Slashdot Mirror
Apple Patents Cutting 3.5mm Jack in Half
An anonymous reader writes with an article on a recent patent application by Apple. From the article: "Apple likes thin devices and considers the depth of the iPod, iPhone and iPad as critical component of the aesthetic appearance of a product and has been very aggressive in finding ways to trim fat from its portable devices: The 3.5 mm audio-connector stands in the way of future design improvements: Apple suggests to simply cut it in half."
Is apple trying to patent an actual invention?
Won't a thinner connector make it much easier to snap off ?
Download free e-books, lectures, and tutorials at bookgoldmine.com
Great, so this will necessitate lugging around even more adaptors for Apple products in addition to the five (exaggerating) different video port adaptors? I find it unlikely that the 3.5mm jack is the limiting factor in device thickness, so it seems a bit odd to abandon the standard...
Fear the penguin.
Bluetooth headphones work fine for me so I'd have no problem with a change in the headphone jacks. The hard part would be finding a case that covers it.
How about an audio connector with a break before make connection, where the ground connection is made first, and doesnt pop and blow speakers when you forget to turn off your ipod before plugging it into your amp?
How about involving an electrician, same for RCA plugs, and just about any analog coupling used in audio.
Seriously, whats the fucking deal with this? This has been a problem since the 50s!
Also I'd have expected to see digital headphones with a 15 cent dsp in the earbud by now. Not from apple, of course, they only deal in substandard hardware.
Wireless devices ought to be wireless. They already have several radios, including Bluetooth. Headphones and docking should be wireless. So should charging. which should be inductive. Then you can have a sealed, waterproof unit with no annoying connector holes.
I'm surprised Apple hasn't already gone that way on aesthetic grounds. Why should those perfect forms have holes in them?
Great.
After only recently being able to plug in most phones with the same USB cable and FINALLY having 3.5 jacks a standard on said phones, Apple now wants to go fuck with the standards.
Jerks.
Or alternatively, they could either not license it at all or license out the male (connector) but but not the female (port), making headphones for Apple products only work with Apple products.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
The port is backwards compatible with existing 3.5mm plugs, so if it remains "licensed" (and there is no indication that it will be - compare to mini-displayport), then it will simply remain on Apple devices only.
The Patent system needs to be reformed.
echo '[q]sa[ln0=aln80~Psnlbx]16isb572CCB9AE9DB03273snlbxq' |dc
It is easily recognized that a 3.5mm TRS jack eats a substantial fraction of the internal volume budget in a modern phone or portable media player. It is thus understandable that Apple would want to replace it with something smaller. However, basing it on the current standard is perhaps the worst possible way to go about it. The standard 3.5mm headphone connector shorts the contacts on the plug to the wrong contacts on the jack all willy nilly. Given the opportunity to push a new design, they should go for a modern connector that mates the grounds first, and allows the signal contacts to mate only to their proper counterparts.
And don't try to tell me it's for backwards compatibility. The patented design allows semi-TRS plugs to mate with standard jacks, but does not permit the connection of standard headphones to the Apple design--what people will actually want to do, given the poor quality of the usual bundled earbuds.
With a smaller battery :(
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Make the box lid a flap rather than a slide?
Two-headed matches?
Sell re-heading kits?
Another advantage which they omitted from the article -- this invention will help you insert the plug the right way round.
With the current circular 3.5mm jacks, it's actually impossible to know whether you've rotated the plug correctly. Sure, you can try to figure out if you've got it right by listening to the resultant sound quality, but that's inexact and most people don't even have the equipment. Now with Apple's invention, everyone will be able to insert it with the right rotation -- first time, and every time.
It was kind of hard to do given that they used the term "jack" to mean "plug" and the term "port" to mean "jack" or "receptacle"....
BTW, has anyone ever actually seen an audio plug (other than the old telephone switchboard plugs from the early-to-mid-1900s) that contained any significant amount of ferrous metal? I'd be curious to know how someone could think that standard audio plugs can be held in place by a magnet. I'm assuming, based on the fact that the person who wrote this story got basic terminology wrong, that the author also misunderstood that aspect of the patent....
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
However, basing it on the current standard is perhaps the worst possible way to go about it.
Only if you do not care about cutting out hundreds of millions of existing (some very expensive) headphones.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They could eliminate a connector and sell REALLY expensive and proprietary headsets, too. Win! Win! for Apple.
I would be worried about the plug strength. let alone there being 1/2 the material, by cutting it in half, it will far easier to bend it on the flat side.
Conservative, mod down for violating
I'm sure they will. Though that's no reason not to add another patent to their portfolio.
It's a half impression of the jack in the side of the device rather than enclosed port*. Hence the need for a cover ( or case ) to enclose the impression and complete the other half of the port. That impression will not be aesthetically pleasing even with the proposed solutions. It will be interesting to see what wins. Aesthetics or functionality. I have my own bets on that.
* before you say RTFA, I did.
"Current jacks will fit the new port design, but since the port is cut in half and exposed to one side of the device shell, a traditional connector would simply drop out: Apple proposes a magnetic interface that would keep a thin audio connector in place. The second issue is that an exposed jack would not look especially appealing, which is why Apple believes that new “custom” jacks should be covered with a “cosmetic cap” on one side."
I've lost all my marbles except one & It's fun to test angular & centripetal acceleration in my skull
Mohels have been doing this for millennia...
#DeleteChrome
Most of them are steel, with either a gold coating or uncoated. It should be sufficient to hold it to the port.
Right now, we have two types [of audio connector] that work well, the 1/4" jack for pro equipment, and the 3.5mm jack for everything else.
Uh, no. Don't forget the XLR connector, the Neutrik connector, RCA connectors, 4-conductor plugs for devices that transmit mono signals as well as receive stereo signals, and I haven't even touched on optical interfaces for audio signals such as SPDIF...do I need to continue?
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Seriously, what?
This is worse than patents that boil down to "a system for doing some thing well known but with a computer".
This is a system for taking a well defined connection and cutting it in half, with a magnet to keep it in place, and putting a rubber thingy on it to make it look pretty. Worse, it's more like "a system to make a cylinder narrower by cutting it in half longitudinally while still retaining all of the connection properties of the original device".
How the hell is this patentable? There is no "invention" here.
And, of course, no longer being a cylinder, it's going to lose rigidity and there will be constant problems with these things bending and/or shearing off.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The tips of the lil buggers break off inside the socket like the mating tactic of some insects. Cheap 3.5mm plugs are weak.
Fix her equipment: bend 1mm or so at the tip of a smallish very thin safety pin (safety first!) Insert into the socket, alongside the busted bit using the spring loaded tab inside the socket to your advantage. Pull it back to remove the plug. It might take a couple minutes. Chicks love it when you do this.
Repair shops advocate motherboard replacement. You could however; delay your "repair sucess" until after a meal is served.
The jack comes after the DAC, thus what goes through the jack and plug is analog signal. The less surface area between connectors, the less analog signal, the more noise, the worse the audio quality. 1/4" inch TRS connections deliver better fidelity than 3.5mm TRS, and 3.5mm TRS will deliver better fidelity than this new scheme. Seems to me Apple would be better served perfecting (even over-engineering, and going (no!) entirely proprietary), the Bluetooth audio standards for fidelity and doing away with the jack altogether.
The Admin and the Engineer
This is an application, not a patent.
No, the idea is for a surface mount 3.5mm port that a half-width plug will sit in flush, but a normal 3.5mm plug will sit in but be proud of the surface, both held in place by a magnet. The patent also specifies an optional cover to make it look more aesthetically pleasing (or as a structural element of the port, depending on magnet strength).
Reducing connector size means reducing the cable size, and reducing reliability. I don't want a phone a millimeter thinner if the cost is a smaller headphone connector, and a connector with Apple proprietary technology. I usually burn through 4 or 5 headphones through the life of my phone. Mostly the cable to connector connection breaks after about 6 months (I walk with my phone in the pocket, while listening to music through headphones ...
In my case, making the connector smaller would mean my headphones last a much shorter time.
This is a recipe for disaster. TRS connectors are very susceptible to hum: when you touch a live TRS connector, your skin conducts enough to make a circuit between the connector poles.
With the connector exposed on the surface of the device, you'd get loud noises every time you accidentally touched the connector. For this to work, the connector has to be covered, negating at least part of the thickness reduction they're seeking.
Also the magnet they propose for keeping the plug in place is going to have to be pretty strong to withstand normal jostling etc. of the device in a pocket. Unlike the Magsafe power connector, this jack need to be kept in place without interruptions. The tiniest shift between the plug and socket results in crackles and other loud noises.
How do they work?
As if the standard connector was not weak enough, they want to cut it in half!
Why not just use a standard connector that has been about for YEARS that is 1/2 the diameter of the "standard" connector?
You have the large 6.35mm (1/4") jack
You have the medium 3.5mm
Then there is the small 2.5mm jack
OR apple could just make a specialized connector that is flat (like Micro USB) and then include an adapter to allow people to use standard headphones.
Could you have a magnet powerful enough to hold this half-plug securely in its half-cradle while not interfering in any way with the tiny electrical signals being sent through said half-plug? Or might we need to surround the plug-jack assembly with several mm of insulation to isolate it from the magnet assembly?
The round design is more for the ability to implement a non-keyed plug and port that does not care about orientation. I would think Apple would be in favour of that more than most companies.
(Please excuse the traditional Apple joke, I couldn't help myself.)
Why not cut a little less than 1/2 and then the port could still hold an old jack w/o magnets?
Or ports. Or plugs.
Sorry, had to be said.
Why not simply use a micro-usb port instead? You could also use that port for charging, thus killing two stones with one bird.
Why would a static magnetic field interfere with the electrical signal?
Why have extra jacks on the devices to begin with? Some phones I've had in the past used the usb port for a earpiece. Why not just do that instead of having the 3.5mm port to begin with? Hell, make a cheapo adapter that extends the usb port with a 3.5mm port that splits off of it for legacy support/the headphones of your choice. That way you can charge and listen to headphones at the same time like you can currently with the two separate ports.
About ports, jacks, and connectors.
The article is somewhat unclear, but the patent application is pretty clear.
The reason Apple is proposing this solution is that it offers the maximum backwards compatibility.
A connector is what most people call the plug.
A jack is the entire female assembly (including housing) that can receive a connector/plug.
A port is the electrical portions of the jack (i.e. the electrical connectors in a specific configuration).
Apple's solution WILL allow the use of standard 3.5mm plugs / connectors.
Here's the exact relevant bit from the patent application:
16. The plug connector of claim 11 wherein the plug is cylindrical in shape, and wherein when the plug is inserted into the longitudinal passage, the plug extends at least partially through the second opening.
For full size plugs / connectors Apple proposes a cap of similar looking material to the device case, which will increase the profile of the device with a sort of bubble around the connector.
I like Apple's approach to standards... embrace and extend.
Why not just use WiFi/Bluetooth or some other type of PAN?
Good luck keeping each device on the PAN charged.
if the car is only compatible with AirPlay, that'll make people think twice before buying
...such a car. I don't know a single driver who doesn't use the FM radio. In fact, some even listen to AM talk or AM oldies.
Apple has been using the power/USB connector for headphones since the iPod shuffle 2.
Screw ports, I'm all about BlueTooth or WiFi for audio out of my iPhone.
Maybe it's time to patent the half-cylindrical shape.
Won't a thinner connector make it much easier to snap off ?
It will fall off, not snap off. Its like the MagSafe power connector. It will hang on the outside of the case due to the magnets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MagSafe
You're both wrong. Round sockets (in general) became standardised by the germans during WW2 because they were faster to make. Simply drill a hole into the case of whatever electronic device you were making. Square ports were fucking difficult to cut into enclosures (still are - I tend to use round ports in my projects whenever I can simply because they are easier to make).
:-)
Also, this is really good whiskey I've got here - my sister gave me a bottle to give me dad next time I flew down to visit, only he got a heart attack before I went, so now I'm sitting at my desk with an almost finished bottle of 25 year old single malt scotch.
IOW, I may be talking shit
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I hated how current cell phones finally started moving towards using a standard headphone jack. I hate not having to buy proprietary things, like headphones, just because some company want to have similar standards with the other guys.
Why use a jack at all?
Apple could make a tiny bluetooth headset that slides into the iPhone. Slide it out and it can attach "magically" to an embedded magnet in your earlobe, like jewelry. Should be easy for the multiple-piercing crowd.
I've been in plenty of cars with an FM radio and no line-in; a lot of them were manufactured before the iPod and other digital audio players became popular. For those, I plug a Jupiter Jack FM transmitter into my digital audio player.
The next evolution of plugs shouldn't be thinner plugs. It should be no plugs - go wireless and start making wireless accessories that don't suck.
Most companies would recognize the problem, and develop a cheap, reusable adapter to take a 3.5mm jack and plug it into a smaller hole. Guess that approach wouldn't look good enough for Apple. That, or when your tiny adapter breaks, its more logical to just buy a new set of headphones than a new $0.50 adapter.
And patent that!
Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
Most connectors have two important factors determining whether or not they will be successful in the market place: (1) functionality, and (2) adoptability. If wide-spread adoption is important to making it successful, why would they bother patenting it? If other makers can't use this connector, this will disincentive people from buying the iPhone and going with a competing maker that sticks with the standards. Further, it will piss-off their more loyal customers who now are forced to buy head phones that only work with the iPhone or iPod, unless they want to stick with the pair that comes with the device when you buy it. Unless they intend to make the patents available royalty-free, this connector is dead before it got off the ground.
I can't be bothered to run around the house with a magnet and check, so take this with a grain of salt, but:
Cheap audio connectors are often (not always) steel, because steel is cheaper than brass. Expensive audio connectors are often (not always) brass, because brass conducts better but is more expensive than steel.
In either case: Various platings are applied for prettiness or corrosion resistance or both (with nickel being cheap and durable, and gold being expensive and pretty).
(Please note that I avoided inferring that any combination of these materials is in some way better than any other combination. My own single-data-point worth of experience with gold-plated steel connectors is that they can rust in normal use, while no other combination of materials ever does so.)
Kid-proof tablet..
Cheers. Hope the scotch is working.
Round connectors are always easier when prototyping, because a drill is always easier and faster than a square punch. But on modern assembled, plastic-molded devices, this isn't necessarily the case.
Also: AFAICT, round connectors became standardized with the telephone switchboard, 40 or so years before the Germans wanted another war. (Some vendors still call a 1/4" plug a "Phone Connector," for this very reason.)
Kid-proof tablet..
Apple has a few options to choose from: Apple's 30 pin connector already has audio out. Why not just remove the 3.5mm jack and either provide an adapter that converts the 30 pin male to a 3.5mm female or have headphones that come with a 30 pin connector. Someone mentioned bluetooth. I like the idea of going cordless. Another option that I like, since we are talking about modifying the standard 3.5mm jack, is to reinvent an external audio connection much like Apple's MagSafe power cord. It would significantly reduce the space taken up by a 3.5mm jack since the audio magnetic jack would be outside the device. An adapter could be easily created for 3.5mm headphone jacks too.
Does anyone else think the term "Razor-Thin" has become devalued?
Or am I just a pedant?
Interfaces should not be patentable. Look at the misery that came from the patents on the FAT (file allocation table) design.
It is just bad for the overall market.
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
This is a bad idea, as anything smaller will break.
Why not move to using bluetooth headphones? No more connections needed, and by integrating bluetooth, you have more seamless connectivity options (home/car stereo) than before.
How exactly would a port that only accepts half a 3.5mm headphone connector work with a full 3.5mm headphone connector? Has Apple extended the reality distortion field to their products now?
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
Did you look at the picture in TFA? Clearly not.
The design is a surface mount connector that holds the plug on with a magnet. Using a thin plug with a flat face, it will sit flush. If you use a standard headphone 3.5mm plug it will stand proud of the surface.
The article does mention very specifically that it is designed to work with existing 3.5mm plugs.
Hardly bending reality.
Even after all of the corrections, still you are confused...
You are not Anonymous Coward, you are Anonymous Clueless.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley