Impacts of removing the headphone jack [MERGED]

[Qbnkelt]

If you say so.

I never said they walk around plugged in. Someone said when could it be an issue and I gave an example. Funny how you turned this into something it's not. Yes, from lockdown to the destination it can easily be 30 hours and one could have limited access to power. So yes, it could be an issue of charging a device or wireless headphones. But if you had ANY military experience or affiliation you would know that.

It's that simple. People can have different opinions or views than yours and it is ok.

Again working on a military base can mean many things....

I am done with this and you. I still don't see why someone can't have a different view point without people getting all mad and trying to dis-prove them.

A field device is not one that would be used for anything other than specific apps approved for use. Military does not allow for personal devices in deployment. Therefore the decision point of choosing whether to maintain battery or listen to music does not happen.

Any battalion or any command post will have power unless they are deployed in battle. At that point the least concern is whether to charge or to mistn to music or to charge an EarPod.

Smartphones in deployment are not recreational they are a tool and therefore they would be tightly controlled as far as use. If it came to long tome away there are power packs as part of what would be handed out or there would be portable power sources that go along with the troops.

So again, if there is extended time away from a power source such as in field deployment the use of the smartphone would be curtail and mitigation strategies for power consumption would be part of the troop's equipment.

If you had ANY awareness of a deployment you would know that ear pods are not found in a troop's pack. The LAST thing they are concerned about are EarPods. And again, this is all moot because any smartphone deployed in the field goes with a device battery back or a company battery pack.

Humvees, Strykers, Bradleys etc all have power supplies so any travel to any destination would take place with a source of power until destination. During that time they're not using their military provided devices unless absolutely necessary, would have a battery pack or have access to power, and personal devices are not used because they're not encrypted and could reveal position.

So no....no 30 hour travel where any military would have to choose between keeping a phone charged and listening to Kanye West. Any sargeant or captain worth a penny would rip that soldier apart.

 

[Thor_1]

A field device is not one that would be used for anything other than specific apps approved for use. Military does not allow for personal devices in deployment. Therefore the decision point of choosing whether to maintain battery or listen to music does not happen.

Not going to lie. I stopped reading after this paragraph and a good laugh.

Smartphones and other devices are ALL these locations.

THIS WAS ABOUT THE NEED TO CHARGE AND LISTEN WHILE TRAVELING on an AIRPLANE and the stops in between. Why are you making stuff up.

Wow just wow. The Mis-information you spread.

 

[Gathomblipoob]

What? Who said anything about horses? Your post makes no sense.

Not a fan of "America", eh?

 

[Qbnkelt]

Not going to lie. I stopped reading after this paragraph and a good laugh.

Smartphones and other devices are ALL these locations.

THIS WAS ABOUT THE NEED TO CHARGE AND LISTEN WHILE TRAVELING on an AIRPLANE and the stops in between. Why are you making stuff up.

Wow just wow. The Mis-information you spread.

Wrong. Personal smartphones are not allowed on deployment in battle because they are not encrypted and can, through GPS, give up location.

And if you're in a battle and you're listening to music or FBing then your sergeant has some few good words for you. To say nothing of you being a danger to the mission.

So....no 30 hour window where you need to choose between charging or playing music.

The military example is a silly one. Try something else.

But then again if you were to find yourself without power source for 30 hours and you aren't adult enough to figure out what you should do then I can't help.

And hey....planes have charging ports.....so do Amtrak trains (taken the DC to NY quite often and have had no trouble plugging in) and touring coaches also have outlets.

So this whole 30 hour travel with no power is bunk.

 

[ArmCortexA8]

What people seem to be missing is that the port that appears where the headphone jack was is not a speaker at all. Only the right speaker grill is actually a speaker and the earpiece is the second speaker. Additionally there is still only one speaker on the bottom despite the two grills as shown here: https://www.apple.com/au/iphone-7/specs/ and listed only the right speaker is classed as a speaker. To further prove this go here: https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPhone+7+Plus+Teardown/67384 and go to Step 7 and it clearly states "In place of the headphone jack, we find a component that seems to channel sound from outside the phone into the microphone... or from the Taptic Engine out. No fancy electronics here, just some well-designed acoustics and moulded plastic." This then means the earpiece is one speaker and the right side at the bottom is only one speaker as well.

 

[Thor_1]

Wrong. Personal smartphones are not allowed on deployment in battle because they are not encrypted and can, through GPS, give up location.

And if you're in a battle and you're listening to music or FBing then your sergeant has some few good words for you. To say nothing of you being a danger to the mission.

So....no 30 hour window where you need to choose between charging or playing music.

The military example is a silly one. Try something else.

But then again if you were to find yourself without power source for 30 hours and you aren't adult enough to figure out what you should do then I can't help.

And hey....planes have charging ports.....so do Amtrak trains (taken the DC to NY quite often and have had no trouble plugging in) and touring coaches also have outlets.

So this whole 30 hour travel with no power is bunk.

Whatever you say. I don't know why you have tried to turn this into YOU HAVE TO BE RIGHT. All I was doing was giving an example of when headphones might be an issue, during traveling!

But hey, I know people who have smart phones over there, but again your right, they don't exist. Just check out you tube for videos people have posted from that region, but they are fake too right.

It was an example, but keep on making stuff up.
[doublepost=1477742675][/doublepost]

Not a fan of "America", eh?

America YES!

 

[Chamcha]

I love the new iphone, more than I actually thought I would but, frankly, the lack of a headphone jack has annoyed me more than I thought it would. There has been more than one occasion where I needed to charge and listen at the same time, more than one occasion where I accidentally picked up old earpods with the 3.5 mm jack, and more than one occasion where I had the lightning pods and needed a 3.5 mm input for my laptop.

I completely understand there are workarounds but, that I have to even think about it, is really annoying.

 

[Mac 128]

I love the new iphone, more than I actually thought I would but, frankly, the lack of a headphone jack has annoyed me more than I thought it would. There has been more than one occasion where I needed to charge and listen at the same time, more than one occasion where I accidentally picked up old earpods with the 3.5 mm jack, and more than one occasion where I had the lightning pods and needed a 3.5 mm input for my laptop.

I completely understand there are workarounds but, that I have to even think about it, is really annoying.

That's why you should just buy a pair of AirPods to use with both ... Oh wait, you can't, and nobody knows when you can. Well there's always the Beats earbuds with the W1 chip ... Oh wait, those aren't available either. Well you could just buy some basic BT headphones that won't be as easy to use, and one of the reasons you probably haven't been using them.

Might I suggest that you use the method Apple seems to be encouraging?

Put those new Lightning EarPods in a drawer you never use. Take the free 3.5mm adapter in the box, and that old set of EarPods you keep mistaking for the Lightning pair, and you'll always have a pair of headphones for your iPhone and Laptop, not to mention any other audio device on the planet. Just don't lose the adapter (but if you do they're only $9, a price even the Chinese haven't been able to crack by much). Of course you'll still have to figure out how to charge it and listen at the same time, or buy a $50 adapter for that.

But for $9, even if you lose the 3.5mm adapter a lot, you'll be able to use cheaper and more compatible 3.5mm technology for years to come, for far less than it would cost to pay for Lightning or wireless technology during that same period (including the charger/signal splitter). Doesn't really make a lot of sense does it?

 

[thekeyring]

For some people like me, it will have NO impact
I never use the headphone jack at all

It has no impact for me. I use the headphone jack all the time, but I use the headphones which came with my iPhone... As the 7 ships with lightning headphones, no problem.

 

[macfacts]

Negative impacts for Apple:

• ...

Positive impacts for consumers:

• ....

Other impacts:

• ....

Any possible impacts I haven't mentioned?

You forgot positive impacts for Apple and negative impact to consumers.

 

[Appleaker]

You forgot positive impacts for Apple and negative impact to consumers.

I don't know why I didn't put that, I thought I did since it's the most obvious. Maybe because these were long term impacts, so a negative consumer impact would be the lack of device compatibility (although wireless basically solves that).
I don't really remember writing it to be honest and I don't know what people are still doing on this thread .

 

[futurejetblackowner]

PS. You have to wonder about those who want the iPhone but can't let go of the 19th century technology that is the headphone jack.

how in the world are headphones 19th century technology?

 

[eyoungren]

how in the world are headphones 19th century technology?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_(audio)

From Wikipedia…

The phone connector was invented for use in telephone switchboards in the 19th century and is still widely used.

 

[futurejetblackowner]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_(audio)

From Wikipedia…

by your standards, cameras are also 19th century technology. I guess the iphone should get rid of that too, right?

 

[eyoungren]

by your standards, cameras are also 19th century technology. I guess the iphone should get rid of that too, right?

If Apple has something better to replace it then, yeah, sure.

I know where you're going with this, but I've never been married to a technological feature so much that I would reject any viable new technology that replaces it.

When it comes to tech I'm always looking to see what's new.

 

[futurejetblackowner]

If Apple has something better to replace it then, yeah, sure.

I know where you're going with this, but I've never been married to a technological feature so much that I would reject any viable new technology that replaces it.

When it comes to tech I'm always looking to see what's new.

So you're an Apple stan that will defend them at all costs? You realize the iphone 7 is heavier than the previous generation, right? so it's not comparable to something like Apple removing the disc drive from Macbooks which resulted in noticeably thinner computers.

Removing the headphone jack was not necessary. The only benefits are slightly better speakers and the phone is now water-resistant but NOT waterproof. The 6s still could withhold water damage.

 

[eyoungren]

So you're an Apple stan that will defend them at all costs? You realize the iphone 7 is heavier than the previous generation, right? so it's not comparable to something like Apple removing the disc drive from Macbooks which resulted in noticeably thinner computers.

Removing the headphone jack was not necessary. The only benefits are slightly better speakers and the phone is now water-resistant but NOT waterproof. The 6s still could withhold water damage.

LOL!!!!

Spend some time here and you'll see I don't drink Apple's Koolaid.

I don't agree with a lot that Apple does, but I'm also realistic enough to know that Apple doesn't care what we think. I realized a long time ago that Apple was making the iPhone thinner and that at some point they'd have to get rid of the headphone jack if they wanted to continue making things thinner.

But you're right, removing the jack wasn't necessary. Neither was removing anything else Apple has removed. But Apple doesn't do things based on what we think is necessary or not. They do what they want to do.

However, I'd rather use a lightning cable over a 30 pin connector. And I'd rather use a BT headset or a headset with a lightining connector. The smaller connectors get the better it benefits me.

You don't like that, fine. I get it. A lot of people share your opinion. I was just expressing mine.

PS. I don't own an iPhone 7. I have a 6s+ and I believe it's a fugly phone because of the antenna lines and the camera bulge. I hate Space Gray but it's the closest thing to black I could get with this series of phone. I don't own it by choice but because of a series of circumstances last year.

I'm typing this on a 2006 17" MacBookPro running Snow Leopard, which is the highest it will ever run because it's not a Core Duo.

My main Macs are a 2003 17" PowerBook G4 and a 2001 PowerMac G4 Quicksilver, both maxing out at OS X Leopard 10.5.8.

I bring this up because if I was what you accuse me of you'd find me over in the Intel Mac section here on MR lambasting anyone for using anything older than a year.

But while I use old technology, like I said earlier, I'm not married to any of it. It's just a preference. One that any self-respecting Apple fanboi drone would be horrified by.

 

[timeconsumer]

So you're an Apple stan that will defend them at all costs? You realize the iphone 7 is heavier than the previous generation, right? so it's not comparable to something like Apple removing the disc drive from Macbooks which resulted in noticeably thinner computers.

Removing the headphone jack was not necessary. The only benefits are slightly better speakers and the phone is now water-resistant but NOT waterproof. The 6s still could withhold water damage.

The iPhone 7 isn't heavier than the 6s, it is however, heavier than the 6 if that is what you meant by previous generation. Of course removing the headphone jack wasn't necessary for the water resistance as Samsung was able to leave it and still get a higher IP rating. But if you look at the ifixit teardowns, the phone seems to be crowded with the new taptic engine where the headphone jack would've previously been placed.

For the first time ever, I wish I didn't upgrade my device to the latest iPhone. I am growing extremely annoyed with the lack of the headphone jack.

 

[anonymous guy]

Removing the headphone jack was not necessary. The only benefits are slightly better speakers and the phone is now water-resistant but NOT waterproof. The 6s still could withhold water damage.

Audio does not come out of the speaker holes in place of the missing headphone jack and appear purely for aesthetic symmetry. Internally, that space is taken up for a slightly larger Taptic Engine, with what appears to be rubber gaskets covering the dummy speakers for water resistance.

Apple is also sending mixed messages, calling the headphone jack obsolete, then including 3.5mm jacks in their brand new 2016 MacBooks.

With the lightning headphones frequently cutting out where the old analog headphone jacks wouldn't and reliability issues with bluetooth connections, the removal of the headphone jack appears to be purely a cash grab for the wireless EarPods and for the Beats brand.

 

[Mac 128]

Audio does not come out of the speaker holes in place of the missing headphone jack and appear purely for aesthetic symmetry. Internally, that space is taken up for a slightly larger Taptic Engine, with what appears to be rubber gaskets covering the dummy speakers for water resistance.

Apple is also sending mixed messages, calling the headphone jack obsolete, then including 3.5mm jacks in their brand new 2016 MacBooks.

With the lightning headphones frequently cutting out where the old analog headphone jacks wouldn't and reliability issues with bluetooth connections, the removal of the headphone jack appears to be purely a cash grab for the wireless EarPods and for the Beats brand.

Since you obviously went to the iFixit site to get the image, you surely read that the plastic "bumper" is an audio channel for the mic, which also provides pressure equalization for the sealed phone, via those functional holes.

Your bias is showing here.

And what about Lightning headphones frequently "cutting out"? I've got a pair and they function perfectly. And what reliability issues with Bluetooth? Maybe you're using the wrong set of BT headphones. Have you tried a pair of W1s?

And there's no mixed message. Apple told us why they removed the headphone jack -- they needed more room. The MBP has more room. It's also used by people who don't use iPhones, so Apple can't control the experience as well and must service those who don't -- just like Beats headphones mostly still use micro-USB instead of Lightning for charging. There's also no real market for USB-C headphones yet. And Apple clearly wasn't prepared to add Lightning to the MacBook. If Apple sold USB-C headphones, it might be a different story, but that doesn't make a lot of sense to put two competitions audio standards on the table within a month of each other either, to the extent Apple even intends to support USB-C as an audio connector. Apple didn't put USB-C charging cables in the iPhone 7 box either, for good reason -- 200 million iPhone 7 customers over the next year vs. less than 15 million MBP over the next year -- in the meantime a lot of incompatibility and inconvenience for their iPhone customers who don't use MacBooks.

But your conclusions simply don't follow the reality.

 

[futurejetblackowner]

LOL!!!!

Spend some time here and you'll see I don't drink Apple's Koolaid.

I don't agree with a lot that Apple does, but I'm also realistic enough to know that Apple doesn't care what we think. I realized a long time ago that Apple was making the iPhone thinner and that at some point they'd have to get rid of the headphone jack if they wanted to continue making things thinner.

But you're right, removing the jack wasn't necessary. Neither was removing anything else Apple has removed. But Apple doesn't do things based on what we think is necessary or not. They do what they want to do.

However, I'd rather use a lightning cable over a 30 pin connector. And I'd rather use a BT headset or a headset with a lightining connector. The smaller connectors get the better it benefits me.

You don't like that, fine. I get it. A lot of people share your opinion. I was just expressing mine.

PS. I don't own an iPhone 7. I have a 6s+ and I believe it's a fugly phone because of the antenna lines and the camera bulge. I hate Space Gray but it's the closest thing to black I could get with this series of phone. I don't own it by choice but because of a series of circumstances last year.

I'm typing this on a 2006 17" MacBookPro running Snow Leopard, which is the highest it will ever run because it's not a Core Duo.

My main Macs are a 2003 17" PowerBook G4 and a 2001 PowerMac G4 Quicksilver, both maxing out at OS X Leopard 10.5.8.

I bring this up because if I was what you accuse me of you'd find me over in the Intel Mac section here on MR lambasting anyone for using anything older than a year.

But while I use old technology, like I said earlier, I'm not married to any of it. It's just a preference. One that any self-respecting Apple fanboi drone would be horrified by.

You just said you think apple removing the headphone jack was unnecessary but you were just defending the move by saying it was 19th century technology.....you're not making sense

 

[eyoungren]

You just said you think apple removing the headphone jack was unnecessary but you were just defending the move by saying it was 19th century technology.....you're not making sense

It wasn't necessary for Apple to remove the jack for the iPhone 7/7s. They could have done that next year while making the phone waterproof instead of just water resistant.

But it IS still 19th century tech and as using the headphone jack is not something I routinely do with my own iPhone, removing it because it's been holding back the advancement of technology in the iPhone is a good thing. In my opinion.

 

[Mac 128]

It wasn't necessary for Apple to remove the jack for the iPhone 7/7s. They could have done that next year while making the phone waterproof instead of just water resistant.

But it IS still 19th century tech and as using the headphone jack is not something I routinely do with my own iPhone, removing it because it's been holding back the advancement of technology in the iPhone is a good thing. In my opinion.

No, Apple looked at what they wanted to do, and were faced with the choice of solving the problem of water proofing the iPhone with a headphone jack (as other phone companies did), while limiting the tech they wanted to include, or instead spend their time upgrading the tech without the limitation of keeping the headphone jack, nor solving the problem of waterproofing it.

Take it anyway way you want, other companies compromise the time they spend upgrading their phones tech by figuring out how to waterproof the headphone jack.

It's not that Apple couldn't do it, it's that they wanted to spend their development time more constructively.

 

[futurejetblackowner]

It wasn't necessary for Apple to remove the jack for the iPhone 7/7s. They could have done that next year while making the phone waterproof instead of just water resistant.

But it IS still 19th century tech and as using the headphone jack is not something I routinely do with my own iPhone, removing it because it's been holding back the advancement of technology in the iPhone is a good thing. In my opinion.

.....ok

 

[timeconsumer]

No, Apple looked at what they wanted to do, and were faced with the choice of solving the problem of water proofing the iPhone with a headphone jack (as other phone companies did), while limiting the tech they wanted to include, or instead spend their time upgrading the tech without the limitation of keeping the headphone jack, nor solving the problem of waterproofing it.

Take it anyway way you want, other companies compromise the time they spend upgrading their phones tech by figuring out how to waterproof the headphone jack.

It's not that Apple couldn't do it, it's that they wanted to spend their development time more constructively.

The problem I have with the argument of removing the headphone jack to allow for water resistance is the fact that Apple does not warranty the device if it has water damage. To me this is absolutely useless as somebody who walks, runs and cycles in the rain often. However, the headphone port would be much more useful to me. Plus the 6s/6s plus was pretty resilient to water.