Impacts of removing the headphone jack [MERGED]

[Taco1933]

I use Bluetooth headphones almost exclusive at work, home, traveling and gym. Charging them is not an issue for me, as I would much rather charge them than deal with cables -- wrapping, untangling, cable management, plugging and unplugging, etc. Assuming sound quality is sufficient, I'd chose that option every time.

There are a few occasions where wired connections can be more convenient. I made sure my BT headphones have a detachable cable so that I can plug them in when the battery runs out and I can't recharge them. Lag is still an issue occasionally, so when it's critical or badly off, then plugging in is just easier. And sound quality can be misleading, again for critical listening. So it's case specific. Also, the ability to use other BT equipment, and pairing -- in many cases, just plugging in a cable is far easier (Lightning or otherwise).

Generally speaking I think the lack of wire management freedom of movement makes them a much better experience for me.

I'm actually very interested in Apple's AirPods, even though I don't think they're very flattering looking, but if the audio qualities there, the battery solution is pretty compelling -- 15 min charge for 3 more hours; I mean that's pretty reasonable, who can't take a 15 minute break every 3 hours? The issues that remain to be seen are how well they address video lag, but this new W1 chip probably does an excellent job with that. The one issue they haven't addressed is sharing audio connections over BT. And as I mentioned above, pairing is going to be great on Apple products, it's still going to be an issue with anything else. But I suspect as usual Apple has shown the way with this W1 chip, and all BT devices will go down this path quickly.

For $160, I'll probably pass. They certainly seem neat, but I have a feeling most of the engineering went into things like auto on-off and siri rather than sound quality. Hope I'm wrong, because they definitely look interesting. It would be great if they can do all that AND actually sound good.

 

[bhayes444]

Even if somebody didn't have Bluetooth headphones or Bluetooth audio in your car, Bluetooth to 3.5mm adapters exist.
[doublepost=1473536736][/doublepost]
Yes I'm not saying that they had never considered smartwatches, and suddenly rumors of Apple doing it made them make one. They would have had designs and models before Apple Watch rumors began.

I don't see any concrete proof on your end either. When the rumors began cropping up, I'm sure Apple hadn't decided on removing it but were considering it. They likely leaked the information themselves.

My attitude towards this is not that Apple does everything first and the others copy - that's not true and I don't have a biased to Apple when it comes to smartphones or smartwatches. But I do believe that the removal of the headphone jack in the Moto Z, and other lesser known phones was due to Apple rumors, enabled by USB C.

You can believe all you want, it doesn't make it true. Of course I have no proof for anything, just as you don't. Now, if I worked for a large smartphone manufacturer and designed these devices I could potentially give you some actual evidence, but I don't. I don't think your attitude is that Apple does everything first, I think your attitude is that companies, other than Apple, base many of their decisions solely on Apple rumors. I have already proved that there was a smartphone without a headphone jack long before Apple decided to ditch it. The smartwatch rumors from Apple weren't the only ones floating around. Rumors of other companies making smart watches in general will cause companies to look into the viability of them, and start producing them if deemed viable. Because a rumor is about Apple doesn't make it the holy grail of rumors, the one everybody should pay attention to, it's just another drop in the bucket.

You hit the nail on the head: USB type C enabled smartphone manufacturers an easy way to get rid of the headphone jack. If USB C wasn't around, Motorola and others wouldn't have ditched the port this year, simple as that. Apple rumors may have played a small part in the timing of it, but they were not the decisive factor. Not by a long shot. If anything, you would think companies would leave the port in their phone just to differentiate it from Apple and provide functionality Apple doesn't; effectively taking the Samsung route of marketing.

 

[Mac 128]

Even if somebody didn't have Bluetooth headphones or Bluetooth audio in your car, Bluetooth to 3.5mm adapters exist.
[doublepost=1473536736][/doublepost]
Yes I'm not saying that they had never considered smartwatches, and suddenly rumors of Apple doing it made them make one. They would have had designs and models before Apple Watch rumors began.

I don't see any concrete proof on your end either. When the rumors began cropping up, I'm sure Apple hadn't decided on removing it but were considering it. They likely leaked the information themselves.

My attitude towards this is not that Apple does everything first and the others copy - that's not true and I don't have a biased to Apple when it comes to smartphones or smartwatches. But I do believe that the removal of the headphone jack in the Moto Z, and other lesser known phones was due to Apple rumors, enabled by USB C.

In addition, there are even BT to FM transmitters for those who don't even have a 3.5mm Jack.

For $160, I'll probably pass. They certainly seem neat, but I have a feeling most of the engineering went into things like auto on-off and siri rather than sound quality. Hope I'm wrong, because they definitely look interesting. It would be great if they can do all that AND actually sound good.

I agree. The key to effectively removing the headphone jack is wireless audio of comperbale quality to what the average user can expect through the 3.5mm Jack. I'm eagerly awaiting some critical reviews. $160 doesn't seem unreasonable for these if so ... I just wish they looked better. It's interesting that Apple didn't work harder to have them available on launch day. Not sure what choice customers are going to have but to use their old headphones or the included Lightning headphones -- which seems like a real failure of purpose here ...

You hit the nail on the head: USB type C enabled smartphone manufacturers an easy way to get rid of the headphone jack. If USB C wasn't around, Motorola and others wouldn't have ditched the port this year, simple as that. Apple rumors may have played a small part in the timing of it, but they were not the decisive factor. Not by a long shot. If anything, you would think companies would leave the port in their phone just to differentiate it from Apple and provide functionality Apple doesn't; effectively taking the Samsung route of marketing.

Well you can at least say that without Apple introducing Lightning, there might not be USB-C as we know it.

 

[firewire9000]

For me this is like when the Adobe Flash thing. Later the time says that Steve was right.

Think in the early years, everyone upset about can't watch Flash videos in his iOS device. Now we have HTML5 that is far better system.

 

[Shirasaki]

You know, maybe if enough people vote with their wallets and don't buy into a product that doesn't give them what they want, the iPhone 8 will come along and bring it back by popular demand.

Business cares ONLY money and this will never change. Then the only way to force them change their business model is to not buy the products.
Yeah, pretty much the case. However I seriously doubt if there are enough customers not buying the new iPhone and then eventually affect iPhone sale significantly.

 

[Mac 128]

For me this is like when the Adobe Flash thing. Later the time says that Steve was right.

Think in the early years, everyone upset about can't watch Flash videos in his iOS device. Now we have HTML5 that is far better system.

I'm loath to bring this up, since who knows what Steve would think or do today. But I think the missteps with removing the headphone jack wouldn't have happened under him. He cared about music too much. If It had not been Steve's lifelong dream to get the Beatles catalogue on iTunes, I'm not sure we'd have it today (and the company probably wouldn't be called Apple).

Jobs was right about Flash. But I doubt he would have let this phone out the door without making sure that the headphone jack -- the common man's connection to music (arguably the life blood of Apple vis-a-vis iTunes) -- the removal of which from the iPhone, was functionally replaced by the new technology replacing it. And right now it isn't. Other than providing another means for a customer to individually hear their own music on the iPhone, the new technology takes away a lot of convenience which is going to hurt its adoption. And that's too bad, because I think we will be better off without the headphone jack.

In the end, it will all sort itself out, and wireless will improve and become the most common way people connect their headphones. But there was no reason for it to be this bad. Unlike Flash, Apple held all the cards here. All they had to do was care a little more. And I think Phil Schiller's tone-deaf response about charging and listening at the same time is all that needs to be said about the current state of things at Apple.

 

[Shirasaki]

The IPhone 6 can handle 50 hours of audio playback so I don't see an issue. Is the screen on constantly?

Nope. It must be Turned off.

 

[ZipZap]

Those Airpods are an epic fail. Pictured by apple on people with larger heads. When seen on typical head sizes they look stupid. Should have been black at the very least.

 

[Appleaker]

You can believe all you want, it doesn't make it true. Of course I have no proof for anything, just as you don't. Now, if I worked for a large smartphone manufacturer and designed these devices I could potentially give you some actual evidence, but I don't. I don't think your attitude is that Apple does everything first, I think your attitude is that companies, other than Apple, base many of their decisions solely on Apple rumors. I have already proved that there was a smartphone without a headphone jack long before Apple decided to ditch it. The smartwatch rumors from Apple weren't the only ones floating around. Rumors of other companies making smart watches in general will cause companies to look into the viability of them, and start producing them if deemed viable. Because a rumor is about Apple doesn't make it the holy grail of rumors, the one everybody should pay attention to, it's just another drop in the bucket.

You hit the nail on the head: USB type C enabled smartphone manufacturers an easy way to get rid of the headphone jack. If USB C wasn't around, Motorola and others wouldn't have ditched the port this year, simple as that. Apple rumors may have played a small part in the timing of it, but they were not the decisive factor. Not by a long shot. If anything, you would think companies would leave the port in their phone just to differentiate it from Apple and provide functionality Apple doesn't; effectively taking the Samsung route of marketing.

I had a feeling you thought I had an Apple biased - I thought I said that but you still don't understand. I am NOT saying that Apple Rumors shape the industry and that every company solely relies on Apple rumors for their decisions. That is ridiculous, and i'm sure you couldn't seriously believe anybody could think that, despite some of the absurd opinions on these forums.

Now I understand why you believe the opposite - you haven't worked for an mobile device manufacturer. You didn't need to prove there were smartphones without a headphone jack nor did you have to prove smartwatches existed before Apple Watch rumors.

When a large number of rumors start appearing of future competition, it will be considered as a strategic move by the company to act on those rumors in order to do it first. If in 5 years time, the move was going to be put down in history as the move that changed the industry and pushed the world to wireless, then other companies are going to want to do that first.

Other companies can do negative things because Apple have done it - for example reducing ports on a laptop or allowing the camera to bulge out of a phone. Again, they were done before but not in the scale they are now. Most companies will be keeping the headphone jack it for now, but it all depends on the reception of the move.

Since USB C is the replacement for all types, it was always going to be used as a headphone connector as was the case with A and very rarely with micro-B. It enabled the move but it was triggered by the rumor of Apple doing it.

At the end of the day, I could be wrong or you could be wrong. Let's stop arguing over a hole in a phone.

 

[bhayes444]

I had a feeling you thought I had an Apple biased - I thought I said that but you still don't understand. I am NOT saying that Apple Rumors shape the industry and that every company solely relies on Apple rumors for their decisions. That is ridiculous, and i'm sure you couldn't seriously believe anybody could think that, despite some of the absurd opinions on these forums.

Now I understand why you believe the opposite - you haven't worked for an mobile device manufacturer. You didn't need to prove there were smartphones without a headphone jack nor did you have to prove smartwatches existed before Apple Watch rumors.

When a large number of rumors start appearing of future competition, it will be considered as a strategic move by the company to act on those rumors in order to do it first. If in 5 years time, the move was going to be put down in history as the move that changed the industry and pushed the world to wireless, then other companies are going to want to do that first.

Other companies can do negative things because Apple have done it - for example reducing ports on a laptop or allowing the camera to bulge out of a phone. Again, they were done before but not in the scale they are now. Most companies will be keeping the headphone jack it for now, but it all depends on the reception of the move.

Since USB C is the replacement for all types, it was always going to be used as a headphone connector as was the case with A and very rarely with micro-B. It enabled the move but it was triggered by the rumor of Apple doing it.

At the end of the day, I could be wrong or you could be wrong. Let's stop arguing over a hole in a phone.

I never said you had an Apple bias, and I still am not. I seriously disagree with you saying other companies produced some products solely necause of Apple's rumors. If that's not what you meant, then sorry but that is how it came across. Your assertion that others do "negative" things because Apple has already done them is also false. Other companies have done things people disapprove of for quite some time, Apple doing it has just brought more notoriety to the issue. Using uet another example you posted: the camera bulge. The camera bulge was a thing long before Apple, and was fairly widespread. Apple took the heat for it not because they were the first major company to do it, but because Apple's critics were very outspoken about it.

I do not think you understand the arguments I am making against your claim. Apple is seen as the technology golden child, and whatever they do will receive huge criticism and/or praise. Rumors of their products do impact the tech world, but companies don't make their decisions solely based on if Apple has or will do something. Companies take to industry trends like any other, and if Apple is involved it is merely coincidence; since Apple is a tech company too.

Despite the rumors of the Apple Watch smart watches were coming. Despite the rumors of no headphone jack, the removal of the port was going to happen. Despite the rumors of a camera bump, companies were already making and were developing devices with camera bumps. Apple does play a large role in the technology world, but the technology world does not revolve around Apple.

 

[Dmal99]

It may be an aging technology on a cell phone, but audiophiles like me will NEVER give up the analog jack overall. Digital is not always better, especially when it comes to audio. Analog jacks are still the way we get our HD music out of our DAC units.

The digital out on the lightning port still does have great use though, and as for me the headphone jack is moot. I'd rather have waterproofing anyway, and most audiophiles use the iPhone lighting port to output a digital music signal direct to an external DAC like the Dragonfly Red/Black, Sony PHA, or iDSP, and then get 24/96 sound on whatever earbuds or phones we end up using.

Now, pay attention, cause here is the part of this whole thing that is DRIPPING with irony. The lightning plug earbuds use an ANALOG audio out, not DIGITAL. Also the headphone adapter included is an ANALOG music out not digital. Everyone is saying time to move on with technology etc, but the adapter and earbuds just gives you access to the lighting port's line level analog audio out. It's the DIGITAL output signal that can be fed to an external DAC and comes in raw form. Funny right? All this talk about time to upgrade music to digital etc, and they still pass a line level analog signal. I really was hoping apple would step up their audio game and make their earbuds 24/96, but, ah, well, that's life. It's a shame most people don't even get regular 16/44 CD quality out of their iPhones, and have no idea what a world of music they're missing.

 

[Mac 128]

It may be an aging technology on a cell phone, but audiophiles like me will NEVER give up the analog jack overall. Digital is not always better, especially when it comes to audio. Analog jacks are still the way we get our HD music out of our DAC units.

The digital out not he lightning port does have great use though, and as for me the headphone jack is moot. I'd rather have waterproofing anyway, and most audiophiles use the iPhone lighting port to output a digital music signal direct to an external DAC like the Dragonfly Red or iDSP, and then get 24/96 sound on whatever earbuds or phones we end up using.

Now, pay attention, cause here is the part of this while thing that is DRIPPING with irony. The lightning plug earbuds use an ANALOG audio out, not DIGITAL. Also the headphone adapter included is an ANALOG music out not digital. Everyone is saying time to move on with technology etc, but the adapter just gives you access to the lighting port's line level out. Its the DIGITAL output signal that can be fed to an external DAC and comes in raw form. Funny right? All this talk about time to upgrade music to digital etc, and they still pass a line level analog signal.

.

What are you talking about? Apple is not passing an analogue signal over Lightning from the internal DAC. It's passing a digital signal into an adapter with a built in DAC and amp.

 

[Dmal99]

.

What are you talking about? Apple is not passing an analogue signal over Lightning from the internal DAC. It's passing a digital signal into an adapter with a built in DAC and amp.

Lighting is the name of the port at the bottom of the phone, it has nothing to do with the internal iPhone DAC, which is capable of 16/44 if its the same as the last iPhone. The lightning port comes with a line level audio out, and also a digital audio out. You can use either or both. When you use the line level audio out, the same signal that comes out of a headphone jack, its an analog signal created and passed from the INTERNAL DAC of the iPhone. When you use the digital audio signal that comes from the lightning port and is passed directly from the iPhone itself, bypassing the DAC, and with it you can use any number of EXTERNAL DAC units designed for use with the iPhone and/or other cell phones.

A built-in DAC and Amp is the same thing as an internal DAC. Its a DAC thats internal to the phone, and any music player uses that DAC inside the iPhone to create an analog signal, which it passes out of the lighting port, along with a digital signal direct from the player. Also, I didn't say anything about passing an analog signal inside the phone to a DAC, thats not how it works, nor would it be efficient, since if you already had an analog signal, you wouldn't need a DAC which stands for DIGITAL TO ANALOG CONVERTER.

The lightning earbuds and the lightning to headphone jack adapter are both analog signals, passed by the INTERNAL DAC or the iPhone.

 

[Mac 128]

Lighting is the name of the port at the bottom of the phone, it has nothing to do with the internal iPhone DAC, which is capable of 16/44 if its the same as the last iPhone. The lightning port comes with a line level audio out, and also a digital audio out. You can use either or both. When you use the line level audio out, the same signal that comes out of a headphone jack, its an analog signal created and passed from the INTERNAL DAC of the iPhone. When you use the digital audio signal that comes from the lightning port and is passed directly from the iPhone itself, bypassing the DAC, you can use any number of EXTERNAL DAC units designed for use with the iPhone and/or other cell phones.

The lightning earbuds and the lightning to headphone jack adapter are both analog signals, passed by the INTERNAL DAC or the iPhone.

No it doesn't. Please show me in the MFi specs and guidelines where this is permitted, or any product on the market that uses this analogue output.

 

[deany]

It may be an aging technology on a cell phone, but audiophiles like me will NEVER give up the analog jack overall. Digital is not always better, especially when it comes to audio. Analog jacks are still the way we get our HD music out of our DAC units.

The digital out on the lightning port still does have great use though, and as for me the headphone jack is moot. I'd rather have waterproofing anyway, and most audiophiles use the iPhone lighting port to output a digital music signal direct to an external DAC like the Dragonfly Red/Black, Sony PHA, or iDSP, and then get 24/96 sound on whatever earbuds or phones we end up using.

Now, pay attention, cause here is the part of this whole thing that is DRIPPING with irony. The lightning plug earbuds use an ANALOG audio out, not DIGITAL. Also the headphone adapter included is an ANALOG music out not digital. Everyone is saying time to move on with technology etc, but the adapter and earbuds just gives you access to the lighting port's line level analog audio out. It's the DIGITAL output signal that can be fed to an external DAC and comes in raw form. Funny right? All this talk about time to upgrade music to digital etc, and they still pass a line level analog signal. I really was hoping apple would step up their audio game and make their earbuds 24/96, but, ah, well, that's life. It's a shame most people don't even get regular 16/44 CD quality out of their iPhones, and have no idea what a world of music they're missing.

Is it the poor quality of the FREE wired, included in box lightning earbuds that make them non-digital?
How can the consumer have HD digital lightning WIRED with iPhone via lightning?
cheers

 

[Dmal99]

No it doesn't. Please show me in the MFi specs and guidelines where this is permitted, or any product on the market that uses this analogue output.

So the DAC in the i7 isnt connected to the lighting port? Its difficult to imagine the sound quality being good at all if an amp and DAC are being built into the lightning to analog 3.5mm adapter.

 

[yep-sure]

I'm surprised Phil didn't pull a Microsoft and say "we have a product for customers who want to use a headphone jack to listen to music, it's called the iPhone 6S".

Although what he did say was equally as out of touch.

 

[Appleaker]

For me this is like when the Adobe Flash thing. Later the time says that Steve was right.

Think in the early years, everyone upset about can't watch Flash videos in his iOS device. Now we have HTML5 that is far better system.

Yeah I think this is a good example. It will be a long time before alternatives (probably wireless) is perfected and adopted by everyone. Although I think it wil be slightly different since the headphone jack will still be i usen

I never said you had an Apple bias, and I still am not. I seriously disagree with you saying other companies produced some products solely necause of Apple's rumors. If that's not what you meant, then sorry but that is how it came across. Your assertion that others do "negative" things because Apple has already done them is also false. Other companies have done things people disapprove of for quite some time, Apple doing it has just brought more notoriety to the issue. Using uet another example you posted: the camera bulge. The camera bulge was a thing long before Apple, and was fairly widespread. Apple took the heat for it not because they were the first major company to do it, but because Apple's critics were very outspoken about it.

I do not think you understand the arguments I am making against your claim. Apple is seen as the technology golden child, and whatever they do will receive huge criticism and/or praise. Rumors of their products do impact the tech world, but companies don't make their decisions solely based on if Apple has or will do something. Companies take to industry trends like any other, and if Apple is involved it is merely coincidence; since Apple is a tech company too.

Despite the rumors of the Apple Watch smart watches were coming. Despite the rumors of no headphone jack, the removal of the port was going to happen. Despite the rumors of a camera bump, companies were already making and were developing devices with camera bumps. Apple does play a large role in the technology world, but the technology world does not revolve around Apple.

Again, I don't think the technology world revolves around Apple. That would be having an Apple bias. I am talking about major companies here, who I don't think would remove the headphone jack without the iPhone doing so and I don't believe smartwatches would have been focused on by major companies if the Apple rumors didn't ramp up.
That is because Apple is the main competitor and the one phone manufacturers worry about, along with Samsung for many.

Of course decisions would be made based off trends, otherwise it would take a hit in sales. However Apple is a very mainstream company so would shape trends in parts of the technology world. Having said that, no, I am not saying that companies actions are solely based on Apple rumors.

Our opinions aren't going to shift so let's agree to disagree.

 

[bigpoppamac31]

Lightning does not carry an analog audio signal, so an external DAC will be necessary somewhere in the chain. The iPhone must still have a DAC for its internal speakers, but there's no analog connection heading out of the phone.

But it'd only be necessary for analog headphones or speakers right? Something like the new lightning EarPods wouldn't need it since they're digital? Does that mean the lightning to 3.5mm jack has a DAC in it? That's incredibly small to house a DAC of any good quality.

 

[xofruitcake]

I am not even sure why removing the headphone jack is a problem at all. The adapter that come with the phone is perfect adequate for someone who insist of using head phone jack. Apple's version of blue tooth headphone cost $160 but you can get one from Amazon for $24. This one has 300+ reviews and 4 stars average. It should be better than the headphone that come with the 6S.. I think for the majority of the average joe like me, it is a non-issue.


https://www.amazon.com/Ansion-Bluet...3576080&sr=8-3&keywords=blue+tooth+headphones

 

[born2runak]

Actually, tinfoil might in fact help to reflect some of the rays.
[doublepost=1469763792][/doublepost]Joking aside, what if some new found evidence did suggest that there were negative health effects to Bluetooth headphones. I wonder if that would encourage Apple to reintroduce the jack in future models.

Again, I'm not saying that there are such effects, just speaking hypothetically.

I think holding a cell phone to your head multiple times daily probably will have a bigger effect than bluetooth headphones. We are all destined for brain tumors

 

[Gathomblipoob]

I think holding a cell phone to your head multiple times daily probably will have a bigger effect than bluetooth headphones. We are all destined for brain tumors

It is not a tumah!

 

[Braveheart88]

I prefer wireless but I have two issues. I currently have two phones, one for work (android) and one for my personal use (iPhone). I prefer apple earbuds but when I plug them to my android phone, the mic is not working. So I am using Samsung headset 3.5mm so that I can switch from my android phone to my iPhone and I have been searching for a better wireless method to connect both devices. When I eventually found one that can pair two phones simultaneously, I had a big problem with connectivity and it was "Samsung level" headset. I prefer Samsung headsets because they look like the apple earbuds and they fit my ears perfectly.

So if apple airpods are able to connect two phones then I will give it a go and this will solve my problem completely. the other solution if for apple to release a phone with two sims and I don't see them doing that.

 

[Goratrix]

But it'd only be necessary for analog headphones or speakers right? Something like the new lightning EarPods wouldn't need it since they're digital?

There are no "digital" headphones or speakers. For an actual sound to be able to reach your ears, it must be an analog sound wave. The only difference is where in the chain you put the DAC (digital -> analog converter). It can be in the phone, in an adapter, or in the speakers/headphones. Being in the phone is of course the best solution, as the DAC needs power input and the phone has a built-in battery. The DAC being in the adapter is stupid, due to the small size and the need to draw power from the phone anyway. The DAC in the headphones is again costrained by size, and the need for a battery and charging. That's why the 3.5mm jack makes perfect sense and is in no way "obsolete". Because you need the analog wave anyway to be able to hear anything, and the most logical and practical place to generate that sound wave is within the phone itself.

 

[joeblow7777]

I think holding a cell phone to your head multiple times daily probably will have a bigger effect than bluetooth headphones. We are all destined for brain tumors

Actually I very rarely hold my cellphone to my head. Who actually talks on their phone anymore?

But I frequently use earbuds.