you'll see how positive they are. My opinion about bluetooth didn't spring up from nowhere

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

CD got replaced by DVD then Blueray because they improved greatly on the previous standard with higher data rates and storage capacities. Also,

I'm talking about abandoning the optical disks altogether. How many laptops have optical drives these days

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Apple is the manufacturer that is well known for poor battery life span (as they last 2-3 years at most)

No, they aren't. I personally own 3GS, 4S, iPad 3, 6S and white MacBook from 2010. All of them apart from 3GS still has about the same battery life when I bought it including my 6 year old MacBook, which lasts longer than most windows laptops. 

And again I can backup my own claim by just publishing the number of people owning iPhones prior to 6. Apple's know for making long lasting products and there's honestly no competition there

2 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

and not allowing expandable storage on any device as well as making it a right royal PITA to get files of their devices-they aren't a good example).

Expandable storage I agree, but atleast there storage options are good apart from the base, 16, 64 ad 128 and this year 32,128,256. Basically pay $100 for more than enough storage for most people instead of getting a insufficient one, I have no issues getting file on my iDevice, granted you need iTunes but otherwise it works the same way, so no problem for me there too

[MrDynamicMan]

@RedRound2 and how many headphones will actually leverage that? 

Likewise, your CD reader example doesn't fit.

 Many cases supply 5.25 bays, and even if it doesn't you can add (as you said yourself) an external reader. 

Also, they are two very different use cases. Even when CD drives where around they didn't have the same kind of use case. There were no peripherals that required them. They were ditched because there was an all around better method of downloading. 

 

Bluetooth is not the equivalent. It completely nullifies all previous products, without substantial backwards compatability. You can use adapters,but that completely nullifies the point of apples "simplicity." and you can't charge and listen to music at the same time. 

 

Bluetooth headphones are also inherently are more expensive than normal IEMs and when we're talking about a 10$ pair,  that $5 battery and Bluetooth module can double the price. 

 

Also, you keep comparing your bluebirds to your crappie Samsung pair. That's an 80$ product Vs a ~5$ product. Of Course its going to be better. But that has everything to do with the drivers and nothing to do with the price. Compare you bluebirds to anoyher $80 IEM. odds are that they won't be as good. 

[Linusinium]

OP posted the article, which is fine but then he repeatedly tried to sell "the innovation" to tech enthusiasts.

Apple isn't even catering to this crowd because the typical user here will see right through it when a business tries to pull a fast one on them.

 

Apple is catering to the mass consumers who don't know better, they may protest the inconvenience a little but will sooner or later give in and Apple knows, it's why they did "innovated" to begin with.

[suicidalfranco]

36 minutes ago, Linusinium said:

OP posted the article, which is fine but then he repeatedly tried to sell "the innovation" to tech enthusiasts.

Apple isn't even catering to this crowd because the typical user here will see right through it when a business tries to pull a fast one on them.

 

Apple is catering to the mass consumers who don't know better, they may protest the inconvenience a little but will sooner or later give in and Apple knows, it's why they did "innovated" to begin with.

[terrytek]

honestly if apple does remove the headphone jack, apple themselves or another company should provide something like a splitter to allow charging and music listening at the same time, if lightning will allow that. if that can happen, it would be the same solution as one company's solution to the lack of ports on the normal macbook, but it still has usb passthrough for charging. maybe lightning will allow charging and listening at the same time with the use of a splitter? i know it would mean another dongle, but then people wouldn't have to complain about the lack of a headphone jack.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

it doesn't apparently. Also as I said before lightning can handle data which can enable a lot more features like stop music when you remove headphones in the future.

Wait, the iPhone doesn't stop music when you unplug your earphones? That is a limitation of iOS, not 3.5mm. Android phones does it. I am 100% sure Apple could implement it as well. Wanna know why I know that? Because when you plug in your headphones the speaker gets disabled right? You don't get sound out from both your speaker and headphones. That's because the OS recognizes that you have plugged your headphones in, and disables the speaker though software. All they would have to do is add a little line of code that also stops music when this disabling/enabling of the speakers occurs.

No need to change to Lighting to stop music when headphones gets unplugged.

 

 

1 hour ago, RedRound2 said:

No I don't think. You say there are a lot of stuff and there may be (don't know much about this stuff), except I've never faced any issue using bluebuds X and it was way better than samsung earplugs I used to use before. Again I'm not an audiophile but bluetooth seems to handle well enough for most people

From a hardware and software point of view it is a mess. It's just that the mess gets covered to the end users. Bluetooth audio is like building a house on top of a swamp. Might look nice inside, but if you look under the floor you see that horrible mess of dead animals and crap it's built upon.

It is like I said before, Bluetooth is more complex, not plug-and-play, uses more power, requires batteries, does not support as good audio quality, more prone to interference and is not "backwards compatible" with existing headphones. All those drawbacks, just so that we can save a tiny bit of space inside phones. It is quite frankly idiotic.

Do you want to use Bluetooth for audio? Fine, go ahead and do that if you are okay with all the drawbacks. Removing the option to use something else for the people who are not okay with the drawbacks is a terrible idea though.

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

I recharge my buds once a week overnight and I use it around an hour a day 5-6 days a week. I don't have a problem with it and I actually find it much better as I don't have cables running around me

Having to charge them is still worse than not having to charge them. It is a pain in the ass because it requires planning. I have a pair of earphones in my bag at all times. Wherever I go I can just plug them in and it will work. No though or planning needed. If I had to move to Bluetooth then all of a sudden I would have to plan and charge them every time I had to go somewhere. Spontaneously want to bring them with you when you go out? Can't do that unless you happened to have charged them earlier. Like for me right now, I haven't used the earphones in my bag for over a week. If they were Bluetooth then I would not be able to just leave my house right now and bring them with me, because they would probably be out of power (they lose their charge even when not in use).

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

You only have to pair it once

Pair it once, for each device. Even having to pair it once is worse than never having to pair it.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

It does, but maybe a max of 5% in my daily use

Having Bluetooth on at all times and using it will use more than 5%. It also uses power from two devices rather than one.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

I've never had interference issues like you claim to be the biggest problem

When did I say it was the biggest problem? It is more prone to interference. It uses the same 2.4GHz band as a ton of other things use.

You might not have that much issues with it right now, but that might be because there aren't that many Bluetooth devices in your surrounding at the moment. A quick Google search reveals that plenty of companies including Bose and Apple got support pages how to minimize interference on your Bluetooth devices.

The more Bluetooth devices there are around you, the bigger this issue will become. Now imagine on a bus where you might have 50 devices in range, all trying to communicate with Bluetooth as well as WiFi. It will probably not work that well.

This is also a problem that can not be solved. Bluetooth uses a shared medium so it is physically impossible to get rid of interference. It is an issue that will become bigger and bigger as more things move to wireless.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

The ones I have (which i got for $89) sounds better than what 90% of people use and if you want better (which is when I would class you as an audiophile) you can very well use the adapter or lightning headphones with extra features

Yes, and a 90 dollar pair of 3.5mm headphones would sound better than what 90% of people use. Might even be better than what 95% of people use.

But this is a shit argument you are trying to make. You are essentially saying "Yeah Bluetooth is way worse in almost every single way, but it's not bad enough that people who are used to the sound of 5 dollar earphones would complain, so therefore we should go with it". You are arguing for change just for the sake of change. You are arguing for removing options from consumers without any benefit.

You are so desperate to defend Apple's potentially horrendous decision that you are throwing all logic and reason out the window, and you're talking about things you clearly have no understanding of.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Not insignificant, in terms of phone dimension and size. Do you realize how small components are. We'll see what Apple does with the extra space

I know the dimensions of phone internals very well thank you. Removing the 3.5mm headphone jack, filling all that space with extra battery and then use Bluetooth for audio instead would most likely result in a net loss of battery life. The extra battery space would most likely not be enough to offset the extra power required for Bluetooth audio. That's how little space you actually save from removing the 3.5mm headphone jack.

Want better battery life? Make the phone slightly thicker. Even a tiny increase in thickness will do waaaay more than filling the 3.5mm jack space with extra battery.

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

Go ask general population about Bluetooth earbuds and they'll be like, whatever. Yes Bluetooth buds have been there for a while now and since these days it's also as good, there it's time we eliminate wires. Say what you want about apple ditching it, but I stand on my original point especially since I've had the liberty to own such a nice pair of buds

I can't figure out what you meant with this post. Don't know if it's me being dumb or your English being bad. In what way is Bluetooth as good as 3.5mm for audio?

Sound quality? Nope.

Power usage? Nope.

Interference? Nope.

Compatibility? Nope.

Price? Nope.

 

 

2 hours ago, RedRound2 said:

We should have kept CD drives. Options right? and all those legacy tech we abandoned. I don't know if you've realized this but many people still use external CD drives as they can't download from the internet due to data cap in many parts of the world.

Well both my laptop and desktop got DVD drives so... For the people who still use CD drives they are probably happy they got the option to use it.

There are some significant differences between DVD drives and the 3.5mm headphone jack though.

1) When we "replaced" DVD drives we already had alternatives which gave us the same quality but with more convenience. Downloading a song can have the exact same quality as listening to it straight from the CD, but you also got the convenience of not having to physically pick the CD up and store it. This is not the case with Bluetooth vs 3.5mm. I have already listed the drawbacks several times so I think you get it at this point.

 

2) Removing the optical drive saved a ton of space. The fact that you even try to compare removing the optical drive to removing the 3.5mm headphone jack indicates that you have absolutely no idea about the size of different components.

Here is a comparison. On the left you can see how much room the optical drive took up. On the right you can see how much space the 3.5mm headphone jack takes up.

 

 

3) People were able to rip their music and other things and create exact duplicates for storing on their hard drives. As long as you had one optical drive somewhere you could get the same data to all your devices, even those without optical drives. That is not the case here.

 

4) When Apple removed the optical drive a lot of people had already abandoned it. It was a dying technology where the usage was declining. 3.5mm on the other hand is just getting more and more popular.

 

 

28 minutes ago, terrytek said:

i know it would mean another dongle, but then people wouldn't have to complain about the lack of a headphone jack.

I would still complain about it, because it is inherently worse than what we currently got.

[terrytek]

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Wait, the iPhone doesn't stop music when you unplug your earphones? That is a limitation of iOS, not 3.5mm. Android phones does it. I am 100% sure Apple could implement it as well. Wanna know why I know that? Because when you plug in your headphones the speaker gets disabled right? You don't get sound out from both your speaker and headphones. That's because the OS recognizes that you have plugged your headphones in, and disables the speaker though software. All they would have to do is add a little line of code that also stops music when this disabling/enabling of the speakers occurs.

No need to change to Lighting to stop music when headphones gets unplugged.

 

 

From a hardware and software point of view it is a mess. It's just that the mess gets covered to the end users. Bluetooth audio is like building a house on top of a swamp. Might look nice inside, but if you look under the floor you see that horrible mess of dead animals and crap it's built upon.

It is like I said before, Bluetooth is more complex, not plug-and-play, uses more power, requires batteries, does not support as good audio quality, more prone to interference and is not "backwards compatible" with existing headphones. All those drawbacks, just so that we can save a tiny bit of space inside phones. It is quite frankly idiotic.

Do you want to use Bluetooth for audio? Fine, go ahead and do that if you are okay with all the drawbacks. Removing the option to use something else for the people who are not okay with the drawbacks is a terrible idea though.

 

 

Having to charge them is still worse than not having to charge them. It is a pain in the ass because it requires planning. I have a pair of earphones in my bag at all times. Wherever I go I can just plug them in and it will work. No though or planning needed. If I had to move to Bluetooth then all of a sudden I would have to plan and charge them every time I had to go somewhere. Spontaneously want to bring them with you when you go out? Can't do that unless you happened to have charged them earlier. Like for me right now, I haven't used the earphones in my bag for over a week. If they were Bluetooth then I would not be able to just leave my house right now and bring them with me, because they would probably be out of power (they lose their charge even when not in use).

 

Pair it once, for each device. Even having to pair it once is worse than never having to pair it.

 

Having Bluetooth on at all times and using it will use more than 5%. It also uses power from two devices rather than one.

 

When did I say it was the biggest problem? It is more prone to interference. It uses the same 2.4GHz band as a ton of other things use.

You might not have that much issues with it right now, but that might be because there aren't that many Bluetooth devices in your surrounding at the moment. A quick Google search reveals that plenty of companies including Bose and Apple got support pages how to minimize interference on your Bluetooth devices.

The more Bluetooth devices there are around you, the bigger this issue will become. Now imagine on a bus where you might have 50 devices in range, all trying to communicate with Bluetooth as well as WiFi. It will probably not work that well.

This is also a problem that can not be solved. Bluetooth uses a shared medium so it is physically impossible to get rid of interference. It is an issue that will become bigger and bigger as more things move to wireless.

 

Yes, and a 90 dollar pair of 3.5mm headphones would sound better than what 90% of people use. Might even be better than what 95% of people use.

But this is a shit argument you are trying to make. You are essentially saying "Yeah Bluetooth is way worse in almost every single way, but it's not bad enough that people who are used to the sound of 5 dollar earphones would complain, so therefore we should go with it". You are arguing for change just for the sake of change. You are arguing for removing options from consumers without any benefit.

You are so desperate to defend Apple's potentially horrendous decision that you are throwing all logic and reason out the window, and you're talking about things you clearly have no understanding of.

 

I know the dimensions of phone internals very well thank you. Removing the 3.5mm headphone jack, filling all that space with extra battery and then use Bluetooth for audio instead would most likely result in a net loss of battery life. The extra battery space would most likely not be enough to offset the extra power required for Bluetooth audio. That's how little space you actually save from removing the 3.5mm headphone jack.

Want better battery life? Make the phone slightly thicker. Even a tiny increase in thickness will do waaaay more than filling the 3.5mm jack space with extra battery.

 

I can't figure out what you meant with this post. Don't know if it's me being dumb or your English being bad. In what way is Bluetooth as good as 3.5mm for audio?

Sound quality? Nope.

Power usage? Nope.

Interference? Nope.

Compatibility? Nope.

Price? Nope.

 

 

Well both my laptop and desktop got DVD drives so... For the people who still use CD drives they are probably happy they got the option to use it.

There are some significant differences between DVD drives and the 3.5mm headphone jack though.

1) When we "replaced" DVD drives we already had alternatives which gave us the same quality but with more convenience. Downloading a song can have the exact same quality as listening to it straight from the CD, but you also got the convenience of not having to physically pick the CD up and store it. This is not the case with Bluetooth vs 3.5mm. I have already listed the drawbacks several times so I think you get it at this point.

 

2) Removing the optical drive saved a ton of space. The fact that you even try to compare removing the optical drive to removing the 3.5mm headphone jack indicates that you have absolutely no idea about the size of different components.

Here is a comparison. On the left you can see how much room the optical drive took up. On the right you can see how much space the 3.5mm headphone jack takes up.

i

 

 

3) People were able to rip their music and other things and create exact duplicates for storing on their hard drives. As long as you had one optical drive somewhere you could get the same data to all your devices, even those without optical drives. That is not the case here.

 

4) When Apple removed the optical drive a lot of people had already abandoned it. It was a dying technology where the usage was declining. 3.5mm on the other hand is just getting more and more popular.

 

 

I would still complain about it, because it is inherently worse than what we currently got.

i mean it's a bit of a compromise. so we can still charge and listen to music at the same time. i mean look at juiced power's dock for the macbook. it adds extra ports while still having passthrough for charging. if we have a small enough dongle from them, they could be used to split power and music.

[Unhelpful]

9 minutes ago, terrytek said:

i mean it's a bit of a compromise. so we can still charge and listen to music at the same time. i mean look at juiced power's dock for the macbook. it adds extra ports while still having passthrough for charging. if we have a small enough dongle from them, they could be used to split power and music.

We can do that now, why be forced to use a splitter for that? It's a compromise with zero benefit...

[terrytek]

3 minutes ago, JoeyDM said:

We can do that now, why be forced to use a splitter for that? It's a compromise with zero benefit...

yeah, but it's inevitable that the headphone jack will disappear on the next iphone. this could be a potential solution tbh. but i agree. removing the jack is stupid. i wished apple would listen to its customers and benefit us in a better way like increasing battery.