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.

20 of 595 comments (clear)

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

    He said "jack off" ! tee hee

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

    Fuck Apple.

    1. 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?

    2. 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?

  3. 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.

  4. 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 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.

    3. 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. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.
  10. 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!
  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.
  14. 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.