Slashdot Mirror


Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Hostile and Stupid (theverge.com)

A WSJ report on Tuesday claimed that the next iPhone won't have the 3.5mm headphone port. A handful of smartphones such as LeEco's Le 2, Le 2 Pro, and Le Max 2 that have launched this year already don't have a headphone jack. The Verge's Nilay Patel has an opinion piece in which he argues that smartphone companies shouldn't ditch headphone ports as it helps no consumer. He lists six reasons:
1. Digital audio means DRM audio :Restricting audio output to a purely digital connection means that music publishers and streaming companies can start to insist on digital copyright enforcement mechanisms. We moved our video systems to HDMI and got HDCP, remember? Copyright enforcement technology never stops piracy and always hurts the people who most rely on legal fair use, but you can bet the music industry is going to start cracking down on "unauthorized" playback and recording devices anyway.2. Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.
3. Dongles are stupid, especially when they require other dongles.
4. Ditching a deeply established standard will disproportionately impact accessibility.:The headphone jack might be less good on some metrics than Lightning or USB-C audio, but it is spectacularly better than anything else in the world at being accessible, enabling, open, and democratizing. A change that will cost every iPhone user at least $29 extra for a dongle (or more for new headphones) is not a change designed to benefit everyone.5. Making Android and iPhone headphones incompatible is incredibly arrogant and stupid.
6. No one is asking for this.

595 comments

  1. Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He said "jack off" ! tee hee

    1. Re:Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sounds like that story my grampa Jack tells about that time he was out at the farm plowing on a stallion. He was getting tired, and he wanted to get off, but he couldn't, so he called for help. A nearby farmhand heard him and called for more help "COME HELP JACK OFF THE STALLION!" Grampa loves to tell that story, but only when there are no women around. I don't know why. I'm only 8 years old.

    2. Re:Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm totally jacking off my phone right now.

    3. Re:Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How appropriate. Here, let the marketing wankers know exactly what you think of this massive cock-up:
      http://www.apple.com/feedback

    4. Re:Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was trying to envision what a "jack off phone" might look like. Perhaps an iPhone grafted to a Fleshlight.

    5. Re: Uhoh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its all about apple wanting to make more mony from proprietary designs. They dont give a shit if its user hostel because apple fanboys will always shell out the cash for something "new." even if there are no real improvements

  2. cost reduction by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and they save a whole whopping nickel off each unit. move a few million units and it's easily 100k+.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're forgetting they'd most likely include a lightening port to 3.5mm dongle, which would cost more than the 3.5mm jack in the phone.
      That said, They'd likely make a killing reselling lightening port Beats Audio headphones to the hipsters & clueless.

    2. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Closer to saving $0.005 per unit. Yes less than a penny. That jack might cost you $0.05 or a little more if you were to buy a one off, but in the 10,000s that Apple purchases them in bulk they are super cheap.

      It's just a dumbass move by a dumbass company who is totally out of touch with the end user.

      Also even at $100k, Apple pisses that 100 times over every single morning. It's nothing.

    3. Re:cost reduction by Chalnoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think it has anything to do with cost reduction. If anything, it's probably about space/weight savings. For mobile phones, each millimeter and milligram make a difference.

    4. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You save the whole analog circuitry behind the jack. That's more expensive than a simple jack.

    5. Re:cost reduction by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, its Apple, which means its about eventually making a phone that is just a sleek glass ovoid, with no surface buttons or ports.

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    6. Re:cost reduction by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Well, that's assuming that world+dog suddenly forgets how to make bluetooth-connected headphones...

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    7. Re:cost reduction by quenda · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its not the money. Apple is sticking with their history. Trying to play "what would Steve do?".
      Was it the first iMac ? Apple removed the non-standard serial ports, and the non-standard floppy drive. All replaced with standard USB ports.
      ADB was good riddance, but floppy sorely missed as USB flash drives were still expensive. Apple did it anyway. They wanted to stand out.
      Removing the optical drive from laptops is a no-brainer due to weight. Ethernet was not removed before fast wifi was ubiquitous.

      Replacing the 3.5mm socket with a non-standard port is more of a worry. Will mean multiple cables and dongles needed for many years.
      Not a huge problem, but not much of a benefit either. Unlike RS232, the 3.5mm audio socket "just works". There is good reason why it has outlived all those other ports.
      And Apple, please stop obsessively making devices thinner until the engineers have improved battery life dramatically.

    8. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can't just remove analog circuitry. The phone still has a loudspeaker and an earpiece speaker, these still need DAC and amp.

    9. Re: cost reduction by imgod2u · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which, incidentally, will make it completely water proof.

      Even IP68 rated phones can only survive brief dips because of the exposed headphone and USB jack.

    10. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and they save a whole whopping nickel off each unit. move a few million units and it's easily 100k+.

      Apple can save even more by not sellilng the iphone in the first place.

    11. Re:cost reduction by supremebob · · Score: 2

      You're thinking like an Engineer and not a CEO. The engineer only sees the opportunity to save a nickel per unit, but the CEO sees an opportunity to see millions of Lightning or USB C to 3.5mm headphone jack adapters for $19.95 each. Or, better yet, an opportunity to sell a $99 of "premium" headphones with a USB C or Lightning jack.

      Besides, it's going to be tough the reclaim the title of "thinnest phone ever!" with that damn headphone jack in the way.

    12. Re:cost reduction by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's also removing weight and volume (the space taken up internally is vast compared to almost everything else but the screen and battery), gets rid of the single largest ingress point for dirt and moisture (another cost issue, since it reduces reliability), and probably disenfranchises some barely-measurable fraction of the market (give me actual figures, not just "I use it so everyone else should have to as well"). Seems like a good move to me.

    13. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      And Apple, please stop obsessively making devices thinner until the engineers have improved battery life dramatically.

      Apple iPhone 8: 1mm thickness. We removed the battery and replaced it with an ecosystem of proprietary inductive charging devices...

    14. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 2, Informative

      Closer to saving $0.005 per unit. Yes less than a penny. That jack might cost you $0.05 or a little more if you were to buy a one off, but in the 10,000s that Apple purchases them in bulk they are super cheap.

      It's just a dumbass move by a dumbass company who is totally out of touch with the end user.

      Also even at $100k, Apple pisses that 100 times over every single morning. It's nothing.

      It isn't a cost-saving measure, you insufferable twit.

      It is mostly about making the next iPhone waterproof. Yes, there are waterproof 3.5 mm jacks; but they are all necessarily much bigger (in all dimensions) than the non-waterproof kind (which are already almost too "thick" for current smartphones). And "bigger" (and especially THICKER) is obviously the last thing a smartphone designer (regardless of Brand) wants to be...

      But due to its design, Apple can waterproof a Lightning connector much easier than a 3.5mm jack. So the Lightning conn can stay; but the analog headphone jack must go.

      I am not sure whether Apple will just ship a Lightning Headset with that iPhone, and either include or sell a Lightning "DACJACK"(tm) for those who want to use old-Skool analog phones; or whether they will just start leveraging Bluetooth 5, but more likely, that will have to wait at least one more product-cycle.

    15. Re:cost reduction by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it will be part of making the next iPhone waterproof, which except for "Make it thicker again, but with more battery" is the leading new feature users want. Current iPhones have a special moisture indicator at the bottom of the jack which, if triggered, voids the warranty.

    16. Re:cost reduction by sr180 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Samsung Galaxy has been waterproof without removing the headphone jack...

      Some early HTC / Dopod windows phones had no headphone jack. It was all pumped through the usb. And It sucked. It sucked hard core. I have no interest in ever buying a phone again without a headphone jack.

      --
      In Soviet Russia the insensitive clod is YOU!
    17. Re:cost reduction by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, there are waterproof 3.5 mm jacks; but they are all necessarily much bigger (in all dimensions) than the non-waterproof kind (which are already almost too "thick" for current smartphones).

      Why use a waterproof jack? Just waterproof that part of the case. Put a solid box sticking in from the back case, rubber on the front case's interior face, and pass a flat ribbon between the case and the rubber gasket. It's not like Apple is ever going to remove the top bezel anyway. As an added bonus, the extra half millimeter it would add to the thickness would give us more usable battery life (which they're going to need anyway if everybody is forced to use Bluetooth).

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    18. Re: cost reduction by dgatwood · · Score: 0

      What's the point? If you don't recover your phone in a minute or two, you're probably not going to get it back anyway. I mean, maybe for a sports edition that people want to take swimming with them???

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    19. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it has anything to do with cost reduction. If anything, it's probably about space/weight savings. For mobile phones, each millimeter and milligram make a difference.

      No it doesn't, mobile phones are so big these days they may as well come with wheels.

    20. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Include? No that will be $29.99

    21. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Class-D, pure digital audio amp. Bet that's where it will go, if not already there. Handful of passives and cheap MOSFET, no need for an analog amp...

    22. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      --------> you insufferable twit

      Very angry.

    23. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will mean multiple cables and dongles needed for many years.

      No, it will mean I won't need to buy an iPhone. Not that I would anyway, for a host of other reasons. I wish shoppers were a bit more discerning. There are some Apple computers at my workplace, and when I see the price tags on the purchased accessories, I can only laugh. I'm sure Apple is laughing too. There must be a staggering amount of suckers out there.

    24. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its about DRM, plain and simple.

      FTFY

    25. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Waterproofing? You fopdoodle!
      What sort of saddle-goose could possibly think this is about waterproofing!

    26. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      my waterproof Galaxy S5 has the same indicatirs. waterproof headphone jack too thick? seriously?
      wtf. wow, "first world problem" meme is even doing a Piccard face palm over that...

    27. Re:cost reduction by dgatwood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ... probably disenfranchises some barely-measurable fraction of the market ...

      I think you'd be wrong about that number. I'd imagine at least a third of users use the headphone jack regularity, and that nearly all of them use it at least occasionally.

      And the bigger problem is that the ones who use it occasionally do so without having to think about it right now. In the future, every time that a user suddenly realizes that "Oops, I don't have my adapter; I can't do that" while they watch their Android-using friends just plug in effortlessly, they'll question their decision to buy an iPhone. The more times a user questions their decision, the less loyal they'll be when they replace that device. Even if it is only a very occasional pain point, the damage to the brand is still considerable for those users.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    28. Re:cost reduction by lucm · · Score: 5, Funny

      I am not sure whether Apple will just ship a Lightning Headset with that iPhone

      What, macs4all, this wasn't covered in your iMissionary marketing material?

      Oh wait I remember, Apple doesn't send material or anything to its volunteer salesforce, they let you guys find things on your own; they don't worry about you, knowing that you'll bend over no matter what.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    29. Re:cost reduction by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Samsung Galaxy has been waterproof without removing the headphone jack...

      Same with Sony Xperia phones. Most of the latter models are waterproof, and some can be submerged for a considerable amount of time.

      This is more likely another lock-in, like non-standard charging ports on previous Apple phones.

    30. Re:cost reduction by lucm · · Score: 0

      --------> you insufferable twit

      Very angry.

      His iChurch is falling apart, give the poor guy a break. He's trying to hang to his beliefs that Apple is still relevant, let him mourn that has been company on his own terms.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    31. Re:cost reduction by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      It's also removing weight and volume (the space taken up internally is vast compared to almost everything else but the screen and battery), gets rid of the single largest ingress point for dirt and moisture (another cost issue, since it reduces reliability), and probably disenfranchises some barely-measurable fraction of the market (give me actual figures, not just "I use it so everyone else should have to as well"). Seems like a good move to me.

      I don't understand why this is 'troll'.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    32. Re:cost reduction by arth1 · · Score: 1

      No it doesn't, mobile phones are so big these days they may as well come with wheels.

      The Marshall London phone does.

      It also comes with two 3.5" jacks, so you can use one for mic input and the other for headphones.

    33. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no. Steve Jobs is dead.

    34. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yet it is the nexus that has no physical home button

    35. Re:cost reduction by jcr · · Score: 1

      There are also rumors about the next iPhone being waterproof. One less connector to seal up makes that easier to do.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    36. Re:cost reduction by brantondaveperson · · Score: 0

      To be fair, micro USB does suck pretty hard.

    37. Re: cost reduction by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      There are water intrusion proof usb ports and headphone ports. The only reason ip68 phones have limits like 30 minutes is cheaping out on the ports and using little fiddly doors and flaps instead.

    38. Re:cost reduction by m0nr0via · · Score: 1

      I had not heard of this device before tonight. Now, I can't wait to get my hands on one. I just hope the OS implementation doesn't suck.

    39. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because he isn't bashing on Apple, duh.

    40. Re:cost reduction by Calydor · · Score: 4, Informative

      That was bullet point #2 in the list: 2. Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    41. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Samsung Galaxy is not waterproof.
      Check various reviews ... google might help.

      ps:
      Killed mine with water... leaking in through the headphone jack.

    42. Re: cost reduction by nachtelfjeiu · · Score: 3, Funny

      iPhone 9: you need to equip your house with proprietary 180V 200Hz iPower outlets to be able to feed the iPhone 9.

    43. Re: cost reduction by Nocturna81 · · Score: 1

      You do realise it's already a class D amp? Anything else won't run of a battery. So parents posts still stands, you need the dac and amp which, even as class D, produce analog output

    44. Re:cost reduction by topologicalanomaly47 · · Score: 1

      "non-standard serial ports"

      That's a joke right?

    45. Re: cost reduction by Khyber · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Even IP68 rated phones can only survive brief dips"

      Then it's not truly IP68. The first number in the Ingress Protection rating, 6, denotes the system is dust-tight. The second number in that rating, 8, denotes suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer. Normally, this will mean that the equipment is hermetically sealed. However, with certain types of equipment, it can mean that water can enter but only in such a manner that it produces no harmful effects. Note, brief dips do not fit the definition of 'continuous immersion' which is typically a time period of MINIMUM 30 minutes (which, incidentally, is all most manufacturers will give you, the cheap fuckers.)

      I've got IP68 LED units that are meant to operate directly in saltwater. And they have watertight plug sockets.

      I find it hilarious that I can bother to do this with my own retail units while more advanced manufacturers can't even do it properly.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    46. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IP68 is a bit of an odd rating since the parameters are specified by the manufacturer rather than being written in the standard.
      The IPx8 ratings does not even require that the devices can handle lower pressures, they might very well rely on the water pressure and fall apart in air.

      Anyway, if we follow the standard IPx7 should be sufficient for showering with it or dropping it in the toilet. IPx8 is for people who absolutely need to play candy crush at the bottom of the deep end of the pool.
      If you just want to wash it off under the tap then IPx5 would do. You seldom see IPx4 but that would be sufficient for most normal uses, including rain.

    47. Re:cost reduction by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Almost every typical connector in existence has a water-sealed version. They're maybe a couple of cents more expensive, depending.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    48. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed those ports can easily be made waterproof. No reason for the hole to give access to the inside of the device.

    49. Re:cost reduction by stoborrobots · · Score: 1

      It looks like the OS doesn't suck, but the hardware does...

      http://www.digitaltrends.com/c...
      "The Marshall London looks fantastic, and its musical ability lives up to expectations, but it's a terribly mediocre, overpriced smartphone."

      http://www.androidauthority.co...
      "What the Marshall London does have going for it is its near-stock Android experience. Marshall didn't try too hard to make Google's OS different, something that might have helped keep the phone snappier. Just keep in mind you would be getting a mid-to-low tier performance out of this phone. That's really the important part....
      With that said, we also have to mention casual smartphone users will have to cut too many corners to live with superior sound. That's the main issue here, Marshall took a generic phone and put its name on it. Cool apps and a good design won't be enough to put this phone in the hands of people outside the target niche. Especially when considering that price."

      http://www.alphr.com/mobile-ph...
      "A distinct lack of imagination continues throughout the handset."

    50. Re:cost reduction by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      They just want to make the phones thinner. Apple doesn't care how much it costs the customers since it's used to having customers that will buy anything they're told to buy. Apple has a tendency to make newer models with incompatible parts and they've never apologized for the inconvenience but rather brag about how much better the new product looks. Which is strange since the current iphone is thin enough that it's not difficult to bend it, there's no reason to make it even thinner and more fragile.

    51. Re:cost reduction by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      No, it will mean I won't need to buy an iPhone. Not that I would anyway, for a host of other reasons. I wish shoppers were a bit more discerning. There are some Apple computers at my workplace, and when I see the price tags on the purchased accessories, I can only laugh. I'm sure Apple is laughing too. There must be a staggering amount of suckers out there.

      Ha, we have a mac in the office that has a wireless mouse on it, very sleek and pretty it is but £60 and to top it off the charging port is on the bottom. Oh, laughs for days that thing.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    52. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they wanted it slimmer, they could switch to a standard 2.5mm jack, though the headphones for those usually suck.

    53. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple, always one dongle away from working properly?

      Need to charge your phone? No problem, get a USB to Lightning dongle.

      It is funny seeing all these iphones at the office with all their dongles on them.

    54. Re:cost reduction by Maritz · · Score: 2

      It's about waterproofing,pure and simple.

      Well of course you'd say that. I think that's pretty unlikely.

      It is much more likely that there are execs at Apple who are observing iPhones being used with all sorts of weird and wonderful sets of headphones/earbuds that Apple is not getting their fucking cut on.

      Now, you won't be able to just use any old headphones. You use your fucking $75 Apple headphones.

      But hey that's alright because they're bound to be LOADS better.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    55. Re:cost reduction by Maritz · · Score: 1

      I have literally never plugged in a phone thinking "oo this connector sucks so bad". What is wrong with it exactly? It seems bizarre to me that people are struggling with them.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    56. Re:cost reduction by olof_the_viking · · Score: 1

      If you want good noises, this is the best "phone" hardware available, it seems. The rest is incidental.

    57. Re:cost reduction by quenda · · Score: 1

      "non-standard serial ports"

      That's a joke right?

      There are plenty of jokes about RS232, but Apple was even more non-standard with ADB and its predecessor.
      USB solved the problem eventually. Also got rid of the 3.5" floppies that could not be read on non-Apple floppy drives and vice versa.
      Apple even had their own network protocol, before adopting TCP/IP. The company changed a lot when Jobs returned.

    58. Re:cost reduction by jonnyj · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're forgetting they'd most likely include a lightening port to 3.5mm dongle, which would cost more than the 3.5mm jack in the phone.

      If they simply change the socket shape to something smaller and more waterproof, I'm good with that. I can put a cheap and light adapter onto all of my existing headphones and life will continue unchanged. A thin, waterproof phone is highly desirable - I once killed a high-end phone by falling into a river on my mountain bike, and I hate the faff of having to keep my phone in a waterproof case when I'm hiking or out on my road bike in showery weather (it always rains in Wales!).

      But if they require an expensive adapter (active electronics or royalties), that's a big problem. I guess I'm not alone in using multiple headphones with my phone. I have good quality headphones at home and in the office, cheap disposable in-ear phones for cycling, sports headphones for running, a lightweight spare set that I keep in my laptop bag for travelling, etc. I don't mind buying a £2 adapter for each of these, but I don't fancy buying multiple £20 adapters, and I'm certainly not willing to carry an adapter with me just in case I need to use it.

    59. Re:cost reduction by Aereus · · Score: 1

      My version of the Xperia Z3 was updated to support wireless charging, but only @ 1A instead of the usual 2A+ so its not very effective unless you want to just throw it on your nightstand for the entire night or such.

    60. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 1

      It's about waterproofing,pure and simple.

      Well of course you'd say that. I think that's pretty unlikely.

      It is much more likely that there are execs at Apple who are observing iPhones being used with all sorts of weird and wonderful sets of headphones/earbuds that Apple is not getting their fucking cut on.

      Now, you won't be able to just use any old headphones. You use your fucking $75 Apple headphones.

      But hey that's alright because they're bound to be LOADS better.

      Aside from all this IDLE SPECULATION (which generates clicks), absolutely NO ONE outside of 1 Infinite Loop REALLY knows what Apple is, or is NOT, planning to do with the 3.5 mm Jack.

      NO ONE.

    61. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too thick, then these fuckers go and complain about bendgate.

    62. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Samsung has been making waterproof phones with 3.5mm headphone jacks for years.

    63. Re:cost reduction by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Its not the money. Apple is sticking with their history. Trying to play "what would Steve do?".

      Yeah, would Steve remove the headphone jack from the iPod? The iPhone? No? Then what are we talking about here exactly? Apple doing what they always have done: to remove the headphone jack from devices without anybody noticing?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    64. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "lightening "??? Racist.

    65. Re: cost reduction by jonnyj · · Score: 1

      I said that a thin, waterproof phone is highly desirable. The current iPhone is slimmer than the waterproof Samsung models, and dropping the headphone jack would presumably allow it to be thinner still.

      I'd be willing to shove a £2 adapter on my headphones if it shaved a millimeter off my phone. Most things in life are a compromise, and that's one that wouldn't trouble me in the slightest.

    66. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reselling Beats? Apple owns Beats. This decision only makes money for Apple.

    67. Re:cost reduction by perryizgr8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >they'd most likely include a lightening port to 3.5mm dongle

      No they won't! This is Apple. You'll pay 39.99 and buy it separately.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    68. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never had a microUSB cable who's springs have failed and it doesn't want to stay in the device?

      At least they put the springs on the cable instead of the device like miniUSB.

    69. Re:cost reduction by dfm3 · · Score: 1

      ...most likely include a lightening port to 3.5mm dongle...

      Wait... why would they include an optical audio port if they're removing the 3.5mm jack? :-P

    70. Re:cost reduction by Trongy · · Score: 2

      absolutely NO ONE outside of 1 Infinite Loop REALLY knows

      Assuming Apple is sticking with it's regular September release cycle, there will be workers in a Chinese factory making the phones right now who will have a strong suspicion. Also people in the supply chain who may or may not have received their annual order of 3.5mm components.

      Of course Apple might test the waters by having only one new model without the 3.5mm jack. Regardless, when it comes to the iphone7, the decision would have been made months if not years ago,

    71. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony has phones and tablets that are thinner than iProducts and waterproof

    72. Re:cost reduction by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Someone who makes really waterproof devices here. Submersible for 5+ years waterproof, not just IP68.

      It's actually harder than people think to waterproof things. For example, rubber seals need compression. Phones are very thin and as we discovered with the iPhone bending problems not all that rigid. For your scheme to work the rubber would need to remain compressed for the life of the phone, in every phone. It's not impossible but it's hard to do without high failure rates.

      The ribbon cable would also be a problem. Rubber doesn't work too well with sharp edges, like the sides of the cable. Wiggling could damage the rubber (people yank on their headphones all the time) and again you would need a lot of pressure to overcome it. Also, most plastic is not entirely waterproof and moisture will eventually permeate it.

      That's why other manufacturers go for the rubber bung in the socket. Even then, they only rate the phone for 30 minutes under water... Being able to wash your phone is pretty awesome though.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    73. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phone's don't have DACs and amps in the traditional sense, they're all class D, which means an IC takes digital audio and drives the speaker directly with an H bridge using PWM. Plus all of a phone's audio (speaker, mic, headphones, etc) are usually implemented on a single IC. As a PCB designer, the reason to remove the headphone jack is obvious - it is a huge part that must have a fixed location making it a pain in the ass to layout. At this point in phones, it is probably one of the the main limiting factors in making them any smaller.

    74. Re:cost reduction by perryizgr8 · · Score: 2

      Headphone port has jack shit to do with waterproofing.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    75. Re: cost reduction by datavirtue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The smaller the phone, the shittier the battery.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    76. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's still one more adapter that you should need in the first place and seriously, how more thin do these things need to be?

    77. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Even IP68 rated phones can only survive brief dips because of the exposed headphone and USB jack.

      Not really. The manual for my phone explains how it is fine to keep it in water 5 feet deep for as long as you'd like. It even encourages you to rinse it with water any time you'd like to clean it. The headphone jack and USB port are both exposed and don't require any plugs. They make those waterproof nowadays.

      http://www.sonymobile.com/global-en/products/phones/xperia-m4-aqua/features/

    78. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, it's apple, who has always included it's signature white headsets (not so much signature, since samsung, et al, once again happened to discover a similar design) with their iphones. so they'll either include new headphones for the lighting port, old ones and an adapter (unelegant, but that's what the rumor mill suggests) or new bluetoth buds (unlikely, they'll sell those for $79 or more)

    79. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was bullet point #2 in the list: 2. Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.

      Which IMO, is a stupid bullet point, or maybe just a poorly explained one. I mean, considering the source of the audio, I wouldn't judge _any_ headphones/speakers as great.

    80. Re: cost reduction by jonnyj · · Score: 1

      Sony has phones and tablets that are thinner than iProducts and waterproof

      Oh? Google doesn't seem to find any for me. Nor does Carphone Warehouse's website. For reference, the iPhone 6 is 6.9mm and the 6S is 7.1mm.

      Besides, Sony says that its phones have only been tested underwater in standby mode. You can't actually use them when they're wet. Seawater is a no-no, too.

      Waterproof phones have a long way to go before you can treat them with the same casual disregard as a waterproof watch.

    81. Re:cost reduction by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      " I hate the faff of having to keep my phone in a waterproof case when I'm hiking or out on my road bike in showery weather (it always rains in Wales!).

      But if they require an expensive adapter (active electronics or royalties), that's a big problem"

      IOW you want a waterproof phone with lots of holes in it.

      What's the problem people, if you have a 5 bucks wired headphone you don't want to ditch for an 800$ phone, just don't buy it!

    82. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.

      Yeah, as opposed to the gold-plated null-terminated ultra shielded cables you can get for $500 to attach to your $800 phone, to listen to...

      oh right, fucking MP3s.

      Get real, bud. If you're wearing headphones to listen to an MP3, you don't care that much about the quality, because the only way you'd care about quality is if you're using open-backed headphones in an absolutely silent space. Not exactly use case #1 for headphones attached to a smartphone.

    83. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it's not truly IP68.

      Then you wrote:

      The second number in that rating, 8, denotes suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer.

      If the manufacturer specifies that it's suitable for continuous immersion in water for only 5 seconds at a time, then they have met the letter of IP68, which means it is "truly IP68."

      Maybe you don't like the conditions they specify, but if they meet the standard, they meet the standard.

    84. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because Apple, who pretty much single-handedly forced DRM-free music sales on the major labels, is all about the DRM.

      Twat.

    85. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 2

      absolutely NO ONE outside of 1 Infinite Loop REALLY knows

      Assuming Apple is sticking with it's regular September release cycle, there will be workers in a Chinese factory making the phones right now who will have a strong suspicion. Also people in the supply chain who may or may not have received their annual order of 3.5mm components.

      Of course Apple might test the waters by having only one new model without the 3.5mm jack. Regardless, when it comes to the iphone7, the decision would have been made months if not years ago,

      I do agree that the decision to drop the 3.5mm jack on the iPhone 7 would have been made months ago (likely not years, though); but they also have a lot of experience making suppliers and Contract Manufacturers quiet about such changes. And if nothing else, Tim Cook is by all accounts a logistics and supply-chain wizard; so I would imagine his regime has continued the sealed-lips policy for their "partners".

      I'd actually sooner believe that Apple had purposely "leaked" the story, to test public reaction for the NEXT-NEXT iPhone iteration (7s, or 8?), BEFORE they had to do a design-freeze for those designs.

    86. Re: cost reduction by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      The adapter would add a thin, weak connection point which, if leaned on, would experience high torque and damage either the phone port or the connector. The greatest length of a 3.5mm connector is *inside* the phone body.

      An adapter would need to decode a digital signal, which requires first processing the packet-encoded signal to a line-digital signal, then feeding it through a DAC. You need the equivalent of an Arduino minimal model, packed in a small case. It needs to negotiate power, control noise (EMI shielding and grounding topologies), and clock itself. To put this into perspective: a YMF289 and YAC512 (OPL3 and DAC) cost about $3.25 together; to couple the digital output on the YMF289 to the digital input of the YAC512, you need about $39 of discrete components. It all starts with a quartz crystal coupled using a resistor and a capacitor into the YMF; the YMF has a pin that emits the same signal at 1/2 frequency, which is unstable if not properly coupled to the YAC.

      So think £6 of chips (a DAC and a microcontroller) and £10-£12 of discrete components (SMT capacitors, resistors, a crystal to provide a timing signal for the uC and DAC, and inductors in the power supply chain), circuit boards, and plastic casing. With bulk ordering of rolls of SMT, they might get it down to £12 overall. It's still going to break off or damage your phone.

    87. Re: cost reduction by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      UM, you lied, there are NO waterproof phones, just water resistant, 'er', somewhat. Do not confuse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... Due to shape (large flat rectangle, think water pressure on the that large surface area, squeezing down as you go deeper and then expanding as you rise, like a pump, pumping out air and pumping in water) and cost and weight, an actual water resistant phone would need to be solidly encased in non-conductive plastic (cast into the plastic right down to the surface of circuit boards etc), with an area exposed for battery connection (water resistant) and heat exchanger, the circuit board would also need to be heat conductive to get it back to the heat exchanger. It is all about a more expensive proprietary connection and nothing more, another chance for profit.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    88. Re:cost reduction by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      You might find your field easier if you move to a silicone compound. Some silicones have good deformation characteristics and will seal with minimal contact pressure; they don't degrade with (reasonable) temperature changes or wet-dry cycling, and they hold up to abrading pretty well. Teflon-coated rubber or silicone is also an option for high-temperature seals.

    89. Re:cost reduction by illogict · · Score: 1

      The Sony Z4 Tablet, which is waterproof (IP 65/68), has a waterproof jack and micro-USB connector, and is 6,1mm thin. Is that still too much for you?

    90. Re:cost reduction by dave420 · · Score: 1

      I'm no Apple fan, but they have been discussing removing the 3.5mm jack for a while because it necessitates a thicker frame for the phone. The discussion was started when phones were racing towards being the skinniest, when people really cared about that. Unless you have some actual evidence on your side, it might make sense to rescind your claims. I know it's fun to hate on Apple and to delve into conspiracy theories which suit your personal impression of Apple, but all you'll do is look like a kook with nothing better on their hands than to engage in faux outrage at something that doesn't affect them. If the future is as bleak with these phones as you seem certain it will be, then other manufacturers will snap up the people abandoning their iDevices with phones and tablets with 3.5mm ports.

    91. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not the guy you replied to, but I'm using a Sony xperia Z5 compact...it's not as thin as an iPhone 6, but it's within spitting distance; it is waterproof, however, and you're not going to bend it accidentally. It's also not marketed in the US.

    92. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I actually think we need a one-way version of Bluetooth too. Just focused on audio quality and range.

    93. Re:cost reduction by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      Closer to saving $0.005 per unit. Yes less than a penny. That jack might cost you $0.05 or a little more if you were to buy a one off, but in the 10,000s that Apple purchases them in bulk they are super cheap.

      It's just a dumbass move by a dumbass company who is totally out of touch with the end user.

      Hey. We resent those remarks. We are too in touch with our users. Totally. I mean, how else would we be able to get you tools to spend as much as you do on our carefully metered stream of shiny new things? We pay a LOT of attention to what makes you tick and our profits show that we're masters at it. We know what you like, baby. So take your whiny little bitch ass down to the store and buy.

      --Your Friends at Apple

    94. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the comment I was looking for. Thank you!

    95. Re:cost reduction by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      No one cares about having a phone that's submersible at 100M for 5 years; people just want their phone to not crap out if they drop it in the toilet or get caught out in the rain. AFAIK, IP68 meets those requirements.

    96. Re:cost reduction by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We do in fact use various silicone compounds in different ways. Gets all over your fingers when you open the device up. Generally we find that rubber gasket and silicone compound works well, with some rather expensive connectors when we need external antennas. Metal bodies where possible, all plastic permeates over time.

      There are all sorts of issues trying to waterproof stuff, as you probably know. Impurities in the water, long term submersion, but also at very shallow depths or just high humidity environments (like a phone in the rain) there is less compression on the joints.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    97. Re:cost reduction by arth1 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, micro USB does suck pretty hard.

      Yes, it does, but it is also cheap and ubiquitous.
      If I had a penny for every time someone has run around at work looking for an iPhone charger... And no, not iPhone version X, but iPhone version Y, because they aren't compatible.
      Meanwhile, those with phones that charge through standard micro-USB never have a problem finding somewhere to plug in.

      One of the few times I have been impressed with Sony is when they decided to ditch the proprietary Ericsson dock and go with standard micro-USB instead. Wise choice, but possibly too late.

    98. Re:cost reduction by dave420 · · Score: 1

      They're also usually larger, which is not good when you're trying to make phones as slim as possible, which Apple has stated is the reason behind losing the 3.5mm jack.

    99. Re:cost reduction by jonnyj · · Score: 1

      IOW you want a waterproof phone with lots of holes in it.

      What's the problem people, if you have a 5 bucks wired headphone you don't want to ditch for an 800$ phone, just don't buy it!

      Garmin makes waterproof watches and bike computers with electrical connectors. Even the touch screens work when they're wet.

      No-one minds replacing £3 headphones unless the cheapest alternative is £50. But no-one wants to replace their existing high-end headphones.

      And I definitely don't want to be forced to use expensive headphones when I'm cycling. Sweat, rain, mud and road grime mean that I regularly chuck out my cycling headphones. I don't care about sound quality because I'm breathing too hard, so cheap is good. Besides, cheap headphones tend to allow traffic noise through, which helps to keep me alive.

      And I want plenty of choice for my running headphones - a narrow range from one lender is unlikely to find something that hits the sweet spot between comfort and staying in place when I'm doing interval training.

    100. Re:cost reduction by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Big Fucking Deal.

    101. Re: cost reduction by publiclurker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and the more fragile the phone. Nothing more ridiculous than paying a premium for an extra thin phone and then wrapping it in a thick case so it will survive in the real world.

    102. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Apple. You'll pay 39.99 and buy it separately.

      When it breaks after 7 months of active use.

    103. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By that argument, there are no seaworthy submarines, because none of them are capable of staying indefinitely in the deepest oceanic trench.
      The most solidly built of today's phones are rated to an ingress protection standard, such that they can withstand 1m water depth for 1 hour, which is reasonable enough for most purposes. I'd say that's effectively "waterproof", in contrast to the majority of devices which will instantly fizzle.
      If you need more than that, you aught to have a more resilient enclosure, or more purpose-built device.

    104. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Double blind tests have shown that even on audiophile equipment 320kpbs mp3s are statistically indistinguishable from 16bit 44.1kHz sampling rate CDs. Decent bit rate mp3s are fine.

    105. Re: cost reduction by Cloud+K · · Score: 1

      This.

      Back in around 2003 when I bought my first Apple product (the awesome iPod 3rd gen) yes, they used to make the high price tag worthwhile by throwing in the adapters, dock, even cleaning cloths, everything you could need. This was a while ago. Not long after that they switched to only including the bare minimum product and charging like wounded buffalo for all the adapters and accessories.

    106. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting they'd most likely include a lightening port to 3.5mm dongle, which would cost more than the 3.5mm jack in the phone.

      If they simply change the socket shape to something smaller and more waterproof, I'm good with that. I can put a cheap and light adapter onto all of my existing headphones and life will continue unchanged. A thin, waterproof phone is highly desirable - I once killed a high-end phone by falling into a river on my mountain bike, and I hate the faff of having to keep my phone in a waterproof case when I'm hiking or out on my road bike in showery weather (it always rains in Wales!)..

      The Galaxy S7 is waterproof and HAS a standard headphone jack..... it ain't those holes that are the problem.

    107. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would seem that a relatively cheap mp3 player would make more sense for cycling near rivers or in the rain as the total loss would be lower in the case of an accident. Audio quality might be a bit lower, though. Or use Bluetooth earphones and have the phone itself packed in a waterproof container that allows touchscreen use.

    108. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Class D refers to a type of analog amplifucation using a switch mode power supply. Whilst many call it digital it's analog.

    109. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they simply change the socket shape to something smaller and more waterproof, I'm good with that.

      My phone has a 3.5mm jack, and is IPX7 rated (water-resistant to one meter).

    110. Re: cost reduction by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if I try to watch a youtube video with bluetooth I have audio lag issues.

    111. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, on audiophile equipment, they sound great. Bass is bassier, warm tones are warmer, and grooves are groovier.

      Except you're still listening to them in a noisy environment on a pair of cheap-ass headphones, probably earbuds.

      Let me say this in clear terms for you, so you understand:

      YOU ARE NOT GETTING AUDIOPHILE QUALITY SOUND NO MATTER HOW FUCKING FANCY YOUR MP3s ARE.

      The only way you're getting audiophile quality sound out of a mobile device playing mp3s is if you are in a completely silent room with ridiculously expensive, "studio quality" open-backed headphones.

      Double blind tests have also shown that 320 kbps mp3s are statistically indistinguishable from the sound of a garbage disposal in typical "mobile listening" scenarios, on even high-end headphones.

      This whining about "audio quality" is ridiculous. If you care about audio quality, rather than just care about seeming to care about audio quality, the presence of bluetooth in your listening path is far less of an issue than controlling interference and garbage noise from the environment around you, and having a decent amplifier to power your high-quality headphones.

    112. Re: cost reduction by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      It's unlikely that we will ever see a smartphone that works properly while wet. Capacitive touchscreens and water are not a good mix.

    113. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 1

      The Sony Z4 Tablet, which is waterproof (IP 65/68), has a waterproof jack and micro-USB connector, and is 6,1mm thin. Is that still too much for you?

      So which is it; IP65 or IP68? They are VERY different standards when it comes to "water resistance".

      6.1 mm, let's see: That's .240 inches (roughly a quarter-inch). The iPhone 6s Plus is 7.3mm TOTAL; so yes, it is a full 1.2mm thinner than the current iPhone.

      HOWEVER, I challenge that "IP65/68" rating. I was looking-up the dimensions, and just randomly picked a site in my search. But as I went down through the specs, looking for the "IP" rating, I came across a comment by "Phillip" that read:

      Don't try to submerse into water even for 5 minutes. It is not water proof or even resistance. if you look at the warranty card. There is a disclaimer. The water proof is not even better than Z3 tablet. I tried it.

      So, I seriously doubt that IP68 rating, and maybe it doesn't even make the IP65 cut.

      Plus, it looks like Sony has (no surprise) been piling on the Asterisks around their "Waterproof" claims (and some would say, outright lying) for its mobile devices in general, and apparently has been forced to pull ads and backpedal regarding those claims.

      BTW, someone who is a diver once told me that a "3-meter" rating on a watch does NOT mean you can take something diving to 12 feet. Because everytime you wave your arm around, you temporarily increase the pressure to several times what you would experience in a "static" depth test (hence the "carefully lowered into a container of water condition in Sony's test). So, a "3-Meter" rating basically means you can have it splashed with water.

      But notice that Sony also stipulated "non-operating". I would bet that means "with no battery". Of course, that changes a LOT. Plus I would bet that Sony uses DISTILLED water (which is non-ionic) for their testing.

      Bottom line: NOT IMPRESSED.

    114. Re:cost reduction by q4Fry · · Score: 1

      Aren't you the guy who told everybody two threads up that this is idle, click-baity speculation? If so, why are you suddenly all about defending the branded adapters?

      A couple stories ago, I read one of your posts saying that you don't only post on Apple stories, but somehow it's only the Apple ones where I notice.

    115. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Aren't you the guy who told everybody two threads up that this is idle, click-baity speculation? If so, why are you suddenly all about defending the branded adapters?

      A couple stories ago, I read one of your posts saying that you don't only post on Apple stories, but somehow it's only the Apple ones where I notice.

      I admit I first got sucked-into the speculation; but later thought that this was really all just FUD.

      Also, not "defending" branded adaptors; just speculating on them.

      Like most Slashdotters, I DO post most frequently on the topics that interest me personally; but I also occasionally post (or moderate) on other articles as well.

    116. Re:cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a waterproof case you might be interested in. It's called a Ziploc bag.

    117. Re:cost reduction by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are waterproof 3.5 mm jacks; but they are all necessarily much bigger (in all dimensions) than the non-waterproof kind (which are already almost too "thick" for current smartphones).

      That would be a good reason if it weren't wrong.

    118. Re:cost reduction by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are waterproof 3.5 mm jacks; but they are all necessarily much bigger (in all dimensions) than the non-waterproof kind (which are already almost too "thick" for current smartphones).

      That would be a good reason if it weren't wrong.

      Citation? I can provide at least one manufacturer's examples, with dimensional drawings. And no, I didn't cherry-pick. I just picked the first one I found that had dimensional drawings.

      Let's see you do the same.

    119. Re:cost reduction by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Was it the first iMac ? Apple removed the non-standard serial ports, and the non-standard floppy drive. All replaced with standard USB ports.
      ADB was good riddance, but floppy sorely missed as USB flash drives were still expensive. Apple did it anyway. They wanted to stand out.
      Removing the optical drive from laptops is a no-brainer due to weight. Ethernet was not removed before fast wifi was ubiquitous.

      So what you're saying, in history Apple replaced all things which were obsolete and superseded by solutions which were technical better. So effectively in this case they are going completely against history.

      They aren't saying what would Steve do, they are forcing hardware lock-in.

    120. Re:cost reduction by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      If this was an issue the jack in the Galaxy S5 wouldn't be smaller than the one in the iPhone 6. There is zero technical reason the jacks can't be the same size, and all jacks used in phones currently are of a type of semi sealed design anyway. But carry on believing!

    121. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wet touchscreens can be done. https://youtu.be/_vK0K0oNmzs

    122. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buds are the worst kind of headphones. You've no idea what you're talking about, dude.

    123. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You audiophiles are probably the douchiest nerd hobbyists known to mankind!

    124. Re: cost reduction by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Camping, swimming, diving, etc?

      I took my camera scuba diving with me, went well past its depth rating and got some great pictures, without any loss to the camera. Why can't I buy a phone like that? I would pay $$$$ for a phone I didn't have to worry about getting wet.

      http://www.bestbuy.com/site/fu...

      Took it to 100 ft..no issue at all.

      It isn't like waterproofing is hard, just put the connectors behind sealing covers, or have no connectors and charge with wireless technology.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    125. Re:cost reduction by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Kyocera Brigadier...unfortunately I lost mine to a cracked screen.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    126. Re:cost reduction by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Read the username, he is always apologetic about anything Apple does wrong. My assumption is that macs4all is a paid employee of Apple and doesn't want to admit it.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    127. Re:cost reduction by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I use a set of these with my Nexus when working out, they work great.

      https://smile.amazon.com/gp/pr...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    128. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I simply don't understand your or anyone else's fascination with paper thin phones. Don't even use the weight excuse. You're perfectly fine with adding a two pound adapter to a ten ounce phone so... ok that was a bad British joke. But seriously the argument that a 3mm thick phone is somehow superior to a 4mm thick phone is ludicrous in my mind.

    129. Re:cost reduction by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Someone who thinks a small fraction of Apple users listen to music? Yeah, the iTunes store is really hurting from all these users who don't listen to music on their headphones.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    130. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you haven't compared typical Shure earbuds to any of the bluetooth buds. The sound quality is terrible because low power bluetooth doesn't have a lot of bandwidth to spare so the data gets compressed. They primarily target voice audio because it is easy and predictable to compress.

      Bluetooth 5.0 devices will probably bridge the gap but that remains to be seen.

    131. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude. There are metric shit tonnes of dirt cheap Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB, and other types of headphones on Amazon, eBay, and Alibaba. If you "have" to go cycling with your expensive Shure headphones, that's you're own fault.

    132. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you can see it in the dark, dumbass.

    133. Re:cost reduction by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      FWIW, I plug my iPhone into a charger and expensive headphones every workday. It would be a pain to change that. (It'd also be a pain to switch over to Android, but that's a one-time pain.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    134. Re:cost reduction by aphelion_rock · · Score: 1

      and they save a whole whopping nickel off each unit. move a few million units and it's easily 100k+.

      The savings are not on the cost of manufacture, the savings are in the warranty.
      I used to work in a repair shop back in the days of walkmans, the single biggest repair job with these things, despite all the delicate electronics on-board, was re-soldering the headphone jack which had broken from the circuit board from all the tugging on the headphone lead.
      There must be a significant cost to the manufacturer on repairing these items whilst they are under warranty.

    135. Re:cost reduction by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.

      So? After all, it's a phone - bandwidth limited to about 4 kHz. It's not like it's a hi-fi system for playing music on. You're listening to something against the background noise in the office, building or street.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    136. Re: cost reduction by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Are you terminally stupid? I just stated the industry-required minimum time for IP66, 67, and 68 - 30 fucking minutes MINIMUM. IP65 is less at 15 minutes.

      I know how to follow standards - you apparently can't even be bothered to read and understand one.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    137. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first number in the Ingres Protection rating 6,denotes the system is pimptight

    138. Re:cost reduction by Calydor · · Score: 1

      That argument would have worked fifteen years ago. Today, phones are MP3 players, movie players, video conference systems ... As the poster above says, if image and sound gets out of sync on bluetooth (full disclosure: never used a bluetooth headset of any kind so I don't know from personal experience) that is something that a lot of people get very annoyed about.

      Have you tried watching a movie where the sound is out of sync? Maybe a dubbed movie where the spoken words don't fit the lip movements?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    139. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you haven't compared typical Shure earbuds to any of the bluetooth buds.

      Yep, you're right. Since TGI Friday's food is better than McDonald's, it must qualify as Michelin 5-star gourmet cooking.

    140. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are, of course, completely fucking wrong.

      Leaving aside the dust ratings for now, since they're all 6's, let's look at what the various moisture protection ratings actually mean.

      For IP65, it requires protection from low pressure water projected from a nozzle with a 6.3mm diameter opening in any direction, for a duration of 3 minutes, from a distance of 3 meters.

      For IP66, it requires protection from water projected in powerful jets from a nozzle with a 12.5mm diameter opening in any direction, for a duration of 3 minutes, from a distance of 3 meters.

      For IP67, it requires protection from immersion in water with a depth of up to 1 meter (or 3.2ft) for up to 30 mins.

      For IP68, it requires protection from immersion in water with a depth of more than 1 meter, and the manufacturer itself must supply the precise depth and length of time the device can be immersed.

      A given rating does not, in any way, imply that the device has also passed other "lower-numbered" ratings. IP68 does not automatically imply IP66, for example.

      So, let's count the ways you're wrong:
      1) Your asserted minimum times are flat out wrong;
      2) You assert that there are minimum times for a rating where the IEC explicitly leaves determination of time & depth to the manufacturer;
      3) You imply that the scale is some sort of progressively higher level of protection, when that's also explicitly not the case;
      4) Despite explictly acknowledging that the IEC leaves determination of time & depth to the manufacturer, you argue that there are some sort of IEC-defined minimums that must be adhered to.

      Did I miss any? I'm not sure. It's hard keeping track of how up your own ass you are. For somebody who opines self-righteously about how people can't be bothered to read & understand standards, you seem curiously ignorant of the standards you're making factual assertions about.

    141. Re:cost reduction by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Dubbed movies - see them all the time. Sub-titled ones too. It's not a big problem. Video conferencing always goes out of sync, regardless of the hardware in use. Network latency is always a problem. If I need to listen to an audiobook on an MP3 player - I use an MP3 player.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    142. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here is how we now know that all you do is google stuff. You found this page when you googled: http://www.budind.com/blog/2014/02/the-mysteries-of-ip-rated-enclosures-explained.

      But the information is incorrect. Actual standards are as the other AC indicates.

      So you have now outed yourself as a Google "know it all" not as someone who actually knows anything.

    143. Re: cost reduction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citation needed.

      Ongoing history of Music with Alan Cross talked about comparing mp3 to records and mentioned that once it's pointed out the difference mp3's cause compared to analog, its quite noticeable to the regular ear.

      Just that most people of newer generations have never heard pure analog versions in high quality to know what they're missing.

    144. Re: cost reduction by Khyber · · Score: 1

      You're entirely wrong. Try again when equipment you sell has to pass standards testing for IP ratings.

      You're looking at an outdated site with way outdated standards. I'm holding the actual book with IEC standards as of 2015, which explicitly state time lengths.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    145. Re:cost reduction by m0nr0via · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

  3. Apple by Sir+Lurkalot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck Apple.

    1. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      For some reason I think of Lily Tomlin, and replace a few words in the sketch:

      "We don't care. We don't have to: We're APPLE."

    2. Re:Apple by Falos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Can you imagine the number of times the phrase "they'll buy it anyway" was spoken during all the stages involved?

    3. Re:Apple by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Can you imagine the number of times the phrase "I'll buy it anyway" is thought by their mindless customers?

    4. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! I paid to see that!

    5. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple just lost a massive lawsuit for e-books fraud and is being forced to bleed ca$h and only time will tell if it ding's their stock. Somehow through the media and world+dog somebody assumed they will open-source their audio connection to the walled garden of digital audio they control? One can also begin assuming an analog audio connection that has existed since before 8-tracks is "unfriendly" to content providers because that is what apple is trying to restrict. But as to what the poster opened with... Well said.

    6. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only a $400 million settlement, Apple won't even notice it. Tim Cook uses $400 million to wipe his butt every day after his morning constitutional.

    7. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm laughing at the Android fangirls on this forum screeching like drama queens over a product they will never buy.

      They all bash Apple but if it wasn't for Apple there would be no Android smartphones.

      Apple proved it could be done. Everything after is just a copy.

    8. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Apple Watch?

    9. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. But a stupid move is a stupid move regardless...

    10. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      idk, seems like they could just print up tshirts instead.

    11. Re: Apple by ZipK · · Score: 1

      Tim Cook uses $400 million to wipe his butt every day after his morning constitutional.

      Not true. Tim Cook has his manservant take care of this.

    12. Re:Apple by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. You know that smartphones existed long before the iPhone right? Both Palm and MS-based. Both very usable. They just weren't suitable for texting and driving and games weren't as cool due to lack of mobile 3D accelerators. Capacitive touch screens weren't cheap enough until about the time the iPhone was released as well. The iPhone was evolutionary, not revolutionary. We'd have Android regardless.

    13. Re:Apple by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Actually, Android did it first.

      Apple hasn't even done it yet.

      The Moto Z, ad the LeEco (a high-end Chinese brand) Le2/Le Max2/Le3Pro (3 phones!) all lack a headphone jack.

      Once again, Apple is a follower, not an innovator. They weren't even the first to release phones without a headphone jack!

    14. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you can't actually prove that because history tells another story.

    15. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the symbian ones. S60 and S80 may have been clunky and a bit shit, but there were more Nokia smartphones out there than anyone else.

    16. Re:Apple by maciejkt · · Score: 1

      Android did exist before the iPhone. As a Blackberry clone. Think about it.

    17. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice rating: Fuck Apple (Score:5, Insightful)

    18. Re: Apple by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      Well, you paid for the banana...

    19. Re:Apple by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It's actually a clever bit of marketing spin. Their phones are pretty low end, equivalent to a 3 year old Android but they make out that they are "revolutionary" and bleeding edge tech by removing "old fashioned" features like the headphone jack. Same with their laptops, the spec isn't great but look how modern it is with it's single USB port that does everything... And, er, those 90s style dongles I have to carry around...

      It's genius really. They figured out how to sell you something that is worse for more money.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    20. Re: Apple by adhdengineer · · Score: 2

      no, he has an army of apple fanbois willing to lick it clean for him

    21. Re:Apple by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine the number of times the phrase "I'll buy it anyway" is thought by their mindless customers?

      Considering it's the Android phones without headphone jacks selling like hot cakes - who's mindless?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    22. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why was this modded 4 Insightful? The level of discourse here has taken a real dip. An "Insightful" "Fuck Apple" would have elaborated on their reasons.

      On an "Insightful" note, who gives a shit about the headphone jack? Headphones will come with the new phone that work with it. If you're spending $650-$1000 on a phone, you can probably afford fancier headphones should you so desire. What's the big fucking deal? Your old headphones won't work? So what...they have your ear funk on them anyhow. Doesn't work with an android phone? so what...someone handed my girlfriend an android phone over the weekend to take a picture and no one could figure out how to take a picture on it...not even the owner. Why try and make something compatible with a competitor who can't even get the basics right? If you need analog audio so bad, get your LP's out of your parent's garage hipster.

    23. Re:Apple by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      Fuck Apple.

      You weren't modded down to -5! Surprise

      What I'd like to be able to do on /. is, on threads about Apple have the normal scoring reversed, so that -5 troll/flamebait/etc gets changed to +5 insightful, because thats usually what happens once the fanbois arrive and start using their modpoints to engineer the world into their own vision.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    24. Re:Apple by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft proved it could be done far earlier than Apple. Apple didn't invent the smartphone, they improved it.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    25. Re: Apple by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      So the Samsung i300 and i500 PalmOS phones I had were hallucinations? Or the handful of Windows CE smartphones that were around? Or the Treo?

      I'd say your history is full of lies.

    26. Re:Apple by ogdenk · · Score: 1

      Nah, some of us actually made the mistake of buying one.... once. Never again. Accessories shouldn't have to be blessed by Apple and cost twice as much. And I like things like USB OTG and Bluetooth that is actually usable. And being able to interact with the world outside of the Apple ecosystem. Being able to run things like emulators without relying on jailbreaking and flaky Cydia crap is nice as well. And real access to the filesystem.

      I want a handheld computing platform not a locked-down, shiny, overpriced, boutique appliance for rich kids and hipsters. Unfortunately I have to support a lot of people sucked into that ecosystem and this type of crap makes my life more difficult.

    27. Re:Apple by Briareos · · Score: 1

      Eh, fucking an Avocado might at least do something for your hair and skin...

      --

      "I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole

    28. Re: Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, he has an army of apple fanbois willing to lick it clean for him

      Actually, he has an army of apple fanbois who force bungholes like you to do it - prepare to be picked up for your duty tomorrow 9 AM.

    29. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not how it works. I work at a consumer products company and user experience is now a key differentiator because of companies like Apple. This will be a two step process:

      First, the jack will be removed from prototype A, opening it up to be thinner while meeting other requirements. Then the prototype will be made larger to provide a similar experience when holding the phone in hand.

      Then, the team members will be asked to use prototype A for three months. Then they will be asked how inconvenient it was to giving up the standard headphone jack adapters when plugging into car aux port, adapters if you misplaced previous gen head phones, etc) when using prototype A, and whether they would personally trade the lack of a standard jack for the slightly larger form factor (better readability, more screen area, better typing).

      I question every previous decision when designing the next generation consumer product, because customer's expectations, technology, competition, all have changed and the answers to the same questions are often different. I'm glad Apple is looking at this and think they will get to a decision that I'm happy with in the long term. They seemed to have made good decisions in the past - USB C (although too few connectors), dropping floppy drive, etc.

  4. User-hostile and stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Never stopped Apple before.

    1. Re:User-hostile and stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One button mouse.

    2. Re:User-hostile and stupid by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      ROUND one-button mouse.

    3. Re:User-hostile and stupid by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Never stopped Apple before.

      Yes. The summary lists all sorts of reasons why this is bad for the consumer and neglects to state that being good for the consumer is not exactly Apple's prime motivation. Apple isn't going to care about a list of reasons a hundred miles long. They know people will buy their stuff no matter what. It could be a cow pie, but if it was polished and sleek and glossy and hip, and it said "Apple" the fans would buy it and love it.

    4. Re:User-hostile and stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never stopped Apple before.

      More like, isn't it what Apple precisely stands for...?

      Some of the cool kids are finally waking up to it? Good for them.

    5. Re:User-hostile and stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. That's the company that removed the floppy drive and replaced it with writable CD rom from their desktops (way before universal internet or USB drives were "the norm").

    6. Re:User-hostile and stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never stopped Apple before.

      [...]They know people will buy their stuff no matter what. It could be a cow pie, but if it was polished and sleek and glossy and hip, and it said "Apple" the fans would buy it and love it.

      Next out of Cooks Brain: The iPet iRock. And yes, it is nothing more than a polished rock with the Apple logo etched into it. That's it. 399.99 retail.

      Btw, Apple even stole their name and logo from the Beatles. (The Beatles had a record company called Apple Corp. Get it?) The Beatles just never cared to litigate.

    7. Re:User-hostile and stupid by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Apple cares about the customers experience. If they don't deliver, people don't buy their stuff.

      Jobs had a remarkable ability to tell what customers would want but didn't know it yet. He screwed up a lot, but he succeeded big when he succeeded. I don't know that there's people at Apple now with that ability. It's possible that someone high up is trying to do like Jobs without having the ability.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    8. Re:User-hostile and stupid by chipschap · · Score: 1

      Apple cares about the customers experience. If they don't deliver, people don't buy their stuff.

      You are completely right. But the unexpressed part of that is, Apple delivers what they think/know Apple buyers will want. It seems to me that by and large this is things like the feeling of support (the "Genius Bar" which I have not quite found to be populated by geniuses), sleek appearance, and hip products that convey status because they look ultra-cool and especially because they cost a lot.

      One place where hipness and coolness intersected with innovative technology was Siri, and there are certainly others. But Apple is in this for the bottom line (like just about every corporation), and there is a very specific "Apple" culture. Headphone jacks may be functional but being cool is more important, and if Apple makes a slim phone that only works with a $250 Apple wireless headset, Apple fans will buy the phone and the headset and maybe even some $50 Apple branded ear cushions.

    9. Re:User-hostile and stupid by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You're overestimating the importance of Apple fans. However many of them there are, they'll buy the stuff anyway. Apple needs to appeal to people who aren't Apple fans, since they are potential but not certain customers. Similarly, my brother is a serious baseball fan, and finds that Major League Baseball frequently does things that aren't in the spirit of the game as he sees it. From a business point of view, MLB doesn't care. They've got his business. They do that stuff to appeal to casual fans, since there's a lot more of them.

      In my limited personal experience, Apple provides excellent support. The numbers from Consumer Reports suggest that this isn't just me. The Genius Bars are indeed not populated by geniuses, but they aren't populated by uncaring people who don't speak English well and go from a script either. (Not around here, anyway.)

      Personally, if Apple comes out with phones without jacks, I'm going to quick buy me one of the current SEs with the jack, which to Apple means I'm spending about $100 less on their stuff than I would have otherwise. I'm going to try to wait until a phone with a jack reappears, much like I waited for something smaller than the 6 and 6S came out again. (They're too big for my use.) If they keep leaving out the jack, I'll have to consider moving to Android, which will be a pain.

      I buy iPhones because they suit my purposes very well, and nothing else does better. When they stop serving my purposes, I won't buy them. Simple.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  5. Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Host by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason they're ditching the headphone jack is because the thickness of the jack assembly is getting in the way of their desire to make the phone thinner. I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards.

  6. Vote with your wallet by Jack_the_Tripper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, just don't buy a phone without a headphone jack...how's that for democratizing?

    1. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How that PS/2 port working out for you?

    2. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, that works for a little while. Until all the other manufacturers do the same. Im guessing you will say "So, just dont buy a phone" then?

    3. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple has a bigger wallet, their vote wins.
      so much for democracy.

    4. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Libertarianism is stupid because it ignores 1) the high cost of entry into nearly every single market; 2) it's easier to manipulate people into changing their wishes than it is to provide for them.

    5. Re:Vote with your wallet by sexconker · · Score: 2

      All the motherboards I buy have PS/2 ports, and they work very well. Even in the cases where it's a combination mouse/keyboard port.

    6. Re:Vote with your wallet by PRMan · · Score: 1

      The two on the motherboard I bought last Black Friday? Great. Thanks for asking.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    7. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3) It assumes everyone will act in good faith 4) I believe most Libertarians secretly know their ideal will result in anarchy, and they fervently believe they'll be in the winning faction, aka, partaking freely of the inevitable raping, pillaging, and murdering that such chaos always brings. (There are so many real world examples, anyone asking for a citation isn't living on Earth)

      Put another way, Libertarianism is like wishing for the zombie apocalypse because of having Dary-Rick-Michonne fantasies. The reality is often quite different from the dream. It's attractive to young readers of Ayn Rand, but eventually they grow up and realize it's all bullshit. Ironically this crap helps prevent a lot of people from voting third party.

    8. Re:Vote with your wallet by dcollins · · Score: 1

      It's not democratizing at all. Consumers are not the same as citizens. Consumption is not the same as voting.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    9. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OR: Buy just the headphone jack, skip the phone, and make a powerful statement!

    10. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as consumers are given a choice it works, however that is not always the case. See the switch to HDMI, companies (content companies & hardware manufacturers) basically forced a switchover using standards organizations and legislation.

    11. Re:Vote with your wallet by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Vote all you want, but the iPhone crowd will still win the election while standing in line to buy new overpriced dongles.

    12. Re:Vote with your wallet by flopsquad · · Score: 1

      Consumers are not the same as citizens. Consumption is not the same as voting.

      Functionally, they are. "Voting with your wallet" is, at least for resource-constrained people (i.e. the vast majority of us), just about the purest form of voting there is. And I would argue this not only in the abstract/ontological "what is voting?" sense, but also the more practical "what does voting achieve?" sense.

      Especially for larger elections (let's take a US presidential for example), you almost certainly exert more political influence, in real terms, via the things you decide to purchase over a four year interval, than you exert by casting your one vote to influence the electoral college outcome in your one state.

      Tackling it from the other end: As citizens we are absolutely "consumers" of political "products." The air quotes are probably unnecessary there. Politics has always more or less been marketing, though perhaps it hasn't always been as pervasive and unabashed.

      --
      Nothing posted to /. has ever been legal advice, including this.
    13. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My IBM Model M is pretty happy with the PS/2 port on my latest motherboard (and that's not an energy efficient keyboard by any means), so I'd say it's working great.

    14. Re:Vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the motherboards I buy have PS/2 ports, and they work very well. Even in the cases where it's a combination mouse/keyboard port.

      All of the motherboards I have purchased recently have PS2 ports as well. They are getting hard to find, but I WILL NOT give up my IBM PS2 "M" keyboards.

  7. This is what passes for innovation by swb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is what passes for innovation when you run out of actual innovation.

    Sure, the engineering is perhaps more elegant and you get rid of a few creaky parts like an amplifier and a jack, but what's the payback for that? If we're lucky a few extra mm^3 of battery? A device even thinner or smaller in some way, features most people don't want?

    But this is what passes for innovation when you don't have ideas, and somebody made the fucking spreadsheet work, indicating it would be some tiny percentage cheaper to build and there would be a short-term bonus in terms of selling dongles and new headphones.

    So really the only actual innovation is *financial* innovation -- squeezing a few more bucks out of end users and creating some licensing deals for "made for iPhone headphones" but not any innovation that anyone seriously thinks improves anything.

    And you can bet that the dongles will be ass-ugly lumps sticking out the bottom of the phone, just asking to break the jack. Maybe somebody 2 years from now will finally get the green light to produce an Apple-approved adapter that makes the phone slightly longer but has a separate lightning and headphone jacks. But you can bet it will be a long delay before they approve it so they can capture every damn dollar of dongle spending.

    1. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what passes for innovation when you run out of actual innovation.

      Apparently "innovation" is when you leave 100 year old technology in place when the market has moved on to bluetooth headsets

      short-term bonus in terms of selling dongles and new headphones.

      It sounds more and more like you've never actually heard of bluetooth before

    2. Re:This is what passes for innovation by nfras · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I had mod points I would mod you up.
      My phone contract expires in about 8 weeks. With a contract renewal I will get a new phone. I have a bunch of criteria that I have around what I need but being 1mm thinner than the previous model isn't on my list. With Apple having issues with bending phones with the last release I would be tempted to think that unless they make the whole phone bendable a thinner phone will simply mean a fragile phone.
      Removing the audio jack is design wank. A bunch of "creative types" has decided that they want a thinner, sleeker phone and that it would be cool not to have the audio jack. Marketing thinks it's great because they get to sell lots of Beats by Dr Dre headphones at vastly inflated prices. Customer think it's a con because they have wired headsets and are still smarting from having to replace their expensive Bose speakers because of the Lighting Connector. Change for the sake of change.

      --
      You call me a pedant? I prefer the term "correct"
    3. Re: This is what passes for innovation by bursch-X · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Bluetooth sucks balls. It's highly prone to electromagnetical interference (of which there is plenty in a smartphone and all the places you take it to), it's laggy as fuck and I don't want to wear a radio transmitter next to my head.

      --
      There are two rules for success:
      1. Never tell everything you know.
    4. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on. Cut to the chase. Apple is dead without Jobs just like the last time they were without Jobs. Except this time there is absolutely no chance of him coming back(*).

      * Zombie Jobs doesn't count

    5. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Spoken like someone who is either deaf or who hasn't ever used Bluetooth headphones. There's really no comparison unless you're in a noisy environment or just listening to speech.

      Also I don't want to have to fucking charge my headphones every few hours. Or press a sequence of buttons to re-pair them when I switch to a new device. Or waste phone battery powering a Bluetooth radio.

    6. Re:This is what passes for innovation by BronsCon · · Score: 5, Informative

      The market hasn't moved on to bluetooth headsets. A segment of the market uses bluetooth headsets (myself included) but I'd hardly say we've moved on to them. They're great for making calls or listening to music in noisy environments where difference a quality pair of headphones makes can't be heard anyway, but bluetooth uses very heavily lossy compression, unless you're lucky enough to have a phone and headset that both support Apt-X, in which case you only lose quality to re-compression. A good pair of wired headphones simply can not be beat, though; no re-compression, no signal loss, no dropouts due to interference when everyone else on the bus or train has their own headset and half of them have a smartwatch, all using the very narrow sliver of spectrum available to bluetooth and all within range of each other.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    7. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, bluetooth.

      A great idea: let's jam hundreds of devices into the 2.4ghz spectrum, so that when you have jus a handful of teens listening to music on their headphones in the lobby, the free WiFi goes to shit, and important business calls on handsfree devices drop like rocks when execs enter the room.

      Yes, a brilliant idea.

      I suppose you like party line based phone service too.

      No, some things really shouldn't be jammed into the 2.4ghz spectrum. Part of being an intelligent consumer is being mindful of the consequences of a technology. When enough things as are jammed on there, nothing works. Be more selective on what gobbles up the local airwave spectrum. It results in a better user experience for everyone. I know it is hard to decide to not be a douche, but please try.

    8. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jobs was the king of getting rid of older technology he didn't like in his devices even if it was a pain for consumers at the time and more expensive. He would've approved of this kind of move.

    9. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

    10. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also Bluetooth security is a joke. It's literally protected by a PIN. Anyone can snoop on your calls. Or they can steal your pictures off your phone without even getting that close to you.

    11. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a contract renewal I will get a new phone.

      Will you, really? Or is it just a chance to BUY another phone in dozens of instalments (sneakily hidden in an excessive data plan), ultimately far more expensive than paying upfront from an independent store or straight from the manufacturer?

    12. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dongle's are dumb. I type this on a Lenovo laptop w/ 32GB RAM -- it has four USB-ports, 1394 Firewire port, VGA port, 4-in-1 SD Card Reader (SD/SDHC/SDXC/MMC slot), Express Card reader, and a smart card reader, fingerprint scanner, ethernet port, and removable DVD drive (can be swapped with extra HDD/SDD).

      And of course, it also has a standard headphone jack -- I have no need for dongles.

    13. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Kjella · · Score: 1

      This is what passes for innovation when you run out of actual innovation.

      Macs have been notorious for using weird new ports, kicking legacy technology to the curb and using non-standard parts and form factors for decades. Sometimes it eventually becomes standard like UEFI or dropping the floppy drive, most of the time it remains an Apple niche like Firewire, Thunderbolt or MagSafe. Heck, the guy famously wouldn't even use ordinary screws on the Apple. Selling proprietary dongles and accessories is not some new thing they started with after Jobs died, maybe that's what they have left but this would be right up Jobs' alley. And YMMV, but I'm not disappointed by the innovation on my iPhone SE. The contrast to an iPhone 4 (I had an Android phone inbetween) is rather stunning. And I expect it to get updates longer...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    14. Re:This is what passes for innovation by jrumney · · Score: 2

      but bluetooth uses very heavily lossy compression, unless you're lucky enough to have a phone and headset that both support Apt-X

      apt-X is also heavily lossy compression. Slightly less heavily lossy than SBC, but at the around 350kpbs bandwidth you get on a typical Bluetooth audio channel it is around the same quality as a 160bps MP3 file.

    15. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Moof123 · · Score: 2

      Go contract free. We shaved down to $35 a month for two phones, but both were purchased outright. I minimize could buy new phones yearly compared to what most folks pay for their monthly contract. Though in reality we funnelled the savings into a little more retirement savings. Not sexy, but neither is working well into your 60's in the tech industry.

    16. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Bluetooth and other wireless headsets suck.

      Until you can magically vacuum energy out of the air, you're going to have to deal with dead batteries in headsets and your headset dying and needing a recharge when you need it the most.

    17. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Batteries/charge? That's your complaint about wireless headphones? Geesh. Grasping at straws there.

    18. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I ride the train in the techiest of tech meccas, usually at least half a dozen of us on there with our bluetooth headphones and FitBits, and I can't say it's been a problem. It's a train. It's noisy. The imperceptible interference you may get from some other bluetooth device (guess what, most interference comes from devices that are MORE powerful than other headphones, like microwaves, TV's, etc.) doesn't make a lick of difference in that environment.

      90% of the people I see on the train that are using wired headphones are using whatever free earbuds came with their phones, or worse Beats, so I'm not convinced the progressive audiophile could ever tell the difference between wired and unwired on a train, even with noise-cancelling headphones.

      At home, maybe it's a slightly different matter, but not much. With Bluetooth 3 and 4, and perhaps adding in AAC, a vast majority of people that don't work at Skywalker Sound will be hard pressed to perceive any difference. If you're listening on a phone you're already compromising your pristine music by digitizing it in the first place.

      Plus I can dance around naked throughout my whole house without having to carry my phone between my buttcheeks.

    19. Re:This is what passes for innovation by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that, I honestly wasn't sure. That would seemingly further support the point I was attempting to make, so really; thanks.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    20. Re:This is what passes for innovation by aXis100 · · Score: 1

      It's a massively valid complaint to me. I have owned several wireless headphones before and charging is a real annoyance.

      The only reason I tolerate my current wireless PC headphones is I built a custom docking station with induction charger, but that's not realistic option with mobile devices.

    21. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "It's highly prone to electromagnetical interference"
      I can count on my hands the number of times I've had interference. "it's laggy as fuck" not that it matters most of the time (laggy audio is only a problem if there's also video, but most devices delay the video to hide the audio anyway), Apt-X low latency gets audio latency down to unnoticeable levels.

      "I don't want to wear a radio transmitter next to my head"
      1. It functions as a receiver most of the time
      2. A bluetooth transmitter is vastly lower power than holding your phone to your head.
      3. There's no evidence that the RF transmission power of a phone has any negative side effect, let alone the much smaller output of a wireless headset.

    22. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Maow · · Score: 1

      Also I don't want to have to fucking charge my headphones every few hours. Or press a sequence of buttons to re-pair them when I switch to a new device. Or waste phone battery powering a Bluetooth radio.

      The first two complaints I sympathize with, but question -- is it actually more power consuming to power a few milliwatts of BT radio vs sending an amplified signal down a set of headphone wires?

      I'm guessing it might be more efficient to send the BT signal to the headset but really don't know.

      Of course, if BT radio is on all the time, even when not in a phone call, it's going to change the equation but I'm mostly curious about usage during phone calls.

    23. Re:This is what passes for innovation by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

      You should listen to a good pair of bluetooth cans with AptX support. It's quite remarkable.

      I've owned ER4s, Grado SR-325is, and even the legendary AKG K1000 driven by a home built current source amp... and I can absolutely tolerate decent BT headphones with the right codec.

      --
      A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
    24. Re:This is what passes for innovation by topologicalanomaly47 · · Score: 1

      Innovation means replacing it with something better. I don't see anything better replacing it. Bluetooth is already there and has it's limitations. Lightshit is already there so all that digital crap talk is already there. Where is the advantage for you the iphone buyer to have this port removed?

    25. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is, but then again bluetooth works just as well without removing the headphones jack.

    26. Re: This is what passes for innovation by bazorg · · Score: 1

      Harsh, but true.
      I use a Nokia HB 121 bluetooth receiver which suits the way I want to use my gadgets (without the radio being against my head), but it is more complicated than just plugging the jack to the phone. If find the sound quality to be good enough compromise for the convenience of leaving the phone on the table/pocket/etc but in absolute terms it does not sound as clean as a direct connection.

    27. Re:This is what passes for innovation by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      If you're listening on a phone you're already compromising your pristine music by digitizing it in the first place.

      Unless you have a tape deck or vinyl player, practically all music is digital to start with.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    28. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you hold one to your head when you talk on the phone?

    29. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't thought this through. I've a pair of BT headphones that also have a 3.5mm socket (and supplied cable) to plug into your phone/whatever should the battery die. So mine AT WORST behave the same as wired headphones.

      On the flip side, with their own inbuilt battery they're not a drain on the phone. I'm going to guesstimate here that powering the BT radio comes in less than powering the amp/jack/headphones. Could be wrong though.

      An hour's charge good for a dozen listening. Suits me fine - never ran out.

    30. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Maritz · · Score: 1

      It sounds more and more like you've never actually heard of bluetooth before

      Bluetooth is OK. The headphones have drawbacks. Running on battery and therefore not being very loud, and being susceptible to interference. Pairing can be a pain.

      In most scenarios it's easier to plug a fucking cable in.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    31. Re: This is what passes for innovation by Maritz · · Score: 1

      and I don't want to wear a radio transmitter next to my head.

      Why?

      Radio is non-ionizing. The photons are much less energetic than the ones you see with.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    32. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Maritz · · Score: 1

      You really think you've seen behind the curtain, or something? With this flash of insight?

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    33. Re:This is what passes for innovation by olof_the_viking · · Score: 1

      Hahaha!
      Future vision: headsets have large antennae for wireless charging and everyone wears a tin foil hat to protect brain from radiation.

    34. Re:This is what passes for innovation by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've actually had a phone without a headphone jack for a couple of years and can confirm this. I bought a "Pluggy Lock" that locks into the headphone socket and gives you a loop to attach a strap to. I have arthritis in my hands so the strap saves the phone from falling on the floor every now and then, but of course means I can't use the socket for headphones unless I remove it.

      It's a pain. I have a Bluetooth receiver for headphones (Sony) and the sound quality is okay for audio books but music sucks. Charging it is annoying too, especially as it can't go 8+ hours on a long flight. Occasionally I have to remove the Pluggy Lock for some reason, but at least I have the option. Unfortunately most good phones available in the west don't have strap loops any more, so I have to live with this.

      It would be 10x worse if the headphone socket was combined with the charging/data port. No strap, no charging and listening at the same time (essential on long flights).

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    35. Re: This is what passes for innovation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Also Bluetooth security is a joke. It's literally protected by a PIN.

      Some implementations ask you before granting access. The ones that don't aren't Bluetooth's fault, but the vendor's.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re:This is what passes for innovation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately most good phones available in the west don't have strap loops any more, so I have to live with this.

      Buy a Ringke Slim case, drill two holes in it, attach strap to holes, attach case to phone. Cheap!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    37. Re:This is what passes for innovation by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      If you look carefully it already has a strap holder built in on many models. Shame they don't do a case for the 6P.

      Hopefully my next phone will have a headphone socket and a nice case with strap holder, or even better just build the damn strap holder into the body again. Often the eastern model of a phone has the strap loop and the western version doesn't.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    38. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAS NO ONE HERE LEARNED THE IMPORTANT LESSON??

      Every time you take out a headphone jack a Chinese employee dies!!

      Don't turn this into a meme! Stop the insanity!

      somebody stop THIS coward

    39. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bluetooth doesn't transmit raw 16-bit stereo, you do realize this, right?

      It's a step down in audio quality from a 3.5 mm jack, which does transmit 16-bit stereo (in an analog fashion).

      Bluetooth uses a lossy codec to achieve jamming the audio signal into the low bandwidth Bluetooth allows.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBC_(codec)

      It literally uses a worse, older codec than MP3. It uses a hack of the MP2 audio codec.

      Why would I want this?

    40. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Grasping at straws? It's a problem that I deal with for my wireless headset all the time.

    41. Re:This is what passes for innovation by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Hahaha!

      Future vision: headsets have large antennae for wireless charging and everyone wears a tin foil hat to protect brain from radiation.

      Then the headset will be too heavy, another (more minor) issue with headsets that need batteries.

  8. Form Factor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In part Apple is doing this to further reduce the size of their phones. Aren't they already thin enough?

    1. Re:Form Factor by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Apple are doing this because it is a scandalous outrage that people can just go buy any old pair of headphones, from anyone, and plug them into the iPhone. Now people will be using the lightning connector Applecans and getting that sweet DRM anti-piracy action. Maybe using unapproved headphones will invalidate your warranty..? I'm sure there's a few other ways to wring some blood from this stone.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  9. This is a great idea that saves me real money by JustNiz · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...since it alone ensures I will never buy an iPhone.

    1. Re:This is a great idea that saves me real money by chispito · · Score: 1

      ...since it alone ensures I will never buy an iPhone.

      I've been trying to tell people there isn't $400 difference between an iPhone (or Galaxy for that matter) and whatever bargain bin LG or Motorola you can get on Amazon.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
  10. Re:big whoop by Hylandr · · Score: 2

    the market will decide whether apple is right or not

    No it won't, the average consumer will have no clue until it's too late, in the meantime the rest of us will suffer or be forced to build our own phones / listening devices for music I already paid for, and still own the CD.

    --
    ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
  11. just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by hsmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No one will care in a year.

    1. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >ripping the requisite sensory medium out
      Oh, so like when they ripped the screens out.

    2. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except the reason no one cared about DVD drives going the way of the dodo was because the people who don't care about DVDs get their videos from the internet. Taking out an audio jack that, in one form or another, has been in use for the last 70 years won't fly the same way because there's nothing there to replace it realistically, Not without buying a dongle or changing your headphones, which is change for changes sake.

    3. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by Jarik+C-Bol · · Score: 2
      To quote some random person on the internet:

      "I was at my friends house, and asked to use a USB port to charge my cigarette(e-cig), but she was charging her book (kindle). The future is stupid."

      --
      I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
    4. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by unrtst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Taking out an audio jack that, in one form or another, has been in use for the last 70 years won't fly the same way because there's nothing there to replace it realistically,

      I think the move is uncalled for and I dislike it, but most people I know that use headphones regularly with their phones tend to go through them fairly quickly.

      Don't most phones ship with a pair of headphones, including the iPhone? Won't they just ship with a pair of lightening earbuds, so there won't be any real pain in the upgrade except for those edge cases where people have some fancy extra expensive headphones, which are probably not earbuds, so having an extra dongle won't make all that much of a difference to those people.

      There's not much downside for Apple. They'll still sell phones; The phones will ship with earbuds to keep most happy enough; They'll also sell new beats headphones, which will start shipping with lightening connectors and probably include a lightening to 1/8" jack adapter for use on traditional equipment; They'll cut off the extremely cheap competitor market for headphones.
      Downside, they'll lose a smallish segment of people that were already considering on making their next upgrade an Android device.
      It's a gamble, but it'll probably net them more profit than not making the move.

    5. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Also some manufacturers just give you an external drive. I was quite surprised when my Lenovo Y700 came with an external-DVD RW.

    6. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I think the move is uncalled for and I dislike it, but most people I know that use headphones regularly with their phones tend to go through them fairly quickly.

      All the more reason not to add ten bucks worth of unnecessary DAC hardware to every pair.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    7. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      Don't most phones ship with a pair of headphones, including the iPhone?

      And almost all of the shipped headphones are mediocre at best. I used to buy adapters from Ext-USB to 3.5mm just to be able to get away from the crappy kit headphones and be able to use the fantastic sounding, non-painful pair I'm able to use on pretty much every audio device anywhere.

      Don't get me wrong: I have no love for the 3.5mm jack specifically, but if we're going to move away from it I'd like it to be replaced with an international standard instead of Apple pushing its proprietary bullshit once again.

    8. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by Maritz · · Score: 1

      I will be using regular old headphones for many years to come. You're right about the not caring though.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    9. Re:just like ripping the dvd drive out of laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Apple does ship headphones with iPhones, but they're godawful. Jabbing a stick in your ear is slightly more comfortable than using Apple earbuds.

  12. Re:big whoop by kwerle · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it will. These phones represent a [large] minority of the marketplace. You really can buy a different phone. And you can buy a CD player.

  13. Don't buy the phone by Crashmarik · · Score: 3, Informative

    I am sure there will be plenty of manufacturers that will be glad to take up the slack.

  14. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Jhon · · Score: 2

    "The reason they're ditching the headphone jack is because the thickness of the jack assembly is getting in the way of their desire to make the phone thinner. I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards."

    I hope you get modded up -- too bad you are AC.. You are right.

    I dont think I would want a phone without a jack -- at least not right now -- but maybe 2 or 3 generations from now a "phone" will be a little card with no real display or speakers -- which will display on some third party hardware or heads up display -- sound, too.

  15. Part 2... potential impact on Apple stock! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I guess not! Wouldn't that be a more obvious article WSJ? Or maybe all WSJ does is blah blah blah!
    On the other hand I agree with Sir Lurkalot, fuck Apple!

  16. Don't even bother bitching about this. by geekmux · · Score: 1, Insightful

    So, the headphone jack is apparently the argument that finally brought forth the "No one is asking for this" argument?

    Hey consumers, where the fuck were you 172 pointless "upgrades" and $500 MSRP dollars ago?

    Don't even bother bitching about design changes now. The monopolies aren't listening anymore. Consumers lost the ability to provide feedback that would result in action long ago.

    1. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by Pulzar · · Score: 2

      Hey consumers, where the fuck were you 172 pointless "upgrades" and $500 MSRP dollars ago?

      Don't even bother bitching about design changes now. The monopolies aren't listening anymore. Consumers lost the ability to provide feedback that would result in action long ago.

      What monopolies? There's like a hundred different phones you can buy, for anything from $50 to $700. You've got more choice in quality smartphones than ever.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
    2. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Hey consumers, where the fuck were you 172 pointless "upgrades" and $500 MSRP dollars ago?

      Don't even bother bitching about design changes now. The monopolies aren't listening anymore. Consumers lost the ability to provide feedback that would result in action long ago.

      What monopolies? There's like a hundred different phones you can buy, for anything from $50 to $700. You've got more choice in quality smartphones than ever.

      The vendor in question here was Apple, in which you're left with little or no choice.

      As far as the rest of the smartphone universe, that would be dominated by Google/Android, hence my propensity to use the term monopoly accurately.

      And this isn't just the proverbial Ford vs. Chevy we're talking about here. It's more like Ford and Chevy being legally allowed to dismantle and dominate every other car manufacturer on the planet (patent hoarding and twelve-figure bank accounts tend to do that). They also offer nothing but four-door sedans while convincing you that picking any color you want equates to "options" as you lease your car, never to own anything ever again, paying a monthly fee until you die.

      Yes, tell me another story about "choice"...

    3. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey consumers, where the fuck were you 172 pointless "upgrades" and $500 MSRP dollars ago?

      Same place they will be after this phone comes out, buying it in large numbers. Don't confuse Slashdot outrage with actual public opinion. I look forward to buying this new iPhone.

    4. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Google didn't make your phone, in all likelihood. So no, not a monopoly. Better luck next time.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    5. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Google didn't make your phone, in all likelihood. So no, not a monopoly. Better luck next time.

      My statement specifically included the word Android, which is the default OS that all service providers support.

      Perhaps we can dispense with the loophole semantics now, along with any arguments about loading FOSS, which tends to result in an unsupported configuration by the vendor and/or service provider 98% of the time.

      It's rather obvious who Ford and Chevy are in the smartphone market, regardless of tire brand or paint color.

    6. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      The monopolies aren't listening anymore. Consumers lost the ability to provide feedback that would result in action long ago.

      What monopolies? There's like a hundred different phones you can buy, for anything from $50 to $700. You've got more choice in quality smartphones than ever.

      The vendor in question here was Apple, in which you're left with little or no choice.

      What does that have to do with monopolies? Words have meanings, often several, but you just can't make up new meanings because you fucking don't have a clue how to use a dictionary.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    7. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by geekmux · · Score: 1

      The monopolies aren't listening anymore. Consumers lost the ability to provide feedback that would result in action long ago.

      What monopolies? There's like a hundred different phones you can buy, for anything from $50 to $700. You've got more choice in quality smartphones than ever.

      The vendor in question here was Apple, in which you're left with little or no choice.

      What does that have to do with monopolies? Words have meanings, often several, but you just can't make up new meanings because you fucking don't have a clue how to use a dictionary.

      Fine. Enjoy your dictionary. And your semantics, while you're being dictated as to what features or options you're allowed to have in the future. Much like your "privacy".

    8. Re:Don't even bother bitching about this. by Pulzar · · Score: 1

      The vendor in question here was Apple, in which you're left with little or no choice.

      That's silly. Apple has a monopoly on Apple products. Sure. You still have a hundred other phones to choose from.

      As far as the rest of the smartphone universe, that would be dominated by Google/Android, hence my propensity to use the term monopoly accurately.

      You complain that others are bringing up semantics, but even if you just look at the OS market, it's dominated by *two* companies, and is clearly not a monopoly. And that's not semantics, the difference is huge -- in one case, the competition is dead, in the other it's alive and well.

      And, then, Android is just the OS, you're still free to choose from any kind of phone -- big, small, with memory cards, without, with keyboards, with and without headphone jacks (imagine that, someone already tried that before Apple!), waterproof, and so on and so on... Nobody is dictating to you what options you can have, they are all competing to build the phone that will sell the most, which is how the market works. I don't understand the reason for your fear.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
  17. No more standard headphone jack??? by burtosis · · Score: 3, Funny

    [sarcasm] Don't they understand this will cause almost every Apple customer to purchase newer and more expensive headphones? [/sarcasm]

    1. Re:No more standard headphone jack??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have to justify the purchase of Beats somehow. Now they can sell a 350$ set of Bluetooth headphones to go with your 700$ phone. Never mind the sound quality of any set of Beats headphone is comparable to the quality of any headphone one would expect to spend $9.99 on out of the bargain bin at Walmart but let's ignore that little detail.

    2. Re: No more standard headphone jack??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phone will still come with headphones that work on it.

    3. Re:No more standard headphone jack??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those of us living in the 21st century have already done that.

    4. Re: No more standard headphone jack??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Included headphones that will sound comparable to the quality of 1.99$ headphones from the dollar store bargain bin. (Which will still sound better than the highest quality Beats headphones.)

    5. Re:No more standard headphone jack??? by Maritz · · Score: 1

      Never mind the sound quality of any set of Beats headphone is comparable to the quality of any headphone one would expect to spend $9.99 on out of the bargain bin at Walmart but let's ignore that little detail.

      Heresy.

      It's the marketing - it makes it sound better.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  18. Will jack-less phones have FM radios? by rickb928 · · Score: 1

    That would be a loss...

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  19. Thin is the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My impression was Apple wanted to remove the jack because it kept them from making a thinner phone. Every time I buy a phone, I think this is as thin as it can get, it's not worth squishing it any further. Then I'm surprised how much I like the next phone.

    I'm also not looking forward to buying special Apple-only ear buds. One more reason to not buy an iPhone, not that I was going to anyway. The rest of my family will need to grapple with this. But I expect in five years, no one will sell phones with that humongous jack and we'll all learn to survive.

    1. Re:Thin is the point by Oloryn · · Score: 1

      Of course, the thinness doesn't do much for you when if you want to protect the phone from breaking, you've got to wrap it in a case. And the thinner they get, the more likely you *need* that case to protect the thin and therefore increasingly fragile phone.

    2. Re:Thin is the point by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      ... to protect the thin and therefore increasingly fragile phone.

      You forgot "increasingly droppable". When you're holding a phone with a screen, you pretty much have to hold it by the edges, or else you're getting fingerprints all over the screen and reducing visibility. The thinner the phone, the less friction, and the more likely you are to drop the phone.

      The iPhone 6S is just plain unholdable, IMO.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  20. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Hussman32 · · Score: 1

    Second the motion, it's the same reason they moved to the Lightning jack too.

    I also don't want to go without a jack, but it looks like that's how it will be.

    --
    "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
  21. There's a very specific reason why by xevioso · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I need my iPhone to have a headphone jack. I love making DJ mixes on my phone. I use an app called dJay, which allows me to mix using my itunes library. I've gotten quite good, to the point where I will occasionally sit on the bus or at a bar making a mix, and I don't need a monitor, as I can tell where to start the mix using the waveforms of the song.

    Anyway, this only works if the sound and screen animation of the song beats are perfectly in sync; if theres ANY delay, I can't mix. I have tried doing this by using a bluetooth speaker instead of headphones, and it never works. It's always off by some delayed amount.

    If Apple actually does this, this is the one thing that will make me never want to upgrade. I know they would make dongles, but that adds other issues, such as what if I need to mix while having the phone plugged in because I'm running out of battery power? Anyway, don't do it, apple.

    And if anyone wants to hear my mixes made on an iPhone with no monitor and just a pair of headphones, here ya go: https://www.mixcloud.com/xevio...

    1. Re: There's a very specific reason why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a douchebag faggot.

    2. Re: There's a very specific reason why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1 for shameless self promotion.

    3. Re: There's a very specific reason why by xevioso · · Score: 1

      And you must be an idiot who lives with his mother. See how that works?

    4. Re: There's a very specific reason why by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Or fair warning...Disco still sucks.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    5. Re: There's a very specific reason why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

    6. Re:There's a very specific reason why by pjbgravely · · Score: 1

      Then don't buy a phone without the jack. It isn't like you are being forced to buy them. Talk with your wallet.

      --
      Star Trek, there maybe hope.
    7. Re:There's a very specific reason why by ericlondaits · · Score: 1

      The audio is now digital, converted to analog, and then sent out through the jack. ... In a phone without the headphone jack it's the same... except the audio travels digitally to the headphone, where it's converted to analog and output. The extra meter the audio travels digitally is no worse than the same meter travelled analogically. ... Hence: You won't notice any difference in sync.

      It's different with wireless speakers, like bluetooth, because there's an extra step of compression and a wireless transmission protocol that adds some latency.

      Also: There's always SOME delay, even with a headphone jack. The circuit that takes video data from memory to screen and the one that takes audio data from memory to the speakers are separate and take some small amount of time. There's no magic to sync them up. Your brain won't notice delays if they're less than some amount (20ms or a bit less).

      --
      As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    8. Re: There's a very specific reason why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must be a douchebag faggot.

      Weird, it says here you're a whiny neckbearded lonely 4chan bitch.

    9. Re:There's a very specific reason why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reducing the number of DJs in the world is actually a point in favor of no more headphone jacks in phones.

  22. Re:big whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) We are the market of consumers, and we're providing feedback.

    2) The whole point in advertising and public relations is to manipulate the market. So, we're getting in early before the reality distortion begins.

    Remember that capitalism isn't about providing what people need - it's about making profit. It incidentally does quite well at providing for basic needs, but we don't need many businesses or workers to fulfil these needs - most everything else is unnecessary crap that people have to be convinced to want.

  23. DRM? My music is DRM-free. by mveloso · · Score: 1

    Why does he think that this will be DRM'd? My music is already DRM-free.

    1. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Pikoro · · Score: 3, Informative

      DRM in the form of something like HDCP. If the phone only allows an authorized (read as licensed) set of headphones to connect, and the link is encrypted, they've just plugged the analog hole that the media companies have been wanting to get rid of since, well, forever.

      --
      "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    2. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does he think that this will be DRM'd? My music is already DRM-free.

      "Hi! TrustedSoundByBeats has detected that the waveforms from the locally-stored lossless FLAC you are playing match a track that is not in your iTunes library. TrustedSoundsByBeats does not wish to saturate your limited-bandwidth bluetooth connection, and we have disabled the offending file. To save space on your phone, we have resampled/transcoded to a 128kbps AAC and added it to your iTunes library. Click here to pay $0.99 to stream a 320kbps MP3 version from a cloud provider of our choosing!"

    3. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by wwalker · · Score: 1

      There is no way for anyone to plug the "analog hole". Unless the media companies are planning to install DRM chips directly into everyone's brains, the audio signal has to be in unencrypted analog form at some point before it becomes sound.

    4. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see how that plugs the analog hole. It just moves the DAC to the dongle/headphone.

      You can already plug a USB DAC into an iOS device with the lightning to usb camera adapter and get a line-out signal. You don't need to use the headphone jack to record analog audio from your iphone.

      http://www.head-fi.org/t/802408/new-apple-lightning-to-usb-3-camera-adapter-39-an-official-answer-for-usb-dac-and-ipad

    5. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, no they haven't. No matter how close to the speaker you get the D/A interface, at some point an analogue signal has to energise a coil (ok 2, 1 per ear) to make a diaphragm wiggle about to make the sounds. At the cost of sacrificing a cheap set of headphones, you can therefore always intercept the analogue signal. In fact, a set of headphones that's digital right up till just before the coil might actually be better for ripping as the signal would have less analogue transmission length for noise to creep in.

    6. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "they've just plugged the analog hole"
      No they haven't. They have just bridged part of it.
      You can't actually plug the hole without building a DRM device in your brain and thereby circumventing your ears.

    7. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Impossible to plug, but possible to make very, very small.

      If the spec requires that the output of the DAC be on the same chip as the decoder, directly connected to the transducer, and that the output pins have a sensor to verify that the impedance on the transducer pins matches the originally installed transducer - which is burned into the microcode on the chip - you're going to have the get more and more creative to pull the signal off. Not impossible, but quite a bit more difficult.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    8. Re:DRM? My music is DRM-free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What prevents someone from ripping out the wire that connects the speakers and record from there ?

  24. Re:big whoop by mschwanke97402 · · Score: 1

    Yup, just like Microsoft didn't listen to the market and didn't bring back some semblance of the Start Menu in windows.

  25. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    they moved to lightning to more cables and adapters, not because the internals may be smaller or thinner than ordinary micro usb... just like the 'dock' connector of previous generations was also not usb but proprietary. to sell more shit, make more money. in the end, that's all it is about... making more money.. fucking over the customer is just 'acceptable collateral damage'. apple has enough people brainwashed into buying whatever they're selling, so they will get away with it.. regardless of how stupid it is.

  26. Yeah, been there before by dejitaru · · Score: 1

    Back in 2007 I bought my first touchscreen Smartphone, the AT&T Tilt. With all that was wrong with it, it also didn't have a headphone jack and expected you to use a usb to stereo adapter that came with it. Fine, I have to carry an extra adapter. The issue came with wanting to listen to music and charging the phone at the same time (battery life was horrible even compared to today's standards). I had to shell out extra cash for a special 3rd party converter that allowed me to charge and listen to music at the same time. It was a pain.

    Even though I use bluetooth headphones when I workout I don't want to have to remember to carry an adapter if for some reason my headphones die and decide to switch over to wired headphones. So yeah, i'd never buy a phone without a dedicated headphone jack /2cents

  27. A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few comments on Mr Patel's points.

    1. ALL audio on smart phones is digital. They could DRM the headphone jack fairly trivially if they wanted to.
    2. It's unlikely people are going to be listening to super hi definition audio on their phone. If you're close enough to use a wired headphone, you're close enough to use a wireless headphone.
    3. Fair enough point.
    4. Like samsung ditching sd card slots? Like pretty much all computer manufacturers ditching rs232 ports, floppy drives, parallel ports, and likely soon vga ports?
    5. There are no "android" headphones. There are headphones made by certain manufacturers. There are all kinds of incompatible hardware, especially with phones. Anything that uses the lightning port, or the old 30 pin port. Just like iPhones don't support the OTG cables that android phones do.
    6. People don't ask for things they don't know they might find useful.

    1. Re:A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. ALL audio on smart phones is digital. They could DRM the headphone jack fairly trivially if they wanted to.

      My ears are analog and can hear my phone.

    2. Re:A few comments by unrtst · · Score: 1

      FWIW...

      4. Like samsung ditching sd card slots? Like pretty much all computer manufacturers ditching rs232 ports, floppy drives, parallel ports, and likely soon vga ports?

      They brought it back in the next revision (galaxy s7).

    3. Re:A few comments by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      Like samsung ditching sd card slots?

      Ah, yes, the Galaxy S6 - such a flop that Samsung backpedaled and re-added the microSD to the S7.

    4. Re:A few comments by NormalVisual · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ALL audio on smart phones is digital. They could DRM the headphone jack fairly trivially if they wanted to.

      No, they couldn't. It's an analog signal at the jack, and a DRMed digital or scrambled analog signal would sound like noise through any traditional set of headphones.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    5. Re:A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh that explains what people are listening to these days...

    6. Re: A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm talking about how it is stored on phone. By your logic, Bluetooth headsets are fine since your ears hear them in analogue

    7. Re: A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point was that an active jack could refuse to play unlicensed audio.

    8. Re:A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they couldn't, doesn't mean that they could make it hard (with new equipment) to record/copy the output.
      Do you remember the video copy protection on VHS. Only with special hardware is was then possible to make copies. Without the hardware you get really awful colors on your duplicate tape.

    9. Re:A few comments by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      Yes, I remember Macrovision, and it's designed to futz with the automatic gain control of an average VCR recorder. Screwing with a VCR is substantially easier than screwing with off-the-shelf audio recorders because an audio recorder doesn't require any kind of synchronization signals.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    10. Re: A few comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point was that an active jack could refuse to play unlicensed audio.

      It's not the jack that's preventing that - it's whatever is on the other side of the DAC or amplifier that's doing it.

  28. Steve Jobs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Steve Jobs wouldn't have done it.

    He was the the one that ADDED 3.5mm headphone jacks to phones.

    Prior to the iPhone, most phones had those small 2.5mm headset jacks that were mostly mono and had a microphone connection making them incompatible with stereo headphones even with an adapter... but then again, prior to the iPhone, nobody much listened to music on their phones since flash memory was effing expensive, and streaming... good luck at edge speeds.

    1. Re: Steve Jobs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Did you own the original iPhone? The jack was such that not all headphones fit in it. Of course Jobs added it to the phone. There weren't any good alternatives then and adding it was 100% necessary at the time.

  29. Free dongles x 10 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not have a fix that'll shift the costs onto smartphone makers? Require by law that, for each phone sold without a 3.5 mm jack, the maker must supply on request up to ten conversion to 3.5 mm dongles. Ten should be enough to cover losses and damages for most people.

  30. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    the thickness of the jack assembly is getting in the way of their desire to make the phone thinner.

    Quite possibly. But when you ask people, what they say they want isn't a thinner phone, it's more battery life, which you get by making the phone thicker.

  31. Apple's attitude by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

    When even "iVerge" criticises Apple's attitude this harshly, you know it's some real shitty attitude.

  32. same arguments when floppys and dvds died by kungfool · · Score: 1

    I remember the exact same comments when apple did away with floppy drives and dvd drives. "Oh, dear me, how will I live without XXXX ? No one will ever buy another apple product, this is the obvious death knell of apple "

    1. Re:same arguments when floppys and dvds died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you really understand what an argument actually is.
      What you meant to say is "some people didn't like that either". Which is true. But there is absolutely nothing about the reasons for it that are similar.

      The biggest difference is that people actually _use_ the headphone jack. People were massively moving away from actually using floppy and DVD drives.

    2. Re:same arguments when floppys and dvds died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I remember the exact same comments when apple did away with floppy drives and dvd drives. "Oh, dear me, how will I live without XXXX ? No one will ever buy another apple product, this is the obvious death knell of apple "

      That was when I left the Apple ecosystem. Apple didn't even notice that I left when I did. My kids were wee little ones and they grew up with Linux and now use Android. Still we were not missed, but I did my part and my wallet is significantly fatter for that decision. I for one thank Apple for not giving a rat's ass about me and my desires.

    3. Re:same arguments when floppys and dvds died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember the exact same comments when apple did away with floppy drives and dvd drives. "Oh, dear me, how will I live without XXXX ? No one will ever buy another apple product, this is the obvious death knell of apple "

      But Apple didn't get rid of DVD drives because consumers didn't want them. They got rid of them because Apple doesn't make any money on DVD sales.

    4. Re:same arguments when floppys and dvds died by istartedi · · Score: 1

      The floppy was already dying. Apple just hammered a few more nails in the coffin. At the time, we were using 100 meg ZIP drives (remember those?) and burning CDs.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    5. Re:same arguments when floppys and dvds died by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There were several differences between my floppies and my ZIP cartridges, including media cost, capacity, and a few other things. One big one was that my floppies mostly worked.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  33. Re:What a load of hooey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't have to be a hipster to care about decent audio quality and not want to use a stupid dongle.

    The cans included with your phone are ear-damaging, flimsy, tinny, useless pieces of aural diarrhea shit.

  34. you missed every point by izzo+nizzo · · Score: 1

    It's rather pitiful to comment on speculation about a product that won't come out for three months. You can't have a valid opinion without seeing the compromises in play.

    Which, by the way, according to the speculation, are that the phone will be thinner and much more waterproof. Are you still arguing "no one asks for this"?

    I realize that Slashdot is just as childishly anti-Apple as it has always been - but as Apple cements its position as the most important company in America and in technology, what does that mean for Slashdot?

    Let's be adults! I know we can!

    1. Re:you missed every point by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Being thinner just means it that generally speaking, it will break easier. At least with a credit card you can get the company to send you a replacement if your card get damaged (at no charge, in my experience). I doubt Apple will do likewise.

      Waterproof is good, certainly, but there are too many other negatives on the device to offset that one advantage.

    2. Re:you missed every point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but as Apple cements its position as the most important company in America and in technology

      Really? It might be the most important company in America (I'm not American) but I really don't think its the most important in technology.

    3. Re:you missed every point by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      It's not about being anti-Apple; it's about being anti-DRM, and anti-planned-obsolescence.

  35. Apple - Think Different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not better, just different.

  36. Solution is simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't buy a device that doesn't have the features you expect. Don't support companies that don't support your needs.

    Simple.

  37. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But bending iPhones were so popular when they came out. Now they can make them even bendier! And when it breaks, they'll be happy to sell you another one at full price.

  38. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is an incredibly obvious and convenient excuse.

  39. What' that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's a Jack Off Phone?

    1. Re:What' that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd imagine it's one that is waterproof.

    2. Re:What' that? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      The one in your pocket.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  40. Because we all need thinner phones at this point.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah

  41. Cost Increase...for customers by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...and they save a whole whopping nickel off each unit.

    That's not the reason they are doing this. The 3.5mm jack is an open standard which anyone can easily use for free and just about any earphones will work with any phone. If each manufacturer can get away with replacing this with their own proprietary connector then now users will have to either purchase a dongle or a specially designed earphone where the phone manufacturer gets a cut because it uses their connector.

    So this is not about saving a 3p/5c per phone this is about making ten times as much, or more, per dongle or earphone purchased. Better yet if these are like Apple's lightning connector the lifespan of the connector is a lot less than that of the phone so they can sell multiple connectors per phone and make even more money. Call me cynical but I have yet to see any real benefit mentioned to the customer from ditching the standard 3.5mm jack, and certainly nothing like enough to offset the pain involved in carrying around multiple dongles so your earphones can work with your tablet, phone an laptop.

    1. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Zmobie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Pretty much exactly this. Apple is and always has been a HARDWARE company. Removing these things and creating a walled garden on even the equipment that is usable with their devices just feeds right into that model, but goes against the rest of the industry giants (mostly anyway). Problem is this will eventually kill them if they can't keep coming up with revolutionary ideas (and be first to market with them), because everyone can do it cheaper while still making money and being compatible with everything else.

    2. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes it easier to waterproof the device.

    3. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I find this scenario, even though it hasn't happened yet in Appleland oddly upsetting. On one hand I have some pretty high end headphone gear which requires wires and this pisses me off. On the other hand I never listen to music on my phone anyways because I fucking hate iTunes. I bought a Cowon portable music player (supports FLAC and has better sound quality than the iPhone). So in once sense I've already given up on the iPhone as a music platform. I shouldn't really be upset if Apple does this. OTOH something about it is infuriating. It feels like a slap in the face.

      If BT 5 can transmit uncompressed audio and it sounds good then I suppose I'm already used to buying expensive headphones I could go wireless. BT4 is a step down from wired options in quality. Maybe it matters maybe it doesn't. People will argue. My biggest gripe against wireless comes down to often in Apt, crowd, busy office, etc bluetooth devices get flakey, wireless transmissions get flakey because the frequency space is congested. The other issue is security. You're broadcasting everything whether you think the connection is secure or not. It's a possible exploit vector. I'll stick with wires and my iPhone 6. The current generation will last me a few more years at least. I'd like to say I'll just ditch the smartphone but that is harder than it seems for a few edge cases.

    5. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by orasio · · Score: 3, Informative

      Pretty much exactly this. Apple is and always has been a HARDWARE company. Removing these things and creating a walled garden on even the equipment that is usable with their devices just feeds right into that model, but goes against the rest of the industry giants (mostly anyway). Problem is this will eventually kill them if they can't keep coming up with revolutionary ideas (and be first to market with them), because everyone can do it cheaper while still making money and being compatible with everything else.

      You haven't been paying attention. This is Apple.
      They don't come up with revolutionary ideas, at least not regarding their products. They don't have to be first to market. Let HTC/Samsung, or even some guy on Kickstarter be first to market.

      They take new stuff that already exists, make it better, package it well, market it well, charge a premium. Nothing revolutionary about that.

      As long as their competitors keep producing inferior quality products, they can keep pulling this kind of stuff on their customers. They only need to keep the quality bar very high, and they are safe.

    6. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by orasio · · Score: 1

      ... The other issue is security. You're broadcasting everything whether you think the connection is secure or not. It's a possible exploit vector. I'll stick with wires and my iPhone 6. ...

      Analog wires (you can also call them antennas) are very easy to eavesdrop on. Bluetooth is much harder, even though it's still not _that_ hard. Security in your audio shouldn't be a reason to choose analog wires over BT.

    7. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Analog wires (you can also call them antennas) are very easy to eavesdrop on. Bluetooth is much harder, even though it's still not _that_ hard. Security in your audio shouldn't be a reason to choose analog wires over BT.

      I don't think the big security concern here is eavesdropping, but DoS. It's far easier to jam BT than analog cables.
      Heck, walk past a wireless access point or microwave oven, and BT audio can drop out.

    8. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Oof, that guy is over a grand. Top of the line iphone is nowhere close to that. I'm not at all surprised it is a better listening experience though. I have some pretty sweet headphones too, and while I don't always listen to them on the iphone, I assuredly do sometimes. It is certainly silly to entertain the idea of either a stupid dongle to add to my list of random gadgets, or a whole different headphone JUST for the fucking phone.

      Mind telling me a bit about the Cowon? Can I maintain all files in it in Linux? Exchange the battery / buy a second battery? Does it have wifi or any other thing like that?

    9. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not the reason they are doing this. The 3.5mm jack is an open standard which anyone can easily use for free and just about any earphones will work with any phone. If each manufacturer can get away with replacing this with their own proprietary connector then now users will have to either purchase a dongle or a specially designed earphone where the phone manufacturer gets a cut because it uses their connector.

      I don't remember a single case where Apple has deliberately used non-open standards without a comprehensible reason. Yes, these technical reasons may just have been pretext but we don't know for sure.

      Apple is also known to actually switch to open standards where it makes sense:

      ADP was replaced with USB
      AppleTalk was replaced with Ethernet
      miniDP became part of the DisplayPort
      MagSafe is beeing replaced with USB-C

      If there's a pattern, then we can assume that Apple will replace Lightning with USB-C, too. The USB-C standard, btw, includes an open specification for carrying analogue audio.

    10. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They take new stuff that already exists, make it better, package it well, market it well, charge a premium. Nothing revolutionary about that.

      As long as their competitors keep producing inferior quality products, they can keep pulling this kind of stuff on their customers. They only need to keep the quality bar very high, and they are safe.

      It's the exact opposite. They take stuff that already exists, make it worse and market the hell out of it as new and revolutionary. While they initially had some lead in the "shiny shiny" metric, for many years other manufacturers have surpassed them in both quality and features.

      Apple is a jewellery manufacturer. They just happen to make electronic jewellery, but it's main selling point is the 18 karat Apple logo on the back and the impractically luxurious glass and metal case. Like other high end brands (Bang and Olufsen TVs, Louis Vitton handbags etc.) what's inside isn't particularly good, probably a few years old in fact, but that's not why you buy it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      You haven't been paying attention. This is Apple.

      This is Apple without Steve Jobs. The company that in the mid 1990's just about faded into obscurity.

      Jobs is gone now, and coincidentally all I've been hearing for the last 2 years or so is about how much Apple's stuff is starting to suck. Not from the people who always disliked Apple mind you - this is from the people who previously were big fans.

      Now, at its heart Apple really hasn't changed that much. The sell relatively good quality devices at inflated prices with completely arbitrary and proprietary hardware and software. That hasn't changed, but it takes a really, really good salesman in charge to make the populace spend money on that type of device. Jobs was that good of a salesman. Apple doesn't seem to have found a good replacement.

      They're still riding momentum for now, but I'd wager than within a decade Apple will be in a similar position as they were back in the mid 1990's: still cranking out a few devices for the die-hard fans while 95% of the market has moved on to a less restrictive option. It was Windows back then, it'll be Android now. Heck Android already powers a majority of the devices already.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    12. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brilliant revenue model when you choose to replace a robust standard with a port that has questionable strength. You'll be heading to the Apple Store regularly for tech support to fix the damn lightning connector (at that wonderful Apple premium cost, no less). They may just transfer your info to a new phone, send it back to China to have the port replaced, and resell the refurbished phone.

      Actually, why am I complaining? Sounds like time to buy Apple stock...

    13. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Or they just want to make smaller phones, which is what they've been saying for years while having this exact same discussion.

      Don't claim something to be true when all you have is a bad gut feeling and contempt. It's not becoming. Plus this doesn't affect you, so your faux outrage is misplaced and rather sad.

    14. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get it right.

      Everyone knows HTC/Samsung copied the original iPhone and everything else HTC/Samsung has done since is derivative.

      But you're an android fanboy so don't let facts like this bother you. Go ahead and believe your fantasy.

    15. Re:Cost Increase...for customers by fferreres · · Score: 1

      They are no longer making my life easier in many regards, and for that, they deserve to start to dissapear. Even if it takes them 15 years. Maybe Elon Musk should be summoned to Apple to steer it in the right direction. Almost all the innovations are coming from App Developers, and users are now immersed in a bad quality of life cycle due to Apple. Instead of more battery life I get a phone that needs a case and if the glass shatters it costs $300 to fix, now I can't use my favorite jacks. I still have products and Apple gear with the older connector (which I like more than the slimmer one).

      I wish them well, and have many apps on their platform. But I have no love for them. That has been gone after the past 3 years. I don't see them caring for people. I don't see them making the right choices, sacrifices (sometimes jobs would make an unpopular decision that was the right things very apparent and very soon). All the latest launches, decisions and things their are doing - or at least most, make little sense to me.

      --
      unfinished: (adj.)
  42. Bluetooth by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    This is sort of a side issue, but if you are still using wired headphones you are really missing the boat. Bluetooth headphones are as cheap as $20 for good enough models. I can't imagine going back to wired headphones.

    1. Re:Bluetooth by acroyear · · Score: 1

      Indeed, if your goal is audio fidelity, you wouldn't be finding it in mp3 or aac files (or streaming sources like spotify or apple radio) in the first place.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    2. Re:Bluetooth by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      It really depends on your needs. I really liked the convienence of my Jaybirds, but... They were easy to lose. I have the Bose in-ear noise cancelling headphones now, and they are awesome for flying, music, and phone... and the battery lasts for about 18 hours. Almost perfect for my needs, but the battery pack is a pain in the ass.

      Having a lightning jack would eliminate the need for battery and really make them great.

      Now for exercise, it is very hard to beat Bluetooth (unless you have a panter next to you).

    3. Re:Bluetooth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't own and iPhone/Pad so can't comment on their abilities in this area, but Bluetooth (for me, on Android) is no good for video. The audio lag needs to be compensated for and depending on the app some can acheive this and some can't - for xaxmple if I'm browsing and then want to watch a video how do I compensate for the audio lag in my browser so that audio matches video?

      And anyway it varies from app to app video to video so you can't set it once at the OS level and forget it.

      So Bluetooth is only an option for pure audio, it'll never be a suitable option for video. I'm pretty sure there will always be some degree of lag when transmitting a compressed data stream over a non-perfect wireless connection.

      Therefore a wired solution has to be an option for video and if it's non analog then we're heading for HDCP hell on our devices.

  43. What is the problem anyway? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I have only two headsets/earbuds I really use anyway, so if I just leave an adaptor on those what is even the issue?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What is the problem anyway? by sageFool · · Score: 1

      30 bucks an adaptor and how do you charge while listening to music? Maybe they do wireless charging but thus that has been a pretty crap experience.

    2. Re:What is the problem anyway? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      Single usb-c port computers will lead to exponential sales of docking dongles - combined powerbank, usb hub, card reader, displayport/vga/hdmi out.

      For several years expect to be fleeced $50-100, until the Chinese flood the market at $20.

    3. Re:What is the problem anyway? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      1) Why would I charge while listening to music? I never do that now. Music is the least draining thing ever for a device.

      2) If you REALLY need to, the other Apple AV adaptors include a charging port and I presume a dongle would also..

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:What is the problem anyway? by sageFool · · Score: 1

      1) Not the case for everyone.

      2) Maybe, if so then the dongle is likely yet bigger and more annoying in pocket. Perhaps apple will make it all perfectly and it won't be any bigger than a 3.5mm jack in some clever packaging but I kind of doubt it.

  44. Re:Chicken little nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Digital audio means DRM audio

    iTunes and later the Amazon MP3 store made DRM free audio a standard for audio you buy. This cat isn't going back in the bag. If you are whining that it's gettting harder to rip DRM from Spotify, etc. (music that you rent) then screw off, you're stealing and it's nobody's problem but your own.

    Copyright violation isn't stealing.

  45. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    Controversial opinion:

    Switch to the 2.5mm jack, instead of 3.5mm? - The one used on the older blackberry? It's significantly smaller, despite it only being 1mm smaller.

  46. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's an admirable goal... but being as thin as a credit card means that it is equally likely to get broken. If your credit card cracks they will send you a replacement for free if you ask for one. Will Apple do likewise?

  47. Re:big whoop by unrtst · · Score: 2

    Yup, just like Microsoft didn't listen to the market and didn't bring back some semblance of the Start Menu in windows.

    That's a decent example since what MS did was to ignore and avoid the issue for just enough iterations so that when they did "bring back" something that was a huge compromise, people took it as good enough and thanked them for it. Two steps forward, one step back... it's a great way to move the herd along.

  48. It's the iMac and USB all over again. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The same thing happened in 1998. Geeks everywhere told Apple to screw themselves for coming out with a 'proprietary' connector USB that no one else used. Forcing everyone to buy new mice and keyboards and ... oh the humanity.

    Not buying an Apple product? Why the hell do you care?

    1. Re:It's the iMac and USB all over again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My PC had USB in 1998... only idiots with their head in the sand thought USB was "proprietary".

    2. Re:It's the iMac and USB all over again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      idiots with their head in the sand

      AKA: Apple customers.

    3. Re:It's the iMac and USB all over again. by BarneyGuarder · · Score: 1

      The same thing happened in 1998. Geeks everywhere told Apple to screw themselves for coming out with a 'proprietary' connector USB that no one else used. Forcing everyone to buy new mice and keyboards and ... oh the humanity.

      Not buying an Apple product? Why the hell do you care?

      This. USB-C is coming and it will be everywhere. Don't underestimate that. I would be surprised if Apple sticks with lightning much longer. Of course, they would piss off everyone who just bought lightning adapters and if any company can swim upstream with a custom connector it would be Apple.

    4. Re:It's the iMac and USB all over again. by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Classic moron shooting himself in the foot.

  49. Devil's Advocate by mentil · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since everyone's hating on replacing 3.5mm jacks, I'm going to play devil's advocate.
    6 reasons that 3.5mm jacks will go the way of the 3.5" floppy drive:

    1) Analog audio cables need shielding from outside interference. Cheaper cabling is inadequately shielded. Digital signals are more resistant to minor interference.

    2) 3.5mm jacks are finicky. I've owned many extension cables with 3.5mm plugs that need fiddling with. If I don't rotate it just so, and plug it in at just the right depth, I get abnormally low volume, one of the channels won't work, or certain frequency ranges won't play.

    3) 3.5mm plugs aren't universal. There are ones with 1, 2, or even 3 rings, and the above problems are more prevalent if a plug is connected to a receptacle/adapter engineered to expect a different number of rings.

    4) Data sent through the 3.5mm jack is an unencrypted analog signal. This means it's vulnerable to side-channel attacks and surveillance. Someone could surveil/inject data going through the microphone channel (assuming the phone uses an analog microphone), or the headphone channel. A simple 'not' inserted into or removed from a sentence could cause substantial disruption to a target. Of course phone networks and smartphones are often surveillable in multiple ways, but not by everyone; also, phones are sometimes used as personal audio recorders, which may not be surveillable. An encrypted digital signal, with a handshake protocol but no master key (i.e. backdoor), could prevent these attacks.

    5) Phones tend to come with noisy/cheap amplifiers/DACs. This means that even if you plug in your $500 headphones you're going to get noise, and there's nothing you can do about it. Moving these components into the headphones means that phones can accommodate top-end audio. For some reason, smartphones have their cameras heavily scrutinized, yet their audio components are glossed over by reviewers and consumers. Go figure.

    6) 3.5mm jacks add cost and thickness to smartphones. This is the real reason (of course) why they're being ditched. Just like laptop makers are aiming for the thinnest laptops, phone makers want to make the thinnest smartphones. USB type C (which Thunderbolt 3 uses) has a height of ~2.6mm, meaning a full millimeter can be shaved off the device thickness. They could add a bump around the 3.5mm jack like they do for rear cameras, but I suspect that's considered ugly. there are 2mm audio jacks, but all the above problems remain, and people would still need an adapter or new headphones.

    The DRM issue is orthogonal to the encrypted digital signal issue. If an unencrypted MP3 file is sent over an encrypted interface, then who cares? The 'protected content being stolen via the analog hole' is the potential bogeyman, but it's not going to be an issue. Music is sold DRM-free today, and people are unlikely to start buying DRM-ed music in the future; it won't matter unless CDs go away, anyways. In the unlikely event the encryption protocol isn't cracked, it will only matter for content that is only available via streaming, which will probably be a minority of audio that people would care to preserve. Furthermore, just as you can buy (outside America) HDCP-compliant devices that decode the signal and then happily pass it on unencrypted, you'll be able to get the same for audio, if there's demand for it.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4) Data sent through the 3.5mm jack is an unencrypted analog signal. This means it's vulnerable to side-channel attacks and surveillance. Someone could surveil/inject data going through the microphone channel (assuming the phone uses an analog microphone), or the headphone channel. A simple 'not' inserted into or removed from a sentence could cause substantial disruption to a target. Of course phone networks and smartphones are often surveillable in multiple ways, but not by everyone; also, phones are sometimes used as personal audio recorders, which may not be surveillable. An encrypted digital signal, with a handshake protocol but no master key (i.e. backdoor), could prevent these attacks.

      If my mic waited for me to complete words before sending it on, or delayed for inserting words, I think I'd notice. That's also quite a bit of computing power, or a person, as well as a device to do the inserting or deletion somewhere on the line. If they have a device in the way they could perform a man in the middle attack on key negotiation allowing them to listen in as well.
      Being spied on is a lot more realistic but if they are in range (either themselves or a device) to detect the signal the could just detect the audio (assuming standard mic usage), although it is possible it could make it easier to tell what you where listening to if your headphones have little noise leakage.

    2. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't you hate people who play devil's advocate just to be a PITA? My responses to (what I consider mostly silly) arguments.

      1. Shielding - Never had any problems in any phone I've ever owned. If shielding is an issue in the "new & improved iphone", then add a damn 1/10th of a mm and put some shielding back in. I'll trade a bit of imaginary interference for bluetooth drops & pairing difficulties any day.

      2. Finicky jacks - this is perhaps one of only two points that I think has some credence. I've had a couple of finicky jacks myself but you know what--a quick squirt of contact cleaner solved the problem perfectly. Want to talk about finicky? Bluetooth pairing on some devices. You know what's even more finicky? When your BT headset battery starts to wear out and you can't replace it. Wired headsets have a much longer lifetime than BT headsets.

      3. Universal plugs - While it's true that there are variations of the 3.5 mm plug, I cannot remember a single time in the past 15 years a time when I plugged a 3.5 mm headset into an apple or android phone and it failed to work. I can remember plenty of times when I couldn't get bluetooth to pair.

      4. Unencrypted data - The second fair point. However, device manufacturers like square have started encrypting their data and this is only applicable to a tiny fraction of phone users.

      5. Cheap DAC - This may be true, but my wired headsets are unequivocally better audio quality than any of my bluetooth headsets.

      6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone. I want a phone with better batter life. Hell, increase the thickness and give me some more battery life.

      Net net--I will not upgrade to a phone that is missing a 3.5 mm headphone jack anytime soon. I am sure it will happen int he future, but not in my near future.

    3. Re:Devil's Advocate by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      7. A 3.5mm socket is an unsealed hole in a piece of electronics that does not respond well to moisture but is likely to be exposed to wet environments.

    4. Re:Devil's Advocate by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      1) Analog audio cables need shielding from outside interference. Cheaper cabling is inadequately shielded. Digital signals are more resistant to minor interference.

      True only in theory. Numerous hardware-design and quality-control problems plaguing HDMI connections of different versions/cable qualities and the accompanying cost of getting a matching set of anything to work right prove this assertion to be completely false in practice. Didn't read any of the rest of your points because this one is fundamentally stupid enough to disqualify you from any expectation of rational discourse. Lemme guess, you work for Samsung, huh?

    5. Re:Devil's Advocate by Bentbob · · Score: 1

      Its a narrow counter point argument that I am making but the 3.5mm audio out socket doesn't always mean added thickness to a device...

      I carry too many devices so I don't use the 3.5mm audio out on my android phone a lot. I use a FiiO X3 gen2 for music and a 6th gen iPod Touch for iOS games and sometimes backup music if the FiiO runs out of battery power (I use both devices with earphones a lot).

      I don't have an iPhone 6S but the spec sheet gives this a thickness of 7.3mm. The iPod Touch 6th Gen has a thickness of 6.1mm (that is probably not including the sticking out camera lens). They could probably squeeze a bit more fractions of a millimetre of thickness off the iPod with more inventive design or different material technologies but it looks like its at at minimum possible thickness.

      If the iPhone 5s was 7.6mm and the iPhone 6 was 6.9mm (7.67mm if you include the lens for depth) as a short sample of varying depths between models, maybe you could state that Apple is hovering around a low to mid 7mm for their iPhone models and it is probably other factors like batteries, SoC/hardware, etc, that are requiring the thickness. Going to larger sizes with the newer iPhones means that they would have to be very careful to avoid "BendGate" if they went thinner.

      I don't know how much this is mentioned in other comments but I think that the issue of body-strength is probably more important to Apple that making it thinner. Its connected to thinness of course, but the iPod Touch is probably not capable of going any thinner whilst keeping the 3.5mm socket without a the 3.5mm being a critical weak point in the body casing (I think that its already close to the absolute minimum of metal used around the 3.5mm socket).

    6. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Music is sold DRM-free today, and people are unlikely to start buying DRM-ed music in the future

      VHS pre-Macrovision: No D(uh, A)RM.
      VHS with Macrovision: Easily-defeated ARM.
      DVD: Never released without (crappy) DRM.
      Blu-Ray: Every disc you insert contains software that can "update" the DRM to fuck up discs that used to play.

      ???: And you claim that RIAA isn't trying desperately to repeat that sad and sordid history when they've been trying to close the analog hole since the introduction of digital audio tape? (and ATRAC, and SACD, and...)

    7. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Analog audio cables need shielding from outside interference. Cheaper cabling is inadequately shielded. Digital signals are more resistant to minor interference.

      This does not change: cables still need shielding. Digital signals are LESS likely to work with more interference, as it requires exact data, whilst analog does not. Digital signals allow for more bandwidth. Case in point: digital television vs analog.

      2) 3.5mm jacks are finicky. I've owned many extension cables with 3.5mm plugs that need fiddling with. If I don't rotate it just so, and plug it in at just the right depth, I get abnormally low volume, one of the channels won't work, or certain frequency ranges won't play.

      This is usually due to manufacturers trying to make the jack do more than just L/R channels over 3 connections. Don't blame a specification for the failings of a company that doesn't follow the specification properly.

      3) 3.5mm plugs aren't universal. There are ones with 1, 2, or even 3 rings, and the above problems are more prevalent if a plug is connected to a receptacle/adapter engineered to expect a different number of rings.

      See response 2.

      4) Data sent through the 3.5mm jack is an unencrypted analog signal. This means it's vulnerable to side-channel attacks and surveillance. Someone could surveil/inject data going through the microphone channel (assuming the phone uses an analog microphone), or the headphone channel. A simple 'not' inserted into or removed from a sentence could cause substantial disruption to a target. Of course phone networks and smartphones are often surveillable in multiple ways, but not by everyone; also, phones are sometimes used as personal audio recorders, which may not be surveillable. An encrypted digital signal, with a handshake protocol but no master key (i.e. backdoor), could prevent these attacks.

      This could be an issue were the user not holding the device and headphones, and the cables visibly connected and unpatched.

      5) Phones tend to come with noisy/cheap amplifiers/DACs. This means that even if you plug in your $500 headphones you're going to get noise, and there's nothing you can do about it. Moving these components into the headphones means that phones can accommodate top-end audio. For some reason, smartphones have their cameras heavily scrutinized, yet their audio components are glossed over by reviewers and consumers. Go figure.

      DAC quality seems to be a hard one to judge: how good is good enough? That said, I have never considered that 3.5mm plugs were ever supposed to be intended for great audio: they are simply a method of getting output that was otherwise intended for the phone speakers. If the phone has crap dacs, the phone audio AND the 3.5mm audio will be crap. The fact that you may be using a 3.5mm plug is moot - crap phone audio is a crap phone audio.
      If you have expensive headphones with DACS built in, I would expect that those headphones will use a different communication method that will not use the built in DACs - what is the point of making headphones with built in DACs if it wont ever use them??

      6) 3.5mm jacks add cost and thickness to smartphones. This is the real reason (of course) why they're being ditched. Just like laptop makers are aiming for the thinnest laptops, phone makers want to make the thinnest smartphones. USB type C (which Thunderbolt 3 uses) has a height of ~2.6mm, meaning a full millimeter can be shaved off the device thickness. They could add a bump around the 3.5mm jack like they do for rear cameras, but I suspect that's considered ugly. there are 2mm audio jacks, but all the above problems remain, and people would still need an adapter or new headphones.

      And this is the crux of the issue.
      Manufacturer wants smaller parts. Manufacturer wants to make money from add-on parts and specification licensing.
      Other manufactu

    8. Re:Devil's Advocate by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      6) 3.5mm jacks add cost and thickness to smartphones. This is the real reason (of course) why they're being ditched. Just like laptop makers are aiming for the thinnest laptops, phone makers want to make the thinnest smartphones. USB type C (which Thunderbolt 3 uses) has a height of ~2.6mm, meaning a full millimeter can be shaved off the device thickness. They could add a bump around the 3.5mm jack like they do for rear cameras, but I suspect that's considered ugly. there are 2mm audio jacks, but all the above problems remain, and people would still need an adapter or new headphones.

      Am I the only one who thinks that having a camera sticking out of the back of your phone is exceptionally poor industrial design? Let's see:

      • I can't place the phone face-down because it will scratch my screen.
      • I can't place the phone on its back because it will scratch my lens.

      So basically, with that design, cases are pretty much mandatory.... As far as I'm concerned, if you can't make the lens recessed into the back far enough that it isn't at risk of being damaged when you put your phone down, your phone is too thin.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    9. Re:Devil's Advocate by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      I must say this devil's advocate list is quite silly in places.

      1. Not over short runs at relatively high powers which is what headphones are.

      2. All jacks can fail. 3.5mm ones last much longer than those wretched super thin high pincount phone connectors.

      3. 1 pin ones are incredibly rare. 2 pin ones are rather rare but work in 3 pin sockets anyway, you just get mono. 3 pin ones are incredibly common. 4 pin ones are not that rare and work in 3 pin sockets just fine.

      4. You're complaining that someone could electrically snoop the microphone signal from your headphones when they're standing close enough to just, well, listen. Also, literally all microphones are analog because sound waves are analog. A "digital" microphone is an analog microphone plus a DAC. Also, you do realise the reverse is true for sound too, right?

      5. I guess hypothetically it's possible to get a bluetooth audio device with a better DAC and noise isolation, but I've yet to encounter one.

      6. Cost isn't the issue, thickness potentially is, though as people have pointed out you can get thiner devices than existing iPhones with 3.5mm jacks.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Devil's Advocate by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

      Most people who own >$500 headphones wouldn't waste them on the DACs in their phones.

      If someones willing to spend that much money on a pair of cans, they likely have tube driven amps and preamps sitting next to their vinyl record player at home.

      --
      Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
    11. Re:Devil's Advocate by ericlondaits · · Score: 1

      You're missing something:

      Right now headphones support volume controls and a single button. A digital interface would enable richer controls... either more buttons or touch surfaces that support simple gestures (large cans could act like the touch surface, for instance). ... I also read of the possibility of measuring the pulse through the ear with a sensor included in sport headphones.

      Also: I don't know why they suppose we'd lose anything if the possibility of ripping audio through the headphone jack was lost. This hasn't been an acceptable way to rip audio for more than a decade now.

      --
      As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    12. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another response:

      1) The majority of digital cables I own USB, HDMI, Ethernet, hell even fibre are thicker than the current cables on the £10 set of Sony headphones I use which have cables that are less than a millimetre in diameter. And I have never had any interferance on an analog cable on headphones, ever. Interference in a digital signal can casue havoc with communications and cause many more issues with dropped audio than with analog. We used to still be able to watch old analog TV with some snow because of a poor signal, but now with digital a poor signal means large drops in video and audio leading to unwatchable content. Analog is, when you consider interference, much more resillient than digital. So this argument really doesn't hold water.

      2) Micro/mini USB jacks (replace with a lot of digital jacks) are finicky. I've owned many micro usb cables that needed fiddling with to ensure that the data / power pins connected properly. If I don't angle it just so or plug it in at the right depth it just completely fails to work. Not one channel working or low volume, complete failure. Again, this argument can be made, and made more forecfully for digital connectivitiy because of the on/off (pun intended) nature of the communication compared to the analog nature of audio over a 3.5mm jack/cable.

      3) 3.5mm jacks are universal. The 3/4 ring jacks are designed to include additional signalling and if properly designed will fit a 3.5mm socket with the standard TRS connectors. You might want to read up on 3.5mm jacks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_%28audio%29) so you can see that they are more standard/universal than say, oooh a Lightening connector?

      4) Seiously, WTF are you listening to? If I have a need for secure communications I won't be using a consumer mobile phone. Ridiculous argument.

      5) This is less an argument for losing 3.5mm jacks and more an argument for improving phone audio quality, which if you did would be an improvement realised over a 3.5mm headphone connection. Any audio on a smart phone is going to be from a digital source and for the majority of the population will be a lossy compressed file/stream using AAC or MP3. The source material will have just as much impact on audio quality as the listening device so arguing that if you remove the jack you can go all digital and put high quality DACs in headphones is only one part of the story. I don't see people arguing for lossless compression on phones or for internet streams because for the majority, compressed at 128K bps is sufficient for casual music/video. Therefore, 3.5mm and standard headphones are also sufficient.

      6) I would (seriously) like to know the actual cost of the 3.5mm jack in a phone. I would say it would be an infinitesimally small cost compared to other compenents that by removing you are not saving the consumer or your manufacturing process that much money by removing it. I agree you get more space and could have a thinner phone, but as others have argued, no one is asking for thinner phones. I know I'm not. I want more battery life and for that I would accept a thicker phone. The removal of a 3.5mm jack and using that space for more battery is not going to offset the additional battery I will need to power Bluetooth if I go wireless and if the phone is going to now be made thinner, I have actually gained NO space from removing the jack and in fact lost battery life because of the thinner phone.

      The rest of your argument is, sort of confusing and rambling re DRM and it's only an argument against digital audio, not an argument for removing the 3.5mm jack.

      I agree the 3.5mm jack isn't ideal, but it's the best balance of ideal at the moment for it's use case. The 3.5" floppy drive died a natural death because genuinley more practical, portable, higher performing alternatives became available in parallel. People naturally moved to these because of the increased capacity, performance, reduced size etc. It was a very natural death. Bluetooth headphones are available in parall

    13. Re:Devil's Advocate by allquixotic · · Score: 1

      1. Shielding - Never had any problems in any phone I've ever owned. If shielding is an issue in the "new & improved iphone", then add a damn 1/10th of a mm and put some shielding back in. I'll trade a bit of imaginary interference for bluetooth
      drops & pairing difficulties any day.

      I guess you never sit your headphones on a busy desk with cables, laptops, etc. then. I had Sennheiser HD-25 II wired studio monitoring headphones with one of the best-shielded cables made for headphones (steel and very thick) and the EM emissions from the IGP on my laptop (a Westmere i5; this was years ago) would be very audible over the music streaming from my MP3 player (this was before I got a smartphone with enough storage and CPU to play music). Newer Intel procs are better at reducing EM, but cheap headphone cables will still pick up emissions several inches away from a desktop with a Skylake i7 in my limited testing. These CPUs will happily spew harmless electromagnetic emissions that get converted into arbitrary sounds by your headphones when the conductor in your cable picks them up.

      Also, the only bluetooth drops and pairing problems I've had in recent years were all on Android. I moved from buying Android phones (numerous, from 3 different manufacturers, all had the same problems with BT) to an iPhone 6S Plus, and I have not had a single BT dropout, not a single one in like 9 months. And pairing always succeeds immediately.

      For my desktop and Windows laptop I use an Imperial BART 1 bluetooth transceiver (with aptX Low Latency) as an intermediary, with the sound being sent to the BART 1 from the motherboard's S/PDIF digital (TOSLINK) port. So the entire audio path is digital. 24-bit 48 kHz, too, which is better than the 16-bit 44.1 kHz that 99.9% of the people are using, and not audibly distinguishable from even higher bitrates and sample rates in most studies (the law of diminishing returns).

      This allows me to have two pair of headphones, total -- one I keep at work and one I keep at home -- for all my headphone needs across desktop, laptop and smartphone. And both headsets double as a serviceable mic to take phone calls, either over Skype or the cellular network. And I never have to tangle with cables.

      2. Finicky jacks - this is perhaps one of only two points that I think has some credence. I've had a couple of finicky jacks myself but you know what--a quick squirt of contact cleaner solved the problem perfectly. Want to talk about finicky? Bluetooth
      pairing on some devices. You know what's even more finicky? When your BT headset battery starts to wear out and you can't replace it. Wired headsets have a much longer lifetime than BT headsets.

      I only buy BT headsets with user-replaceable batteries. What kind of junk are you buying that doesn't? Beats? People actually think Beats BT headsets are good, you know? It's embarrassing and a disgrace to actually good bluetooth headsets, like the BeoPlay H8.

      BT pairing issues are basically non-existent if both devices support BT version >= 4.0. Latency is not a problem if both ends support aptX Low Latency (it sits around 30-ish ms with very low jitter, and it's not detectable by most users, even when gaming, even while focused on it.) Not all BT versions and not all BT equipment is created equal, though. Android is an absolute cesspool of crappy BT stacks. Avoid it like t

    14. Re:Devil's Advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2) 3.5mm jacks are finicky. I've owned many extension cables with 3.5mm plugs that need fiddling with. If I don't rotate it just so, and plug it in at just the right depth, I get abnormally low volume, one of the channels won't work, or certain frequency ranges won't play.

      Anecdotally (same as you), I have a pair of $3 headphones that, while certainly not "audiophile quality", sound good enough to me, and I have never had a problem in the approximately 5 years I have been using them.

      6) 3.5mm jacks add cost and thickness to smartphones. This is the real reason (of course) why they're being ditched. Just like laptop makers are aiming for the thinnest laptops, phone makers want to make the thinnest smartphones.

      They are thin enough now. If they make the guts thinner, use the extra space for a bigger battery.

      Laptops getting thinner pisses me off too. Ten years ago my laptop had a higher resolution screen than the one I have today, which has less resolution than my smartphone, and they brag "Full HD!" (okay, not really relevant, but annoying none the less). Back on topic, my 10 year old laptop has 6 USB ports, 4 of which were on the back, along with most of the ports. Now there is no room on the back. Only have 4 USB ports and they are all on the side, just so the lid can slide down in the back (does that really make it thinner?). So everything plugged in on the side (especially right side as I am right handed) is in the way. Horrible design beyond my ability to comprehend, but I could not find one that was not that way. My mouse must be uncomfortably far off to the side to avoid the mess of cables.

      Thinner was good to a point. Stop already.

      The DRM issue is orthogonal to the encrypted digital signal issue.

      Once all devices support it, it will come back.

    15. Re:Devil's Advocate by acoustix · · Score: 1

      7. A 3.5mm socket is an unsealed hole in a piece of electronics that does not respond well to moisture but is likely to be exposed to wet environments.

      You mean like the speaker grill, usb, hdmi, and lightning ports?

      One hole is all it takes to let moisture in.

      --
      "A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
    16. Re:Devil's Advocate by BarneyGuarder · · Score: 1

      Just to chime in here, the 3.5mm connector in phones is a royal PITA.

      1. Sure the 3.5mm jack is "standard" but it is a physical standard only and there is no uniformity. There are 2, 3, 4, and even 5-pole plugs. The phone needs to detect this and respond accordingly. Also, headsets with a microphone use 4-pole connectors but sometimes the mic and ground pins are swapped. The phone needs to detect this and respond accordingly. These circuits degrade analog performance.

      2. FM and audio do not play well together. In many countries people like to listen to FM radio on their phones. Using the headphones as the antenna sounds nice until you realize that the FM antenna filters increase crosstalk and distortion in the audio. Digital TV signals are even worse.

      3. Phones need to detect what is plugged into the jack. That means stere/mono, microphone, pinout, speaker impedance, etc. Can you tell the difference between an extension cable vs. a pair of headphones vs. a headset with microphone vs. a headset with buttons. Again, this adds complexity and usually you can hear clicks and buzzes while this is being done.

      However, digital headsets are not all rainbows and unicorns either. There is the obvious lightning vs USB-C issue. Battery drain may increase. Cost will increase (at least initially). But all of the issues mentioned above with the 3.5mm jack get resolved.

      I think the DRM issue is a red herring. Music is moving away from DRM now anyway.

    17. Re:Devil's Advocate by kheldan · · Score: 1

      1. This point is invalid unless you're connecting it to an external amplifier with a hi-Z input, and even then unless it's ten feet away you won't get significant amounts of 60Hz hum or any other interference, unless you're in an RF-noisy environment (like next door to a big transmitter).
      2. They're only 'finicky' for people who aren't careful with their electronics to start with, so don't try to tell us it's everyone.
      3. They're 'universal' enough. TRS is what all headphones have; TRSS is what most headsets have. Engineers know this and account for it.
      4. So some 'attacker' might discover you like to listen to Radiohead? LOL my heart bleeds for you. Not really a valid point unless you have a tinfoil hat.
      5. Not ALL phones. You get what you pay for. Also, unless you're an 'audiophile' type, you won't know the difference, and unless you're listening to totally uncompressed or totally lossless audio, you won't hear the difference anyway.
      6. This is the only really valid point you're making, but you're far from the first to do so.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  50. More like MacBook than DVDs by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    No one will care in a year.

    DVDs were replaced by online downloads and streaming. The 3.5mm jack is going to be replaced by multiple competing standards so you are going to be carrying dongles around with you so your earphones work with all your devices. This is more like the MacBook where they replaced multiple standard ports with just USB-C and made all the users buy dongles to get the ports they needed. People were not happy.

    1. Re:More like MacBook than DVDs by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      There was a replacement technology for DVDs that offered benefits with almost no downsides. Bluetooth only offers almost every downside with regards to listening to music.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    2. Re:More like MacBook than DVDs by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      DVDs were replaced by online downloads and streaming.

      And perhaps more importantly, for users who still needed DVD drives, you could get an external drive, and almost nobody needed them except in specific locations (usually at home or at work), so the lack of portability caused by the external bricks wasn't a big concern.

      Contrast this with a cell phone that people carry with them everywhere, used everywhere. And multiply the cost of that adapter times all the places you might want to have one (home, car, backpack, your desk at work, your friend's house, the hotel room you're staying in on the opposite side of the country) and it adds up to a much bigger hassle, IMO.

      This is more like the MacBook where they replaced multiple standard ports with just USB-C and made all the users buy dongles to get the ports they needed. People were not happy.

      That was just plain incompetent design, for many reasons. For one, the main target market, IIRC, was students. Apparently, nobody remembered being in a crowded dorm room, where a laptop serves not only as a computer, but also as a cell phone charger. Or if they did remember it, they somehow failed to recognize that almost every user in their target market needs to be able to charge their laptops while charging a USB device....

      Add to that the extra risk of damage caused by the removal of magsafe, and the complete lack of any additional benefits to make up for that removal, and you have a recipe for a lot of unhappy consumers. I really can't even begin to imagine what they were thinking when they designed that. Wasn't there even one single person who looked at that design and asked, "Wait, are you serious?"

      But I digress.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  51. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards.

    I agree that's what they're shooting for. But I wish they wouldn't. A super-thin phone would be hard to hold.

  52. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Stormwatch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards.

    And that's a very dumb goal. No one complains, "I wish my phone was thinner." People do complain, "I wish my phone had better battery life" and "I wish my phone's screen wouldn't break so easily."

  53. IoT by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2
    Interference? Dump the protocol. It's all about IoT and wifi headphones nowadays.

    Hey! It ain't my fault someone hacked your IPv4 address and all you get through your headset is this ditty.

    1. Re:IoT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks ChunderDownunder, that ditty made my day.

  54. Re:Chicken little nonsense by aXis100 · · Score: 2

    I'd argue that Bluetooth is not great, and despite having shitty amps inside phones, the analog audio is still significantly higher quality than that Bluetooth audio. Not to mention that Bluetooth is noticeably laggy for anything interactive.

    Also dont forget that Bluetooth needs a powered receiver and I dont want to have to charge another farking device every few hours.

    Sure, Bluetooth has it's place, but I would be disappointed if it was the only option.

  55. Trends in the Tech Industry by Etcetera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    6. No one is asking for this.

    No one asked for systemd either, but look what happened.

    Speaking more broadly, I honestly can't tell if this is because most of the major problems have been solved, people are too ignorant of the thought processes that went into the original tech, people don't know their history, people have too much faith in overly-complex technology that couldn't possible fail, people honestly, think they're just that much smarter than the installed base of users and want to increase "Quality of Life" (as one notable Borg put it), people want to make their own mark, or people are disingenuously trying to achieve lock-in on their newfangled contraption. No doubt, it's a mixture of all of the above.

    Speaking as someone who's only been around in the industry for 15 years or so, I've already seen this pattern repeat way too frequently. I can only imagine what people who've been writing COBOL for the past 40 years think of it all...

    Please, for the love of God, stop breaking sh*t that works fine.

    1. Re:Trends in the Tech Industry by Lije+Baley · · Score: 1

      I'm old enough to agree, but you know, "People gotta do stuff, and so they do." Usually with the help of managers who either lack a clue or a spine. Though I suppose it's better to have the young ones always reinventing everything than to have them going around breaking stuff up and guzzling milk.

      --
      Strange things are afoot at the Circle-K.
    2. Re:Trends in the Tech Industry by houghi · · Score: 0

      That part where they say that no one is asking for it is wrong. The end users did not ask for this. They are however not the customers. They are just the people who pay for things.

      The customers are the operators and they are snug with the MAFIAA as that is where the real monies are.

      Apple sells music. They want exclusive deals with operators. As soon as they see they can get extra monies now from the music industry, they will ask the others for the same.

      Buy a phone with DRM and you get 2 songs free!

      Many people will not buy one, but enough will as the new phones will all have it. So one by one people will switch and find an excuse as to why they are doing it.

      So for them it does NOT work fine. They are interested in making money, not in a phone that works fine.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Trends in the Tech Industry by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I think that people want to make their own mark are the most common affliction, whatever other excuses they may come up with. That's especially true when they have to crap in everyone else's garden instead of growing their own. They don't have the skills to do it themselves, but they can shit up something someone else has done and then take credit for it.

      I, for one, have long said that I eagerly awaited a candy-coated OS experience built on top of a Linux kernel, where everything was managed for me and everything was simple. The thing is, I never said that I wanted it to replace my existing Linux. I always said I wanted it in addition. There have been a few attempts to deliver this so far, but all of them suck in some way. Android is obviously the most successful; it's contaminated with Java. Not in the legal sense, but in the sense of sapping my performance and complicating the issue. I love the interface, but since I need different binaries for different platforms anyway, the whole virtual machine thing is just dumb compared to native binaries. Intel brought out Moblin, which I thought was pretty nifty, but not only did they abandon the best thing about it (the interface) but they spent at least as much effort ripping out all the stuff that would make it run on AMD-based machines. Fucking assholes. This flopped around like a dead fish and begat a couple of descendants that statistically nobody cares about, after dropping the awesome interface. And way way back in the day I used to run GPE on my iPaq, but I never could build it myself because OpenEmbedded and GNOME, need I say more?

      I still don't understand why nobody has taken the Linux kernel and gone in a more non-Unixlike direction with it. Android is still very Unixy underneath, even if it's in a very bastardized way. When you get down to the prompt, it's all very familiar. I know, it's a lot of work, but there are people out there developing whole hobby operating systems including an inferior kernel with poor driver support.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:Trends in the Tech Industry by StormReaver · · Score: 2

      No one asked for systemd either, but look what happened.

      That is patently false. SysV init is a fragile, horribly broken piece of shit that should have died 20 years ago. Having used systemd-based Kubuntu for some time now, I'm finding most things work far better than they ever did under SysV init:

      1) Boot times on my virtual machines are much, much faster than they ever were under SysV init. The clever hacks piled on top of it to make Linux boot faster were so fragile that they broke at the drop of a pin.

      2) Hardware interaction is far more reliable than it ever was under SysV init. This is much like boot speeds. There were hacks upon hacks to main dynamic hardware appear usable, but they were very fragile and painful to use. Desktop Linux under SysV init was horribly painful on the hardware interaction front between 1991 and the introduction of systemd.

      These are the two main issues that had needed to be resolved since Linux's inception, and that nobody had ever been able to solve before. It's fashionable to dump on systemd (and Pulse Audio, for that matter), but they both solved a crucial failing of Linux desktops that nobody had done successfully -- ever.

      As a desktop user and server administrator, I love systemd. My only complaint about it is that it took way too long for it to kill SysV init.

    5. Re:Trends in the Tech Industry by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      No one asked for systemd either, but look what happened.

      That is patently false. SysV init is a fragile, horribly broken piece of shit that should have died 20 years ago. Having used systemd-based Kubuntu for some time now, I'm finding most things work far better than they ever did under SysV init:

      1) Boot times on my virtual machines are much, much faster than they ever were under SysV init. The clever hacks piled on top of it to make Linux boot faster were so fragile that they broke at the drop of a pin.

      I guarantee to you that that was 85-90% Ubuntu (or Debian) crap and maybe 10% "using rc scripts to do setup and then launch independent scripts in /rc#.d/ directories". RedHat-land init scripts were fine. They still are, if you're using RHEL/CentOS 6, which a metric crap ton of people still do... It's not like we can't boot using them, and if post-kernel boot times were that important for your VM (they're not) there are other solutions for streamlining things. Hell, using DashAsBinSh was something RH should have done a long time back.

      2) Hardware interaction is far more reliable than it ever was under SysV init. This is much like boot speeds. There were hacks upon hacks to main dynamic hardware appear usable, but they were very fragile and painful to use. Desktop Linux under SysV init was horribly painful on the hardware interaction front between 1991 and the introduction of systemd.

      These are the two main issues that had needed to be resolved since Linux's inception, and that nobody had ever been able to solve before. It's fashionable to dump on systemd (and Pulse Audio, for that matter), but they both solved a crucial failing of Linux desktops that nobody had done successfully -- ever.

      Great. Make a laptop-focused OS that trades determinism and admin-controllability with dynamic response and trusting yourself into the arbitrary hands of fate and the guy who programmed udev.

      It wasn't *that* painful -- it's not like people didn't use Linux on laptops in the 2000's -- and virtually all of it could be solved without replacing /sbin/init with a complex interlocking mesh of interdependent tools.

      As a desktop user and server administrator, I love systemd. My only complaint about it is that it took way too long for it to kill SysV init.

      There's very little besides automatic/free cgroup management that systemd's paradigm gives you that didn't already exist. Admins can and do use xinetd, service managers, tcp servers, and monitor programs to do their jobs. systemd wraps it all up into a nice, tiny, black-is-the-only-color bow for you... and if you think that's a good idea, you should consider why Embrace, Extend and Extinguish was such a successful strategy.

  56. But it's (cr)Apple! by Chas · · Score: 1

    It'll be a STYLISH dongle!

    For which frothing fanbois feign to forego fornication and fork over funds in fullsome and fearsome figures! Feel me?

    And we won't even need a guy in a stupid Guy Fawkes mask for it!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  57. Not impressed with this ideal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I was not impressed when I learned the 3.5 jack was going away and the reason given was it limited how thin a phone can be? Seriously, how thin do we need it? Remember bendgate? What I hate is that it pushed D/A conversion to device rather than the phone doing it. So you do not get a analog output for audio. But even more to the point, this eliminates a cheap and effective way of using any amplifier that can amplify a analog signal. Bluetooth is an option and I beg to differ that cheap $20 bluetooth headphones are good. You must be tone deaf or quality audio challenged or never heard music from a quality reproductive source. Good sounding Bluetooth will run you $150 to start around $400 for really good quality. If you think $20 wireless is good headphones, then you probably don't care about losing a wired audio jack. Your more about the wireless part then the quality of sound.

  58. if they include bluetooth headphones by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    then whats the problem? oh you want to plug it in to a computers audio input? i am sure somebody will make a bluetooth dongle to fill that niche,

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  59. "6. No one is asking for this." by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    "6. No one is asking for this."

    This! +1, no +100. Nobody fscking cares about a few mm less width, on the contrary, please use the "surplus" millimeters that you want to cut down, to include a bit higher battery capacity while retaining the previous models' width.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    1. Re:"6. No one is asking for this." by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The "content" industry is asking for this. The music industry, and the film industry, and all of the the people who use (and abuse) the DMCA, are asking for this. This is one more step in covering the "analog hole". If they could, they would insist that every person have a serialized DAC chip implanted to be able to listen to any recorded audio, so there's no analog at all.

  60. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that cell phones in the early 2000s all had 2.5 mm jacks instead of 3.5 mm jacks, thickness shouldn't be a reason to remove jacks entirely - just switch back to the 2.5 mm jacks that all cell phones used until a few years ago!

  61. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by mark-t · · Score: 1
    Not to mention as fragile as fuck.

    At least a CC company will mail you a replacement card if yours gets damaged.

  62. hair-port by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A new port which accepts exactly two hair-size filaments that allow for the highest high-fidelity, amd specifically built for the discerning ear. Anyone unwilling to adopt this new standard of audiophilation must not be worthy.

  63. Actually ditch every jack by iamacat · · Score: 1

    I am all for hermetically sealed case with wireless charging and bluetooth/WiFi/NFC for connectivity. Ports invariably loosen, act flaky and fill up with dust even during regular use. Forget about swimming in salt water for an hour and then throwing the phone on sandy beach blanket. Throw in capacitive buttons with no moving parts and we have major improvements in reliability.

    1. Re:Actually ditch every jack by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I've been using iPhones since 2007, using wired headphones approximately daily on the original iPhone, the iPhone 5, and the iPhone 6S. In all that time, I've never had a port fail other than the one on the original iPhone, which exactly once got into a state where it thought the headphone cable was plugged in when it wasn't. Even that was easily fixed by plugging in a pair of earbuds and unplugging it a couple of times. Oh, and it was almost five years old at the time.

      Bluetooth, by contrast, has been anything but reliable. I've tried using an A2DP receiver in my car, and it frequently gets into states where I have to power cycle the equipment to get the iPhone to talk to it again. And so does the non-A2DP bluetooth (headset profile) receiver built into the car. There have been at least four occasions when I've taken a phone call, and said, "Hold on a minute. I have to pull over and power-cycle my car." That's just nightmarish by comparison. And that's not even counting the iOS 9.2.x bug where the A2DP stack would stop working until you rebooted the phone... about once a week. So by comparison, I've had much, much better luck with analog audio. That's unsurprising, because simpler technology is almost invariably more reliable.

      As for swimming in salt water, that will seriously oxidize the case, so it would be inadvisable even if the phone were perfectly waterproof.

      The amount of power needed for wireless charging would probably make it impractical to charge your phone off of a USB port on your computer while traveling. That's a pretty serious downside. Contact charging (e.g. with a magnet that holds two pieces of metal together), sure, but probably not wireless.

      Finally, capacitive buttons on the sides of a phone would be a nightmare. You'd accidentally press the volume buttons all the time while you're holding the phone, because it doesn't take any force to press a capacitive button (and it isn't possible to solve that, because even if the touch sensor were more like a touchscreen, a hard press from the finger would still be indistinguishable from a light brush from a flatter part of your hand). And such a design would make it much harder to build usable cases for the phones, too. There are good reasons why Apple still uses mechanical buttons in current iPhones even though they used capacitive buttons in the iPod line way back in 2004. :-)

      All in all, what you describe sounds like a major decrease in usability, all in exchange for only mostly hypothetical improvements in reliability.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  64. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't need my phone to be any thinner. I'm fine if it's as thick as the original iPhone if that means a bit more battery life. In fact, I'm considering moving to a bigger phone/screen size NOT because I really want the screen space, but because it gives me a bigger built-in battery.

    Second, audio quality on bluetooth is not great. I have a couple high end bluetooth headsets, and I still rely on wired headphones in situations when clarity is important.

    Finally and most importantly, I DO NOT want something else I have to charge. I use my wired headset in large part because I never have to worry about charging it.

  65. ...Beats? by Miamicoastguard · · Score: 2

    Does anyone remember that they own the beats headphones? One way to get people to buy more of their over priced junk is to offer exclusive companion over priced junk.

  66. Cutting the cord. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Wireless is everywhere and corded is going away. It isn't just the headphone jack and it isn't just the smartphone.

    1. Re: Cutting the cord. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      I would think like, that, but actually my Bluetooth headphone is now another gadget that I have to make sure I plug into the charger often enough for it to have battery power when I want to use it. It's a headphone that can no longer just be taken for granted it will always work.

      And you tossed out the term "wireless" like a fad word.

    2. Re:Cutting the cord. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is there any content to your posts? Or do you strive to be as self-referential and redundant as possible?

      Apple is not phasing out wired headphones, they are redirecting it through their proprietary interface. They have every right to do so, since it is their business and they've successfully captured a corner of the market that accepts these changes as feature enhancements.

  67. Re:You hipster douchebag! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aww, a quick look through your comments shows who the true hipster is, rectum ranger.

  68. Digital vs. Analog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last bastion of freedom from digital rights management and content provider restrictions is alive today but being attacked as we speak. It's called the AM and FM bands and small devices you use from day to day to play back your already-owned content (read ripped MP3 from your personally-owned CD disc or any other method where you can reproduce your owned media but not re-distribute). Sure you have to find a program that isn't either quashed or under-the gun to convert your legally owned music CDs to a personal collection of music you prefer. Other than that..you can continually try to survive the abomination called commercials but the transmission medium is analog. I'm pretty sure the content providers had high hopes for Sirius FM and Digital FM but the inertia of music devices otherwise known as our basic cars and trucks aren't replaceable every two to three years like an Iphone or another DRM restricted music providing device. Who here has noticed that *only* Apple is pressing so hard for a digital audio output device? I don't see an equivalent rush from Samsung, HTC and other far eastern phone vendors (and I won't digress to the massive push of the middle-kingdom saturation). Microsoft is ambiguous and has decided that Windows 10 for phones is last-years news yet they still vaguely support music content for them.

  69. On an infinite timescale by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A bit of devil's advocate here:
    0 - is author stating that the 3.6mm jack is the pinnacle of design and should be our audio-out interface *forever*? Most of his points, or phrasing are consistent with that position.
    1 - digital does not necessitate DRM. Q: How much of apple's _purchase_ music is DRM'd? A: none. Q: How much of their music purchase is digital. A: all of it. For that matter 3.5mm does not necessitate analog connection (see ipod shuffle file transfers 4th gen).
    2 - wireless headphones are getting better and are sufficient for majority people. Even if true, this is point would more support a "not now" position than "never" on dropping it.
    3 - who says it will require a dongle or that the dongle will require a dongle? My 0.25" headphone would also require a dongle. This is just an observation that you will need to eventually replace your headphones and when you do, you should take into account what devices you are plugging them into.
    4 - how is this different than the ipod-dock connector, the mouse and ps2 ports, or any of numerous other ubiquitous standards that have been retired over the years. and yes you will eventually replace your devices and peripherals, see point 0. I bet the phone would come with either a compatible pair of headphones or dongle (how ugly such a device would be is TBD and it is arrogant and stupid to speculate).
    5 - very few people cares if iphone peripherals and android peripherals are interchangeable. They are largely distinct consumer bases.
    6 - 'If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.'

    "On an infinite timescale" all ports will be replaced.

  70. Battery life by thecombatwombat · · Score: 1

    "6. No one is asking for this

    Raise your hand if the thing you wanted most from your next phone was either fewer ports or more dongles.

    I didn’t think so. You wanted better battery life, didn’t you? Everyone just wants better battery life."

    As the article says, what everyone really wants is more battery life in their phone. Is the best way to increase battery life something other than just making the battery bigger?

    As a percentage of the size of the battery, I'd imagine all the empty space taken up by the 3.5 mm jack is quite a lot. Seriously, is there any better way to increase the size of the battery? I'll trade a dongle on my headphones for 15% more battery.

    1. Re:Battery life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want longer runtime too. However, that battery in your pocket is a mini bomb. 4 volts @ 4000 mah is 57,600 joules. For comparison a .50 caliber round is about 15,000 joules. Also we don't have an infinite supply of Lithium.

    2. Re:Battery life by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      As a percentage of the size of the battery, I'd imagine all the empty space taken up by the 3.5 mm jack is quite a lot.

      I don't think you realize just how much of the inside of an iPhone is used by the battery....

      Headphone jacks are tiny. IIRC, they are slightly shorter than the plug itself (the plug sticks out through a hole at the end), and they're in the neighborhood of a quarter inch wide, or maybe a third of an inch. So that's something like 1/8th to 1/4 of a square inch, as viewed from above, give or take. The battery in an iPhone 6s Plus is 4.7" x 1.9", or about 9 square inches. Thus, the empty space taken up by the 3.5mm jack is only about one or two percent of the space taken up by the battery. So you'd gain an extra 15 minutes of talk time, give or take, on a device that currently provides 24 hours of talk time.

      By contrast, making the phone thicker by 1mm would allow you to increase the battery capacity by about 30–40% (and would also mean that the lens wouldn't awkwardly stick out). Making it 2mm thicker (still 2mm thinner than the original iPhone) would almost double its battery capacity—and that's without shifting components around on top of one another to give you even more room for a bigger battery.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  71. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Switch to the 2.5mm jack, instead of 3.5mm? - The one used on the older blackberry?

    ... and also Palm phones. Those 2.5mm jacks did just great for me. One of the things I hated about the transition to Android was how they succumbed to that 3.5mm jack that Apple introduced in the first place!

  72. Not made here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple has done this several times. A few years ago there was a call to have all phones pluggable by a mini-usb cable. That way, you could plug your phone into any usb port, and power it or charge it. And apple didn't. Now we have really really simple, really useful technology. The 3.5 mm headphone jack. Its incredibly useful. Any pair of headphones can be used to listen in privacy without bothering anyone else. If you are in a shooting/hostage/dangerous situation, you can listen to someone in complete privacy, and very quietly whisper into the phone in response. It might not seem like such a big deal, but it is. And now apple wants to do away with it in favor of proprietary. And no amount of convincing will change their mind unless you buy the special dongle that you can buy for more money, so that you can then plug in your headphones. And its clunky, and could potentially wreck your phone, and if you lose it, or it falls out, then you only have to spend more money, and if it bumps against your phone wrong, then it breaks (both dongle and phone). And apple says "oh, just buy a new dongle and/or phone or both". It would be nice just once instead of just capitulating and sucking up the additional cost, apple users said "enough bullshit" and refused a phone without a proper jack. But that will never happen. Dollars vs sense.

  73. Counterpoints by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    1. Shielding - Never had any problems in any phone I've ever owned.

    You've NEVER had headphones on, got near some large electrical device, and had any interference at all? No buzzing or clicks? Really??????

    5. Cheap DAC - This may be true, but my wired headsets are unequivocally better audio quality than any of my bluetooth headsets.

    But are they better than wired headphones with an end to end audio channel? No.

    People who still use wired headsets (I do also) are the people who will benefit MOST from our digital audio output.

    6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone.

    Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Counterpoints by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      You've NEVER had headphones on, got near some large electrical device, and had any interference at all? No buzzing or clicks? Really??????

      Nope. I've had problems with microphone-level audio near lighting dimmer boards, but that's several orders of magnitude lower voltage. In fact, normally, headphone cables aren't shielded at all, because the extra capacitance compromises the sound quality. Don't believe me? Cut one open some time.

      The only time I've had problems with electrical interference on my iPhone was when I was using a cheap 5V power supply to power it while using analog audio, and I was getting noise passed along the ground wire. This is, of course, why proper car audio almost always involves transformer coupling (or, ideally, an optocoupler). And a Bluetooth receiver plugged into the same jack would have the same problem with noisy power for the same reason, so moving to wireless doesn't actually solve that problem; it just shifts it from one device to another.

      But are they better than wired headphones with an end to end audio channel? No.

      End-to-end audio channel? Do you mean running a digital signal all the way to a circuit next to the speaker? The answer is that there's no difference either way. At the voltages involved, there's minimal loss caused by those three or four feet of wire, and almost no opportunity for any significant amount of induced noise—certainly nothing that can't be corrected for using a trivial amount of EQ (which iOS really ought to do a better job of providing, BTW).

      In the best case, if the headphones provide a really high-quality DAC with a decent amplifier, the quality might be ever so slightly better, but probably not enough for the user to hear the difference. In the worst (and most common) case, if the headphones use whatever twenty-cent junk DAC and amplifier that they can get their hands on, the quality of so-called end-to-end digital will be much worse.

      Either way, the cost difference to get even a small improvement in quality is considerable, so you can safely assume that on average, the quality will be worse, not better. This is not to say that users won't think it is better (usually because of designs where the amplifier in the headphones is deliberately slightly hotter than the amplifier in the iPhone so that it sounds louder when connected by Lightning than by the 3.5" cable), but it won't be better in a truly controlled A/B test.

      6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone.

      Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

      That's a joke, right? They're already so thin that I keep dropping the darn thing over and over. I literally cannot hold my iPhone 6S (or my iPhone 5) when out of its case without dropping it at least three or four times per day. Thankfully, I have nice, soft carpet in my house, and I rarely take them out of their cases. The only way I would want a thinner phone would be if it weighed so little that its wind resistance would limit its terminal velocity to the point that you could drop it on concrete without damage hundreds of times in a row. That's not going to be possible any time in the next decade, and probably longer than that.

      As someone who uses a holster anyway, thinness is not a virtue. It is 100% vice. It limits battery capacity and features without providing any real tangible benefit whatsoever. In fact, I want the exact opposite of thin. I want a phone that's at least twice as thick as the current phones so that I don't have to put it in a case to keep from dropping it constantly. I want a raised bezel around the edges so that it is more drop resistant. And I want the extra thickness to be filled with battery capacity so that I can reliably use it all day at 100% CPU utilization without charging it (or, more accurately, so that whatever random daemon has wedged itself into a tightly rolled loop this week can reliably use 100% of one CPU without my battery lasting less than a day).

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:Counterpoints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Shielding - Never had any problems in any phone I've ever owned.

      You've NEVER had headphones on, got near some large electrical device, and had any interference at all? No buzzing or clicks? Really??????

      No. Occasionally my phone causes interference with my car radio but I've never noticed any interference audible via the headphones. Do you regularly work with poorly shielded MRI kit or something?

      5. Cheap DAC - This may be true, but my wired headsets are unequivocally better audio quality than any of my bluetooth headsets.

      But are they better than wired headphones with an end to end audio channel? No. People who still use wired headsets (I do also) are the people who will benefit MOST from our digital audio output.

      And why on earth do you think the DACs built into digital headphones would be any better than the DACs built into phones?

      6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone.

      Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

      No, I really don't. I still have a Galaxy S5 and actually sought out the (thicker) wireless charging back. My fiancee has a S6 and I find it too thin and delicate. I would much rather have a robust / waterproof phone and/or better battery life than a thinner phone.

    3. Re:Counterpoints by bjb · · Score: 1

      6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone. Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

      Tell you what... first make it that the lens doesn't stick out 1mm on the current generation and then we'll talk about making the phone thinner.

      --
      Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
    4. Re:Counterpoints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

      I did have a thinner phone and went thicker with the next one because I hated how the thinner one felt in my hand. I am sure I am not the only one that felt this way

    5. Re:Counterpoints by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6. Thickness - I don't need a thinner phone.

      Yes you do. You just do not realize the value yet because none exist.

      No he doesn't. He already thinks the phone is too thin and battery life suffers because of it.

  74. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

    Quite possibly. But when you ask people, what they say they want isn't a thinner phone, it's more battery life, which you get by making the phone thicker.

    If some customers want more battery life, a good approach would be to remove a component wasting a lot of internal volume, which also allows you to eliminate various large-ish components from the logic board. The saved space could be used to expand the battery. Every cubic mm in the iPhone is used for something ...

    Another approach might be to sell a case with a battery to those customers.

    The last approach you would logically take is forcing everyone to buy a bulkier phone.

  75. In other news... by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Slashdot is jam-packed with luddites who refuse to join the 21st century and buy decent Bluetooth headphones.

    I bought a decent pair for my son at Walmart for $10 at the cash register "impulse buy" shelf. They've been working great and sound a hell of a lot better than ear buds.

  76. I thenth thum hostility, said Daffy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoever thought of thith idea sure has a thick mind!

  77. Definitely a Deciding Factor For Me by grimfate · · Score: 1

    Once Windows Phone finally dies and I am forced to decide between Apple or Android, if the only new phones available from the former do not have a 3.5mm jack, I will definitely go with the latter. From using the headphones I already have, to plugging into my home or car stereo, to plugging into most other headphones/speakers I have encountered, 3.5mm was always the method used. (Never used a bluetooth headset or speakers.)

    1. Re:Definitely a Deciding Factor For Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      forced

      I don't own any of those completely unnecessary products. Life is good.

  78. what people say, versus what they do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the thickness of the jack assembly is getting in the way of their desire to make the phone thinner.

    Quite possibly. But when you ask people, what they say they want isn't a thinner phone, it's more battery life, which you get by making the phone thicker.

    I doubt that supposed desire is reflected in sale charts though. What people say versus what they do is often different.

    1. Re:what people say, versus what they do by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      It is reflected in sales charts, just not Apple's. Take a look at the sales figures for battery cases.

      The only way it would be reflected in Apple's sales charts would be if you could buy two different iPhone models, one with better battery life and one that's thinner. As long as Apple doesn't give consumers the option, the only other option is to reject the entire platform and switch to Android. That would take something much bigger than a few percent difference in battery life.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re: what people say, versus what they do by BeaverCleaver · · Score: 1

      Why would you sell a phone with a long-lasting battery when you could sell a phone AND an external battery? Or, better still, licence a 3rd party to make the external battery! Free money!

    3. Re: what people say, versus what they do by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Why would you sell a phone with a long-lasting battery when you could sell a phone AND an external battery? Or, better still, licence a 3rd party to make the external battery!

      Competition.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  79. Faggot debate over faggot iPhone over faggots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is because of three reasons:

    1) China
    2) Faggots just don't get it
    3) You can always just shove your headphones right up your ass because if you have an iPhone they fit

    Tim Cock loves the cook.

  80. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The reason they're ditching the headphone jack is because the thickness of the jack assembly is getting in the way of their desire to make the phone thinner. I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards."

    I hope you get modded up -- too bad you are AC.. You are right.

    I dont think I would want a phone without a jack -- at least not right now -- but maybe 2 or 3 generations from now a "phone" will be a little card with no real display or speakers -- which will display on some third party hardware or heads up display -- sound, too.

    Correct. And as soon as Apple introduces that phone, all the other phone makers will start copying the design and the squeeling Android fanbois will be all about how thin their new phone is.

  81. Spend all that money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and you don't get jack.

  82. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by macs4all · · Score: 2

    Controversial opinion:

    Switch to the 2.5mm jack, instead of 3.5mm? - The one used on the older blackberry? It's significantly smaller, despite it only being 1mm smaller.

    And how many people own 2.5mm headphones?

  83. It was Tim Cooks idea obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taking the Head
    phone
    Jack Off

  84. An open letter to mfgrs thinking of ditching audio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I won't buy a smartphone made by morons who neglect to put in a headphone jack. I kept my old MP3 player, my CD player, and if this comes to pass, when my current smartphone gives up the ghost, I will pull out my old MP3 player, and get a dumb phone for cheap or free, before I buy a "new" "smart" phone that lacks this critical feature.

    FUCK YOU IF YOU THINK I'M GOING TO BUY REPLACEMENTS FOR ALL MY PERFECTLY GOOD HEADPHONES JUST SO YOU CAN MAKE A PRODUCT THAT IS A MILLIMETER FUCKING THINNER.

    I don't need ANOTHER fucking thing I have to recharge every time I want to use it. It's why I don't own an iWatch, it's why I'm not using Apple's overpriced fucking iPencil, and why I won't be buying a new iPhone to replace my SE if the replacement is missing a fucking headphone jack.

    In fact, I may switch to a goddamned dumbphone any fucking way, because I'm tired of supporting Tim Cook's crack habit, or any of their addictions.

    I suggest you all do the same, unless you want to reward them for making a progressively shittier product over time!

  85. Why have the jack at all? by thogard · · Score: 1

    I would expect that Apple could design a way to hold a headphone jack next to contacts on a phone using a magnet. Then they could make the phones water proof to the point where they can be submerged.

  86. Re:Chicken little nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone's complaining about Bluetooth audio quality. Does everyone buy those cheap one-ear Bluetooth headset pieces designed for voice calls and then expect to listen to music on them? I bought a Bluetooth headset for my phone precisely because I wasn't happy with the quality of the sound I was getting out of my phone's audio jack. But I looked around for a decent quality pair of over-the-ear Bluetooth headphones. With the audio jack, the quality of what you hear is dependent on the quality of the analog audio circuitry in your phone (which you can't do anything about), and the quality of your headset. With Bluetooth, the quality of what you hear depends only on the quality of your headset.

    Now, it's definitely true the there is a delay on Bluetooth. There will be on any wireless protocol. They way they get around EM interference is to buffer a bit of sound ahead of time, so that the audio can continue while the radio frantically tries to re-transmit the next chunk of data. In general, if you're gaming, you really don't want to use anything wireless - neither speakers nor mouse/keyboard. But I mostly care about listening to music.

    As for battery life, I use my Bluetooth headset for about 1.5h a day (45min each way to and from work). I charge it less than once a week on average. True, the battery is non-replaceable, but I bought this headset nearly 4 years ago, and it still goes more than a week between charges.

    With regards to quality, keep in mind that while just about all Bluetooth headsets support a basic voice-quality link, you won't want to use that for music. You want at least A2DP. It seems A2DP is roughly equivalent to MP3 streaming. That's good enough for me to listen to music on the go. If I'm stationary and listening to music, I don't use my phone - I use my computer with real speakers (which I connect via a digital optical link, because the analog audio circuitry on my motherboards is also terrible). Newer Bluetooth headsets support aptX, which is supposed to be an improvement over A2DP. Unfortunately, I don't have first-hand experience with it - when I bought my headset, no Bluetooth headsets used it yet (at least none I saw, and my phone at the time didn't support it).

  87. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    Who cares?
    Perhaps the industry can move forward with a new cabled standard. No DRM issues, smaller profile, adapters easily available, no need to be wireless, no charging?

    Initial transition won't be fun, however neither was Mini USB to Micro. At least this way most of the issues are alleviated and an adapter can work in the meantime.

  88. Disappointing by Pfhorrest · · Score: 2

    I've been waiting for a jack off phone to come around for years, it's about time the sex toy industry capitalized on the market for mobile devices, but if it has no headphones that's a deal-breaker, I can't have everyone in the house hearing what I'm doing; and if it's user-hostile and stupid to boot, I mean, who the hell thought those would make good features?

    I'm surprised this kind of bomb is coming from Apple of all people, makers of the famous iBrator.

    --
    -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
    "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    1. Re:Disappointing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been waiting for a jack off phone to come around for years, it's about time the sex toy industry capitalized on the market for mobile devices, but if it has no headphones that's a deal-breaker, I can't have everyone in the house hearing what I'm doing.

      You do know that with a 4th generation Apple TV you can pair Bluetooth headphones with it right? Why would you want to jack off using the little screen on the phone when you can AirPlay it to a 60 inch UltraHD television?

    2. Re:Disappointing by Pfhorrest · · Score: 0

      The joke is misreading the "jack off phones" in the headline as discussing some kind of fancy sex-toy phones that you use to masturbate, not talking about masturbating to regular porn on the screen of a regular phone.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
  89. Their customers aren't mindless by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    there are very specific reasons they want an iPhone. For one, they're a Veblen good. E.g. something you buy because you can. There are very real social advantages to Veblen goods. iMessage is practically a social network, which is another advantage. iTunes is highly desirable and iMusic is $5/mo if you're in college and mostly just works. Apple has an entire ecosystem that powers a social network. I resent buying my kid an iPhone every 2 1/2 years (they last about that long before they're falling apart). But I'm smart enough to recognize that, like it or not, it is a very real social advantage. That's fucked up. But with the amount of fucked up shit in this world it's one of the more minor instances...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Their customers aren't mindless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      there are very specific reasons they want an iPhone. For one, they're a Veblen good. E.g. something you buy because you can. There are very real social advantages to Veblen goods. iMessage is practically a social network, which is another advantage. iTunes is highly desirable and iMusic is $5/mo if you're in college and mostly just works. Apple has an entire ecosystem that powers a social network. I resent buying my kid an iPhone every 2 1/2 years (they last about that long before they're falling apart). But I'm smart enough to recognize that, like it or not, it is a very real social advantage. That's fucked up. But with the amount of fucked up shit in this world it's one of the more minor instances...

      Yea, sure...

      Teach your kids to be vain and pretentious assholes, and look down on the lower classes because they can't afford to buy things that are no good and offer no real value, other than marking you as a pretentious asshole. Then they can grow up to be neurotic assholes like yourself, that are constantly worried about what other people think of them and where they fit into the vicious culture of bullying that you have created.

      Nobody in those circles are happy. They are all neurotically paranoid and on edge about what everybody thinks about them and how they are judged. And they make other people miserable by applying the same warped morality you demonstrate in your post.

      What there is very real value to, is being able to afford the things you actually need because you didn't blow all your money purchasing vacuous status symbols.

    2. Re:Their customers aren't mindless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you are saying that Apple customers are the very model mouth breathing moron. Got it.

  90. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

    Additionally, when ifixit did their tear-down of the iPhone 6s and 6s+, they found a significant amount of resistance had been added. The case seals shut with a rubber gasket and the cable connectors on the logic board are waterproofed. Apple has not advertised, or to my knowledge mentioned, this. So the 6s and 6s+ are not likely fully waterproof, nor even certified water resistant. But it's there.

    Eliminating the 3.5" port may also be another step towards eliminating entry points for water, possibly pointing towards an actual waterproof iPhone in the future.

    --
    Imagine all the people...
  91. Not the only user-hostile thing by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Apple is Surface-mount SOLDERING the RAM on new Imacs and Mac Minis.

    If your ram stick goes bad, then it's Replace the whole logic board, Because Apple-authorized repair centers are essentially prohibited from doing component-level replacements.

    Also, upgrading is almost impossible now..... And if you do it, according to Apple your computer is now a PC, and you voided the license to run MacOS on it.

  92. Because users keep rolling over and taking it by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

    "User-Hostile and Stupid" describes both Apple and Google, along with so many other companies. They get away with stuff like this because people not only keep coming back for more abuse, but keep paying for the 'privilege' of being abused. I've often said that some of us get the governments that our neighbours deserve, and the same idea applies to products and services. If the majority keeps being suckers, then there's not much left other than sucker-bait for the rest of us.

    --
    'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
  93. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But if you look at the trend in iphones over the years they have gotten a LOT thinner..and the iphone 6S is both thin and strong. It's just a matter of materials. Ten years from now there will be new materials that are much stronger than what we have now..and making the phone as thin as a credit card will not mean that it will be any more breakable..Likely it'll be way, way tougher than a credit card.

  94. Re: Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The repeated name calling really isn't necessary, and it detracts from your points.

  95. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're forgetting where 10 years advancement in materials could easily compensate for the thinness..and batteries will also evolve in 10 years time.

  96. Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Hosti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Hostile and Stupid "
    Those Jack Off Phones...

  97. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You ignorant little fuck..

    You're an angry fellow.

  98. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If some customers want more battery life, a good approach would be to remove a component wasting a lot of internal volume, which also allows you to eliminate various large-ish components from the logic board. The saved space could be used to expand the battery. Every cubic mm in the iPhone is used for something ...

    It doesn't allow you to eliminate anything from the logic board. Basically the entire set of audio circuitry for the phone is still required for driving the normal speaker and the speakerphone speaker. The only thing that removing the headphone jack does is cut out a jack that is already really, really small.

    So now consider the amount of space used by that headphone jack. I think the headphone jack is about a quarter inch by half an inch by the thickness of the interior of the phone (smaller than the 3.5mm plug, in fact, both in length and in thickness, IIRC). The battery in an iPhone 6S is a whopping 120mm x 48mm x 3mm (approx.). Removing the headphone jack, then, would give about a 1–2% boost in battery capacity. If you instead made the iPhone just 1mm thicker, the battery would increase from 3.3mm to 4.3mm in thickness, yielding at least a 30% increase in battery life (and really, more than that, because you aren't making the battery's packaging proportionally thicker). An extra 2mm would almost double the battery life.

    The best part about using the thickness approach is that you could even give users a choice (audible gasps). Make several versions of the back case that allow for different thicknesses of batteries (by having various side wall heights), but are otherwise identical in construction. The extra R&D cost is basically zero for doing that, and the tooling costs should be minimal. Then, let the market decide whether users want more battery life or thinner phones. I'd be willing to bet that most users would choose the thicker phone with the longer battery life (unless they made the cost difference so ridiculous that it artificially skewed the market, which knowing Apple, they might just do).

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  99. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many people own Lightening (whatever the fuck it is called) headphones? I bet less than the number of people who own 2.5mm headphones.

  100. It's Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you expect? I hope this will help making Apple irrelevant.

  101. Re:Chicken little nonsense by aXis100 · · Score: 1

    I've probably used about 3 different wireless bluetooth audio devices and had varying levels of quality, some of them approach the analog audio out but none have been better:

    - Bluetooth hands-free headset about 7 years ago. Phone calls were OK, PC audio was a shockingly bad.
    - Bluetooth sports headphones, before A2DP. Noticable compression and distortion
    - UE Boom bluetooth speaker. Uses A2DP I assume, quality is OK but hard to tell on such a limited speaker. Fine for ambience.
    - JVC Bluetooth car head unit. Uses A2DP, and since the speakers/amp are better i can hear some of the compression. Like a low end MP3 I guess, noticeably worse than the high bitrate MP3's stored on the phone. It's a reasonable compromise for convenience though.

    So yes, things are improving, but it's not great yet.

  102. User-hostile and stupid by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Yes it is, just like selling a phone without a removable battery or card slot.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  103. well duh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the next iphone is going to be 3mm thick, and 3mm 3.5mm

  104. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    Quite possibly. But when you ask people, what they say they want isn't a thinner phone, it's more battery life, which you get by making the phone thicker.

    They make cases that thicken your iPhone and give it more battery-life. They do not make cases that make your phone thinner.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  105. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, you get more battery life by making it thinner - then filling up the free space with batteries.

  106. Re: Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that worked so very well for calculators...

  107. Think outside the jack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you ever consider that they may be adding more functionality to headphones than can be practically done through the current TRRS one? Maybe they are adding more microphones for noise cancelling or microphones on the buds themselves so you can hear a conversation or traffic without having to remove them? Maybe the new earbuds will adjust for your hearing by taking measurements of your ears response to sound? Seriously people, there used to be nerds here on /.

  108. The New Apple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If true it's just another sign that the New Apple ("The New Apple: Remember When We Were Good?" or maybe "The New Apple; Stuff by Morons, for Morons!") is rotten to the core. Idiocy after idiocy coming from the absolute fucktards now in control. Shit UIs, Shit hardware designs (MacPro????? Hahahahahahaha! Seriously, how fucking stupid are the people remaining at Apple? How fucking stupid do they actually think their customers are?). I think we are already seeing a huge Anti-New-(rotten)-Apple response in the market and I think it's going to get bigger. Apple lost their way when they decided that "good enough" is good enough. It isn't. "Good Enough" just means the same crap as everyone else. They don't have to innovate all the time, but they do have to make really, really good stuff, good hardware, and great software. Now they basically just make shit.

  109. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    battery life is more of a function of FUCKING KILL ALL THE ADWARE ASSHOLES! Doesn't really need to make the phones thicker.

    Give me the ability to sideload a hosts file that redirects all ad servers to 0.0.0.0; and my battery will last DAYS. It's a software fix. A dead simple software fix. Unfortunately, it would cost apple way too much in lost ad revenue. Incidentally - Google/Android fails hard here too.

  110. Re:Devil's Advocate? Nah. by RandCraw · · Score: 2

    Wait. Are you saying Apple is the Devil, if you're the devil's advocate?

    Then allow me to be the devil's prosecutor:

    1) All wire cables need shielding. You're assuming a digital signal will fail less often than analog due to strong RF interference. But since digital cables use wires too, they too will fail if the field is intense enough, probably at about the same point as analog does (just as digital TV tuners do). And I've *never* experienced interference from my analog cables.

    2) You bought cables with crap connectors. Any decent analog cable has connectors that don't crackle or quit when the line is bent. (BTW, all earbuds are fine examples of such crap.)

    3) Phones come with 1 or 2 rings, usually 2. If this leaves in deeply dismayed and contemplating suicide, switch to bluetooth now. Problem solved.

    4) What's the point of encryption on headphones? The audio bleeding through your earpads is audible to anyone within 5 feet anyway. If this made sense, it'd be available via bluetooth now.

    5) Digital connectors won't bypass the internal DAC. The market for external mobile DACs is so small, mobile DACs will remain internal and in-line... inescapably, alas.

    6) Again, nobody wants an ultra thin phone, except Apple -- so they can sell more replacement phones after you break yours for the fourth time in a month.

    And remember, a digital output signal will require active headphones with batteries to drive an external amp and noise cancelling DSP. Thus *all* mobile phones just got a lot more fragile and expensive, in ways that do NOT serve anyone but Wall Street analysts. It's they who are afraid that too small an excess of useless features will cause Apple's stock valuation to slip, thereby driving the entire board to jerk their knees in perfect synchrony with "Yankee Doodle Dandy" while waving incense and sprinkling rose water.

  111. Re:You hipster douchebag! by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Your complete cluelessness is funny. I'm actually 53, clean shaven and English.

  112. I want a completely sealed... by Bartles · · Score: 1

    ...phone with no ports or openings at all. I think physical connectors are already obsolete, except perhaps for a power connector. Phones are too delicate.

    1. Re:I want a completely sealed... by Nadir · · Score: 1

      What about microphone or speaker ? Oh, you don't use your phone to make calls.

      --
      --
      The world is divided in two categories:
      those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
    2. Re:I want a completely sealed... by Bartles · · Score: 1

      No, I do. It's just that it's 2016. I think they can make sealed audio components or use some sort of neat transducer.

  113. I used to love Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now I revile them. Apple = hubris

  114. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by stephanruby · · Score: 1

    That and the fact that if you hold your credit card-like iPhone just the right way, it would just vibrate and use your skull as a speaker.

  115. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think you can argue a component that everyone uses all the time is a waste of space. Remove something that hardly anybody actually uses like fingerprint readers or NFC if you must. Hell, remove the bloody cameras before you remove the stereo jack.

  116. Vote with your wallet. by evorster · · Score: 1

    May I be the first one to point out that if you don't like it, don't buy it? There are plenty of alternative smart phones out there. If Apple can't sell their jack-less phone, they will get the message in a hurry. If they can, well; then just maybe it is not such a big deal.

  117. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by UnderCoverPenguin · · Score: 1

    "I wish my phone's screen wouldn't break so easily."

    My girlfriend's mom got an iPhone 6, within 2 months, the screen had cracked under "gentler" circumstances than she treated her previous iPhone. Apple did replace it. By then, a new screen protector was available - made of the same type of glass. She got one of those, thus making her slimmer iPhone 6 as thick as her previous iPhone.

    Seems the business getting the better part of the deal was the protector vendor. And Apple wants to go even thinner?

    --
    Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
  118. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by VincentFreeman · · Score: 1

    Actually, the iPod Touch and Nano are much thinner than the iPhone 6, and both have headphone jacks. If you want more battery life, you can increase the volume of the battery without making the phone thicker, by removing the jack and using the previously wasted depth.

  119. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by dgatwood · · Score: 1

    USB, FireWire, "RS-232-like" Serial I/O, analog audio out L/R, Analog Audio In?, Analog Video out, Power, and a few other signals I can't remember right now.

    USB, FireWire (on some devices), stereo audio input and output, 3.3V power output (for accessories), serial (for accessories), composite and S-Video output (on iPod Photo only). And the USB contacts could be used in either device mode or host mode (on hardware that supported it). In fact, IIRC, many iOS devices could actually drive standards-compliant USB audio interfaces through the dock connector, so with a small amount of effort, it was possible to provide digital audio through that connector as well, albeit slightly indirectly, and with less than 100% compatibility.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  120. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by dgatwood · · Score: 1

    Sorry, slight correction: Those are the dimensions of the battery in the iPhone 6s Plus. :-) That would basically be the entire interior of a 6s....

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  121. Remember PS/2, Serial, Parallel ports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple did the exact same thing when they switched the iMac to all USB from the standard serial/parallel/PS/2/ADB ports. Everyone had exactly the same complaints. And you know what? After about 3 years of whining everyone is thrilled with USB. Change happens and smarter interfaces are almost always better.

  122. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They make cases that thicken your iPhone dramatically and give it a little bit more battery life. The problem with using external cases is that a battery requires a hard wall around it to protect it. This adds considerable volume. And an external battery, because it cannot share the phone's charge circuit, has to include all of that redundant circuitry as well. So you could double an iPhone's battery life internally by adding about 2mm of thickness, but a case that doubles the battery life adds about 8mm of thickness. That's fine if you were planning to use a case anyway, but if you weren't, then that's a lot of wasted space.

    To make matters worse, because of Apple's Lightning port licensing rules, unless you buy Apple's hunchback of Notre Dame case, AAFAIK, all of those external battery cases make your phone incompatible with lightning accessories. So if Apple ditches the headphone jack, those third-party battery case users won't have any way to connect their phones to any kind of wired audio output without removing the phones from their cases (thus eliminating the extra power boost, along with any protection that the cases might provide). That's a terrible user experience if ever I heard of one.

    Incidentally, that's yet another reason why removing the headphone jack is such a very bad idea.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  123. Another reason to migrate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd buy a thicker phone. With more battery life. I don't want a wider or taller phone. But thicker would be fine if they added battery (and maybe some memory.) Phones have gotten impossible to put in your pocket.

  124. Re: big whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think most of the commenters don't own an iPhone already, so not likely really the market.

  125. "Ditching a deeply established standard..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah.

    Just like killing VGA for screens, PS/2 for keyboards, BNC for networks did.
    Get over it. The audio-jack -- especially the 3.5mm version -- has been a nightmare for everybody -- since the very beginning.
    It's time to finally abandon it.

  126. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My case doubles the thickness of my phone and can charge my phone twice. It also has a USB port I can use to charge other devices. If I don't want the bulk (the iPhone 6 is think enough that this doesn't matter a whole lot) I can simply take the phone out of the case.

    Personally I'd rather have the thinner phone.

  127. Never interrupt Apple by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    Never interrupt Apple when it is busy making a mistake.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  128. I am neutral, but what weak arguments... by DutchDopey · · Score: 1

    1. Digital audio means DRM audio :
    That has already happened, You aren't really digitising a headphone jack signal, right?
    2. Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.
    Don't use them, use a dongle.
    3. Dongles are stupid, especially when they require other dongles.
    If you don't like dongles, use lightning or wireless.
    4. Ditching a deeply established standard will disproportionately impact accessibility.:
    Let's keep hanging on standards, that is always really helpful. I can see the innovation in moving HQ DAC to the headphones. Now customers can choose if they care about audio.
    5. Making Android and iPhone headphones incompatible is incredibly arrogant and stupid.
    .....
    6. No one is asking for this.
    No one was asking for an iPhone.

  129. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Adapters for 3.5 to 2.5 are cheap and small. It's the same electronics.

    Apple's solution is complex and expensive. Shock, horror.

  130. How about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about voting with your wallet and not buying a phone that lacks the 3.5mm jack?

  131. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by topologicalanomaly47 · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately most of same people go out and buy the thinner glossier shit phone they find while bitching all over about how bad plastic phones are.

  132. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every cubic mm in the iPhone is used for something ...

    Yeap. Glue, glue and more glue!

  133. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about a design that is a groove in the back of the device? The plug is pushed in sideways, and when it is in it will stick out a little. So, it is probably only 2.1 mm deep. Ah, well, it is not smooth and hidden.

    Perhaps this change is just to create feature parity between iphone and iwatch.

  134. No one is asking for this by Askmum · · Score: 1

    6. No one is asking for this.

    Really? I refer to the first argument:
    1. Digital audio means DRM audio

    Sure, no users are asking for this, but do you make a phone for the users or to make money?
    If the reason was waterproofing then there are analog options too. There is no reason whatsoever a Lightning connector could not transfer analog signals.

  135. Growing user-hostility by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    Smartphones are getting more hostile, to certain users. Like those who want to synch things locally with a PC without putting all of their data in $COMPANY cloud first.

    I'm sure a user-friendly smartphone could find quite a few customers.

  136. Apple Long Game - Cut of everyone's pie by Aurien · · Score: 1

    This is all apart of Apple's long term strategy of making sure they get a piece of everything sold that runs on or connects to their devices. This started with forcing all apps to be installed and bought through their market place, no side loading allowed without rooting. Then it continued when they moved to a proprietary connector so that they got a cut of the pie from all of the manufacturers who made accessories/devices that connected to their bottom port. Now you'll have to buy a lightning to 3.5mm adapter or headphones that connect to their lightning port if you want wired headphones. Either way Apple makes money. In a couple of years they'll phase out audio over Bluetooth for a new proprietary standard that'll improve audio quality, use less battery, blah, blah, blah. So that Apple will get a cut of that pie as well. Wouldn't surprise me then after that, they'll phase out Bluetooth all together because their new proprietary standard is just so awesome.

  137. I don't get number 2 by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Wireless headphones and speakers are fine, not great.

    What?

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  138. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    I want a thicker battery AND a card slot. There's no reason to make them thinner anymore. It's just going to either make the phones more fragile or cause more damage to you when it's in your pants pocket and you bend over (only to hear the ghost of Steve Jobs tell you "you're bending over wrong").

  139. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My main current complain is "I wish my high-end phone was smaller". 4-4.5" FTW!!

  140. Well, if that's so... by OpenSourced · · Score: 1

    If that's so, people won't like the new "feature" and won't buy un-jacked phones. If they buy them, then it's not such a big problem. As long as there is competition, natural selection should take care of the problem, if there is a problem. I, for myself, welcome our... I mean I'll add the "having a 3.5mm jack" to the list of things my phones must have.

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  141. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is apple we are talking about, they are use to buying additional dongles.. After all most already own the 19.95 USB to lightning dongle, what is another dongle hanging off their phones?

  142. Luddite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Kids get off my lawn" is all I'm hearing here. Digital audio is simply better quality. It just is better. We've had the 3.5" stereo analog port for a very, very long time and we can do better now.

  143. 2 year old rumor as fact by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1
    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  144. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by havana9 · · Score: 1

    There's a 2,5 mm four jack that is quite standard, and actlually used on Nokia cellphones and in some two-way radios. Ready made adapters were sold by almost every electronics store, and of course Nokia made earpiece with the smaller connector.

  145. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember, though, that what people think they want is not always what they really want.

    Yes, people may say that they don't need a thinner phone. But they may still prefer the thinner one nevertheless.

  146. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by macs4all · · Score: 1

    USB, FireWire, "RS-232-like" Serial I/O, analog audio out L/R, Analog Audio In?, Analog Video out, Power, and a few other signals I can't remember right now.

    USB, FireWire (on some devices), stereo audio input and output, 3.3V power output (for accessories), serial (for accessories), composite and S-Video output (on iPod Photo only). And the USB contacts could be used in either device mode or host mode (on hardware that supported it). In fact, IIRC, many iOS devices could actually drive standards-compliant USB audio interfaces through the dock connector, so with a small amount of effort, it was possible to provide digital audio through that connector as well, albeit slightly indirectly, and with less than 100% compatibility.

    Thanks for that list!

    I know a lot of iOS Device engineers at Apple were actually not too happy with the video capabilities they lost when Apple moved from the 30 pin connector to Lightning. But the Dock connector was beginning to show its age, and I don't miss having to play the " which way does it plug in?" Game with the 30 pin charging cable.

  147. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by macs4all · · Score: 1

    Adapters for 3.5 to 2.5 are cheap and small. It's the same electronics.

    Apple's solution is complex and expensive. Shock, horror.

    So, one adapter Good, but another adapter Bad.

    And has anyone ever seen a FOUR conductor 2.5 mm plug? Because that is needed for headsets with a microphone.

  148. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by macs4all · · Score: 1

    This is apple we are talking about, they are use to buying additional dongles.. After all most already own the 19.95 USB to lightning dongle, what is another dongle hanging off their phones?

    By the way, ALL of this is FUD. No one outside of 1 Infinite Loop REALLY knows what, if anything, Apple is planning to do with the 3.5 mm jack.

  149. Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    3.5mm connectors are "democratizing"?

    Go back to your shitty gender studies class.

    Fucking hell.

  150. No one is asking for this? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    I love how you guys have ZERO clue as to who the customer is to phone makers.

    It's not you. It's the phone companies and they want that jack gone. That way they can DRM the hell out of everything and force you to buy their Bluetooth headphones at 40% more profit.

    Yet all you will still happily buy the crap because you all have to have the latest shiny.... oohh shiny must have shiny!

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  151. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by jabuzz · · Score: 1

    There have been 3.5mm jacks sockets in waterproof phones for over two years now. Heck the Sony Z5 has a waterproof microUSB socket as well and it's only 7.3mm thick.

  152. Here's a suggestion... by wkwilley2 · · Score: 1

    If you don't like the change, then don't buy the next iPhone.

    How hard is that?

    --
    Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
  153. Agreed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also where is a new slide out qwerty keyboard 5 rows please. Those phones were the best! Fuck phone companies.

  154. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by jabuzz · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, here is a nice decent quality one with solder connectors

    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2-5m...

  155. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by olof_the_viking · · Score: 1

    But they would surely not be compatible with the old 2,5 mm connector, would they?

  156. The claim I've heard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is that 3.5mm is too big to fit on the new slim phones. Well, way back in the day, there were "radio watches" (yes, watches with built in AM radios). There was a standard 2.5mm headphone jack used on all those small devices. That'd probably hold phone companies for another couple generations...

  157. Opinions Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course, why not? This is what slashdot is now.

  158. dirt in jack causes problems by ed644 · · Score: 1

    Lint from my pocket inevitably finds it way into the jack. The headphone jack then doesn't fit in properly. I need a needle to pull out the lint. Sometimes this causes my iphone speaker phone to be silenced because the software thinks a headphone jack is plugged in. I hate my 3.5mm jack https://discussions.apple.com/... I'm not suggesting that this is the reason that they are eliminating the jack, but it's an added benefit for me. Apple could provide a software option to override the sensor telling the OS that a headphone is plugged in when it really isn't. I don't know why they don't do that.

    1. Re:dirt in jack causes problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Find a broken seat of headphones or earbuds, saw off a piece and make a plug.

  159. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by cdrudge · · Score: 1

    It's just going to either make the phones more fragile or cause more damage to you when it's in your pants pocket and you bend over

    ...which drives up future sales, AppleCare service plans, and/or repair profits. Plus add in all the additional sales for lightning-to-headphone adapters and lightning-based headphones and you now have additional revenue streams.

  160. what about an online petition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please consider the petition @
    https://www.change.org/p/apple-apple-s-iphone-to-keep-headphone-jack?recruiter=560391068&utm_source=share_for_starters&utm_medium=copyLink

  161. Re:Devil's Advocate? Nah. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    All wire cables need shielding.

    Allow me to introduce you to twisted pair.

    Digital connectors won't bypass the internal DAC. The market for external mobile DACs is so small, mobile DACs will remain internal and in-line... inescapably, alas.

    What? They most certainly do bypass the internal DAC. You have no idea what we are talking about, not even slightly.

    a digital output signal will require active headphones with batteries

    Oh yeah? Just like USB headsets have to have batteries? Hint, they don't.

    to drive an external amp and noise cancelling DSP.

    So don't have a DSP. Just the amp.

    There are real problems with this approach, most notably that charging and listening to headphones at the same time requires a special splitter cable which nobody wants to carry, and that nobody wants to have to replace the headphones they already paid for and few people will want to dick around with an additional headphone amplifier to make normal headphones work with the new system. Don't invent fake reasons because you're imagining things or just not paying attention to the conversation.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  162. Agree on all 6 counts by DriveDog · · Score: 1

    I hope the backlash takes a notch or two out of Apple's arrogance. Making some other thinner analog connector for which very cheap analog adapters could exist might be defensible in the name of thickness or water resistance, but eliminating a wired analog headphone port is flat out insulting to customers.

  163. FM Radio by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    Goes in the same category as refusing to enable FM Radio on phones. Well established standard that provides value to the consumer, and helps people on low budget plans and phones who don't want to spend more. In the case of headphones, they'll argue wireless headphones are the better technology and one people will adopt, but some people don't have the money to spend on new headphones. In the case of Radio, they'll argue everything is shifting to the internet, but people who can't afford more data on their plan can save and still get information and music off conventional radio.

  164. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

    Ultimately I would like something like that. But the devil is in the details. The battery life could be addressed maybe by not having a screen. So if there is a personal computer that I could put in my wallet like a credit card, and then provide ad hoc (and secure) interfaces to various proximity device like displays, keyboards, voice, etc. I would be interested in that. But you are right it's dumb to want an "all in one" device much smaller than what we have now. I already have to avoid the tiny USB drives that are around, they are too easy to lose. I just end up putting a bulky lanyard or something on them so i can find them.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  165. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by david-bo · · Score: 1

    Why not change from 3.5 mm to 2.5 mm headphone jacks then? It is still a standard and dongles will be trivial, cheap and available everywhere.

  166. Maybe they're removing it because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If there's no jack to plug in headphones, they won't be able to listen to the complaints.

  167. Could be Snowden effect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vice ran a Snowden interview in which he "secured" a phone by disconnecting the internal camera and microphone(s). That way the only possible microphone usage had to be intentional by plugging one in...

    Hot, muggy and coastal showers here by the Beach

  168. Re:What a load of hooey! by Maritz · · Score: 1

    If you're really so much of a douchebag hipster that you have some fancy-schmancy headphones with a round jack

    lol, the hipster in the equation is the guy with the regular ol' headphone jack that we've had forever?

    --
    I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  169. vote with your wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about instead of bitching that you don't like what a company is doing... don't buy the product!
    Or is having the shiny new iphone such a necessity you will buy it no matter what (pretty sure that's what they are betting on here).

  170. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by r0kk3rz · · Score: 1

    I think they're ultimately shooting for having future phones as thin as credit cards.

    And that's a very dumb goal. No one complains, "I wish my phone was thinner." People do complain, "I wish my phone had better battery life" and "I wish my phone's screen wouldn't break so easily."

    It's an interesting strategy really, you make phones impressively thin which only bolsters the idea that they're fragile, which makes people buy cases for them.

    You're basically outsourcing the structural integrity of the device and providing customisation options in one hit.

  171. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And that's a very dumb goal. No one complains, "I wish my phone was thinner." People do complain, "I wish my phone had better battery life" and "I wish my phone's screen wouldn't break so easily."

    People do however complain "I wish my phone fit in my pocket", which is partly a function of thickness, but much more the other two dimensions.

  172. No different than when Apple dropped the A: Drive by linuxrunner · · Score: 1

    Are you the same people complaining now that complained then?

    Apple is no longer going to have a PC with the A drive? *gasp* How dare they? They are going to increase the cost to the consumer. Why do they hate the consumer? We still use A drives!!!

    Now look.

    You are the same people complaining now that complained then.

    --
    www.slightlycrewed.com - Because aren't we all?
  173. three words: by mlwmohawk · · Score: 1

    3 1/4 floppy

  174. Another reason why this Apple shareholder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uses an Android phone.

  175. What else is new? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    I'd say a good percent of decisions that Apple makes are stupid and hostile and are simply done to find ways to skim more money off of their users. Their devices are overpriced and overrated as it is.

  176. Re:big whoop by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

    Even worse,the "early adopters" will rush out and give an early sales bump that makes it look popular, and the "cool kids" will insist that it's BETTER.

  177. Don't Buy Those Phones. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem solved. QED.

  178. Butt hurt much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one asked for systemd either, but look what happened.

    Butt hurt much?

  179. missing punctuation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Taking the Headphone, Jack Off. Phones Is User-Hostile and Stupid!

  180. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    Right because the headphone jack is sooo big....

  181. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    As thin as a credit card but as large as a book!?!? Yeah ok Potsy.

  182. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by kheldan · · Score: 1

    That's not the only reason, though, that's just their ostensible reason. The recording and movie industries have been trying to close the 'analog hole' for years now, and that's also what this is about. Removing any baseband audio output from devices means you can' t just plug it straight into another computer or digital recorder and record music in analog format, then re-digitize it. Of course they're creating a huge inconvenience for the average, non-pirating end-user, whereas all you need is a USB DAC dongle to 're-open' the so-called 'analog hole'; at some point audio must be analog again, otherwise human ears will never hear it, therefore there's always a way to gain the connectivity necessary to record baseband audio. Of course I'm not saying that Apple's claim that it's doing this to make phones thinner isn't valid, either, but it's not the only reason. Oh and by the way expect to see analog headphone jacks disappearing from lots of things for the above mentioned reason.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  183. vote with wallet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should be short lived stupidity. I won't be buying any phone without the standard analog headphone jack present. If everyone voices their feelings via their wallet, then Apple and everyone else will only be releasing 1 model that demonstrates incredible stupidity.

  184. Next iPhone will be near field charging by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Extending battery life immensely.

    It's a UW patent, actually.

    Other than that, I have no feedback, they dropped me from the alpha test.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  185. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

    the 3.5mm jack is older than that, you insensitive clod!
    I remember those at least going as far as the 1980's
    remember the Sony walkman

  186. ðYnobody cares about apple anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On it's way to death

  187. No on is asking for this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many valid points.. but when I consider my own situation, I realize I haven't plugged anything into the headphone jack on my phones in years. So, if it meant I could have a waterproof phone, then I would certainly ask for an Android device with no headset jack.

    I'm officially asking for it.

    You can remove point 6 from the list.

  188. Not to mention privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can disconnect a microphone built into a phone to preserve your privacy from eavesdropping. using the plug then allows you physical control of your microphone.

    we just seem to be stepping further and further into being under constant surveillance.

  189. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, any adaptor is regrettable.

    An expensive complex one is worst.

    Apple solution is expensive and complex and proprietary. Shock.

  190. Let's see how popular that is by kattisch · · Score: 1

    I would think that the power of the purse should show whether the consumer will accept this or not. I, for one, would never purchase one without a headphone. I live in a remote area and download things to listen to when I'm traveling and unfortunately my state doesn't have a lot of data connectivity in many parts of our state, and I use my vehicles aux port to play what is on my phone.

  191. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real problem is, to the company their phone is a piece of artwork. To us lowly customers, it's just a tool. Of COURSE they look down upon us and ignore our cries. Battery life? MORE BATTERY LIFE?! Simple, small minded commoners...

  192. Re:No different than when Apple dropped the A: Dri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully I'm not the only one that sees the humor in someone with a nickname involving Linux, discussing Apple hardware, using the Windows/DOS-specific naming convention for the technology. I think the name you're looking for is 'floppy disk/diskette drive'.

    Although floppy technology was getting long in the tooth, back then it was difficult or impossible to boot computers using a USB flash drive or CDROM (if you absolutely needed floppies, you could buy an external drive, increasing costs like you said). Heck, it can still be tricky to get bootable USB flash drives to work, but the technology has a lot more potential. A lot of people complaining about replacing 3.5mm headphones can't find good proposals for how a digital connector will be an improvement for listening to MP3s/streaming music on their phones. Change can be good, change for the sake of change not so much.

  193. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by macs4all · · Score: 0

    No, any adaptor is regrettable.

    An expensive complex one is worst.

    Apple solution is expensive and complex and proprietary. Shock.

    Actually, NO ONE that isn't under heavy NDA knows even if ANY of this FUD is even CLOSE to being true; so it all falls under the heading of "HFM" (Hardly Fucking Matters) until the new iPhones are launched, likely in September.

  194. "No one is asking for this" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "No one is asking for this"

    Has that ever stopped Apple? Or for that matter, Google, Microsoft, or when there is profits to be had?

  195. Let them die by their own hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Apple removed the headphone jack and half the people dropped iPhone in favor of Android. I don't see any downside to me. Only the upside of watching hubris take another life.

  196. Biggest problem is that lightning sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apples proprietary cables are just getting worse. The old dock connectors and cables would wear out and be expensive to replace. Lighting connectors are worse, because of the chip in them they seem to fail more ofter and do so electronically as well as physically. They put the stress of the cord over a smaller area and thus can wear out and break the port, and thus far offer ZERO advantage over micro USB to me.

    Arguably the 30-pin dock connector had advantages over the headphone jack for playback controls, etc., but those devices also had headphone jacks for backwards compatibility with my stereo, aux ins of older cars, my expensive headphones. A lightning to 3.5mm jack dongle will do that but will undoubtably go wrong more often, require expensive replacement, and be more of a PITA.

  197. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Though I for one, would not be averse to a narrower or shorter phone.

  198. So don't buy it by CauseBy · · Score: 1

    In 2008 I bought my second iPod after the first one broke. I plugged in my video cable to export a show to my TV, just like I'd done with my first iPod, but an error message told me I needed Apple branded cables. I learned that despite being physically compatible, Apple had made a software change which made my cables useless.

    I looked up the cables. On that day, the cables I owned were selling for (not a typo) six cents (I had paid several dollars when I bought them), and Apple's cables were selling for $49.99.

    It was the last purchase I ever made from Apple and was the day I swore never to buy anything with proprietary cables ever again. I have kept that promise to myself and I do miss the Mac OS but not nearly enough to go back. In my life, genericness is the top priority when buying equipment.

    This sounds like a shitty change to the iPhone. I have a dozen pairs of headphones and all of them have 3.5mm jacks. I wouldn't buy any audio product without the compatible jack and neither should anyone else.

  199. I'm teaching my kid to live in the world by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    the way it is, not the way I want it to be. Not to sound offputting but I think you're projecting your own neuroticism onto others. My kid, and most people, never give it two thoughts. She's never going to go to /. and post about it. The iPhone is a means to an end for her. It helps her fit in, helps her connect with people and gives her common ground with people in the upper strata. Those people can easily afford an iPhone. It's a trinket the them. And it's worth while engaging with them. They're successful. And while it's true associating with successful people doesn't guarantee success the opposite (associating with failures) most definitely guarantees failure.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I'm teaching my kid to live in the world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's time for you to read The Sneetches by Dr. Seuss. A race of monsters divided into two camps -- those who have stars on their bellies and those that don't. When a smart guy is able to ensure they all have stars, the ones that originally were set apart by their stars had theirs removed, setting them apart once again. Having a star was never what set them apart, they just used it as an excuse to exclude "the rabble" and when "the rabble" caught up, they changed the rules -- it was never about stars. It was about "Those who are there and those who want to catch up."

      Having an iphone won't make your daughter fit in with the cool kids. BEING a "cool kid" makes her fit in with the cool kids, and there's nothing she can buy, that the cool kids already have, that will transform her into a "cool kid". That's the act of "catching up" and it instantly removes any approaching "cool kid" status. If she wants to fit in, she needs to either naturally fit in with them (in which case, buying the phone won't be an act of desperation to fit in, it's just an optional thing she did to be like her friends) or bring something to the table that the cool kids are actually interested in but don't have, while still being "cool kid" material.

      Her personal grooming, smell, and attitude will decide if she's a "cool kid" and not anything she owns, and therefore whether those in that strata will not only engage with her, but treat her as an equal.

  200. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    Quite possibly. But when you ask people, what they say they want isn't a thinner phone, it's more battery life, which you get by making the phone thicker.

    Actually, it's by making the phone heavier - which they don't want.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  201. Re:Taking the Headphone Jack Off Phones Is User-Ho by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    The receptacle is much larger then what gets shoved into it. You should know.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  202. Half Measures by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    To be honest, I think this has little to do with either waterproofing or making phones thinner. This has to do with selling more stuff to users for more profit, and further locking in what consumer base they already have because all their gear will only work with your product. This has been the Apple mantra since the iPhone came out. Considering how much money they have made, it has been working.

    As far as "waterproofing" anything getting rid of a "port" is kinda pointless unless you get rid of all ports. Which might actually be possible now that you can do wireless charging and have wireless speakers (and wireless networking and communication). Heck if it wasn't for the touch screen, you could probably totally encase it in a solid block of plastic making it more less totally waterproof... Of course then you couldn't have removable battery or storage, but it isn't like apple does any of those things. As far as the SIM card goes I am sure there is probably a better way than having a physical chip you have to plug into your device anyway.

    1. Re: Half Measures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All those things you listed make the phone suck.

  203. dummy microphone for privacy by Doke · · Score: 1

    The iphone headphone jack is also the external microphone port. Eliminating the jack would make it impossible to insert a "dummy" plug to disable the microphone. This may matter to some of the more paranoid users.