Pursuit of Slenderness May Mean No More Headphone Jack In iPhone 7 (pcmag.com)

An intriguing rumor reported by PC Mag (and initially reported in this Japanese blog) holds that Apple may drop the standard headphone jack from the next revision of the iPhone, in favor of Bluetooth and Lightning connectors. From PC Mag's article: The big question is just how such a move might affect all the other headphones one can buy, as well as the other devices Apple makes. While we can envision some manufacturers making iPhone-exclusive variants of their headphones, we doubt that Apple's potential decision to chop out the headphone jack is going to suddenly make for a market full of Lightning-only headphones and earbuds. There are, after all, plenty of non-iPhone devices that still use the 3.5mm connection. And, of course, you could just pair any ol' pair of Bluetooth headphones or earbuds with the iPhone 7.

Comments

3.5mm?

[MichaelSmith]

There are, after all, plenty of non-iPhone devices that still use the 3.5mm connection

I thought the headphone socket on phones was much smaller than that.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well you're wrong.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

you thought wrong?

Re:3.5mm?

[kupekhaize]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

3.5 mm refers to the size of the metal connector going into the socket, not the diameter of the connector. You're likely thinking of the diameter and not the length.

That said, both are likely a concern for Apple who like to squeeze things down to the smallest micron possible then brag about it. The whole reason they are trying to get rid of SIM cards is they don't like the amount of space it takes up. Reduced functionality, be damned... It looks prettier this way....

Re:3.5mm?

[zAPPzAPP]

Did you even read the link you posted there?
It says right at the top: 'The "mini" connector has a diameter of 3.5 mm [...]'

Looking at my headphone's plug right now, this seems to be correct. The upper part of it (the part without the pinch) is exactly 3.5mm in width.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason Apple want to get rid of the SIM card is to take more control over which network the device is using. And likely get a large revenue cut of the network subscription.

This could in theory be a good thing, with an e-sim your device can switch effortless between networks and chose the best offer at any time. And Apple could pressure networks on price to be part of the selection for iDevices.

But, at the same time Apple has also taken away the control you today have to switch SIM card yourself. And while networks are pressured on price, Apple will likely pocket a large cut to themselves.

Re:3.5mm?

[wonkey_monkey]

Nope. I think there was a 2.5mm variant floating around for a while, but it never caught on.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Redmancometh]

xbox 360 used it actually...still many devices that do

Re:3.5mm?

[drinkypoo]

I thought the headphone socket on phones was much smaller than that.

It was, in the flip phone era. But then we got phones which are also mp3 players, so then we got a real stereo miniplug so that we could use real headphones without an adapter.

Re:3.5mm?

[PopeRatzo]

I think there was a 2.5mm variant floating around for a while, but it never caught on.

Yeah. I had a Sangean radio that had the smaller variant. I hated it because I couldn't get replacement earbuds for it and had to buy an adapter, which defeats the purpose of the smaller jack.

Re:3.5mm?

[GrpA]

If Apple could make a phone just 3.5mm thick, then I could understand having problems putting a headphone jack in place... But if it's even 4mm thick, them this reflects that they just aren't capable of designing something this thin...I guess the lack of Steve Jobs is starting to become apparent.

After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?

Re:3.5mm?

[JaredOfEuropa]

Meh. Keep the 3.5mm connector, shrink the rest of the phone down,and fill the remaining space with extra battery. Seriously, how much thinner do phones need to be? I'd prefer some extra battery life, thanks.

Re:3.5mm?

[jazzis]

Did you even read the link you posted there?

What did you expect here? Conscious comments?

Re:3.5mm?

[jazzis]

You are a fucking dumbass. Please don't post about shit you clearly haven't got a clue about.

Mod up as insightful and informative flame!

Re:3.5mm?

[turbidostato]

"After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?"

They probably can but then, what would you call an object 1.5mm width and ending on a point? That's a connector no more but a needle. And a needle has two problems: it's fragile and it can hurt. Not such a wise decision for a connector.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

i had a phone with a 2.5mm connector.

if apple is making handheld devices that are going to get too thin for a 2.5mm or even 3.5mm connector one has to wonder how durable the damn things are going to be. they already have had issues with current and past "thicker" designs and flexing, and devices failing as a result... imagine shaving even more of the thickness (and with it, strength and durability) away.....

i'll keep my old phone, tyvm. it is also pocket sized, even more so than any iphone model, and doesn't bend at all... flip phones do have advantages.. pocketability being one.. tactile buttons being another.. along with crazy long 3 week average battery life between charges for me. i'll never have to carry around a separate battery pack power/charging unit because my phone won't last through a day.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

And whats worse, for the first some years users will have to carry a "samsung needle" an "apple needle" and a nokia .. oh sorry ..

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, the 2.5mm head phone jack was the de-facto standard for phones until the iPhone came around.

Re:3.5mm?

[bytesex]

Too true. Miniaturize what you can, keep it in the current dimension-sphere. Fill up what remains with battery, security and antenna features. The phone is already a good size, it doesn't need to be too small.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you generally this stupid or is it just on Sundays?

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like this, perhaps? http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/09/22/apple-prepares-for-thinner-smartphones-with-slim-headphone-plug-patent

Re:3.5mm?

[Noah Haders]

There's an existing 2.5m TRL standard. This would be a pain. Because you would often need an adapter, but it would be better than completely changing things imho?

Re:3.5mm?

[Noah Haders]

They're already having trouble shrinking the camera components. My iPhone 6s has a bump. I'm not going to cry

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you carry a separate GPS, decent camera, music player, Etc. too?

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thinner so that you can accidentally break it more often.

Re: 3.5mm?

[mspohr]

I don't know why they are concerned about phone thickness. Every iPhone I have seen has a thick case (with flowers).

Re:3.5mm?

[rwa2]

yep, I have a headset with a 2.5mm connector that includes stereo and microphone channels. I use it with a breakout splitter to separate 3.5mm jacks nowadays. But that kind of stuff is too cheap... I buy handfuls of earbuds for my kids' devices from Daiso, and they're happy with them. There's no way for big companies to make money off them anymore.

But this is fine, unbalanced analog signal wires suck. It's about time for Bluetooth audio to finally catch on or something, despite the annoyances.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Keep the 3.5mm connector, shrink the rest of the phone down,and fill the remaining space with extra battery. Seriously, how much thinner do phones need to be? I'd prefer some extra battery life, thanks.

+1 to that. Also note the iPhone 6 has a bulge for the camera. If for whatever reason Apple insists to make the phone even slimmer, please keep the headphone jack and have a reinforced bulge. I'll gladly take that.

I'm fairly mixed feelings over this decision actually.
1) Wireless headphones are an option. IMO they're not ready for prime time, audio quality, or mic quality, or drop out issues etc.
2) Adapter/dongle for normal headphone. Yuck dongles.
3) Looking at more audiophile solutions (head-fi). There's a market for external DAC and/or Amp solutions to drive various headphones. You can buy 3rd party DAC+Amp, connect to the phone via Lightning connector, and get the headphone jack from your 3rd party device (as well as rubber band the extra box onto your phone some how).

Apple doesn't really solve the weight/battery/thinness-while-still-being-sufficiently-good solution. They just export it to 3rd parties to make up the difference. Maybe we're all supposed to go buy Beats and subscribe to Apple Music. Two things I refuse to do.

Also keep in mind there are dedicated music players out there. The downside is you lose your single device convergence but people who are really into trying to have the best portable audio experience probably already carry one or two extra boxes in their pocket already. I want something above average but it doesn't have to be just as good as a desktop experience. I'm willing to sacrifice a little for portability but I think Apple is setting the bar too low. As-is I'm looking at buying one of those external DAC/Amp boxes.

Fuck you Apple for setting the bar too low.

Re:3.5mm?

[Noah Haders]

For me it's another thing I have to charge.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, a dedicated GPS with both GPS and Glonass.
A decent camera.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

My HTC Wizard (T-Mobile MDA) had a 2.5mm jack. I wound up buying an adapter for it to make it usable. Of course, there were the large adapters that stuck out a few inches, which were bad because they could easily put torque on the socket and break it, but there were others which were in two pieces with a wire between them, that put a lot less stress on that connector.

I do wish Apple could keep the headphone jack. It definitely gets used. However, with Apple owning a headphone maker, I wouldn't be surprised if the change was deliberate, since people would be forced to upgrade... and Beats likely would be the only game in town for a while.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Fire_Wraith]

This. I've never understood why everyone wants the phones to keep getting lighter and thinner, with things like a glass back, only to then have to put them in a giant bulky plastic case to protect them, entirely defeating the purpose. People (mostly tech journalists) complained about how the Samsung S3/S4 felt with its plastic back, but you could actually get away without putting it in a case, which seems to be true of fewer and fewer phones these days (certainly not the iPhones or the S6).

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

exactly especially when so many people put this "thin" phone in a thick case that doubles or triples it's width...

Re:3.5mm?

[kuzb]

I don't agree with their stance on headphone jacks because it limits your options for headphones and microphones and makes it so you have one more thing to charge, but sim cards are pretty stupid. It's just a physical set of credentials for a phone, and there are any number of non-hardware ways we could do that.

Re:3.5mm?

[cyn1c77]

Meh. Keep the 3.5mm connector, shrink the rest of the phone down,and fill the remaining space with extra battery. Seriously, how much thinner do phones need to be? I'd prefer some extra battery life, thanks.

Agreed! The phone is already too thin to hold onto without a case right now.

Also, Apple could just make a new 1.5mm female connector jack that was thinner than existing ones. For example, the female conductor could only contact some of the male connector on two sides, not all the way around. But I'm sure it's more profitable for Apple to have us buy their marked up new male connectors...

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Except cell phones don't have decent cameras. They have mediocre cameras.

Re:3.5mm?

[safetyinnumbers]

Phones used to use 2.5mm for wired headsets, but that made them incompatible with standard headphones/earphones which was inconvenient when listening to music became more of a thing.

Re:3.5mm?

[ganjadude]

IMO phones are too thin as it is, imagine if we had nokia phone width circa 2002 with modern batteries. we could go days (as we did back then!)

Re:3.5mm?

[ganjadude]

id rather keep it flat and use the space for battery instead of a bump personally

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

And assuming I'm not a fickle, wasteful consumer, my SIM card matters why? I've never removed one from any phone I've owned.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would also still break compatibility, which is what most people here seem to be objecting to.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Also the case needs a big round cutout, to make certain the Apple logo is visible.

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, with all the patents out there isn't there a flattish 3 mm female connector that could take standard males?
I think you could shave a whole mm in there and keep people buying your phone for the great earbuds.
In any case, I'm already keeping my iPhone 5s because the 6 series sucks dick. A blueshit connector is jumping the shark imho.
The last Apple phone that was free of reproach was the aptly named 4 Steve. Even the 5 series is a bit crappy with the elongated screen.
Seriously sell $AAPL stock you can only go so far out of inertia alone.

Re:3.5mm?

[ItsJustAPseudonym]

...had to buy an adapter, which defeats the purpose of the smaller jack.

It defeats the purpose for the end user, but not for the device manufacturer who wanted to make a super-thin device.

And yes, I do agree that it was a bad overall situation. It seems like the manufacturer performed a disservice to the user, just to claim "our device is thinner".

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want something to be smaller every time. Sometimes, I want that space used up with new things. Example
http://www.titancomputers.com/...

I am very happy with it.

Re:3.5mm?

[unixisc]

There is a 2.5mm standard as well. Can't iPhone 7 go for this? Granted, it's less standard, but no less standard than the lightning connector

Re:3.5mm?

[LynnwoodRooster]

It's a standard connector. How can Apple monetize and lock-in users with an open standard?

Re: 3.5mm?

[brantondaveperson]

Grrr

Clickable link for the lazy

Executive summary: It's a regular connector, with one side flattened so that it's slightly thinner. Means you have to insert the plug the right way around, which is a terrible idea. My vote: They won't do it. But then, I thought they wouldn't get rid of the magsafe connectors, and they have. In their defence, magsafe connectors are rather prone to dirt on the contacts preventing them from working

Re: 3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi. Common sense here. A thin phone with a thin case will be thinner than a thick phone with a thin case.

Even an otter box would be thicker if it had to account for a thicker phone.

So yeah. This one time. Size matters

Re: 3.5mm?

[Bartles]

Slashdot is the lazy one. 20 years later and we still need to manually type stupid slashcode.

Re:3.5mm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most phones weren't marketed with music playback as a major features; the 2.5mm port was intended for headsets for talking, and nothing else. The Motorola Razer is the first notable phone I can recall that made MP3 playback a major selling point, and for a feature phone in its time it sold pretty well and inspired a few copycats.

Re: 3.5mm?

[GrpA]

Thanks for that - But this really illustrates that the issue is the socket, not the plug. Apple need to make a slimmer socket -

Re:3.5mm?

[Citizen of Earth]

If they're pulling a new connector out of their asses, they could make it any shape, not one compromised by 70 years of backward compatibility.

Re:3.5mm?

[ILongForDarkness]

Yeah they want to get it so thin you cut your finger on it and if you complain about the crappy battery life "you just don't get it".

They haven't updated the earbuds for years and years I think. They probably realized they can make more money selling $300 beats bluetooth headphones than the already ridiculous (~$39) earbuds.

Re:3.5mm?

[macs4all]

"After all, why can't they just redesign the audio socket so it's a couple of millimeters thinner?"

They probably can but then, what would you call an object 1.5mm width and ending on a point? That's a connector no more but a needle. And a needle has two problems: it's fragile and it can hurt. Not such a wise decision for a connector.

Back when we used to call them 1/8" phone plugs, there was another standard (usually only 2 conductors, but could easily be modified for 3 or even 4) that was about 1/2 the diameter of what we now call a 3.5mm plug. They were very common as the "pause" control on old cassette recorders.

So, since a smaller diameter barrel means a smaller diameter socket, why can't Apple just adopt that connector, then it would be a simple adapter (or headphones/earbuds manufactured with that connector already) to allow for a slimmer phone/tablet?

Re: 3.5mm?

[macs4all]

Grrr

Clickable link for the lazy

Executive summary: It's a regular connector, with one side flattened so that it's slightly thinner. Means you have to insert the plug the right way around, which is a terrible idea. My vote: They won't do it. But then, I thought they wouldn't get rid of the magsafe connectors, and they have. In their defence, magsafe connectors are rather prone to dirt on the contacts preventing them from working

Since when have they gotten rid of Magsafe connectors (except on the low-end MacBook). The most recent refresh of the MacBook Pro which just happened about a month ago, sports a Magsafe 2 Connector.

Re:3.5mm?

[macs4all]

yep, I have a headset with a 2.5mm connector that includes stereo and microphone channels. I use it with a breakout splitter to separate 3.5mm jacks nowadays. But that kind of stuff is too cheap... I buy handfuls of earbuds for my kids' devices from Daiso, and they're happy with them. There's no way for big companies to make money off them anymore.

But this is fine, unbalanced analog signal wires suck. It's about time for Bluetooth audio to finally catch on or something, despite the annoyances.

You obviously don't understand what Balanced audio lines are for. Balanced (differential) audio inputs are GREAT for the teeny-tiny signals from microphones, especially when they are carried long distances (like from a stage to a soundboard a hundred feet away). But they are essentially useless when talking about "line-level" (or above) signals. And when you are talking about speaker outputs, at the current levels that are sent to headphones/earbuds, the amount of possible intermodulation distortion reduction that could possibly be gained could be much easier accomplished by simply making headphone cables a little thicker than a human hair.

There's a reason that NO headphones, even high-end ones, have EVER had "balanced" inputs (except perhaps the speaker-powered electrostats): It just isn't necessary.

Re:3.5mm?

[hucker75]

There already exists a 2.5mm connector. There have always been 2.5, 3.5, and 6.5mm audio jacks.

Re:3.5mm?

[pupsocket]

In the universe of connectors, the 3.5 mm is a steamshovel at at tea party. Does there need to be another reason?

Re: 3.5mm?

[pupsocket]

Perhaps Apple is edging toward flexibility, one of the qualities that an organic light-emitting diode panel allows.

Re:3.5mm?

[pupsocket]

No other connector-type requires a metallic prong to go that deep into the mechanism or for an empty hole to take volume from other components.

Moreover, the case could more easily isolate the rest of the components -- including the screen -- if the case itself intrudes uniformly and only a little into the space behind the screen.

Re:3.5mm?

[Meski]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

3.5 mm refers to the size of the metal connector going into the socket, not the diameter of the connector. You're likely thinking of the diameter and not the length.

That's what she said.

Re:3.5mm?

[AK Marc]

You are missing the design. Make it a 3-pin surface connector (magnetic, or similar if that violates Apple patents). When the connector is free-form and without width minimums, it will free up the designers to design whatever they want.

Re: 3.5mm?

[rocket rancher]

This. I've never understood why everyone wants the phones to keep getting lighter and thinner, with things like a glass back, only to then have to put them in a giant bulky plastic case to protect them, entirely defeating the purpose. People (mostly tech journalists) complained about how the Samsung S3/S4 felt with its plastic back, but you could actually get away without putting it in a case, which seems to be true of fewer and fewer phones these days (certainly not the iPhones or the S6).

Hmmm. I have never seen an iPhone in a case. Hiding those patented curves in an unaesthetic box would truly defeat the purpose of having an iPhone. I have an iPhone for one reason -- herd acceptance. At meetings with clients, for example, it is sometimes useful to flash the bling to blend in. I have a venerable Galaxy S5 for the other 23 hours of my day, safely ensconced in a Lifebox. Most tech types are sceptical of arguments grounded in social behavior, I know, but it pays to acknowledge that a large number of humans care deeply about how they are perceived by others. Jobs made himself a wealthy, wealthy man by pitching his products to people who care more about how they look holding it, than what they can do with it. Sleek is sexy, and therefore sells much better to people who need to be perceived as sexy.

With that said, there are great functional reasons to reduce the size of certain components, if for no other reason than to leave more room for battery, as several people already have mentioned in this thread. Eliminating external physical ports would help ruggedize any phone, and simultaneously make it easier (read: less expensive to manufacture) to make it look sexy. And not having to deal with cables every fucking day is a win for me. Finding a micro-USB port is goddamn hard for those of us with failing eyesight and deteriorating motor skills. The only cable I have to deal with now on a regular basis (~ weekly) is the micro-USB charger for my BT headset; I installed a $40 wireless charging kit on my aforementioned S5 and I'm loving it.

Re:3.5mm?

[Agripa]

The 2.5mm version is commonly used for microphone connections and there is even a standard spacing between the 3.5mm jack and the 2.5mm jack for this application.

converter

[Anonymous Coward]

As with virtually any apple device, there will be a $75 piece manufactured for 85 cents that will be a lightning to headphone jack connection.

As with the other lightning connectors, if you plug it into your mac it will crash when it wakes on sleep.

Re:converter

[hcs_$reboot]

there will be a $75 piece manufactured for 85 cents that will be a lightning to headphone jack connection.

The only reason Apple keeps doing this is because people keep purchasing their stuff, whatever the price (well, maybe not you I reckon).

Re:converter

[Zontar The Mindless]

I can buy a wired headset that plugs into just about any device that's been manufactured in the last 40 years for about 1/20 the price of a wireless one. SO it seems to me your message is actually more like, "You should spend heaps more money to accomplish the same task, because... um... because I said so, dammit!"

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and it would have to be priced like that to get the message across: Stop plugging things into your phone. The future is wireless*.

* Except at conventions. in crowded lecture theaters, or anywhere else where there are lots of other people who think the future is wireless.

There, ftfy ;-)

Re:converter

[hcs_$reboot]

You hide pretty well your apple fanboiness...

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously though, take a look at some diagrams of duck pussies, it's fucking interesting shit.

Given that female ducks use the cloaca for both reproduction and excretion, it's natural that it *would* contain shit at some point- though whether it would be "interesting", I don't know. Doubt they'd include it on the diagram anyway.

Re: converter

[Anonymous Coward]

So wrong and so misguided on so many levels..

Re:converter

[Zontar The Mindless]

Floppy disks were superseded by other removable storage with clear, tangible advantages over it, as in, "You can pack 50,000 times as much data on something that has no moving parts, requires no power supply, uses a bog-standard connector and thus does not require a cable, is about 50,000 times as rugged, and you can stick in your pocket."

BTW, I have been using various Bluetooth devices for years (speakers and keyboards), and this discussion isn't about going wireless in any case. It's about Apple ditching a standard wired connector in favour of a proprietary wired one.

Re:converter

[Zontar The Mindless]

In my day, we called that a "watch pocket".

Re:converter

[lazybeam]

This looks like $75 to me: http://www.apple.com/au/shop/p...

Albeit Australian dollars...

Re:converter

[Zontar The Mindless]

This kind of bizarre nonsense hate just convinces me Apple's brand is still among the most powerful in the world.

I don't make calls with a brand. I do make them with my phone.

The supposedly rabid fans seem almost mythical to me, I can never find any...

You have time to talk about the power of the Apple brand as if it were a good thing, yet you've no time to look in a mirror. Interesting.

Re:converter

[Zontar The Mindless]

Right, Apple ditched floppy disks when 64GB thumbdrives became available. Last year, right?

No, of course they did not--they simply dropped it, and left lots of their users hanging. But that's entirely orthogonal to the point I was trying to make, which, rephrased, goes something like, "I'm not opposed to change. I'm opposed to change that serves only to increase vendor lock-in whilst providing users with no real benefit other than helping to lighten the users' wallets."

Re:converter

[PopeRatzo]

Call me when there is a Bluetooth headset that sounds as good and uses the same amount of power as wired headsets.

So digital audio to the speaker is the future

Nonsense.

Re:converter

[AthanasiusKircher]

Yes, and you could buy a floppy disk drive very cheaply too. Nobody uses those anymore either.

What a ridiculous comparison. Floppies were limited in their design capacity, and Apple's decision to start phasing them out in 1998 (I believe) was ALSO premature. Why? Because there wasn't a good alternative on the market yet for those who needed to transfer files. Zipdisks were fine, but they were pricey, buggy, and annoying. CD-ROMs were write-only. CD-RWs were unreliable and often unsupported in some readers. It was really the USB flash drive which finally replaced the floppy, but that didn't come around until 2000. Once they became cheap and popular, most computer companies finally started dropping floppy drives.

On the other hand, lots of people complained about Apple's decision to drop the optical drive on the MacBook Air, but I thought they were behind the times on that one. I've been using laptops (ultraportables) that didn't come with an optical drive since 2005. The reality is if you wanted the lightest, smallest laptop, why would you carry an optical drive around with you?

And yet they are still useful periodically, so when I built my current desktop, obviously I put an optical drive in. The choice is for a specific use case -- you want the lightest thinnest possible thing, why not get rid of something bulky? You could always buy a USB optical drive, which I've been using with every laptop I've had since 2005. For bigger laptops ("desktop replacements"), an optical drive can still be useful depending on what you do.

So digital audio to the speaker is the future, and then it might as well be wireless. Or you'd have to define a new physical connector which supplies power and a digital signal.

What the heck are you talking about? Why do you think you need to replace the physical connector to get the advantages in digital signal you want? You can ALREADY buy a bluetooth headset and use it with current technology. Your argument doesn't make any sense -- "There are some things that you can't do with the analog audio connector, and if you wanted to do them that way, you'd need other complicated things." NO -- if you want those things, you just buy BLUETOOTH now.

The only difference Apple's decision here makes is that we're all forced to buy more expensive tech to do a rather simple task. The vast majority of people don't care about the audio things you're talking about -- they listen on the crappiest set of earbuds they can buy.

Except now you want to force them to bulk UP those crappy earbuds with a battery and a Bluetooth connection.

Frankly, I don't want to have another device with batteries to deal with. It's already enough to worry about to plug in my phone and tablet to charge. Now I need to be ready to replace the battery in my headphones or charge them too?

Sorry, but even if the cost for wireless was similar, that's just too much of a pain for little benefit. To me, it's the same as wireless mice and keyboards. I bought my first wireless mouse in 2005, I think. It was cool for a couple weeks. Then I had to replace the battery. Then I decided it wasn't necessary. I've never bought another wireless mouse or keyboard since. If I had a specific use case where running a wire was annoying (e.g., controlling a TV across the room or whatever), then sure, I'd use one. But I don't need to have a wireless mouse to "declutter my desk." Dealing with batteries is just annoying unless there's a significant tangible advantage.

Same thing with this headphone thing. I'm not going to deal with batteries to power my headphones unless there's a real advantage. I do actually have Bose noise-cancelling headphones, which are awesome for when I use them, and yes they require batteries. But that's for a use case like airplanes where there's a real advantage. On a daily basis if I'm out for a walk or whatever, I don't want to deal with my battery in my earbuds going dead... just so Apple can shave another fraction of a millimeter off the thickness of its devices. (And of course, that's not the real reason -- they want to see you buy some expensive connector or other peripherals.)

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Call me when there is a Bluetooth headset that sounds as good and uses the same amount of power as wired headsets.

Hell, call me when there's an acceptable amount of lag between the Bluetooth headset and the phone. It's fine if all you're doing is placing calls, but it's noticeable even if all you do is adjust volume or play music (press play, and there'll be a delay before the music starts, skip a track, and you can note the delay, etc.) and it makes playing games with sound cues impossible on a Bluetooth headset.

Also, SJWs. Take a drink.

Re: converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes they did the duck terrorist theme yesterday. Get over it.

Re:converter

[unimacs]

Yes, and you could buy a floppy disk drive very cheaply too. Nobody uses those anymore either.

What a ridiculous comparison. Floppies were limited in their design capacity, and Apple's decision to start phasing them out in 1998 (I believe) was ALSO premature. Why? Because there wasn't a good alternative on the market yet for those who needed to transfer files. Zipdisks were fine, but they were pricey, buggy, and annoying. CD-ROMs were write-only. CD-RWs were unreliable and often unsupported in some readers. It was really the USB flash drive which finally replaced the floppy, but that didn't come around until 2000. Once they became cheap and popular, most computer companies finally started dropping floppy drives.

The "i" in iMac stood for "Internet". One the selling points of the product is that it took only two steps to connect to the Internet. Being connected meant there was less need for physical media and sneaker net. For those who wanted a floppy drive, there were USB drives available. Another important factor that people forget was that the writing was already on the wall for the original 3.5 floppy and it took a stack of them to do much with. The problem was that there was no clear successor. Zip drives were competing with SyQuest drives and "Super Disks" (remember those) that had some backwards compatibility. The removable media world was in transition.

In spite of getting a ton of criticism for leaving off what was thought to be a crucial peripheral, the original iMac was one of Apple's most successful products and helped bring back the company from the brink of bankruptcy. It also led to an explosion of USB products and helped push USB into being a truly universal connector which is still found on virtually every computer almost 20 years later. Had innovation been left up to PC manufacturers we might have been stuck with RS-232 and parallel ports for another decade.

Re:converter

[jazzis]

As with virtually any apple device, there will be a $75 piece manufactured for 85 cents that will be a lightning to headphone jack connection.

As with the other lightning connectors, if you plug it into your mac it will crash when it wakes on sleep.

You are an idiot troll sir.

Re:converter

[PopeRatzo]

Also, SJWs. Take a drink.

No. I'm posting from rehab.

Re:converter

[guruevi]

No, they dropped it long after 100MB ZIP drives and CDR's became available and nobody was using the floppy anymore except for device drivers. Kind of like the CD these days. You got to understand that Apple never got stuck with a decades-old Basic Input/Output System that requires (to this day) 8088 Real Mode in the CPU, VGA support in your graphics card and a Floppy to boot the system or heck, drivers in the OS.

Re:converter

[AchilleTalon]

It seems to me you are just using the old Bluetooth generation devices which are power hungry. Bluetooth 4.x, called Low-Energy is fixing this problem.

Re:converter

[jeepies]

Apple already has a replacement connector and it's not a lightning dongle. They patented it a couple months ago. Pretty sure that's for the next iPhone.

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know why I'm biting, but I'll bite. Seriously, what the heck are you talking about? So far as I can tell, Apple doesn't have a single $75 adapter out there now. Whatever they cost to manufacture, they're so far from standard as to not exist. The most expensive one I can find is the lightning to HDMI adapter and it's less than $50. The others are all much cheaper than that.

This one is $79 US.
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital-av-multiport-adapter?fnode=8b

And so is this one.
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1L2AM/A/usb-c-vga-multiport-adapter?fnode=8b

Re:converter

[PopeRatzo]

It seems to me you are just using the old Bluetooth generation devices which are power hungry. Bluetooth 4.x, called Low-Energy is fixing this problem.

Bluetooth still uses more power than a wired headphone, and with a device that is chronically power-hungry (like an iPhone), this is not a feature.

Re:converter

[BronsCon]

Until it's "No-energy", meaning no power is required for any purpose other than driving the speakers to produce audio, and all of that power comes from the audio source, it's not fixing the problem stated in GP's post. As long as the limiting factor on my listening time is the size of the battery in my bluetooth headset, my bluetooth headset will always play second fiddle to my wired headphones. And I have a couple of really high-end bluetooth headsets that I really love but rarely use for that exact reason. They're great when wires are really a problem, like when laying down to sleep or working on a car, but they're not so great when using them means carrying twice as many battery-powered chargers, for example, on a two week hike.

Re: converter

[Anonymous Coward]

This.

Re:converter

[jazzis]

As for the second part, seriously, WTF? No macs have lightning ports? If you're jamming the connector into some other port the machine does have, crashing is probably the least of your issues.

Mod this one up as +5 Informative. The rest of the comment is spot on Informative!

Re:converter

[LynnwoodRooster]

The data rate of BLE is WAY too low for any real audio experience. You can get about a 64 kbps MP3 stream and that's it. I guess if you like listening to highly compressed music it would work, but for anything else (like anything you can get from any of the online music streaming/selling services) - you'll have to use "full" Bluetooth, and the power consumption associated.

Re:converter

[LynnwoodRooster]

Lighten up, grandpa - I'm already off your lawn!

Re:converter

[edremy]

The 3.5mm headphone jack is one of the stupidest connectors in existence, and it only still exists because of inertia. Like floppies in 1998. You'll see.

Why? The floppy failed because there were better options- faster, more storage, etc.

Is the new connector somehow going to transfer data faster? Well, no, 3.5mm is analog so you're not going to do any better. Is it going to be more durable? Given that it will be smaller than 3.5 mm, doubtful. Cheaper? Not a chance. Other than OMG THIN! and proprietary what does this have going for it?

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, and this is the reason for the story, it is HUGE (not great) for what it does, and not just the diameter but also the depth. But there are more reasons why it's a stupid connector: It connects the contacts in the wrong way while you insert or remove the plug and shorts them momentarily. It's a deep socket which stresses the soldering joints and is practically impossible to clean. The metal contacts inside the socket are easily bent out of shape, for example when you do try to clean dirt out of the socket. The electrical contact is sketchy under the best of circumstances and creates noise, especially the tip contact. The different contact resistances can lead to uneven volume balance. To get good contact, the fit needs to be very tight. Even good quality plugs are rated for fewer connect-disconnect cycles than the lowly micro USB plug. There are multiple incompatible "standards" for the order of the signals on a four ring headset connector, and also for the the way button presses are signaled which are used for controlling volume, play, pause, accepting calls etc. It doesn't supply power for embedded electronics in the headphones (e.g. FIR filter DSP or noise cancelling). It's analog only (technically it could be used for S/PDIF, but without power what's the point.) There is also the problem that it's used as a combined audio connector for both line-out and headphones, which requires compromises in the output stage.

The one good thing about the headphone jack? It's round. That's it.

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Your sig would be more impactful without the contraction.

Re:converter

[spire3661]

"Being connected meant there was less need for physical media and sneaker net."

No. There will ALWAYS be a need for sneakernet. At no point in the next 100 years will sneakernet be made unviable. The plain fact is WE DONT WANT an explosion of digital connection-only speakers and headphones. There is no benefit to anyone but Apple in doing this.

Re: converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Stupid people have not realized that all Apple products since the 4 Steve have sucked dick.
Must buy shitty bumpy China phone resembling female hygiene product.
Once they do Apple tanks.
Apple is a radiation poisoned company. They are dead but their money doesn't let them realize it just yet.

Re:converter

[Jack Griffin]

You have to hand it to Apple. They recognised early on that soon lots of stupid people will be buying technology devices. While I personally will never buy one of their products, I applaud their skill at separating fools from their money.

Re:converter

[hcs_$reboot]

Indeed! thanks

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

BLE does not stream audio though. In fact it doesn't really "stream" anything.

By design it sends brief bursts of data, 20 bytes or so at a time. Intended for sensors, telemetry, automation, etc. but NOT multimedia.

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Obsessive much? Geez.

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, yes, I remember those battery-powered floppy disks.

Re:converter

[macs4all]

As with virtually any apple device, there will be a $75 piece manufactured for 85 cents that will be a lightning to headphone jack connection.

As with the other lightning connectors, if you plug it into your mac it will crash when it wakes on sleep.

Excuse me. How do you plug a Lightning connector into a Mac? Are you talking about trying to plug one into a Thunderbolt socket?

Re:converter

[macs4all]

...digital audio to the speaker is the future, and then it might as well be wireless.

I've wanted that for the past 25 years. No reason that it can't happen.

Most subwoofers are "powered"; why not the "main" speakers? LOTS of nice things can happen when speakers and amplifiers are "matched". For one thing, passive crossovers (which are responsible for a LOT of bad things in a LOT of speaker systems) become a thing of the past. Another is "tuning" the amplifier's response to "flatten" the system. For another, A/V Receivers stop having to be behemoths, and can actually start being modular control systems, where consumers can easily choose their particular needs for number and type of audio in/outs, virtual tape/processing loops, EQ "plugins", etc. In fact, your entire A/V control system can become an App, with faceless boxes that do your bidding, and can distribute the signals to wherever. Yes, they have these things to some extent already; but to really do it right still costs quite a bit, and is really fairly limited.

I disagree to some extent on the wireless part for phase-coherence reasons; but I suppose the same signal that can carry the audio information can also carry a syncronization/timestamp so that samples are presented for conversion at the "same" time. And wireless SURE makes doing surround-sound setups easier in a LOT of homes (including my own).

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

There is competition out there for other phones and hardware, so it's not like apple has a monopoly. If you don't like or want proprietary connectors, then don't buy it and take your money to some other manufacturer. Personally I would find it fairly stupid on apples part to get rid of 3.5mm phone jacks and I sort of doubt they will.

Re:converter

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you've been downmodded because of your (lack of) reading comprehension skills. Most people buy the cheapest headphones or earbuds (as the GP referred to) that "look nice" that they can. Most people don't buy Beats (I'm not making a quality statement about them, but that they do not sell enough to be considered what "most" people buy).

Re:converter

[TwentyCharsIsNotEnou]

This is what worries me:

In an ideal (sensible) world, doing this would make the iPhone fail, due to lacking a very important and standard feature in order to achieve something that has no real effect on the user (unnecessary thinness).

But in the real world, the iPhone 7 will sell with or without at 3.5mm jack, and worse than that - others will then do the same, reducing (or at least heavily segmenting) consumer options.

It already happened with micro SD slots.

Re: converter

[nvidi0t]

Do you seriously think that the USB port was invented by Apple? The PC I built in 1997 had two USB ports on it. This was before the iMac was introduced. USB was designed by a consortium of tech companies, including Intel, Microsoft, IBM, and Compaq, but definitely NOT including Apple.

Re: converter

[unimacs]

Where did I say that Apple invented USB?

What I did say was that the iMac led to an explosion of USB products. If you wanted to hook a printer, keyboard, mouse, Zip drive, external hard drive or whatever to an iMac, it had to be USB.

Re:converter

[tibit]

I have never had a low-lag experience with Bluetooth audio and Apple devices. Perhaps the technology doesn't allow it, but somehow every Apple device I use with wireless audio will delay the audio output by ~0.2 seconds. This makes it completely useless for live playing. With a hardwired connection to the headphones, I can use an iPhone 6 with 2-3 instrument apps running in the background, a programmable midi controller in the foreground, hook up my keyboard through the lightning camera adapter, and jam. The lag is not noticeable - iOS has a very good, low-latency midi/audio system that supports VSTs very well. If they drop wired audio connections, they better offer a wireless interface that has very low lag or else they'll anger the audio market. VSTs on Android are a joke...

Re:converter

[tibit]

Say what you will, but at the moment Apple devices running iOS are the only mobile platform that runs VSTs and routes midi in an easy-to-use fashion. Windows Phone doesn't do it, Android doesn't do it. If you want to get a lot of bang for your buck, buy a couple VST apps from the app store, a USB midi controller, USB-to-lightning "camera" adapter, and off you go. It works great, is trivial to set up (there is none, really), and iOS is the de-facto standard for such things. I'd say it's a lot of bang for my buck compared to buying obsolete keyboards/synths at exorbitant prices and having to service the damn things myself.

Re:converter

[Agripa]

And it will include both patent protection and DRM to prevent unauthorized use.

Bullshit

[melatonin]

This would mean a DAC, headphone amp, and batteries in every headphone.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember, you are speaking about APPLE here.

They think differently to you and I.

They are quite happy with gimping their products to appease to weird niches with too much money and less brains.

Re:Bullshit

[AmiMoJo]

They will probably offer an adapter cable. They seem to love adapters these days, because the device can be smaller and they get to sell you an accessory.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

I LOL'ed.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

This would mean a DAC, headphone amp, and batteries in every headphone.

The Lightning connector can supply power. Driving an internal DAC/amp shouldn't be much different than driving an external DAC/amp, so battery usage should be about the same.

Re:Bullshit

[squiggleslash]

No batteries needed if it connects via the Lightning (or micro-USB for generic phones - let's be honest, if Apple goes there others will to) port. DAC and headphone amp will probably add about 25c to the cost of the device.

The only serious issue really is that nobody has these headphones. I don't mind us moving to digital audio transmission, but I'd like all the manufacturers to agree upon a common standard first. Apple unilaterally deciding to go Lightning is about the worst possible outcome.

Re:Bullshit

[Solandri]

Actually, the standard 3.5mm jack does have a design flaw. When it's inserted, it sticks out from the device. That's fine if you want to place the device in a pocket so that the jack is pointed at the opening. But if for some reason you want to orient the device so the jack is pointed away from the opening, it'll stick out and catch on things, increasing the risk of breakage.

A better design would be a spring-loaded recessed plug, so when you press the jack in all the way, only the flexible part of the wires stick out of the device. Or something that latches on flat against the side of the device (spring clip or magnetically attached).

Re:Bullshit

[aaarrrgggh]

If using a USB-C or lightning connector that can source power, it might not be an entirely bad thing. Bought the Bose in-ear noise cancelling headphones, and the biggest annoyance is the little power brick. Go digital with power from the phone, and you actually improve both products.

But, this change would really piss me off; I would want at least one generation of dual-mode operation so I can phase out my new headphones over a reasonable life.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

they're already going to put a lightning port in beats so what they don't give two shits about other companies, this is basically apple reinventing the headphones so nobody can compete now that they have marketshare; yay for fragmenting the system more apple, kudos to you

Re:Bullshit

[cfalcon]

> A better design would be a spring-loaded recessed plug

I bet a better design on cars would be to move the brakes somewhere else too, and you could back that up with response time studies. The point is WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER STANDARD. I don't want to have to carry a stupid converter around. Does it go in the pocket with the keys, so the keys slowly ruin it? Does it go in the pocket with the phone, so it slowly dings up the phone? Do I put it in back pocket? Do I leave it on the headphones, or near them? How do I remember where I put it after the headphones have been in a normal jack for a week?

It adds complexity and gives us nothing in return. Your idea adds complexity and cost for a minor use case.

Anyway, I actually doubt they will do this at all. It's really dumb. I doubt they'll do YOUR idea either, but for a different reason- it seems that new standards only exist to solve business problems, not real ones.

Re:Bullshit

[R3d M3rcury]

...and Apple makes the coolest adapters.

Re:Bullshit

[macs4all]

This would mean a DAC, headphone amp, and batteries in every headphone.

So, IOW, a single, fairly simple ARM microcontroller to negotiate the Lightning protocol and do the D/A conversion, likely sub-dollar at Apple's quantities, with possibly a 5 cent amplifier chip and a few passive components. No batteries, since Lightning has power pins. The most expensive thing would be the connector.

Apple could sell it at $20 and still make a handy profit.

If you're talking about bluetooth, I am less sure what would be required; but yes, that would obviously require batteries and a bit more guts to deal with the RF stuff.

Re:Bullshit

[tibit]

These days, BLE 4 headphone solutions are single-chip, some even have a battery charger included and truly require only a few external components for a complete system.

They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

... before long Apple will put in an 'identity tag detector' inside their new iPhone and only their own brand headphones have the tag - and without the tag the headphone won't work

Re:They will go one step further

[kupekhaize]

I hate to say it, but they already have a "Made for iPhone" program where there are special chips the iDevices are looking for, and if they don't find it they will complain the accessory may not work properly:

http://www.iphonehacks.com/201...

Last I heard it never went past fear mongering but was still annoying. I can't remember if there was a way to disable it or not but I'm sure if so it was on by default.

Re:They will go one step further

[Plumpaquatsch]

... before long Apple will put in an 'identity tag detector' inside their new iPhone and only their own brand headphones have the tag - and without the tag the headphone won't work

2009 called, and wants its meme back - https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/apple-adds-still-more-drm-ipod-shuffle

Re:They will go one step further

[jellomizer]

Apple has the problem of being highly visable with any problem with there devices. Apple users are picky and there are a bunch of haters who are willing to exploit any issue. A scam company makes a charger that is essentially plugging the wires to the wall and people who used it had there phones catch on fire will blame apple for their phones catching on fire. iPhone catches fire spreads across the Internet. Not stupid person bought a cheap ripoff charger that feed the phone direct ac current from the wall.

Re: They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't be that large lawsuit happy mega company wants to extort more money from locked in customers. It must be the malicious small companies.

Re:They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

Nike has the problem of being highly visable with any problem in their shoes. Nike users are picky and there are a bunch of haters who are willing to exploit any issue. A scam company makes a pair of running shoes that essentially use the same method of foot comfort and aeration but broke easily and people blamed Nike for making shitty products. "Nike shoes cause ankle sprain when they fail" spreads across the internet. Not stupid person bought a cheap ripoff of Nike shoes that are made out of substandard materials that fail easily after exposure to the sun.

However, in this case, they have branding.

But, unfortunately, Apple are banned from using a mark of their trade, so are unable to protect themselves from the scurrilous "haters", who only complain because they are haters, not because there's something to complain about. After all, APPLE made it, therefore there CANNOT be anything to complain about!

If ONLY Apple were allowed to register a mark of trade so that they could be clear about an accessory not being officially their manufacture, therefore having to make their products whine and whinge at their pets when they don't buy them the more expensive Apple version of the toys they want.

Re:They will go one step further

[jazzis]

Apple has the problem of being highly visable with any problem with there devices. Apple users are picky and there are a bunch of haters who are willing to exploit any issue.

So true.

Re:They will go one step further

[bytesex]

Like the cryptographically protected power plug? 'Oh we're too visible while trying to corner the market for 5VDC!' *faints*.

Yeah right.

Re:They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

The USB standard delivers very little power by default, you will need to speak the usb protocol to tell the application that it can deliver more power, then the device need to tell the charger it wants more power.

Apple instead allowed a simple resister on the dataline to tell how much power should be transferred, not so much encryption.

Re:They will go one step further

[LordKronos]

I hate to say it, but they already have a "Made for iPhone" program where there are special chips the iDevices are looking for, and if they don't find it they will complain the accessory may not work properly:

http://www.iphonehacks.com/201...

Last I heard it never went past fear mongering but was still annoying. I can't remember if there was a way to disable it or not but I'm sure if so it was on by default.

That's nothing new. It's been around for a long time. I had a 2nd gen ipod touch. Apple wanted like $50 for their composite A/V cable (with the red/white/yellow connectors) so you could play video back on an old analog TV. Instead I went onto ebay and bought one for $3.50 that worked perfectly. Or at least it did work perfectly, until IOS 4.0 (I think that was the version, but maybe it was 3.0) was released. Then whenever the cable was connected, it would pop up that error message. You could still use the audio out on the cable, but the video portion was useless (I don't remember if it completely stopped working or was just useless because it showed the error message on your TV). The only way to get video out was to buy a new ridiculously priced official cable that had their DRM chip inside.

Re: They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

My God, did you warn them about Paris?

Re: They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

July 15, 2013, a woman in China was killed by her iPhone. August 9, 2013 it was revealed that it was actually the poor quality knockoff charger she was using, and not the iPhone.

There was several days of coverage for the first story in mainstream media. There was no correction when the truth came out.

He has a point.

Re: They will go one step further

[JustOK]

Tom is fine. He's no danger now. He's gotten better.

Re:They will go one step further

[Bing Tsher E]

Apple was just protecting the "user experience" of people flashing plastic at their stores.

Re: They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

This is real. I bought a cheap cable and my phone rejected it, but iPad was fine. My phone said it could not be guaranteed to work with the cable and did not charge.

Re: They will go one step further

[Anonymous Coward]

So what's your point? What impact did the "Made for iPhone" program have in this instance?

Re:They will go one step further

[jellomizer]

You must be a wiz at Ad-libs.

You analogy is poor. Shoes are not meant for addons and plugins. Unless someone say causes a shoe failure because of a faulty third partly shoelace.

With cheap fake shoes with Nike logo, Nike and law enforcement can go after the rip off. As for the 3rd party apple add on. Well they just happened to make a device that fits in the wall, and fits in an iPhone. The fact you put them together is your own fault.

funny and sad

[matushorvath]

Apple is slowly but surely becoming a parody of itself.

Re:funny and sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is slowly but surely becoming a parody of itself.

Apple has always been doing stuff like this. I remember when they removed 3.5" floppy drive from their Macs while Quark Xpress (one of the biggest Mac applications at the time) still needed a startup floppy to run. Cue a lot of companies having to buy external floppy drives at ridiculous prices. So the Mac got a little bit more streamlined, but the users desk much more cluttered. And Apple laughed all the way to the bank.

Re:funny and sad

[Anonymous Coward]

But they'll still outsell everyone else by a large margin, while pretending to invent products. Their fans cannot grasp they're just picking other companies' components off the shelf and having a Chinese sweatshop fabricate them. Apple have got it spot on. Their R&D is icon colors and the shape of the container. while the real engineering is done by LG and Samsung, who are then daft enough to let Apple get their screens, memory, storage et al, for a minuscule profit. So who's the fool really? The Eastern electronic companies could destroy Apple within a few months if they stopped selling their components to them.

Re: funny and sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that Apple design their own A series chips and display timing controllers, but don't let facts get in the way.

Re:funny and sad

[Dogtanian]

Apple has always been doing stuff like this. I remember when they removed 3.5" floppy drive [..] Cue a lot of companies having to buy external floppy drives at ridiculous prices.

Don't know if you were thinking of the original late-90s iMac, which Apple made a big hurrah about not including a floppy drive. Except that- for all its archaicness- there was still no universal affordable alternative to the floppy (#), which is why almost every bondi blue iMac you saw had a external floppy (in matching colours) hanging off it anyway!! (Ironically far less tidy and aesthetically pleasing than having it built in like the CD reader would have been).

Had they done that five years later, yeah, it'd have been more sensible. Circa 1998, it was just a contrived anti-feature that gave Apple a "we're so futuristic" selling point anyway, one that fanboys still trumpet today.

(#) CD writers were starting to come down in price quite fast by the late-90s, but they still weren't cheap enough at that point to be included as a default option, which would explain why Apple didn't even include one! The Internet (which IIRC was one of their suggestions for transferring files) was still 56kbps dial-up even for most people that *did* have it, and far from everyone did back then (remember that the other person you wanted to exchange files with would *also* need Internet access). Pen drives weren't even around then- Wikipedia claims that the first ones came out in 2000- and would take quite a bit longer to reach dirt-cheap floppy-replacing affordability.

Re:funny and sad

[Dog-Cow]

Had they done that five years later, yeah, it'd have been more sensible.

It would be hard to argue that Apple's decision to leave out the floppy drive didn't cause the situation we had 5 years later.

Re:funny and sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Had they done that five years later, yeah, it'd have been more sensible.

It would be hard to argue that Apple's decision to leave out the floppy drive didn't cause the situation we had 5 years later.

There is a natural progression to most of these Apple choices that would have happened anyway. Maybe a little bit slower if not for Apple pushing changes before their time, but I believe Apple's effect on how things have progressed is highly exaggerated.

Re:funny and sad

[Dogtanian]

It would be hard to argue that Apple's decision to leave out the floppy drive didn't cause the situation we had 5 years later.

It wouldn't be hard to argue that at all! (#)

As I said, CD writers were already getting cheaper by the late 90s, and Apple can hardly claim credit for hastening their adoption since they didn't even include one.

Yes, the 1.44MB floppy format's capacity was already outdated and starting to look badly out of sync with the sort of file sizes and uses common by the late 90s (cf. the rapidly-growing capacity of hard drives, and the amount of data already-widespread CD-ROMs could hold). The pressure for a replacement was already there in the PC market, the only problem was that no realistic alternative at a practical price had received universal adoption by then. Apple's abolition of the floppy didn't provide a solution at all, it only forced their users to buy external floppy drives.

At best, as the other guy suggested, Apple provide a marginal level of forward pressure to something that would have happened anyway.

If anything, what Apple *do* deserve some credit for is encouraging the adoption of USB, whose time had- or should have- arrived by then. And even that was available in PCs at the time- the one I bought 3 or 4 months before the iMac came out included USB, the problem was that it wasn't that well-supported, and there seemed to be no hurry to do so. So maybe they helped that- and it could be argued, indirectly helped the adoption of USB pen drives several years later- but even that was by forcing the issue (i.e. abolishing legacy ports), and I suspect that USB would have taken off eventually anyway. At least in that case they included a realistic alternative, unlike with the abolition of the floppy.

(#) I think your nickname gives away your slightly partisan nature :-)

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

That's two components, at least one of which is based on licensed block designs from ARM, who could simply stop licensing them for future use and BAM, no more A series chips can be made. Go on thinking Apple invented everything in the iPhone, really, go ahead, don't let those pesky facts get in the way. Don't get me wrong, I've got a number of apple products and I do love them, but i don't bullshit myself about what Apple actually does as a company. The AC you replied to is absolutely correct.

Re:funny and sad

[Jack Griffin]

Apple has always been a parody. Except for maybe a breif period in 1983 with the Apple 2, and again in 2007-2009 when the iPhone was leading product of its type, but other than that, Apple products have been mostly stupid and gimmicky.

Re: funny and sad

[Karlt1]

Well assuming that for some reason Arm stopped licensing to Apple, Apple could easily move over to Intel chips. When you run a program under the iOS simulator, it compiles the code to x86 and binds against an x86 build of the iOS libraries. So Apple already has an x86 tool chain for iOS.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

Intel would have to offer a sufficiently low-powered chip, which they currently do not do. However, that mosses the point; then Apple would make even fewer parts of the iPhone.

Re:funny and sad

[ravenscar]

Clearly it's a great business plan.

As for their fans, they appreciate quality design and a generally positive software experience. I doubt they could care much less about just how "cutting edge" the components are.

I tend to go back and forth between Apple and Android because I like a new experience when I get a new phone. Until a few years ago, Android was often a pain. Getting files onto the device was an ugly process, the software was 'laggy', and the phone crashed regularly (which I fixed by moving to a different distort). I didn't mind because I liked playing with my phone. It turned a lot of people off - people who are now die-hard Apple folk. Sure, Android had more features, but it was fraught with bugs. The Apple stuff worked reasonably well.

Android is worlds better today, but it still hasn't shaken it's budget, low quality image in some minds.

The other thing that Apple has all over the other handset makers is a physical retail presence (in many areas). I broke the screen on an Apple phone (my fault - not that of the phone) and needed it repaired ASAP. I went online, submitted a ticket, picked a location, made an appointment, and headed in at my chosen time. It took the employee around 1 hour to replace the entire screen (glass and LCD) at a cost of $150. Had they not been able to fix it they would have replaced my phone. What do you do if you drop your Samsung or LG? I'd imagine you ship it off and wait a week or two or visit a shady mall kiosk. I'm due a switch back to Android with my next phone. I'm hoping to avoid a break so that the above can remain a mystery ;-)

There are lots of great products out there. Don't discount the perceived value of design and accessibility. They really are worth it to a large number of people.

Re: funny and sad

[macs4all]

That's two components, at least one of which is based on licensed block designs from ARM, who could simply stop licensing them for future use and BAM, no more A series chips can be made. Go on thinking Apple invented everything in the iPhone, really, go ahead, don't let those pesky facts get in the way. Don't get me wrong, I've got a number of apple products and I do love them, but i don't bullshit myself about what Apple actually does as a company. The AC you replied to is absolutely correct.

Actually, Apple has a "Soft Core" ARM license that actually lets them design their own CPUs (and they do), rather than just licensing IP from ARM. Being a founding member in ARM doesn't hurt, either. There are a few other companies that have such a license (Samsung and Qualcomm being two of them, IIRC); but Apple actually does design A-series chips from the CPU-on out.

Re:funny and sad

[macs4all]

Apple has always been a parody. Except for maybe a breif period in 1983 with the Apple 2, and again in 2007-2009 when the iPhone was leading product of its type, but other than that, Apple products have been mostly stupid and gimmicky.

First off, the Apple ][ pretty much supported Apple from 1977 through 1992, and there wasn't a school from K through University in the U.S. that didn't have several dozen to several hundred of them. During the same time, at least up through the mid '80s, it was relatively rare to see a Wintel PC in a school. The terms Stupid or gimmicky has never been applied to the Apple ][ series.

Then we have the Macs, starting in 1984. I'm not sure what metrics you use to determine "Stupidity" or "Gimmicky-ness" (maybe if a computer doesn't come in a beige steel box, eh?); but Macs have been every bit as "Serious" of computers since at least the advent of the Macintosh II in 1987. Actually, the "toaster" Macs were pretty serious, too, compressing 80% of the software and hardware technology of the $10,000 Lisa (the computer so far ahead of its time that almost no one could understand it) into a cube 1/4 the size of the Lisa, and for nearly 1/10 the price. True, the Mac was SUPPOSED to be a Laptop (a "Dynabook", actually); but what they did was still pretty neat, compared with the competition of the time.

Fast-forward to the present: Apple makes the best laptops, as opined by, well, most everyone, and does a pretty damned good job at their other product lines as well.

Curiously enough, though: The one thing that they have NEVER done is make a beige steel box. The PowerMac 9500/9600 are about as close as they got to that; but even those weren't just generic Wintel PCs.

Re: funny and sad

[Plumpaquatsch]

That's two components, at least one of which is based on licensed block designs from ARM, who could simply stop licensing them for future use and BAM, no more A series chips can be made.

Yeah, ARM is going to stop licensing to the developer of the fastest ARM chip available, who managed to build the first 64-bit ARM chip by hacking together some official block designs.

I believe ARM isn't as crazy as you.

Re:funny and sad

[MachineShedFred]

What the hell are you even talking about? When Apple deleted the floppy from the iMac, all computers had a hard disk in them, as well as an operating system running from that hard disk. Plus, the iMac was only one line that Apple was selling - the Power Macintosh still had a floppy drive, and that's what anyone would actually be running Quark on if they knew what the fuck they were doing.

Boot floppy? Post System 6? Only if you're a moron, or have a dead System Folder on the hard disk. Either way, boot floppies for every-day use were dead after like 1992 in the Mac universe.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

I believe I'm not as crazy as you give me credit for. Nowhere did I say ARM would> or even should stop licensing to Apple. I simply stated that they could.

Re:funny and sad

[Jack Griffin]

The terms Stupid or gimmicky has never been applied to the Apple ][ series.

That's why I qualified the statement with "other than that". With the "that" being the Apple 2 and original iPhone.

I'm not sure what metrics you use to determine "Stupidity" or "Gimmicky-ness"

Cost more, did less, tried to justify it with shineyness.
Most Apple 2 owners upgraded them for 286's when they came out and never looked back. There is a reason Apple almost went bankrupt in the 90's.

Fast-forward to the present: Apple makes the best laptops

Only since the Macbook became a shinier Wintel box. Not really thinking different now is it?

Re: funny and sad

[Plumpaquatsch]

And monkey could fly out of your ass.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

You see, that's not really true, there would have to be a monkey in my ass, first. However, as ARM does, in fact, license designs to Apple, they actually could stop doing so.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

Yes, they do design the CPUs ...and I never said they didn't... from ARM block designs. They arrange the blocks, they design the connecting lattice between the blocks, and yes, they've designed a few non ARM-core blocks to reside on the same die for specific functions; those blocks are not ARM, though. They're application-specific processors like audio and video hardware CODECs and such; living on the same die as the ARM CPU makes them ARM blocks in the same way that living on the same die as the x86 CPU makes an Intel GPU and x86 block: it doesn't.

Re:funny and sad

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell are you even talking about? When Apple deleted the floppy from the iMac, all computers had a hard disk in them, as well as an operating system running from that hard disk. Plus, the iMac was only one line that Apple was selling - the Power Macintosh still had a floppy drive, and that's what anyone would actually be running Quark on if they knew what the fuck they were doing.

Boot floppy? Post System 6? Only if you're a moron, or have a dead System Folder on the hard disk. Either way, boot floppies for every-day use were dead after like 1992 in the Mac universe.

Same AC here. I worked in a publishing company at the time, and most of your points about hard disk etc. are moot, because the DTP program specifically needed a "key" floppy inserted as an copy-protection scheme.

And yes, iMac G3 was a popular choice for DTP when launched, and chosen by many professional outfits. We had around 20 DTP stations where I worked that fairly quickly migrated to G3 (and the external floppy drives). A number of reasons for this, including price/value for the needed application compared to Power Macintosh (despite the floppy lobotomy).

Re:funny and sad

[macs4all]

The terms Stupid or gimmicky has never been applied to the Apple ][ series.

That's why I qualified the statement with "other than that". With the "that" being the Apple 2 and original iPhone.

No, you placed "year" restrictions around the Apple ][ that were wholly incorrect.

I'm not sure what metrics you use to determine "Stupidity" or "Gimmicky-ness"

Cost more, did less, tried to justify it with shineyness. Most Apple 2 owners upgraded them for 286's when they came out and never looked back. There is a reason Apple almost went bankrupt in the 90's.

And that wasn't it. It was the fact that Apple tried to go in too many directions at once, and buried themselves in SKUs. And the final blow was Apple Licensing MacOS. THAT almost did them in. But it was never about "cost more, did less", unless the "Less" was Windows-Specific software.

But now all that has changed...

Fast-forward to the present: Apple makes the best laptops

Only since the Macbook became a shinier Wintel box. Not really thinking different now is it?

Just because Apple changed to Intel CPUs (the smartest move they ever made!), does NOT mean they became a "Wintel box". Far from it.

Re: funny and sad

[macs4all]

Yes, they do design the CPUs ...and I never said they didn't... from ARM block designs. They arrange the blocks, they design the connecting lattice between the blocks, and yes, they've designed a few non ARM-core blocks to reside on the same die for specific functions; those blocks are not ARM, though. They're application-specific processors like audio and video hardware CODECs and such; living on the same die as the ARM CPU makes them ARM blocks in the same way that living on the same die as the x86 CPU makes an Intel GPU and x86 block: it doesn't.

I believe that it goes deeper than that. What you are describing is what most everyone else does with ARM designs. I'm pretty sure that Apple does more tweaking inside the CPU "block" itself. How else would you explain the difference in performance between A-Series ARMs and everyone else's? Seriously, they are getting more performance out of their dual-core designs that competitors are out of their quad (and more) core "equivalents".

All of that can't be attributed to differences in glue-logic and memory controllers.

Re: funny and sad

[Plumpaquatsch]

You see, that's not really true, there would have to be a monkey in my ass, first. However, as ARM does, in fact, license designs to Apple, they actually could stop doing so.

And yet all that could happen. And I have a hunch (based on your behavior) you already have something up your ass, and it likely is a monkey.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

All of that can't be attributed to differences in glue-logic and memory controllers.

Actually, if you know much about CPU design (more than I do, but less than some people I know who concur on this point), it can. As proof, I offer the Intel Core series of CPUs, the i3, i5, and i7 lines, each of which can be found on dual-core variants at similar clock speeds. What differentiates them is the number of instructions per cycle each core can execute, which is informed by the amount of on-die cache (L1, L2, and in the higher-end chips, L3) available. The cores are the same, the glue logic is effectively the same, with changes being necessary for the larger or smaller caches, but the caches are larger and that allows more instructions to be queued for execution, meaning that while the cores in all 3 chips could potentially execute the same number of instructions per second, the i3's caches will be emptied faster, leaving its cores idle while they wait for more instructions, then the i5's caches will be emptied, leaving it idle while the i7 is still processing.

You'll also note that the A6 barely outperformed the mid-range CPUs found in Android phones at the time and lost slightly to the high end. This indicates that Apple was utilizing larger caches to keep those two slower cores busy (I can ask for a better explanation of why that's what is indicated, but it's likely to be over both of our heads). It wasn't until the A7, which is a 64-bit chip, that Apple's CPUs became competitive with the high end of the Android market; and at that point they were completely destroying anything in the Android world. That is owed in large part to the larger 64-bit instruction set; many of these instructions execute in one cycle what requires multiple subsequent instructions (therefore multiple cycles, as you need the result from one instruction to be fed into the next, which prevents you from executing them concurrently) on a 32-bit CPU. This is the general reason why (all else, e.g. clock speed, caches, and such, being equal) 64-bit CPUs aren't any faster running 32-bit code, but the same source compiled to take advantage of the 64-but instruction set typically runs much faster; the 64-bit CPU isn't executing more instructions in the same amount of time, it's executing fewer and more efficient instructions.

The real fact of the matter is that, outside of synthetic benchmarks, the CPUs used high-end Android phones are every bit as performant as the CPUs used in the iPhone. In real-world usage, one is really not perceptibly faster than the other. And before you jump on me for limiting my comparison to high-end Android phones, can you provide a low-end or mid-range iPhone for me to compare against? Unless such a beast exists and you are willing to admit as much, we'll just keep comparing high-end to high-end. You see, the problem with benchmarks is that they test either the ability of a single core to belt out calculations as fast as possible or the ability all available cores to belt out the same types of calculations as quickly as possible, they don't test the cores all working on different things, and they don't account for switching from one execution context to another. A dual core chip can only work on two different things at once and, as a result, will switch execution context twice as often as a quad core chip when more than two processes are simultaneously demanding CPU time. Context switching is expensive, and that's why benchmarks that don't account for it don't matter in the real world.

I'd love to see someone write a benchmark that simultaneously runs eight different threads, each doing a different task. You could start with one thread repeatedly rendering an image of random static. When that thread finishes its first rendering, another thread starts that repeatedly encodes the most recent image as a PNG. When that thread finishes its first encoding, another thread starts that repeatedly decodes the most r

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

You have a hunch, meanwhile I can assure you that your hunch is incorrect, while I have facts backing my position.

Re: funny and sad

[macs4all]

What differentiates them is the number of instructions per cycle each core can execute, which is informed by the amount of on-die cache (L1, L2, and in the higher-end chips, L3) available. The cores are the same, the glue logic is effectively the same, with changes being necessary for the larger or smaller caches, but the caches are larger and that allows more instructions to be queued for execution...

First, I will freely admit that I couldn't design a modern CPU with a gun pressed to my head. BUT I'm not sure that the design of the "Core" series has much to do with ARM design. Yes, I get what you are saying about larger caches being generally faster/better; but the length of the execution pipeline makes even a bigger difference, as do niceties like lookahead, out-of-order execution, etc. And I seem to remember an Intel document where they SHORTENED the instruction pipeline, because the "cost" of refilling a long pipeline based on a bad-predictive branch decision was higher than refilling a shorter pipe. So sometimes, more isn't always better in CPU design.

It wasn't until the A7, which is a 64-bit chip, that Apple's CPUs became competitive with the high end of the Android market; and at that point they were completely destroying anything in the Android world. That is owed in large part to the larger 64-bit instruction set;

Ok, I'll give you that; especially with ARM, where Opcode and Operand are often combined in the same instruction. (Extrapolating from my experience writing 32 bit ARM assembly language).

A dual core chip can only work on two different things at once and, as a result, will switch execution context twice as often as a quad core chip when more than two processes are simultaneously demanding CPU time. Context switching is expensive, and that's why benchmarks that don't account for it don't matter in the real world.

You are right that context-switching is VERY important. And I seem to remember a recent article that complained the Android handled multiple threads much worse than iOS (which I found amazing, actually, because all the Linux people whine about OS X's context-switch overhead). And since Benchmarks actually test SYSTEMS not CPUs, it kinda all gets lost in the sauce.

Bottom line: I would really like to know what someone on the A[x] Chip Development Team has to say about all this. Do you have any of those friends in your back pocket?

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

Sadly, no, the guys I know are working on iOS and iTunes. I'd definitely be interested to hear from one of the chip devs, as well, though I'm sure there's nothing they can legally tell us that we don't already know (or can't find through Google). NDAs tend to suck like that.

All of that said, I actually haven't been watching the phone market, for the first time since the iPhone came out, since I got my Nexus 6. Plain and simple, this is the first time I've ever been satisfied with a phone I've owned. I'm sure the iPhone 6 Plus would have scratched that same itch for me if I were in the iPhone camp; it's certainly doing the trick for my wife, she didn't even watch the keynote where the 6s models were announced because she simply doesn't need any more than she's got now... for the first time in as long as I've known her.

Being firmly entrenched in the iPad camp, though, I do still think Apple screwed the pooch when they broke compatibility with all of the active styluses (e.g. pressure sensitive) in the iPad Air 2. Anything to make the iPad Pro look more attractive, I guess. My Air is working fine for me still and there are now active styluses on the market that work for the Air 2, so it would seem they didn't get the iPad Pro out fast enough if that's what they were going for. And I'm not sure what else they possibly could have been going for, there is no benefit to the developer, nor to the end user, in the changes they made to the touch screen on the Air 2. But, I digress, that's an old argument; it still hurts me, though, because the end result was that I bought a $700 product that ended up being useless to me for the purpose for which I bought it until a year after it was purchased, by which point I had moved on already.

Honestly, though, I've kind of bittered on the whole Apple experience. My Windows testing machine died a month ago and needed to be replaced. I've used my MacBook Pro 3 times since the replacement arrived; Apple simply doesn't make a laptop that performs the way this new one does. I say that as an owner of the fastest laptop they currently produce (which strangely remains the fastest laptop they sell since I bought it in January). I'm definitely not the typical laptop user, though; for most, anything in any manufacturer's mid-range is more machine than they'll need in their lifetime. For me? I need something that doesn't choke on my daily workload, and the MacBook Pro was doing just that.

To each their own. I certainly do miss the native Unix environment at times, but Cygwin does well enough on that front, as the majority of what I do on the command line is done on other machines via SSH anyway. I certainly enjoyed my time using an Apple machine as my primary desktop, but it is clear where their focus is now, and that focus has shifted to products I don't use, to the detriment of products I (and many others who don't use an iPhone) do use. For reference (to illustrate my point), the Windows laptop I am typing this on is a model that was first released several months before the MacBook Pro line refresh that resulted in the MBP model I currently own; that is to say that, while the Windows laptop is a more recent purchase than the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Pro is actually the newer machine, by several months. The Windows laptop is not the highest-end machine in its line when it launched, while the MacBook Pro was and still is. To put it another way, Apple's best laptop was lagging behind MSI's mid-high laptops when it launched, and they haven't done anything about that, nor does it look like they intend to.

But at least they make the fastest mobile processor. So... there's that, I guess. Doesn't really make up for the end of a glorious 5 year run, though.

Re: funny and sad

[macs4all]

Sadly, no, the guys I know are working on iOS and iTunes. I'd definitely be interested to hear from one of the chip devs, as well, though I'm sure there's nothing they can legally tell us that we don't already know (or can't find through Google). NDAs tend to suck like that.

True. But I thought I'd ask...

All of that said, I actually haven't been watching the phone market, for the first time since the iPhone came out, since I got my Nexus 6. Plain and simple, this is the first time I've ever been satisfied with a phone I've owned. I'm sure the iPhone 6 Plus would have scratched that same itch for me if I were in the iPhone camp; it's certainly doing the trick for my wife, she didn't even watch the keynote where the 6s models were announced because she simply doesn't need any more than she's got now... for the first time in as long as I've known her.

I must admit that I, also owning a 6 Plus, didn't watch that part of the Keynote too closely; simply because I, too, am very satisfied with my current iPhone. Having said that, the 6s does have some really significant hardware advances, and I am happy that whenever I get a new iPhone, it will incorporate those advances, and more.

Being firmly entrenched in the iPad camp, though, I do still think Apple screwed the pooch when they broke compatibility with all of the active styluses (e.g. pressure sensitive) in the iPad Air 2. Anything to make the iPad Pro look more attractive, I guess. My Air is working fine for me still and there are now active styluses on the market that work for the Air 2, so it would seem they didn't get the iPad Pro out fast enough if that's what they were going for. And I'm not sure what else they possibly could have been going for, there is no benefit to the developer, nor to the end user, in the changes they made to the touch screen on the Air 2. But, I digress, that's an old argument; it still hurts me, though, because the end result was that I bought a $700 product that ended up being useless to me for the purpose for which I bought it until a year after it was purchased, by which point I had moved on already.

You REALLY have to stop beating that drum, LOL! So, why aren't you interested in an iPad Pro? That neatly addresses your need for a Stylus (er, Pencil); and has more screen resolution and real-estate to boot...

Honestly, though, I've kind of bittered on the whole Apple experience. My Windows testing machine died a month ago and needed to be replaced. I've used my MacBook Pro 3 times since the replacement arrived; Apple simply doesn't make a laptop that performs the way this new one does. I say that as an owner of the fastest laptop they currently produce (which strangely remains the fastest laptop they sell since I bought it in January). I'm definitely not the typical laptop user, though; for most, anything in any manufacturer's mid-range is more machine than they'll need in their lifetime. For me? I need something that doesn't choke on my daily workload, and the MacBook Pro was doing just that.

Well, since you didn't favor us with what Windows laptop you're talking about, and what it's specs are, it's hardly a "fair fight", right?

Plus, didn't the MacBook Pros just go through a design refresh? So, like my 2013 MacBook Pro (non-Retina), the MacBook Pro you bought last January is no longer the New Hotness; so I don't doubt that there might be some differences in performance when compared to the newest model.

But even more important, there might be serious differences in the Applications you're using, as far as their performance on similar hardware in Windows versus OS X. I say this because, when it comes to Benchmarks, similarly-spec'ed machines from different manufacturers seem to perform within spitting distance of each other, regardless of platform.

To each their own. I certainly do miss the native Unix environment at times, but Cygwin does wel

Re:funny and sad

[Jack Griffin]

But it was never about "cost more, did less", unless the "Less" was Windows-Specific software.

By Windows-specific you mean business-specific. The reason MS did so well is that they catered to the smaller-medium business which was the lion's share of the market at the time.

Just because Apple changed to Intel CPUs (the smartest move they ever made!), does NOT mean they became a "Wintel box". Far from it.

In what way? The hardware is identical to Wintel boxes and fully compatible, you can even run Windows on it, meaning that by definition it is a Wintel machine.

Re: funny and sad

[Plumpaquatsch]

Wow, I was wrong after all - it was the evidence you just pulled out of your ass, not a monkey. A monkey would have been better though.

Re: funny and sad

[BronsCon]

So you're saying that it would be literally impossible for ARM to stop licensing to Apple? Sorry, no contract is interminable. It may be that they never would stop, and I don't think they would (nor did I ever claim to), but the fact remains they could. You can sit here and tell me I'm pulling "evidence" out of my ass, but facts aren't simply pulled from one's own rectum, they exist on their own. It's really and truly not my fault you can't see them yourself.

make the device too thin and...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll start getting iphone cuts when I whip it out of my purse

Re:make the device too thin and...

[Opportunist]

I'd rather be worried that slipping it into my pocket I may crumple it.

better idea

[matushorvath]

The next step: Customers don't own the connectors on their phone. Apple retains the ownership, and rents out the connectors. Every time you connect something to your phone, you pay 1 cent to Apple via Apple Store.

Re: better idea

[Anonymous Coward]

How about: The phone is free, but you're charged an hourly fee based on usage (cpu, memory, network, storage, etc) like AWS

Real bad news

[cfalcon]

Really excellent headphones use the standard jacks, and will not be converting over. Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will. While I'm sure there will be some dumb converter you can buy, who wants to keep that crap in their pocket, or attached to their headphones (which you will have to track carefully when plugged into a normal outlet).

It's true that mostly I listen on little crappy remote earbuds, but that's absolutely not the case that this is ALL I want to listen to.

Moving to this will remove my ability to use real headphones on Apple phones. That's totally shit.

Re:Real bad news

[sd4f]

I think this is the main thing, the inertia on quality headphones using 3.5mm plugs just makes this a silly decision. Additionally, there's just a point where getting a phone thinner is just being silly. Give me better battery life over a thinner device. Problem is the industry appears to be dead set against progressing beyond a 1 day battery.

Re:Real bad news

[AmiMoJo]

Plenty of Android phones have multiple days of battery life. My rather cheap but rather good OnePlus One can go for three or four days on a charge, for example. It's more than thin enough.

I'd rather have a slightly thicker (+1mm) phone with:

- Micro SIM*
- Micro SD card
- Headphone jack
- Strap loop
- Qi wireless charging
- >3000mAh battery
- USB C connector
- Supports all bands (or at least Europe and Japan)
- Factory rooted / unlocked with TWRP installed

Re:Real bad news

[cfalcon]

Apple's move to the larger "plus" option did so very much to help battery life. I also think that there are Androids available with more than a single day, but I'll concede it's rare in general.

I think it's nuts to swap out the headphone jack for any reason at all. I also really think that the "thin" thing is overdone- I already consider any of the larger breed phones too fragile without a case, so you could make it as thin as a card and I'd still need to wrap it in plastic so it doesn't bend and die.

Re:Real bad news

[Feral Nerd]

Really excellent headphones use the standard jacks, and will not be converting over. Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will. While I'm sure there will be some dumb converter you can buy, who wants to keep that crap in their pocket, or attached to their headphones (which you will have to track carefully when plugged into a normal outlet).

It's true that mostly I listen on little crappy remote earbuds, but that's absolutely not the case that this is ALL I want to listen to.

Moving to this will remove my ability to use real headphones on Apple phones. That's totally shit.

I agree with you on the lightning connector, vendor specific connectors always suck, but then I expect all the high end manufacturers like Sennheiser, Bose and friends to offer a lightning variant of their proper full sized headphones and if you are an Audiophile you'll not be a stranger to paying in pounds of flesh for good quality headphones. I switched to Bluetooth headphones years ago because I kept losing corded ones to metal fatigue. I tried re-soldering the connectors which was a bitch because of the type of copper used in the headphone cords and because they didn't last very long. I can't say that I regret going cordless, the audio occasionally cuts out and very occasionally the daemons that handle Bluetooth or audio on the iPhone crap up and I have to reboot the phone. I expect much the same applies to Bluetooth audio on Android phones. Other than that Bluetooth audio works well for my purposes although I can see why die hard audiophiles who expect and strive for live concert quality audio might be disappointed with Bluetooth sound quality but the vast majority of consumers will not give a hoot. The biggest annoyance to date actually stems from the biggest feature of wireless headphones i.e the wirelessness because sometimes I'll forget to pocket my phone and only notice it when I'm 15-30 or more meters from the phone depending on how many walls are between me and it.

Re:Real bad news

[amiga3D]

Most of the people I know with the 6s and 6s plus already have cases with an extra battery included. It makes it much thicker than the device itself but then people really seem more interested in survivability and battery life than thinness.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Advertisements for Apple products tend to be static images of the device either at 1:1 scale or next to a convenient reference (the manila envelope thing, for example). It's hard to show durability or battery life in such an advertisement. It's easy to show it being thin. Same reason why devices have glossy screens--almost everyone hates them, but they (apparently) catch the eye better under store lighting. Most consumer tech is designed to be profitable, not useful.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

"... and likely never will"

How the hell would you know, fuckwit?

Re:Real bad news

[Aristos Mazer]

Apple bought Beats. They make good headphones. My guess is that Apple will say, "There's at least one vendor who makes really excellent [opinions may vary, I'm stating this from Apple's perspective] headphones. Buy those." And enough of the market will accept that to make yet another piece of hardware be Apple exclusive.

Re:Real bad news

[Opportunist]

Because they're the Apple of the audio market. They don't bend to Apple's wishes. Device manufacturers bend to theirs.

Re:Real bad news

[GuB-42]

For real audiophiles, it may not be a bad thing. iPhone audio jacks are less than ideal for driving high-end headphones. The reason is that on smartphones, audio jack outputs have plenty of compromises to make : they must be light, cheap, have an impedance that works for both headphones and line output and avoid using too much power.
A digital connection to a proper headphone amp would be probably be better if you really want high quality.

I agree that if you just want convenience and decent quality, it sucks. In fact it sucks in most cases but for the top end may be ok.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

They make good headphones.

Lol. If your music tastes extend beyond hip-hop, any headphones half the price of Beats will blow them out of the water. Beats are the headphones of Dr. Dre, by Dr. Dre, for Dr. Dre.
OTOH, a sizeable fraction of Apple's clientele is more interested in consumer exhibitionism than device functionality. So, Beats were a very meaningful addition to the Apple lineup.

Re:Real bad news

[supremebob]

That sounds like a nice phone, but I think that most people just want a phone that looks cool and "just works". Those are the folks who end up buying or financing a new iPhone.

I'm sure a bunch of Slashdot members want a phone like that, but there probably isn't enough of us to mass producing a phone worthwhile.

Re:Real bad news

[MightyYar]

You must not use the screen much. It's rated around the same as the iPhone 6. I've yet to find a really high-capacity phone, though "phablets" like yours have a lot more room for battery. So, if you don't use the ginormous, power-draining screen then you will get a lot more time on standby or talk.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

- Strap loop

Where do you ever find one.. Since smartphone area i haven't seen a single one.

I modded mine by drilling some holes in the casing - luckily it had just some space for that - and attaching an old camera strap.

Most important and most-missing feature imho. And seen the amount of broken screens i see - not only for me either. My only explanation is that manufacturers actually want you to break your phone to sell you a new one every year.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

This post describes the new Lumina 950 almost exactly!

Re:Real bad news

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

I always add a case that can accept a strap loop. Or I mod it. The wallet cases made of leather can accept a grommet. Punch one in and cut out the hole inside. Then I loop a neck lanyard through it. The lanyard is usually connected to the belt. It is long enough to reach the ear, but not long enough to hit the floor if it is jostled out or if I drop it. Many people laugh at my Dilbert level of dorkiness.

But once in a while I catch a well dressed young person using a phone with screen cracked like a sun burst and that makes my day. Sadly I do not get any visible notification of people who have misplaced their phone.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you on the lightning connector, vendor specific connectors always suck, but then I expect all the high end manufacturers like Sennheiser, Bose and friends to offer a lightning variant of their proper full sized headphones and if you are an Audiophile you'll not be a stranger to paying in pounds of flesh for good quality headphones. I switched to Bluetooth headphones years ago because I kept losing corded ones to metal fatigue.

I agree, but...planes.

I use my headphones most in 3 areas:

1) My morning run -BT sport headphones.
2) Computer/Tablet gaming -Wired cheap earbuds.
3) Traveling -Wired high-quality ANC headphones (Bose and Audio-Technica).

#2 can be replaced by BT, but it will be some while before #3 can. As it is, I am often asked to turn off my ANC during takeoff and landing. The Bose headset won't work with ANC off.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Really excellent headphones use the standard jacks, and will not be converting over. Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will. While I'm sure there will be some dumb converter you can buy, who wants to keep that crap in their pocket, or attached to their headphones (which you will have to track carefully when plugged into a normal outlet).

It's true that mostly I listen on little crappy remote earbuds, but that's absolutely not the case that this is ALL I want to listen to.

Moving to this will remove my ability to use real headphones on Apple phones. That's totally shit.

I agree with you on the lightning connector, vendor specific connectors always suck, but then I expect all the high end manufacturers like Sennheiser, Bose and friends to offer a lightning variant of their proper full sized headphones and if you are an Audiophile you'll not be a stranger to paying in pounds of flesh for good quality headphones.

I can assure you Sennheiser would never make a Lightning variant of their HD600s and up. Simply put, it's impossible for a phone (or a laptop, or most audio interfaces) to drive those headphones. As such, if you wanted to use something like those (or any other high impedance headphone), you'd have to have an adapter. Bose, possibly, Beats, we'll they're Apple now and fuck Beats, Audio Technica, nope, Shure, nope, Sony, probably not, etc. Basically, if you want really good headphones to be compatible with your device, you're going to have the 3.5mm/1/8" connector still on there.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Using "studio monitor" headphones to listen to music is stupid. That kind of high-end gear is designed for producing music, not consuming it. You just look like a fucking tool.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you on the lightning connector, vendor specific connectors always suck, but then I expect all the high end manufacturers like Sennheiser, Bose and friends to offer a lightning variant of their proper full sized headphones and if you are an Audiophile you'll not be a stranger to paying in pounds of flesh for good quality headphones. I switched to Bluetooth headphones years ago because I kept losing corded ones to metal fatigue.

I agree, but...planes.

I use my headphones most in 3 areas:

1) My morning run -BT sport headphones. 2) Computer/Tablet gaming -Wired cheap earbuds. 3) Traveling -Wired high-quality ANC headphones (Bose and Audio-Technica).

#2 can be replaced by BT, but it will be some while before #3 can. As it is, I am often asked to turn off my ANC during takeoff and landing. The Bose headset won't work with ANC off.

#2 cannot be replaced with Bluetooth. At least, not if any of your games rely on sound queues at all. The delay, while slight these days, is enough to throw it off.

Re:Real bad news

[Mattcelt]

This is precisely correct.

Apple have made the lightning microcontroller proprietary and directly licensed only from themselves (as anyone who has seen the "this accessory is not supported" error when trying to charge their idevice can tell you). They have now purchased a headphones manufacturer, so the next logical step is to force users to purchase either their own hardware, or hardware which earns them a licensing fee.

This is about device lock-in; an attempt to create monopolistic conditions legally (if only barely so). I saw this coming as soon as they purchased Beats - I was actually surprised the 6 series hadn't already eliminated the 3.5mm interface.

Personally, I hope the attempt fails miserably. There was a time I loved Apple... but no longer. They have taken Microsoft's entire 2003 playbook and made it even worse for the consumer.

Re:Real bad news

[Feral Nerd]

Really excellent headphones use the standard jacks, and will not be converting over. Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will. While I'm sure there will be some dumb converter you can buy, who wants to keep that crap in their pocket, or attached to their headphones (which you will have to track carefully when plugged into a normal outlet).

It's true that mostly I listen on little crappy remote earbuds, but that's absolutely not the case that this is ALL I want to listen to.

Moving to this will remove my ability to use real headphones on Apple phones. That's totally shit.

I agree with you on the lightning connector, vendor specific connectors always suck, but then I expect all the high end manufacturers like Sennheiser, Bose and friends to offer a lightning variant of their proper full sized headphones and if you are an Audiophile you'll not be a stranger to paying in pounds of flesh for good quality headphones.

I can assure you Sennheiser would never make a Lightning variant of their HD600s and up. Simply put, it's impossible for a phone (or a laptop, or most audio interfaces) to drive those headphones. As such, if you wanted to use something like those (or any other high impedance headphone), you'd have to have an adapter. Bose, possibly, Beats, we'll they're Apple now and fuck Beats, Audio Technica, nope, Shure, nope, Sony, probably not, etc. Basically, if you want really good headphones to be compatible with your device, you're going to have the 3.5mm/1/8" connector still on there.

Most of the Sennheisers I have are equipped with an exchangeable chord. I was unhappy with the straight cord on my big massive high end Sennheiser headphones (can't remember the type but it cost a few pounds of flesh) so I bought a new spiral cord, snapped the old one out, snapped the new one is and Bob was my uncle. The last time I tried it the iPhone, admittedly my old open 4S the thing was able to drive these headphones but maybe that's only because they have noise cancelling and a built in battery. All of my Bluetooth headsets from Sennheiser (except the BT ear plugs) also have an optional removable cord complete with an aircraft adapter. I fail to see why Shennheiser would not simply add another optional cord with a lighting connector it should not cost them a kings ransom.

Re:Real bad news

[dgatwood]

This. "I would buy an iPhone if it were only thinner," said no one ever.

What would make me upgrade my iPhone 6S to the iPhone 7 rather than skipping two generations and buying the iPhone 8? Give me the ability to carry my phone for a two week trip, using it the way I do now, without having to charge it.

By contrast, there's something bordering on pure insanity about the notion of taking away the headphone jack that many of us use very heavily in our cars while charging the device just so that Apple's engineers can brag about how much thinner they made a device that's already too thin to hold up to your ear without being constantly in fear of dropping it unless you put it in a case. Doubly so when you realize that it will likely mean relying more and more on software tricks to keep the battery life numbers up, while the worst-case battery life (with one of those hundred minor background daemons sitting in a tight loop using 100% of one CPU) continues to decline.

Re:Real bad news

[0100010001010011]

I think this is the main thing, the inertia of quality keyboards using PS/2|ADB plugs just makes this a silly decision.

I think this is the main thing, the inertia of quality printers using a Parallel port just makes this a silly decision.

The 3.5mm jack has had a good run. They figured out how to shoehorn in stereo and a microphone. Let it go.

Re:Real bad news

[guruevi]

My iPhone lasts 3 days with moderate e-mail and web surfing use, occasional text and phone calls. I'm sure if you're on the phone all day, it would last only a day but that has been true since the inception of the cell phone. I remember the old bricks that weighed close to a kg, the Nokia's, the SonyEricsson's, the Motorola's lasted only a few days with moderate use (and very tiny screens). You can still buy a 'dumb phone' or 'feature phones' with modern battery technology and those might last a few days to a week with moderate use but then we're also giving up all the features of a modern smart phone.

Re:Real bad news

[AmiMoJo]

Forgot the *...

* Nano SIMs are a pain in the arse. They are slightly thinner than Micro SIMs, so you can't just cut a larger SIM down to size. Well, you can, but it will be a really tight fit and be prone to getting stuck.

Re:Real bad news

[AmiMoJo]

I use the screen a fair bit. What benchmarks usually fail to measure is standby time. If they do measure it, the do it wrong.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

As do all people using Apple products.. Fuck Apple..

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

"The 3.5mm jack has had a good run. They figured out how to shoehorn in stereo and a microphone. Let it go."

Making the jack any thinner isn't an acceptable option, you begin running into crosstalk and construction/reliability issues. Bluetooth is a wrecked fucking 'standard,' half my BT devices will not pair with newer or older adapter dongles.

There are these magical things called 'standards.' Learn about them.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apple bought Beats. They make good headphones."

No, they do not. I get better sound from a cheap-ass pair of headphones from Big Lots for $10. (Sentry Headart series.)

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

"Making the jack any thinner isn't an acceptable option, you begin running into crosstalk "

Crosstalk? Oh stop making up shit. You think that 3 feet of wire isn't going to have crosstalk? At audio frequencies? That 1mm of jack isn't doing anything.

"There are these magical things called 'standards.' Learn about them."

There's this magical thing called physics. Learn about that first.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Really excellent headphones use the standard jacks, and will not be converting over. Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will. While I'm sure there will be some dumb converter you can buy, who wants to keep that crap in their pocket, or attached to their headphones (which you will have to track carefully when plugged into a normal outlet).

It's true that mostly I listen on little crappy remote earbuds, but that's absolutely not the case that this is ALL I want to listen to.

Moving to this will remove my ability to use real headphones on Apple phones. That's totally shit.

To use those excellent headphones, people carry around a headphone amplifier and if you want to listen to 24 bit audio, a headphone amplifier with a DAC built in using the USB out for digital data.

The USB sound out is the preferred method to listen to audio for quality. The 3.5" output is low on power and on the whim of whatever DAC that was stuck in. Apple has abandoned the high quality Wolfson DACs since iPod video days and Samsung only have them in Europe because some sort of Snapdragon deal that throws in a DAC with the board.

I carry around a separate Fiio DAC and headphone amplifier with battery in it for listening to music. In the future, headphones can incorporate the DAC and headphone amplifier in them and get power through USB or have its own battery.

The bottom line is that a good headphone amplifier can make a night/day difference. Apple probably wants you to throw all your old stuff away and buy Beats but there is a possible benefit of abandoning the 2.5" jack for audio.

Re:Real bad news

[LynnwoodRooster]

Well, the IAP2 chip and license is about a buck, and then you'd need a DAC and amp. It's around $4-$5 minimum to do Lightning to powered analog for the electrical. Add the packaging required (either an on-cable box, or a separate box) and battery and you're up to close to $10 for the Lightning-to-highend headphone adapter. So figure $40-$50 MSRP. Not an insignificant amount!

Re:Real bad news

[aaarrrgggh]

FWIW, at least Audiotechnica offers iPhone compatible mic/controller in their noise cancelling models. A DJ or studio set isn't exactly the target market though.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Multiple days when just waiting for incoming class? But when you use the phone for surfing the web, checking mails and playing your occasional game, how long does your battery live? And iPhone can also go for 4-5 days on a single charge. That is when it is just turned on and you do not turn on the screen.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it does not. I have one. It is crap.

Re:Real bad news

[cfalcon]

> Beats are the headphones of Dr. Dre, by Dr. Dre, for Dr. Dre.

Generally agree. Those headphones are poop on treble. I prefer Grado by far for sound quality, and for gaming I use Audio Technica. Bose requires a lot of research to not get one of their crap models by accident, and I just don't think I'll ever own a Beats.

Re:Real bad news

[MightyYar]

Standby time on larger devices will be excellent. There is plenty of room for a battery and the non-screen electronics draw the same amount as the smaller phones. My problem is that I don't like phones with 5" screens, let alone phablets or tablets. I want something that I can stick in my rear jeans pocket and sit on like a wallet.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

No, Beats do NOT make "good" headphones. Most of their stuff is overpriced junk. They make STYLISH headphones, which is highly regarded among many of Apple's customers.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

There's literally no benefit to changing it though. USB theoretically allowed you to chain multiple devices, unless you're putting in multiple lightning connectors it actually makes it hard to use the device and charge at the same time. I mean the same could be said for a whole bunch of failed technology that didn't overtake the incumbent simply because there wasn't a burning need. Using your keyboard as a USB hub was extremely useful, a mobile device isn't going to have the same usefulness from a dongle you always have to carry, and you're losing the benefit of charging while listening to music. Bluetooth headphones will probably overtake 3.5 before lightning headphones do.

Re:Real bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Really excellent headphones have 1/4" jacks, so you already need a converter.

Re:Real bad news

[ravenscar]

I agree it's a bad idea, but...

Don't just about all top end headphones have exchangeable cords? I mean, it would be generally poor design to have something running into the thousands of dollars ruined by something as flimsy as a cord. Seems to me that making a compatible cord would be good for business.

Second, I imagine many of these manufacturers would be glad to make an "iPhone compatible" version. Some of the existing cans are tanks. You buy them once and never need to replace them. I think most places would be happy to have the opportunity to generate a repeat sale.

Third, when it comes to really high end cans, people generally aren't plugging those into their phones. That's what headphone amps are for.

I don't really see any value to the consumer, but I bet there are a number of companies looking to sell new products.

Re:Real bad news

[macs4all]

Well, the IAP2 chip and license is about a buck, and then you'd need a DAC and amp. It's around $4-$5 minimum to do Lightning to powered analog for the electrical. Add the packaging required (either an on-cable box, or a separate box) and battery and you're up to close to $10 for the Lightning-to-highend headphone adapter. So figure $40-$50 MSRP. Not an insignificant amount!

I assume you're building these by hand in the U.S. out of off-the-shelf parts from TI or someone similar. I submit that, at scale, these could be manufactured in some faraway land for $2 to $3, landed cost. That puts them in the $20-30 retail world, even with insane margins. Just like nearly every other Apple adapter. They'll build the whole thing into the Lightning connector body, and have a short cable with the 3.5mm jack at the other end.

Re:Real bad news

[macs4all]

I carry around a separate Fiio DAC and headphone amplifier with battery in it for listening to music.

You wanna talk about a company that is NOTHING but HYPE, that's Fiio.

I almost peed my pants from laughing while reading the sales brochure for the X5 Gen II. OMFG the utter bullshit!

First off, you simply can't design something that runs off batteries that has a power supply impedance low enough and grounding and shielding good enough to do a 24 bit DAC justice. And since pretty much ALL digital music is 16 bit, there is only SO much dithering can do with those other 8 bits. Sure you can hunt down a FEW 24 bit downloads; but (unfortunately) they simply are few and far between; so your 24 bit DAC, like lossless encoding formats, is simply assinine on a portable music player or phone.

Re:Real bad news

[LynnwoodRooster]

Nope, built in volume (100K/yr) in a factory in Zhuhai. Using a TI amplifier ($1.20/100K pieces), AKM DAC ($1.00 for a good quality unit, 100K pricing). Regulators ($0.70 - need 3.3V and 1.8V, LDOs are cheap but not that cheap), passives (another $0.40, driven mainly by caps), connectors, mechanicals (squirt a part, shoot a little paint, you're at $0.50 in 250K pricing). It's not cheap - which is why there is a STRONG market for counterfeit IAP2 chips, and many who don't pay the appropriate licensing fees, and many who use raw plastic finish (screw flow and knit lines), improper connectors (fake Lightning connectors with questionable tolerancing), etc.

This isn't just "an adapter" - it also would need to have a full DAC and amplifier inside, as well as a power supply. So it's more than the simple connector/wiring adapters you're thinking of.

Re:Real bad news

[Plumpaquatsch]

This post describes the new Lumina 950 almost exactly!

Like he said: "there probably isn't enough of us to mass producing a phone worthwhile."

Re:Real bad news

[LynnwoodRooster]

One other datapoint... Silicon Labs has a Lightning-to-Audio converter (CP2614) available. it's $3.39 in 100K quantities. You still need an amplifier on it, as well as some power supply filtering and protection. It's still a $5-$6 electrical solution, on which a package needs to be placed, then assembly costs, etc. It's not cheap to do a Lightning-to-analog conversion adapter, not cheap at all.

Re:Real bad news

[tibit]

Grado, Audiotechnica, and many others simply do not have a funny little iphone connector, and likely never will.

Given that Apple mobile devices are probably a half of what their consumer products attach to, you must be kidding yourself.

Re:Real bad news

[macs4all]

Nope, built in volume (100K/yr) in a factory in Zhuhai. Using a TI amplifier ($1.20/100K pieces), AKM DAC ($1.00 for a good quality unit, 100K pricing). Regulators ($0.70 - need 3.3V and 1.8V, LDOs are cheap but not that cheap), passives (another $0.40, driven mainly by caps), connectors, mechanicals (squirt a part, shoot a little paint, you're at $0.50 in 250K pricing). It's not cheap - which is why there is a STRONG market for counterfeit IAP2 chips, and many who don't pay the appropriate licensing fees, and many who use raw plastic finish (screw flow and knit lines), improper connectors (fake Lightning connectors with questionable tolerancing), etc.

This isn't just "an adapter" - it also would need to have a full DAC and amplifier inside, as well as a power supply. So it's more than the simple connector/wiring adapters you're thinking of.

Your quantities are low by AT LEAST an order of magnitude. Plus, at those quantities, and with a company like Apple, price-points for components are nothing like what you can find on a distributor's (or manufacturer's) website.

If Apple really were to do this, it would be purchasing at the "million" pricing level (think about the number of iPhones/iPod Touches/iPads that would be affected), not the piddly 100k level, and would be negotiating special pricing on pretty much every component. So, shave at least another 25-30 percent off the cost, especially since Apple doesn't have to pay as much for the IAP2 chip, and no licensing either. Plus, they would likely simply integrate the controller and DAC on the same die, and maybe even the amp. The quantities are such that it would make sense for Apple to spin-up custom silicon for this.

And if you look at my post, I wasn't contemplating a passive adapter, either.

Re:Real bad news

[LynnwoodRooster]

IF Apple were to offer it, do you think they'd price the product BELOW what others could conceivably sell for? Effectively price "below market value"?

If you're a 3rd party, and you want to offer that kind of a dongle, with active electronics (digital and analog) inside of it, it's going to be a ~$50 product. If it were simply an IAP2 chip and some wiring, you could do it for $4. Apple could do it for $2. But then, Apple sells that very thing (Lightning cable) for $19 - so they're pricing it at market value (typical 5X markup of COGM to MSRP for consumer electronics, based on the $4 build cost for non-Apple companies). Which would put a Lightning-to-headphone adapter probably around $50 - what everyone else would pay.

I've been playing in the consumer audio space for nearly 2 decades, heavy design AND production (including living in China full time for the better part of a decade, and still spending 30-40% of each year in China), and even worked for Apple for a while (audio systems on Macbooks). I have a pretty good idea of what it would cost a non-Apple vendor to make this kind of a device - and my experience says that Apple would in no way price lower than what other vendors would have to price at.

Re:Real bad news

[rdnetto]

You can get most of those with something like the Moto X (easily rooted, all bands, microUSB). Add the right case for Qi + strap loop.

Buy NEW Apple Proprietary Headphones

[Anonymous Coward]

They plan to make a product with less functionality than a 2001 iPod? What a blatant cash grab.

Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[jolyonr]

Surprised no-one mentioned this:

http://appleinsider.com/articl...

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[Anonymous Coward]

That's probably because it's beyond stupid. The one redeeming quality of the headphone jack is that it's round.

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[mobby_6kl]

That's ridiculous, especially considering that the 2.5mm stereo jack IS ALREADY A THING. They've been used for ages in phones for headsets too.

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[Anonymous Coward]

if you are going to require an adapter, then why not a lightning one?

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[vovin]

So how would you charge the phone and listen to music at the same time?

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[samwichse]

Oh good, a jack with all the negatives of the standard 3.5mm, but it's now directional, and you still can't plug standard peripherals into it.

Sounds just like the apple solution.

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[scdeimos]

The Palm Treo line, and I'm sure many others, had 2.5mm headphone/mic sockets and performed just fine.

That said... you're just not thinking like Apple. They've patented this connector and so can charge royalties to anyone wanting to sell headphones (or adaptors) in their ecosystem. And anyone manufacturing unlicensed connectors will get torpedoed by their lawyers.

Re:Slimmer 3.5mm connector patent

[MachineShedFred]

I'm sure that in no way, could such an adapter have power pass-through, allowing both headphones to be plugged in, and another lighting cable to supply current. You know, exactly like they did with the 34-pin iPod HDMI video adapter.

Back to the dongle days?

[thegarbz]

I remember owning several devices including a Sony Walkman with a dongle style remote control into which you could plug headphones. Though those devices did still have a 3.5mm jack next to their proprietary connectors.

I think a return of that is far more likely than Apple forcing headphone makers to incorporate the DAC and amplification stages into each of their devices.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[Hognoxious]

Apple forcing headphone makers to incorporate the DAC and amplification stages into each of their devices.

Don't forget the battery.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[thegarbz]

What battery? All these devices have always provided power over the lines.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[Hognoxious]

My bad. I thought we were talking about bluetooth.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[BronsCon]

The battery in the portable charger you'll need to carry with you to recharge your iPhone when the DAC and amplified in your headphones kills its battery. You could still listen while you charged if you had a 3.5mm jack, but you'll have to unplug those headphones from the lightning connector in order to plug in that battery.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[macs4all]

Apple forcing headphone makers to incorporate the DAC and amplification stages into each of their devices.

Don't forget the battery.

They still have to have that for the built-in speaker output.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the one that's already there, in the phone, to make it work?

I think we knew that. With wireless, you need ANOTHER ONE in the headset.

Re:Back to the dongle days?

[macs4all]

You mean the one that's already there, in the phone, to make it work?

I think we knew that. With wireless, you need ANOTHER ONE in the headset.

Who was talking about Wireless?

Yea the proof is in the patent

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately this has come out a while back. Shortly after Apple bought Beats. It does appear Apple is moving away from the standard jack because it limits potential for a thinner design. Apple seems obsessed with thin and the only other thing holding Apple back on thin is bendgate. Apple will either have to find a more rigid material in a thin state, or have materials that withstand bending. So get ready to buy a ugly dongle if you want to use a standard headphone with iPhone's in the future. Or buy a wireless one.

Re:Yea the proof is in the patent

[macs4all]

Unfortunately this has come out a while back. Shortly after Apple bought Beats. It does appear Apple is moving away from the standard jack because it limits potential for a thinner design. Apple seems obsessed with thin and the only other thing holding Apple back on thin is bendgate. Apple will either have to find a more rigid material in a thin state, or have materials that withstand bending. So get ready to buy a ugly dongle if you want to use a standard headphone with iPhone's in the future. Or buy a wireless one.

They already developed that improved alloy.

Airplane Mode

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think that the FAA will make an exception for iPhone7 Bluetooth usage on board planes... So no more silly inflight playlists (in the air tonight, jefferson airplane, top gun)... ;)

Re: Airplane Mode

[Anonymous Coward]

The last few flights I've been on have allowed WiFi and Bluetooth. Just not during take off or landing. Then again no electronic devices were allowed during take off or landing.

Re:Airplane Mode

[timmyf2371]

No-one on a plane has ever questioned the small square bluetooth device clipped onto my collar, or the headphone cable coming from it.

I really hope they don't become mainstream.

Re:Airplane Mode

[Incadenza]

Don't forget Laurie Anderson - From the Air.

This was actually available on LAN flights from the in-flight entertainment system years ago. Always wondered if somebody just screwed up, or if somebody shared my sense of humour.

Re: Airplane Mode

[dgatwood]

In the U.S., portable devices like cell phones can be used in airplane mode during takeoff and landing. Wireless headsets, however, are not allowed. So this would mean that if you plan to fly, you'll have to carry your wired headphones and an adapter. Just another reason that removing the headphone jack is an idiotic idea.

Re: Airplane Mode

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is an EXPERT at idiotic ideas....

So...

[EmeraldBot]

They plan plan on using Lightning or Bluetooth as replacements? That's all well and good, but lightning prevents you from charging the device and also listening to anything, while Bluetooth sucks up battery life and works on a crowded spectrum. Is that really worth the extra 0.3mm? Genuinely curious, I would prefer they work on a better battery life or on durability instead, but does anyone want an iPhone thinner than what they currently offer???

Re:So...

[MachineShedFred]

Why do people assume that a lightning audio adapter that doesn't exist, wouldn't allow pass-through charging from another lighting port?

Bendgate II on the horizon

[hcs_$reboot]

If 3.5 jack cannot fit, what will the new iphone made of, to prevent another bendgate issue? Maybe a flexible iphone is the solution...

Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[laserhead]

We need more battery life!

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[hcs_$reboot]

??!! And what's wrong with thin + battery life?

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[eWarz]

As devices get thinner, batteries get smaller, and battery life shrinks. Batteries aren't subject to "Moore's law". They do not gain power as they shrink in size.

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[hcs_$reboot]

Well my iphone 6+ lasts a lot longer than my former 5.

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[Dog-Cow]

An iPhone 6+ is considerably larger than an iPhone 5. Thickness is only one of 3 physical dimensions, ya know?

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[Anonymous Coward]

Easier chance of damaging the phone, thus damaging the battery inside, thus burning your sorry Apple-loving ass because you can't be bothered to think critically, which is typical of most Apple product users.

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[snadrus]

And Durability!
If they want average people holding thinner phones, they would build-in the protective case themselves. It will be thicker than without it, but thinner than third-party wrappers (which is the common case nowadays anyway).

Re:Stop making super thin phones you idiots!

[macs4all]

As devices get thinner, batteries get smaller, and battery life shrinks. Batteries aren't subject to "Moore's law". They do not gain power as they shrink in size.

Yes, but because of a corollary to Moore's Law, the devices powered by those batteries get more efficient; thus "effectively" increasing the battery-size.

Let's do the Time-Warp agaaaaiiiin!

[Plumpaquatsch]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gordonkelly/2014/06/05/apple-to-abandon-headphone-jack-suddenly-beats-deal-makes-sense/ - hey just 1.5 years ago, the same was claimed about the iPhone 6.

And the rumor was totally on point. Not about the dropping of the jack part of course, but that there would be active headphones for the Lightning connector.

But maybe Apple will finally cut the jack in half? http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/08/18/1736235/apple-patents-cutting-35mm-jack-in-half

Wow!

[nospam007]

Wow! People on a diet (Pursuit of Slenderness) won't get no more headphones?

What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[areusche]

I miss the good 'ol days of 2004-5 when smartphone innovation was huge. Nowadays what's left to innovate? There isn't much room left for Apple to do anything nifty besides up the memory and processor speed. Smartphones are so boring these days. The last phone I was excited for was the Droid 4 and iPhone 4 and the marginal software updates for each applicable platform. What is a mobile hardware geek to do?

I'd love it if some phone manufacturer made a device that was truly secure and could detect when it was being connected to a StingRay device used by law enforcement. Now that's an exciting innovation!

Brb, checking out the Blackberry Priv.

Re:What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[SJ2000]

Improved privacy and reduced attack surface, sadly enough.

Re:What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[Anonymous Coward]

Enjoy your backdoored encryption.

Re:What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[GuB-42]

I would like to see more tactile feedback. And I am not talking about the iPhone version of the "taptic engine" which is just an oversized vibration motor.
By tactile feedback I mean actually feeling objects on the screen, like the keys on a virtual keyboard. I want to be able to do basic actions by touch only, without looking at the screen, like with physical buttons.

Re:What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[Dutch Gun]

When a technology is rapidly evolving, and innovation occurs on a yearly basis, all that means is that the technology is still very immature.

I, for one, will be glad to see the end of smartphone "innovation". That means smartphones will stop becoming a trendy fad you "need" to purchase everyone one to two years, and instead will become a commodity, a tool, that you instead purchase once every four to seven years, or as desired - sort of like with PCs now. It will mean that designs and form will have settled down into what is universally agreed to be the best form-factor and feature sets, and the "innovation" will occur with incremental improvements that simply refine already good functionality into slightly better.

*Gasp* Our trendy smartphones becoming as boring as a tired old *PC*? Say it ain't so!

Re:What else is there left to do on smartphones?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're on Android there's IMSI software in the F-Droid repository which will do this for you. ;)

USB type-c

[bstrobl]

This would work a lot better if a USB type-c port were used, since there are provisions in the connector to allow analogue audio output. Lightning would need expensive chips to do the conversion in the headphones or adapters, increasing cost. Obviously the momentum of current audio jacks would make this difficult to put through, but making USB capable of replacing pretty much every port in existence is certainly interesting. Having two type-c ports on a phone or computer could for example provide two audio outputs. But in the end this is just to save space, so we will get one port and nothing else :(.

Reminds me of catwalk models

[jez9999]

The original goal of the fashion industry and catwalk models was simply to promote slim women - women who were a healthy weight. This was fair enough, and a decent goal - the happy medium. But the fashion industry didn't stop there. They became psychotic about thinness until the point where they now fetishize anorexic women who are very far from attractive and need to see a fucking doctor.

This seems to be what is happening with smartphones. The first iPhone was somewhat slim and just about right. The boasts about how slim it was were *in relation to* other thicker models at the time; not just about slimness *per se*. It was still a happy medium between slender attractiveness/lack of bulkiness, and utility. But the smartphone industry, led by Apple, is going the way of the fashion industry. It is now led by UX designers with a psychotic obsession with thinness because "that's attractive". Well if some iPhone user comes up to me with a credit card-width phone I'm going to say that my LG G3 is better. Not just because I have a proper headphone jack, replacable SIM card, SD card slot, and replacable battery. But also because the thing actually feels substantial when I hold it. I don't WANT it to be thinner. I don't WANT it to be the anorexic of smartphones.

All I can say is I hope some smartphone manufacturers break rank and start advertising that they are NOT trying to make their phones thinner than 1cm. If Apple want to do that, it's their funeral. I want a decent thickness phone with a good number of features and a decent battery life.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[drinkypoo]

The original goal of the fashion industry and catwalk models was simply to promote slim women - women who were a healthy weight. This was fair enough, and a decent goal - the happy medium. But the fashion industry didn't stop there. They became psychotic about thinness until the point where they now fetishize anorexic women who are very far from attractive and need to see a fucking doctor.

Yeah, I've heard two competing theories and I think they're both right, albeit more the first one than the second one. The first one is that when women are attractive people look at the women and not the clothes, so they wanted women who are more like a clothes hanger. Second, the influence of the homosexual fashion designer, who doesn't want to look at women anyway. (I know queers who like to look at boobs, so it's not all of them, but I also have met queers who seem to have a problem with women. It's a lumpy world.)

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Anonymous Coward]

All I can say is I hope some smartphone manufacturers break rank and start advertising that they are NOT trying to make their phones thinner than 1cm. If Apple want to do that, it's their funeral. I want a decent thickness phone with a good number of features and a decent battery life.

And what will you say when flexible screens allow you to roll up the entire phone? Are consumers going to get angry because there's no jacks anymore when the truly hip can curl their devices into pencils?

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Anonymous Coward]

The original goal of the fashion industry and catwalk models was simply to promote slim women

Citation needed.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[quantaman]

The original goal of the fashion industry and catwalk models was simply to promote slim women - women who were a healthy weight. This was fair enough, and a decent goal - the happy medium. But the fashion industry didn't stop there. They became psychotic about thinness until the point where they now fetishize anorexic women who are very far from attractive and need to see a fucking doctor.

Yeah, I've heard two competing theories and I think they're both right, albeit more the first one than the second one. The first one is that when women are attractive people look at the women and not the clothes, so they wanted women who are more like a clothes hanger. Second, the influence of the homosexual fashion designer, who doesn't want to look at women anyway. (I know queers who like to look at boobs, so it's not all of them, but I also have met queers who seem to have a problem with women. It's a lumpy world.)

Or it's like the peacocks tail, guys don't like thinness because it's healthy, they like it because it's difficult to achieve. In our society there's a huge excess of calories and the standard person tends to be overweight. If you manage to be thin in that environment it suggests you're a higher quality mate because you've achieved a difficult task.

Supposedly a bit of fat tends to be attractive in societies with low food security, that would be completely consistent with this mechanism.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Anonymous Coward]

The original goal of the fashion industry and catwalk models was simply to promote slim women

Lol, and here I was, thinking the goal of the fashion industry was to make loads of money by selling clothes.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[a whoabot]

Thin women are considered more attractive generally, even in countries with low food security.

https://peerj.com/articles/115...

"Participants from three Caucasian populations (Austria, Lithuania and the UK), three Asian populations (China, Iran and Mauritius) and four African populations (Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria and Senegal) rated attractiveness of a series of female images varying in fatness (BMI) and waist to hip ratio (WHR). There was an inverse linear relationship between physical attractiveness and body fatness or BMI in all populations. Lower body fat was more attractive, down to at least BMI = 19. There was no peak in the relationship over the range we studied in any population"

Also:

"For example, the BMIs of Playboy centerfolds and glamour models over the last 50 years are almost all in the range 17 to 20 (Katzmarzyk & Davis, 2001; Tovee et al., 1999; Voracek & Fisher, 2002). Women and men asked to manipulate female 3D computer models to make them maximally attractive make them have BMIs of 18.9 and 18.8 respectively (Crossley, Cornelissen & Tovee, 2012). The biggest outlier in previous studies of attractiveness at low BMI was the observation that in Poland the highest rated attractiveness was at a BMI of 15 (Koscinski, 2013), and potentially lower as this was the smallest stimulus in the set presented."

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Anonymous Coward]

Point and shoot digital cameras were going down this route, but at some point they stopped and did a 180. Now we're back to having compact but functional cameras that also feel good to hold and use.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Jack Griffin]

Yeah, I've heard two competing theories and I think they're both right, albeit more the first one than the second one. The first one is that when women are attractive people look at the women and not the clothes,

Not quite. I used to work in the fashion industry, and it's all about the clothes. People in that industry love clothes, and the look of the clothes themselves, not the person wearing them. When I look at a woman, I'm checking her face, her boobs, her arse, and clothes are merely a prop to help show those off.
In fashion, the clothes are the focus, and the person is merely a prop, so the closer to a coat hanger or ironing board, the less impact the human body will have on the product.
The bias towards gay men in the industry is probably due to the fact the a hetero man would be too distracted by the tits and ass, where a gay man can look straight past these.

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Jack Griffin]

Or it's like the peacocks tail, guys don't like thinness because it's healthy, they like it because it's difficult to achieve.

I don't know many guys who like thin women. Thin women look like boys, so most guys I know would prefer a Kim K physique to a Kate Moss.
Also worth noting, back when I went to school you could count the number fatties on one hand (in a school of 2000). Even then I remember the go to girls had curves (tits and ass, not waistline).

Re:Reminds me of catwalk models

[Anonymous Coward]

This is all part of their nefarious plan to sell you their new iPaper (patent pending):

-Thinner than all your other gadgets (less than 1mm thin!)
- No external connections, they were an eye sore anyway
- No backlight, they only drained the battery.
- Available in many sizes, though the most popular is 8.5" x 11"
- Available in bundles of 200, 500, or more.
- May only be used with the new iPen, an officially branded Apple product, sold in packs of 12, for $120.
- Collect all your iPaper in an iFolder, capable of storing up to 30 iPapers... or go extreme and get an iBinder, capable of holding 500 iPapers.

wrong end of the stick

[qwerty shrdlu]

Apple wouldn't mind selling you a $200 pair of Beats headphone to fit your iPhone. And they wouldn't mind if these work only with other iStuff. But if your brand new $200 Beats won't plug into your MacBook, that's a problem.

Re:wrong end of the stick

[Anonymous Coward]

But if your brand new $200 Beats won't plug into your MacBook, that's a problem.

You're plugging it wrong.

Re:wrong end of the stick

[LynnwoodRooster]

But if your brand new $200 Beats won't plug into your MacBook, that's a problem.

It's OK, there will be a $29 dongle to fix that...

The first iPhone had a similar quirk

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember when the first iPhone had a recessed headphone jack, and many standard headphones didnt fit? Some companies made adapters, others like Sony made new versions of their headphones with slimmer housings on the plug so it would fit and advertised this prominently on the box.

Re:The first iPhone had a similar quirk

[BronsCon]

Yup, and those headphones with the thinner plug housings still worked everywhere else, as well. Not so this time around, so you can expect Sony et-al to not follow along, especially (in Sony's case) when it means making something that doesn't work with their own product.

Re:The first iPhone had a similar quirk

[Anonymous Coward]

Call me cheap. I just got out a knife and whittled down some of the plastic on my headphones plug. And I'm still using those headphones even now (love Sennheiser).

Walled garden ecosystem.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/26/9401563/iphone-6s-teardown-ram-confirmed-2gb

Do an X-Ray on the 7, get the fat specs.

STOPT HE FUCKING INSANITY

[Anonymous Coward]

There is exactly zero to gain from making phones thinner. The only thing they are doing right now is making them ever more fragile, less compatible, low battery size/life shit shows.

Re:STOPT HE FUCKING INSANITY

[Anonymous Coward]

For real, bro. I'm a hardcore Apple fanboi, love me that fly UNIX desktop, but if they put thin before doing useful, or even "cool", shit, then I may have to switch. Or actually I may have to just use my 5S for the rest of eternity.

Pursuit of Slenderness? Pursuit for Cash

[hsa]

Yeah, right. This has nothing to do with selling overpriced accessories.

Re:Pursuit of Slenderness? Pursuit for Cash

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, you can buy a Official Apple iNothing(tm) wireless cable to plug your wireless headphone into your iphone7...

I can sell you one for $79. Lifetime guarantee!

Re:Pursuit of Slenderness? Pursuit for Cash

[Anonymous Coward]

To be totally fair the Oppo lineup of android phones has at least one model that is so slim it needs an adapter (included with phone). I think this has more to do with appealing to "fashionistas". It isn't die hard nerds or people who like the idea of standards they've been appealing to lately anyway.

Typical

[markdavis]

Typical of Apple: form over function. Throw away one of the very few remaining universal devices/connectors.

Re:Typical

[MightyYar]

I can't be the only one who has been disappointed for over 30 years by the 3.5mm headphone connector. I think the failure mode for every set of headphones that I've ever had has been the stupid 3.5mm connector (or worse, the socket in the device). I don't have an iPhone, so I don't really have a dog in this fight - but I'll be thrilled if this leads to better connectors for headphones.

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, now you can be disappointed about the fragile lightning connector.

Progress!

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

The higher end headphone come with replaceable cables.

There's a whole market for $700 range headphone cables (Nordost is an example that makes really expensive "audiophile grade" cable). I've been hoping BT gets good enough soon. I look around and ultimately still buy wired headphones. I can't remember the last time I wore out the jack on a device though I've read about it happening to some.

Point being wire fatigue isn't usually that big of an issue. Wireless may be the future but I don't think it's here yet. If I stick with iPhone then I may upgrade to the 6S and hold there for 2-3 years and revisit wireless solutions.

Also right now today there are some BT adapters that let you plug in your wired headphone and go wireless. You lose quality so it's not a good solution for listening to music but if you can get a mic added and use it for voice calls maybe it's a good enough bridge and you can use something else as the music solution.

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

And here I rather like them. I've had earbud fail at the actual earbud repeatedly, USB headsets that experience controller failures and end up malfunctioning repeatedly, I've had several earbud/mic sets for phones die at the little control board/mic pod. I also experience cable failures where the 3.5 stands up to off axis loads well enough for the tiny conductors in the cable to stretch/die/snap in the middle of the cable. I have had 3.5MM failures though, no bones about it. But they are a minority. It may be my odd use cases cause these, since most people are not working around CNC tools, which is a rather hard environment for most things to deal with. Between coolant spray from adjusting tools and their cooling, chips, and sharp edges, anything that isn't reasonably ruggedized dies fast. And it's hard to justify the expense of ruggedized earbuds.

Re:Typical

[MightyYar]

Needless to say, I haven't spend $700 on headphones if you total up my entire 40 years - and that includes two sets of noise cancelling headphones from when I used to take a lot of long flights. So my headphones are rarely worthy of a new jack. I'll just be happy if the weakest link is moved one step up the chain.

Re:Typical

[MightyYar]

You don't think they'll adopt the new USB connector?

Re:Typical

[Anonymous Coward]

My last headphones were Audeze a couple months back .... $1700, then 20% off deal for BF at NobleAudio, Ordered the Kaiser 10s... $1300 ... so I've kind of shot myself in the foot here on audio. I also have a cheap $35 pair of headphones. My expensive ones aren't 48 times better. IDK what to say. With my setup there's moments when it all seems worth it. Other times I wonder WTF am I thinking?! Madness... It's especially since I just shelled out big bucks on something portable with a 3.5mm jack that I'm really interested in this thread.

BTW I'm not buying any of those crazy $350+ cables... Maybe there's gains there at the very end when everything else is top notch spare no expense. But they'll always be minimal if you have at least a decent cheap cable. Noble Audio has a Bluetooth adaptor you can connect any headphone. That's what I'm getting near term. I probably will go for an Oppo HA-2 DAC/Amp. Nice portable connects to iPhone with lightning, well styled, very functional and can act as additional battery for the iPhone.

Re:Typical

[MightyYar]

If you ever want to slum it, I've found myself quite happy with Sennheiser CX-150s (2 for $30 special on Newegg). Those are my most expensive set. My others are neon-green Panasonic RPHJE120G, $6 each. When sitting at work listening to music or podcasts, the Sennheisers are slightly better than the cheap Panasonics. When mowing the lawn or working outside, it really doesn't matter except that the seal with the ear needs to be tight.

I'm happy to report that I don't have golden ears :)

Why thinner?

[Opportunist]

Thinner means less sturdy and easier to bend and break. Honestly, how long 'til iPhones crumple when you pocket them?

Now that would actually be an interesting /. poll for a change: Do people actually WANT slimmer phones?

Re:Why thinner?

[wvmarle]

Flexible electronics and screens exist (if only in the lab).

How about a phone you can fold a few times to have a nice form factor to hold when making a call, then unfold and put on the table for some browsing, after that roll up and stick in your bag.

Sounds convenient to me.

Re:Why thinner?

[Opportunist]

Yup, but I doubt that the iPhone is still going to work after crumpling it.

Meh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me a removable battery and I'll be happy.

Re:Meh.

[Anonymous Coward]

There are already many phones on the market with removable batteries. I bought one of them. However, if people keep professing to want removable batteries but only buy phones with non-removable batteries, soon there will be no more phones that DO have removable batteries.

Put your money where your mouth is.

Dear Apple

[grahamtriggs]

If the 3.5mm jack is restricting you from making the device thinner, then use the "unnecessary" space for high battery capacity.

Hell, just make the device a tiny bit thicker and increase the battery life anyway.

Just because Jony Ive is a twat that craves how things look over how they function, a substantial part of your user base (and potential user base), actually give a shit about having a device that can be used consistently without dying in under 24 hours, and might even last more than a day without charging.

To an extent we will trade battery life for increased functionality, but an even thinner device isn't more functional. We want more battery life.

Re:Dear Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

So why not by a different kind of device?

I have a cheap Chinese Android phone - I don't really care for Android very much, but it does get me 5 days of use on a single charge, and it's not a thick device either (7mm). Comes with an SD card slot, standard earphone jack, and dual SIM slots, for 1/5 the cost of an Apple device.

Re:Dear Apple

[samwichse]

What phone is this?

Re:Dear Apple

[LynnwoodRooster]

Gionee, Xiaomi, Huawei all have offerings like this. Thin, big screens, SD slots, dual SIMs, and pretty cheap. Not SOTA processors, but plenty good for basic phone operations. You usually have to put up with a butchered China-centric version of Android, though...

Re:Dear Apple

[grahamtriggs]

I've had numerous Android devices in the past - they've all had worse battery life than the 6 plus, and not had the convenience of a wide selection of good quality headphones with volume control support.

If it comes down to it, I'll switch to a different device, based on the comparative functionality at the time. In all likelihood, I'll probably just stick with the 6 plus for as long as possible.

Yeah right

[liqu1d]

In pursuit of slenderness? Do you mean profits?

This is crazy

[Theovon]

The fallout could be really bad. If Apple gives people lightning headphones, most people will just deal. And there will be a market for Lightning-to-minijack adaptors. And those adaptors will cost way more than the headphones themselves, and they'll be as unreliable as Apple's magsafe-to-magsafe2 converter. But where it's really going to go bad is if people have to deal with heavy earphones with crappy battery life. They'll be heavy because of the rechargable battery, but they'll run out of charge in a few hours. That will NOT go over well.

There's already incompatibility

[Fuzi719]

Many high-end "mobile" earphones are "IOS"-centric, in that their control buttons or microphone will only work with IOS devices. While the earphones will work with Android, the buttons for volume or skip won't work. I see this so many times on Sennheiser and other high-end products. They don't make Android-compatible controls, only IOS. Thankfully, BlueTooth is, for the most part, OS-agnostic, so the buttons function as they should regardless of device.

Re:There's already incompatibility

[LynnwoodRooster]

You can thank Apple for that. If you want the "made for iPhone" logo on your box, then you have to include an IAP2 chip and CANNOT include functionality to support other devices (part of the deal). So a company can do a universal iPhone AND Android controller (it's trivial), but Apple will not license you the IAP2 chip, and thus you cannot claim it is "made for iPhone". It's their way - or no way.

Re:There's already incompatibility

[brantondaveperson]

I did some searching, and was unable to find support for this claim, which would surely run afoul of anti-trust laws would it not?

You wouldn't have a citation, would you?

I also couldn't find any reports of widely-available headphone remotes that permit volume control for Android devices, but I presume that there must be some out there.

Re:There's already incompatibility

[LynnwoodRooster]

Most of this is in the MFi manufacturing (Made For iPhone) program, and you can only get details if you're an audited and accepted factory to build MFi products (I've done several MFi products in the last few years, I've been through the Apple approval grinder more than once). But Apple doesn't let you build products that play with non-iOS or even obsolete iOS devices and still get the MFi (and thus, Lightning) licensing. Does it run afoul of anti-trust laws? Only if someone was to take it to court and push it through - which would be a very long, very expensive process. And there a few manufacturers out there making MFi-like cables for Android.

Re:There's already incompatibility

[brantondaveperson]

Looks like they changed their mind. It was too late for POP though, and they closed down anyway. Mind you, in the spirit of kickstarter-bashing, it did seem to be a pretty stupid product.

Rugged case and slender phones

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

How many people use these phones in its all original slender splendor? 99% of them add a case. Some of them pay token respect to the slenderness as a concept. Some go the other way and make it conspicuously bulky to invoke a feeling of ruggedness. Some add covers that lets you a few credit cards and driving license, gym membership card or bus passes. Some of the ladies clutch purses have a holder to pack the phone inside along with assorted things that must be carried at all times. You never know when you suddenly need the eye brow tweezer or the 15% off coupon from Bed Bath and Beyond that expired 18 months ago. Anyway, I digress.

The point is very few consumers worship slenderness and sleekness as much as the designers of Apple. At some point it is not a selling point anymore. Looks like Apple is where Microsoft was in lat 1990s. Running on inertia of the huge installed base and de-facto monopoly status.

Re:Rugged case and slender phones

[Anonymous Coward]

In general, a slimmer phone can have a slimmer case.
They don't make the case thicker just because the phone is slimmer.
So slimmer phone = slimmer phone+case.

My dream phone

[MarkH]

Samsung note 4 plus:
* Extra depth to support 2 batteries
* use extra space for some good sound load enough for in van
* USB 3 through existing socket
* built in 'case' tested to puddle and 6ft drop tests
* all pre installed cruft in 1 folder
* not phone fault but really smart handling of wifi, 3g transitions etc to minimise having to flick mobile access on off to get data reception.

Another explanation - waterproof

[605dave]

Perhaps there is another explanation, the goal of a waterproof phone. I've been following the patents that Apple has been taking out on Liquid Metal, and believe the goal is to create a completely sealed phone. There have been rumors that the lightning port is already waterproof. If so eliminating the other big open port, the mini jack, would make sense.

http://www.cultofmac.com/20044...

And yes the buttons are an issue, but Apple has many patents related to liquid metal that have waterproofing implications as well, one example

http://www.patentlyapple.com/p...

And Apple continues to file waterproofing patents

http://www.digitaltrends.com/m...

I don't think it's about slenderness. I think it's about having a phone that is molded with a waterproof casing with one port.

Re:Another explanation - waterproof

[Dwedit]

I thought you just had to update to IOS 7 to become waterproof.

Re: Another explanation - waterproof

[Anonymous Coward]

The Sony Xperia Z line of phones has waterproof 3.5 mm connectors.

Re:Another explanation - waterproof

[LynnwoodRooster]

Samsung, Sony and many others already use the commodity waterproof 3.5mm jacks. IP67 rated at that...

Re:Another explanation - waterproof

[cfalcon]

Common misunderstanding, that and microwave charging are features of ios 8.

Re:Another explanation - waterproof

[Jack Griffin]

Don't worry Apple will sue them for copyright infringment as soon as they've figured out how to do it too.

So have a lightning connector adapter

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't it possible to have an adaptor built for the phone's accessory/charging port?

A constant loop

[Anonymous Coward]

IF MEME$ "2009 called" THEN
LOOP "THEY.WILL.GO.ONE.STEP.FURTHER" ELSE CONTINUE
END

Yes, I know it's not proper syntax, but I thought it was funny that a "2009 called" meme was use when it itself IS a meme.

I have my doubts.

[MtViewGuy]

I think in the end, the next iPhone will look very akin to the iPhone 6/6+ design, but will likely get rid of the physical home button altogether, thanks to new touchscreen technologies that will allow parts of the touchscreen to become a big Touch ID fingerprint sensor area. Given that Apple has demonstrated they can make a thinner device without sacrificing the 3.5 mm headphone jack with the current iPod touch and iPod nano models, they don't need to sacrifice the headphone jack in the name of "thinness."

Tim Cook's Out of Ideas

[indytx]

The Apple Watch will never be more than a niche product even if it's the most successful smart watch by a long margin. There's just no case for most people to buy one. Sales of the iPad are in trouble. The only bright spot is phones, and it's a pretty mature market at this point. This is just one more way to increase revenue on accessories because there are no groundbreaking products on the horizon. Sure, Apple will continue to sell gargantuan numbers of phones in Asia and other developing markets, but I would suspect that the average "middle class" mobile phone buyer in a developing market is not going to replace their mobile phone every year for something newer, shinier, and really not much better. If Apple can squeeze $20 out of each of these folks it adds up into a lot of money.

Re:Tim Cook's Out of Ideas

[Anonymous Coward]

You are a retard.

Apple watch outsells all android watches COMBINED. All of them COMBINED, LG,Motorola,Samsung,even the china brands.
The only watch that is the top right now is the Pebble, and it's because it is wide open and has been on the market a lot longer than any other smartwatch.

Ipad Pro sales are exceeding expectations, standard ipad sales STILL outpace any one brand of android tablet.

Maybe if you actually knew something before you opened your mouth you would not look so dumb at parties.

Re:Tim Cook's Out of Ideas

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be a fuckwit, his first sentence said that the Apple Watch is the most used by a large margin. It doesn't change the fact these are expensive niche status symbols most people don't want. The sales numbers are so low the suppliers are losing money, and that's with practically free China labor, they still can't break even.

Apple Watch is almost as big a failure as Google Glass, it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, many millions of dollars ventured to create a product people don't want.

How about ditch ALL external connections?

[wvmarle]

The only thing I'm using the USB plug on my phone for is charging (I've used it for file transfer but that was mostly as I was too lazy to pair the Bluetooth instead).

With wireless charging options available already, the logical next step would be to create a phone with no external connections. Everything wireless. The only thing I don't have a ready solution for is the SIM card (I don't consider the US way of SIM-less, carrier-locked phones a solution). After that making phones waterproof becomes easy as well.

Next challenge: a touch screen that works under water. Preferably seawater.

Re:How about ditch ALL external connections?

[samwichse]

Wireless charging is great until you need to use the phone while it's charging (comes up so depressingly often my wireless charger is plugged in the same outlet as a standard USB charger).

Re:Typical crApple loving faggot

[jazzis]

You crApple loving faggots can't tell the difference between "their" and "there" so it makes all your "points" null and void except for one, you are a cock-sucking crApple fanboi sheep and a fucktard.

Troll posting as AC asshole complains about language usage, and uses idiot language to express displeasure with spelling meanings. Duh.

POS

[Anonymous Coward]

So ends all the people using them for Point of Sale devices.

more proprietary stuff from Apple

[lophophore]

More proprietary stuff from Apple, and is anyone surprised? This is bad for the consumer, but great for Apple's stockholders.

What happened to their D-shaped 3.5 mm plug they patented recently? another proprietary connector that nobody's headphones -- except Apple's -- will fit.

Don't even get me started on the patented and essentially single-source MagSafe, and the MagSafe to MagSafe 2 converters.

uggh.

Re:more proprietary stuff from Apple

[LynnwoodRooster]

That will be supported with an iPad Pro connector/authorized accessory port. Gotta do something to sell those $1000 iPads!

Re:more proprietary stuff from Apple

[lophophore]

OOOOH. Down-modded because I slammed Apple. Must not piss off the fanbois!

News flash: Apple is more proprietary than Microsoft.

Here come more down-mods. ROFL.

This pursuit is utterly stupid...

[Lumpy]

All it does is make phones suck more. 99% of the buying public if you ask them... "do you want a thinner phone or a phone that will last 2 days on a charge?"
  all of them will say, "give me the longer lasting charge."

We don't want thinner, we want more battery capacity. The number 1 flaw with the One Plus X is that it's battery life utterly sucks. Well number 2.. Number 1 is that it's a 3G only phone in most of the United states as they were complete retards at OnePlus and did not set it up for the 700mhz LTE band.

Everyone I show mine to says, "Ohh that is a very nice phone it's so thin!" until I tell them about battery life.. then they say they would rather have a phone that is thicker so that it lasts longer.

Re:This pursuit is utterly stupid...

[samwichse]

Oneplus was quick out of the gate with the One, and then just as quick to fail with the 2 and X.

No better (or worse!) battery lives, no NFC (which I use on my Nexus 5 daily), no SD slot because... Apple did it too? I hear a lot of people say NFC was to save money. OK, so they saved money not including a $3 chip and antenna, but but a fancy aluminum frame on it. Makes sense.

Seriously, all I was looking for in the Two was a longer battery life than my wife's One, and hopefully an SD card slot. Instead they lost a feature I use constantly, the chance to extend battery life, and a sale.

Re:Typical crApple loving faggot

[Anonymous Coward]

You crApple loving faggots can't tell the difference between "their" and "there" so it makes all your "points" null and void except for one, you are a cock-sucking crApple fanboi sheep and a fucktard.

Troll posting as AC asshole complains about language usage, and uses idiot language to express displeasure with spelling meanings.
Duh.

"Spelling meanings"?!?!?!

Talk about "idiot language"...

Works for me

[Dixie_Flatline]

Well, it works for me on the condition that the adaptor is provided in the box.

I know some people want more battery life and find a thinner phone anathema, but Apple's phones get about the same battery life from model to modelâ"10-14 hoursâ"while being thinner. So they tend not to regress significantly. I only need about that much, so a thinner phone is a bonus for me. For other people, external battery cases let you have the thicker phone you want and provide an enormous battery boost. I've heard John Siracusa call it the 'naked robotic core' theory. Sell a good, physically minimal device and allow people to augment it externally. That's the best of both worlds to me. I get the smaller phone that I want, and I can put a thin or nice case on it for a bit of protection or fashion. People with more robust needs will buy a different kind of case. Isn't that part of the choice everyone is begging for? I can't make a thick phone thinner, but I can slap attachments onto the phone all I want.

On the headphone front, I do about 3/4 of my listening through the Lightning port anyway. I have the phone docked at work and then run through a mixer, and I've got audio through the port in my car. A small adaptor on my headphones for when I'm walking around is a minimal burden. It's one fewer port that can be fouled or damaged.

Despite complaints, thinness does have actual benefits, tech-wise. Being forced to think about physical constraints and throw out old ideas about what's necessary on a device is important. Making parts smaller and more heat efficient is good. Packing it all into one thin device is amazing. And it's not just Appleâ"Apple drives parts manufacturers and competitors to come up with novel designs to compete. Sony has been making and refining amazing camera sensors for years now, driven in large part by the industry's need for better cameras in small formats.

Apple took a lot of crap for removing floppy drives and disc drives from their machines, too. The alternatives were better.

I don't think the headphone industry will switch to lightning (not even Beats; they'll obviously just have a choice between the two) but that's fine. I want my phone to effectively disappear. Something so thin and light and unobtrusive that I hardly notice it's there. We're most of the way there now, but I like how this is progressing.

Just PLEASE include the adaptor in the box, Apple. Seriously.

Re:Works for me

[amiga3D]

I'm okay with losing the 3.5 port but not with a thinner phone. It's too damn thin now. I have to have a case just to have something to hold.

What exactly is the point of that?

[Ellis D. Tripp]

It isn't forward OR backward compatible with the standard 3.5mm plug or jack, so why try to copy the physical appearance of one?

If Apple is really stupid/evil enough to discard the only industry standard connector their phones actually use, then why not design something entirely new, like they did with the lightning connector?

Re:What exactly is the point of that?

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't forward OR backward compatible with the standard 3.5mm plug or jack, so why try to copy the physical appearance of one?

If Apple is really stupid/evil enough to discard the only industry standard connector their phones actually use, then why not design something entirely new, like they did with the lightning connector?

The patent seems to only cover a t/s connection. Perhaps they ARE doing something completely different.. like a digital only output.

Bandwidth?

[TooTechy]

So if you have a room, say about the size of a 737, with a few laptops going, using the WiFi and a bunch of people with this new fangled iPhone thingy. Is there enough bandwidth? 25Mbps sounds like a lot, but when shared, is it enough?

Another Apple Money Grab

[Anonymous Coward]

The 3.5 mm headphone jack is the only non-proprietary I/O interface on the iPhone so Apple needs to eliminate it so they can pork you another $29.95 for a proprietary lightning to 3.5 mm adapter or $100 for some Apple branded crappy lightning headphone. And what about all those devices that use the 3.5 mm jack for other things like the Square credit card reader. Apple's greed knows no bounds.

Aeroplanes?

[Tomahawk]

Most (all?) airlines don't allow a device that can broadcast, so that means that Bluetooth earphones shouldn't be used on an aeroplane (not that that actually stops people - I see plenty of people using them).

As for 3.5mm jacks, it would be easy enough for someone to bring out a lightning->3.5mm adapter, I'm sure. If be surprised if apple themselves don't do it, or they'd lose sales in their Beats range.

As for apple specific headphones, plenty of manufactures bring them out already, but also bring out versions for other phones (typically android). These would be headphones with microphones and start/stop controls, where apple and everyone-else use slightly different methods, naturally.

I agree, though, that there _is_ such a thing as too thin. I can't understand why manufacturers want to get thinner. Can't they actually listen to their customers... ah, I forgot, they're apple -- they tell customers what they want. Silly me.

Re:Aeroplanes?

[cfalcon]

> Most (all?) airlines don't allow a device that can broadcast

During the flight, you normally can't use "cellular technology". During takeoff and landing, they will often say no wireless (which includes bluetooth), but it's never ever enforced.

Re:Aeroplanes?

[Jack Griffin]

Which makes you wonder why it's a rule in the first place. I've never paid attention to their "turn off your phone" rules, and I'm sure thousands of other don't either. In a decade and a half of common cell phone use on planes, there's be no known issues I've ever heard of, so why is it still a thing?

Re:Aeroplanes?

[cfalcon]

There are so many stupid rules, asking why any given one is around is literally a waste of time. Rest assured there is both no real reason, and some idiot story that some impassioned fool will tell you, based on bullshit. Search long enough and all you'll find is the impassioned fool, and the subsequent idiot story.

iPhone 7?

[Anonymous Coward]

iPhone 7.... iPhone 7?

WTF, the iPhone 6 just came out. Please, stop updating your products like Mozilla updates Firefox!

Apple would reject 100% CPU app

[tepples]

while the worst-case battery life (with one of those hundred minor background daemons sitting in a tight loop using 100% of one CPU) continues to decline.

I thought 100% CPU loops in a background application were exactly what the App Store review process was designed to prevent.

Re:Apple would reject 100% CPU app

[cfalcon]

> I thought 100% CPU loops in a background application were exactly what the App Store review process was designed to prevent.

I'm pretty sure it's more for security issues, but I'm not aware of a program that spams CPU like this. I know that some apps are active in the background annoyingly, but I'm in the habit of force killing apps I don't want sitting around anyway. Waze is the big one that started me on this kick- there's no setting to turn it off in the background, and it always will update the botnet with your location, so it's a 100% force kill every time I use it. But I have plenty of games that sit in the background without using CPU or power, and contact apps, and browsers- it's pretty uncommon to find a drainer daemon app.

Re:Apple would reject 100% CPU app

[dgatwood]

I thought 100% CPU loops in a background application were exactly what the App Store review process was designed to prevent.

Unfortunately, first-party code doesn't go through that same process. I was thinking in particular about a recent experience with spotlight indexing when I made that snarky comment.

Re: Apple would reject 100% CPU app

[Karlt1]

Settings->Battery->low power mode stops all apps from running in the background. You can also turn off background refresh on a per app basis and not allow an app to track your location in the background.

Re: Apple would reject 100% CPU app

[dgatwood]

Not apps. System daemons.

Lower bending moment

[AbrasiveCat]

Great, so more bent phones. The thinner they get the easier it is to bend to break them. Don't put this phone in your pants pocket!

OMG, I'll DIE!!!

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

OMG, mom and dad....I'LL simply DIE if my new phone isn't thinner than 3.5 millimeters, and what will my friends say? Janice and Marsha and Taylor and Sarah and Jen will all laugh and point at me and taunt me about how my fucking phone is almost 4 millimeters thick!!! I'll be the butt of every joke and my life will be ruined, RUINED I TELL YOU. I'll be a social OUTCAST!!! Please mom and dad, don't let me be the "uncool kid", buy me the new iPhone that's slim and stylish, just like all my friends will have!!

Closing the analog hole, perhaps?

[kheldan]

I'm wondering if part of the motivation behind a move like this is to close the 'analog hole', meaning eliminating a baseband audio output, which is far easier to pirate music with (the connected device just has to have the correct impedance, and you have high-quality analog recording capability). Not that it can't still be done by hacking a Bluetooth or other digital device to get at the baseband audio, but Bluetooth at least has it's own compression algorithm it uses to transmit high sampling rate audio, and it's lossy.

Things I actually want in a Phone

[amiga3D]

Longer battery life
Survivability
A microSD card slot
A really great screen.

The 6S is already too thin.

Bluetooth

[Anonymous Coward]

This is made possible by the advancements in the bluetooth standard. By late 2016 the standard will have evolved to twice the throughput and range as current devices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_Special_Interest_Group

https://www.bluetooth.org/en-us

http://www.bluetooth.com/news/pressreleases/2015/11/11/bluetooth-technology-to-gain-longer-rangefaster-speedand-mesh-networking-in-2016?_ga=1.17160381.583070483.1448822087

"Today the Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG) is previewing highlights from its 2016 technology roadmap. Planned enhancements for the technology are focused squarely on increasing its Internet of Things (IoT) functionality. Key updates include longer range, higher speeds and mesh networking. The host of Bluetooth advancements coming in 2016 will further energize fast-growing industries such as smart home, industrial automation, location-based services and smart infrastructure. - See more at: http://www.bluetooth.com/news/pressreleases/2015/11/11/bluetooth-technology-to-gain-longer-rangefaster-speedand-mesh-networking-in-2016?_ga=1.17160381.583070483.1448822087#sthash.Eh4xSa8i.dpuf"

roaming

[Joe_Dragon]

And take a big cut of the $15-$20 a meg data roaming fees.

Bluetooth

[jgotts]

Bluetooth isn't perfect, but I'm a happy convert.

I'd rather have Apple put a micro SD card slot where the headphone jack is. I'll never buy an Apple smartphone, but Samsung and the other Android device makers have been issuing close copies of Apple products lately in terms of hardware specs.

Wires hanging off of wireless devices for ordinary use cases seems wrong. I'm 100% wireless charging now as well, even though I have an older device without the capability built in.

The only downside of Bluetooth is occasional audio interruptions. I'm not sure why this happens, but I have a feeling it has to do with misbehaving apps eating up too many CPU cycles.

Apple hasn't done anything yet.

[Brannon]

This is a third party speculating on what Apple might do.

Ummm, Apple hasn't ditched the 3.5mm connector.

[Brannon]

This is a third party speculating on what Apple might do. Now who is the parody?

NO NO NO

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't spend $500 on a pair of Audio Technica headphones to not be able to use them with my phone.
If they do this, the 6S will be my last iDevice.
Give me more battery life and a slightly bigger phone any day.
I don't know why the thin obsession

For fuck's sake, the man's dead.

[Anonymous Coward]

This obsession with thinness came about when Jobs started getting ill. It's clear what was going on. Now a whole industry is being suckered into the delusions of a dying man.

Bluetooth for me

[movdqa]

I bought the Jaybird Bluebuds X two years ago and have been very happy with them. I use them for running and in the gym and it's nice to not have to worry about cords getting caught on equipment or your wires getting caught up on the treadmill arms when running indoors or dealing with cord tangle. Yes, wired sound quality is better but it wouldn't be perfect anyways because of the bouncing around running, banging of weight plates and people dropping dumbbells and barbells on the ground.

Why make super thin phones?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the point of making phones super thin? I'd rather have a phone that's easy to hold and use, that accepts standard connectors.

In other iPhone 7 news...

[rcase5]

Apple will also be dumping the speakers from iPhone 7, in an effort to make it quieter.

<smh>

If they are concerned about dimensions

[nehumanuscrede]

why does the gd screen keep getting bigger ? At the rate were going, the Iphone X is going to look like Captain America's shield. At which point the argument over removing a 3.5mm audio jack to save size / weight becomes a ludicrous one :|

Ha ha, told you so.

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew it! I totally predicted they would do something like this when they bought Beats. I was downvoted for it too.

I don't buy it

[pghmike4]

There are just too many 3.5mm high quality headphones out there for Apple to walk away from them. And at some point, thinness starts working against battery lifetime anyway. It just doesn't make any sense -- why hurt the usability of your device on both the battery life and headphone compatibility dimensions for the sake of making a thin device a little thinner?

Meh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't care less. Haven't used this in years, but my phone is already thin enough. Can we please have the damned thing waterproofed FINALLY??? If having one less port makes it easier to waterproof, then great!

Beats

[DMJC]

Smart money is that they're doing this to push the Beats by Dr Dre brand they bought a while ago. There will be a pair of Beats headphones that work with the iPhone and all the other brands can go suck the big one. Apple has basically gone south ever since Steve died. The systems are less and less attractive, more locked down. Treacherous computing.

hahaha

[Anonymous Coward]

No Android
No 3.5 mm

Only a fool would buy such phone

3.5" or USB-C

[Anonymous Coward]

The iPhones are already thin enoough as it is. There is no good reason to ditch the standard headphone jack. Conversely, if Apple is determined to ditch the jack, how about going all of the way and ditching Lightning for USB-C?

Open-side design

[xombo]

It's possible to just leave a side of the headphone jack "open" so that the socket plugs in and is caught in a C shape plug that can be thinner than the round connection of the headphones. That would let you continue to make the jack thinner by some margin, but is not a long-term solution. If they get rid of the lightning port and use inductive charging they could waterproof the entire case.

Switching back to a Droid then

[WillAffleckUW]

No headphone, no buy.

Non-issue

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a non-issue. Clearly there will be a lightning to earphone jack adapter, and that's all you would need to get back to current state.

Stupid article.

Likely another reason...

[PCeye]

The move is likely to make analog duplication of available streaming services more difficult, to impossible depending on your skill set.

Embrace change...

[Anonymous Coward]

Should they still include a floppy drive on laptops so as not to piss off the small number of geezers who still might use them? But wait those geezers wouldn't buy anything new anyway.

Wired headphones are for...

[Anonymous Coward]

People who aren't organized enough to remember to charge BT headphones. Like my wife or my kids.

Skinny... easy to fold and..

[niftymitch]

Too skinny and it is too easy to bend and fold.

Too skinny and there is not enough battery to call the SO and
apologize. The LAST thing a family needs is a phone with
a dead battery at the time you should be calling to get the dinner
grocery list...

Of interest men often have shirt pockets that were designed for
a pack of cigarettes while weight is important the dimensions can
still fit a pocket.

Talk and standby time are critical for any phone I am willing to
shell out upgrade cash for.

Please no ports

[iamacat]

What I want is a completely sealed phone which is waterproof, dustproof and shockproof. Bluetooth for headphones, wireless charging, sim-free network registration. Plus nice thick form factor and efficient software for weeklong battery life. Only then I can trust the device to fit my life rather than me structuring my life around its limitations.

On the second thought, Apple is the least likely company to help me with that.

Nice ideal

[tinsonmobile]

I'll think bluetooth is new ideal