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.

95 of 595 comments (clear)

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

    He said "jack off" ! tee hee

  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 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.

    3. 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.
    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.

    7. 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.

    8. 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...

    9. 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.

    10. 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.

    11. 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!
    12. 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.

    13. 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.

    14. 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.
    15. 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.

    16. 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=-
    17. 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.

    18. 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.
    19. 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.

    20. 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.
    21. 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.

    22. 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.
    23. 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,

    24. 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
    25. Re:cost reduction by perryizgr8 · · Score: 2

      Headphone port has jack shit to do with waterproofing.

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

      The smaller the phone, the shittier the battery.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    27. 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.

    28. 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.

    29. 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.

    30. 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.

    31. 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.

  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 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
    5. Re: Apple by adhdengineer · · Score: 2

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

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

    Never stopped Apple before.

  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 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.

    2. 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.

  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 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"
    2. 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.
    3. 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.

    4. 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.
    5. 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.

    6. 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.

    7. 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
  8. 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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: 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.

    2. 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.
    3. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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]

  14. 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...

  15. 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.

  16. 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: 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.

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

  17. 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?

  18. 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.

  19. 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: 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.

    2. 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.

  20. 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."

  21. 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.

  22. 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.

  23. 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 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.

  24. 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.

  25. 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.
  26. ...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.

  27. 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
  28. 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.

  29. 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"
  30. 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?

  31. 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."
  32. 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.

  33. 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.

  34. 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.

  35. 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.

  36. 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.

  37. 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...

  38. 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.