Slashdot Mirror
Steve Wozniak Says Apple Must Fix iPhone 7 Bluetooth Or Revive Its Headphone Jack (afr.com)
We've talked extensively about the missing headphone jack on the upcoming iPhone. While some say that the move will ruin user experience -- something that has already started to seem that way in the real world -- a few argue that someone needs to push the needle to move the technology forward. Now Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has something to say about the missing legacy audio jack as well. He is asking Apple to fix the Bluetooth first if the company intends to give users to move to wireless headphones. From a Financial Review report: Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak has warned Apple is going to frustrate a lot of customers if it removes the headphone jack from the upcoming iPhone 7. [...] Customers wanting to use their existing, wired earbuds and headphones might have to buy an adaptor that attaches to the iPhone's Lightning port, or to whatever port does remain on the phone. "If it's missing the 3.5mm earphone jack, that's going to tick off a lot of people," Mr Wozniak told The Australian Financial Review. "I would not use Bluetooth ... I don't like wireless. I have cars where you can plug in the music, or go through Bluetooth, and Bluetooth just sounds so flat for the same music." Mr Wozniak said he would probably use the adaptor to connect his existing earphones to his next iPhone, and said that, like many other users he is attached to the accessories that he uses alongside the phone. "Mine have custom ear implants, they fit in so comfortably, I can sleep on them and everything. And they only come out with one kind of jack, so ''ll have to go through the adaptor," he said. "If there's a Bluetooth 2 that has higher bandwidth and better quality, that sounds like real music, I would use it. But we'll see. Apple is good at moving towards the future, and I like to follow that."
Doesn't mean he isn't right.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
He also founded CL 9, maker of the first programmable universal remote control.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Bluetooth has it's own compression it uses. Very often it clashes with the compression that many audio files use. I found this out the hard way by buying a Bluetooth to stereo device to plug into my home theatre receiver, to play music from my phone over house speakers. If the file was even high-rate MP3, I could hear artifacts of the two compression algorithms fighting with each other; it actually set my teeth on edge. Using AAC instead of MP3 helped, but I'm sure the guys with really sensitive ears will still hear some artifacts to set their teeth on edge, even with something 'lossless' like FLAC or Apple's lossless compression, or maybe even with an uncompressed audio file.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
"If there's a Bluetooth 2 that has higher bandwidth and better quality..."
- Steve Wozniak, Bluetooth expert
karma: ouch!
I think Bluetooth audio sounds very poor, but I also feel there could be something else as the endgame here. Step one - wireless headphones are cool, get everyone using them and don't worry about audio quality, just overcook the bass. Step two - eliminate the headphone jack so no one can connect analogue headphones anymore. Step three - introduce DRM on the phone and ensure that only DRM protected audio can be played across the connection. Result - the RIAA and their associates are super happy. Maybe I'm paranoid, but it's what HDCP purports to do for HDMI.
This fall, my next laptop might very well be Windows. The fact the MBP lineup has been flat these past generations, combined with some really fucking stupid decisions (USB-C), and now this fiasco with the iPhone 7... yeah, Apple, your innovation has been sucking balls lately.
Life is not for the lazy.
Oh, they're going to "fix" it? What do users love more than 1 battery to worry about and having it run dry at just the right time? TWO BATTERIES! Yay, wireless headphones! Good luck "fixing" that, lol.
Apple will do no fixes of anything until it learns its lesson with very bad iPhone 7 sales because of the removal of the 3.5mm audio jack. Apple are no longer trend setting, they are losing sales to Far East Android phones giving people mostly what they want in a phone shows.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
also represents the most successful period of apple's short history
Come on people, you don't have to validate the RIAA's meddling in our phones.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
I for one would like an iPhone that's totally wa ter proof
headphone jack: bluetooth
lightning port : inductive charging
would be completely water proof with no external buttons -- how is that a bad thing exactly?
/sarcasm, Riiight, because teaching kids "doesn't count."
WTF have _you_ done?
I've given many thousands of dollars to Apple over the years. If they get rid of the headphone jack then I am out of the Apple Camp for good. This is the first real evidence I have seen that Apple is really not the same without Jobs. Removing the headphone jack is so god damn stupid I can't believe they will actually do it. There isn't a reality distortion field to save this one.
Doesn't mean he isn't right.
Maybe, but he should do some research on Bluetooth before making recommendations. It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio.
From Wiki: Bluetooth 5 was announced in June 2016. It will quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity of low energy Bluetooth connections, in addition to adding functionality for connection-less services like location-relevant information and navigation
...they're just rumoured to be shipping the phone without one.
That's not removing. Nobody is having their existing phone amputated. The SE and 6S series will still ship after the release of the new phone, and they have headphone jacks. The existing, shipped devices have their headphone jacks.
If the new phone doesn't have a headphone jack, it'll be all over the Internet. There will be almost no way to avoid knowing that the iPhone 7 doesn't have a headphone jack.
Any "frustration" felt by users who then go and bye one, *knowing* that it doesn't have a headphone jack, *seeing* in the store that it doesn't have a headphone jack, having an Apple employing trying to up-sell them Bluetooth headphones after *telling* them it doesn't have a headphone jack... well, I have a suggestion for where they can plug their existing headphones.
"It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio"
So the sane decision is to wait until BT5.0 is out, widely adopted, and stable, before cutting the cord, yes?
"Steve who?"
I don't mind new technologies. Improving Bluetooth audio, improving the Bluetooth standard to support better audio. That's all fine, and may lead to the improvement of audio in the future.
However, the technology of the headphone jack is so simple, so universal, so useful- I feel like removing the headphone jack seems a silly move. I'd rather a slightly thicker phone than no headphone jack.
Now... with that said, I don't actually remember the last time I used a headphone jack on my phone anyway. I think for a large number of people its not going to make a difference. I'm curious how many people who are lamenting the loss of the headphone jack actually use it. I suspect it is a minority of users who use it today.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Headphones are important, and much more personal than the phone because they must fit your ears (or head for clamshells).
Next step is to introduce cinavia protection to the tracks.
Noticeably crappier sound quality, plus yet another device that needs charging and can fail before my phone battery does, and is more expensinve, for what benefit? The lack of a cable that never bothered me anyway? I just dont get it.
I am sort-of in the camp of "leave the audio jack alone", but either way - don't see any issue with copy protection. Ok, so there is DRM on the data and on the radio (Bluetooth or whatever) link to the external headphone/speaker/whatever. But that external device still has to play analog over the air sound for human analog ears? So, perhaps with exception of more loss of quality due to sub-par compression, we still have the same "analog gap" and the same ability to record/save/backup/whatever?
Am I missing anything here? Did Apple invent direct to brain wave interface?
Doesn't mean he isn't right.
Maybe, but he should do some research on Bluetooth before making recommendations. It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio.
From Wiki: Bluetooth 5 was announced in June 2016. It will quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity of low energy Bluetooth connections, in addition to adding functionality for connection-less services like location-relevant information and navigation
Oh, well then. That's different. That ought to allow me to play my mp3 files, in all their shitty lossy resolution, quite faithfully. Jeezuz, talk about a pointless gripe. Fix the music industry's (and Apple's) focus on mp3 first, then we can bitch about the fidelity of Bluetooth.
why does Apple have this obsession with making their devices thinner. Most of the people I've talked to wouldn't mind a thicker device if it meant longer battery life.
Doesn't anyone remember the dumbphones being fond of using 2.5mm headphone jacks, which required 2.5-to-3.5mm adapters? It was obnoxious, you'd lose them and be SOL for listening to your music, or the fragile wires would break prematurely. It was an improvement to START putting 3.5mm headphone jacks on phones. And now we're moving backwards, back to these stupid adapters.
.. if Apple is so dead-set determined to say that their way is better, would be for the iphone to have *2* lightning ports instead of just one... You'd still need an adapter for 3.5 mm phones, but even if you had lightning headphones, you could at least charge your phone while you listen without requiring a lightning hub, (or even plug in other lightning devices that the phone supports)
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
a few argue that someone needs to push the needle to move the technology forward.#### What the hell for? Why fix something if it isn't broken? The only forward I see is where everything is encrypted, locked down, welded shut, and sealed in exposy so you can't do anything without your new masters' blessing This future - DO. NOT. WANT.
>I have cars where you can plug in the music
How many cars do you have, Steve? Just curious.
A pox on web designers who feel that window.innerWidth == screen.availWidth
Steve Wozniak, CEO of Apple, Inc.
nice ring to it, huh? why the hell didn't that happen?
Why does Apple constantly feel the need to make their customer cater to their silly money-grabbing whims? If Apple didn't have so many hipster fanboys buying every single stupid product they make, they would have been out of business 10 years ago. My brand new PA speakers don't have bluetooth. My relatively new home theater receiver doesn't have bluetooth. Any sound-outputting product that doesn't have a headphone jack is a sound-outputting product I won't be buying. Period.
a few argue that someone needs to push the needle to move the technology forward.#### What the hell for? Why fix something if it isn't broken? The only forward I see is where everything is encrypted, locked down, welded shut, and sealed in epoxy so you can't do anything without your new masters' blessing This future - DO. NOT. WANT.
Did you know that MP3 is nearly 25 years old?
And Apple never sold MP3 music files. They started with 128kbps AAC and they've upgraded to 256kbps AAC a few years ago.
iTunes also allows you to rip your own CDs in even higher bitrates and in Apple Lossless (Apple's equivalent of FLAC).
So no, bitching about the quality of Bluetooth audio is not pointless.
Anyone else suddenly wondering what type of music Woz listens to?
And it's supported by all the high end phones. Except Apple - they want their own standard (interestingly, just the iOS devices; the Macbooks have AptX compatibility). It consistently rates higher than any other Bluetooth audio experience, and it's low-latency variant is very nice too. And yes, I develop Bluetooth headphones for a living.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Never mind 2 weeks, it was probably too late 12 months ago if not more.
And AptX is available on at least the Samsung Galaxy S3 and newer (https://www.aptx.com/products?field_product_brand_tid=12&field_product_category_tid=126), but still not on any Apple devices.
Works nicely withy S6 and the August EP-650 bluetooth headphones (which I also use on my linux desktop and was painless to use).
Yes! It doesn't seem to bother anyone else I know, but how can they enjoy music that sounds like it's coming from under several inches of water? Not an audiophile or anything, but I do want decent fidelity. I heard all the hype about satellite radio, then the first time I heard it, I thought something had to be wrong.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Bluetooth works fine for me if I have the phone on an armband or if I hold it out to the side, but the second I lower my arm or put the phone in my pocket, my headphones stop working. Give me a wired connection please!!
Don't even get me stated on having to re-pair my phone to my car stereo every time I want to use it, but that's my fault for buying a cheap car stereo (note to self - don't buy Pyle brand ever again)
Real SUV's don't have cupholders
It's 5:42 A.M., do you know where your stack pointer is?
Anyone else spot the problem here? "His next iPhone." The guy has already made up his mind, independent of whether it's good or bad. This is the economic equivalent of someone who votes party line.
He doesn't give a single fuck, so there is no reason Apple (or anyone else) should listen to him. He has announced his irrelevancy. I'm not projecting that onto him; he's saying it!
All the funnier that he's "attached" to his nonstandard accessories. The guy is a classic lock-in victim, except with the bonus that's he's already sworn to never do anything about it.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Sounds good ... if there isn't a corresponding increase in battery consumption. (i.e. you can't get something for nothing, especially when they constantly try to make phones thinner at the same time for some stupid reason)
Low power bluetooth signal vs powering magnets that are physically driving a plastic cone? The phone's battery is powering the current ear buds. In a wireless scenario the the wireless device has its own battery.
Other than being a first class engineer and proven visionary?
Also note that this topic isn't quite random and does cover technical areas that are within his field of expertise. On top of that driving paper/plastic cones with magnets isn't exactly modern technology and predates the 1970s.
Lack of another huge success like the Apple I and II does not reflect upon engineering skills and opinions. It reflects that success often demands much more than engineering skill, many non-engineering skills often.
...And it goes through the lightning port. I bought a third party adaptor that fits in behind the standard stereo (in a 2006 VW!) and while I actually have to have two adaptors (iPhone 3G to iPhone 4--something changed in the 30-pin layout or something, and then a standard 30-pin to lightning adaptor on top of that) I can still control my phone from the steering wheel. The sound quality is, of course, very good.
When I borrowed my friend's car, I used my USB/Lightning cable to plug into her Sony deck. That worked fine, too. Charged the phone as well.
So I don't know what he's talking about when it comes to cars. There are a few ways around having to use the headphone jack or bluetooth.
It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio.
Will it work with headphones that never need charging?
"can fail before my phone battery does"
No worries - with your phone using the Bluetooth radio constantly - the extra battery drain ensures it will fail first!
Steve Jobs that made Apple what it was
According to Wall Street but engineers tend to feel very differently. The simple truth is that it was a partnership. Without the revolutionary hardware design of Woz, Jobs wouldn't have had such a low cost and capable machine to sell. There are engineers as talented as Woz, and pitchmen as talented as Jobs, that have not had "great" success because they never met their peer from the other side.
Similarly Jobs' success with the Mac and iPhone also relied on extremely talented engineers, required them.
Jobs was the face of Apple, not the heart of Apple. That heart lies in the engineering talent.
Apple hasn't even released a mac book with a skylake processor yet
Review of 12-inch Skylake macbook from April
Why bother posting easily falsifiable lies?
Actually it is. It is short hand for:
* What have you done that is even 1/10 as meaningful as what Woz has accomplished?
* Where are your devices that helped change the world?
* Where is your computer langue?
* Where were you when they were _creating_ the personal computer movement?
* After starting a fortune 50 company why _isn't_ Woz allowed to "retire"?
* Why are you so insecure that you must put down others?
* Why do you criticize others when you're too afraid to even use a real name?
Only a troll criticizes a visionary and great engineer due to their own insecurity.
And talk radio channels are so heavily compressed it is sometimes hard to understand over the road noise.
However, that's in my wife's car. In my car, I do not have SiriusXM capable radio, but I have a USB input into a 3rd party headend. So I use the SiriusXM app on my iPhone and stream over LTE. In the app you can select "Maximum" for streaming audio quality. This setup actually sounds really good, better than any FM radio station (even ones supporting HD Radio). And it doesn't even dent my monthly usage at high quality, since it's still just an audio stream, not video.
The only advantage the satellite signal has is that you can receive it anywhere, whereas my solution only works where I have 4G/LTE service (which drops off quickly once you travel off the Interstate and outside of city limits where I live).
To charge the phones just get the adapter to the thunderbolt port and eun a wire from there while you list....hey now..waita minute
Who left Apple more than 30 years ago, and hasn't done anything since.
He stopped working day-to-day at Apple in the early 90's; but in no way would I characterize his Post-Apple endeavors as "not doing anything". Far from it. He just doesn't self-aggrandize; so most people never hear of the many, many things he has done after leaving his day-to-day job at Apple.
Just put aptX on Bluetooth like most decent quality Headphones and smart phones have. My Samsung Note 4 has supported aptX for almost 2 years now.
Gee, keep up with old technology....
I believe that the BT 5 audio standard is UNCOMPRESSED (or at least Lossless). That isn't possible without improving the underlying bitrate, which I believe BT 5 offers.
You're right, except you got it backwards. Without Wozniak, Jobs would have wound up selling insurance, or used cars, or some self aggrandizing personal improvement scam.
There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
Be that as it may, Bluetooth still uses more power then an audio jack: http://www.muada.com/2014/10-2... And that's not even counting the fact that this just covers transmission. You have even higher power requirements when you take the battery on the other end into account, but of course you won't notice that in the battery life on your phone
Fix the music industry's (and Apple's) focus on mp3 first
Apple has never been focused on MP3. They use AAC (which is an industry-standard CODEC that is demonstrably far superior to MP3 at any given bitrate below about 160 kbps), and ALAC, which is Lossless.
So, DO try to keep up with 2003, will ya?
> The internal DAC on the prius seems like it works well for CDs and BT, but not on it's auxillary inputs. Thoughts?
The AUX as in the 3.5mm jack that connects to your (analog) headphone jack? THIS headphone jack?:
> It doesn't seem to have that great of a headphone DAC as it sounds mediocre on everything I plug it into.
If you're plugging from a regular headphone jack, the DAC in the car shouldn't be involved - it is already analog.
As for the "bad DAC", trying turning the volume down considerably on the source and compensating by turning it up on the amp. Any modern DAC should have distortion below the threshold humans can detect in music. HOWEVER, the tiny amp for the headphones or the input it is plugged into could very well be overdriven. Turning down the volume on the source may very well fix your problem.
Here's what happens, when things are right and when they're wrong. When levels are right:
DAC sends 0.14 volts to headphone amp.
Volume is set at 5, so:
Headphone amp multiplies by 5 and sends 0.7V to car input.
(Car input sees near maximum loudness, line-level car input maxes out at 0.77 volts).
Car amp multiplies by 20 and sends 14 volts to speakers.
How things go wrong:
DAC sends 0.14 volts to headphone amp.
Volume is set at 10, so:
Headphone amp multiplies by 10 and tries to send 1.4 to car input.
Headphone amp can only manage 1volt, so the tops of the waves get cut off.
Car input gets 1V, but sinces it maxes out at 0.77V, it chops even more off the top of the wave.
Car amp multiplies by 20 and sends 15 volts to speakers, but not as a smooth wave, the tops are chopped of square.
Speakers try to move in smooth motion, not chopped, distorting the sound even more.
Having the level TOO low on the source creates a different problem.
Suppose there is 0.05V of noise in the source and the wire.
Source outputs 0.2V of music.
Car set to amplify by 40 (to compensate for low source level) also amplifies the noise by 40X.
2V of noise goes to speakers, along with 8V of music.
You're still relying on the audio hardware running in the headphone as opposed to the expensive device you payed for it in.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Says who? The Anonymous Coward who hasn't done anything ever?
I'm with you.... I don't need any more devices that need to be plugged in. Fine for tablets, because that is the point of them. But I don't like the idea of taking a device that doesn't need to be charged and making it chargeable, especially since batteries seem to only last 2 years of repeated charge cycles.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Don't worry, your BT Earbuds will have a dead battery too.
Wired earbuds just work. With BT earbuds, you'll have another device that you have to charge all the time, and it will be dead every couple of years, with non-replaceable batteries...
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
He *probably* meant to complain about the MacBook Pro, but, still, it's not really a good point. Apple is a bit behind the bleeding edge on some pieces of tech, notably anything related to system integration on the newest PC hardware, as they pick and choose what to support from top to bottom, leaving out a lot of good tech and picking other good tech. That's not an approach that would work for Linux or Windows. Meanwhile, areas like mobile processors they are leading the field in many ways.
aptX isn't exactly lossless.
It switches between lossless and lossy while trying to fit within bandwidth constrain.
Also, the codec is proprietary to Qualcomm.
IETF has already issued an open codec that beats most of its competition: OPUS.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Other than being a first class engineer and proven visionary?
You are a massive retard if you think he has any vision. Jobs had the vision.
Vision exists in design, in the user experience, AND in the design and implementation of hardware and software. Woz's vision is in the later areas, Jobs' in the former.
This moron was still pushing the Apple II well after it was obsolete.
The Mac under Jobs was not successful, its eventual success only came under the stewardship of others. At the time of Jobs' ouster from Apple in 1985 the Apple // was generating over 80% of Apple's income. The Apple // generated most of Apple revenue for many years after Jobs' departure. It wasn't until the early 1990s that Mac became the primary source of revenue.
// saved Jobs with the Apple III and save Jobs again with the early Mac.
And in the early 1980s it was Jobs that prematurely downplayed the Apple II in order to focus in the Apple III, which was a major failure and helped create an opening for IBM. So Woz and the Apple
Every venture this guy has been in after he left Apple has been a massive failure.
Jobs had many failures with the Apple III, the Apple Lisa, the Apple Macintosh under his original tenure (others turned it around after his ouster), the NeXT computer, etc. The eventual partial success of NeXTSTEP as Mac OS X was a fluke of history, of Apple's two internal classic Mac OS replacement projects failing. When NeXTSTEP was standing on its own two feet it was never very popular outside of computer science labs. It was Apple's adoption, something independent of Jobs' vision, and the grafting of a Mac OS user interfaces for NeXTSTEP that made it partially successful (its core, not its original UI). Jobs' vision also failed with respect to larger screen iPhones. His vision failed with the 6th generation iPod Nano that was developed under his tenure.
// saving Jobs over and over as Job's post Apple // vision failed repeatedly.
Plus Jobs v2.0, the person who revitalized the Mac and pivoted from computers to phones, was a very very different person than the Jobs v1.0 that founded Apple and developed the original Mac. He spent many years learning from old and new mistakes to get from v1.0 to v2.0. Woz in contrast took off a lot of time to teach, literally, in public schools. Its silly to compare Woz and Jobs, in v1.0 days they were trying similar things, but in v2.0 days they were not and hence the comparison fails. The fact remains that in those v1.0 days is was Woz and the Apple
This seems perfectly sensible to somebody making a media player, but for smartphones it means you have to come up with something else to do with your UI tones and notifications and whatnot (because you can't mix them into the mp3 stream without decoding and re-encoding, defeating the purpose of mp3 passthrough).
Or, the sound server/mixer in the phone could switch from MP3/AAC passthrough to mix-and-reecode whenever there are multiple streams, and switch back to passthrough once the music is the only remaining sound.
(As far as I know, pulse audio should be able to do it. It's already able to do with sample (only resampling and mixing audio if multiple channels, otherwise switching back to the music's sample rate if supported by the hardware), and is already used in several lesser known smartphone OS: as far back as the openmoko, and more recently in Palm/HP's webOS, and currently in Sailfish OS and Ubuntu Phone.
I suspect that Windows' sound mixing service should in theory be able to do it too...)
SBC was the first implemented because it's computationally trivial and royalty-free.
Speaking of which, FLAC and OPUS are royalty-free nowadays, and OPUS is even a IETF standard. Bluetooth should consider introducing them to Bluetooth...
I'm not sure it would have been practical to encode mp3 in real-time on a featurephone in 2004.
Trivially possible, but it would have required a MP3 *codec* core, instead of a purely MP3 decoding hardware core as done back then, which would have risen the cost of the SoC and thus of the feature phone. So nobody did it to stay competitive.
Anyway, the limiting factor of BT audio quality is the codec, not the radio. AptX is ~384Kbps for 16-bit stereo, and BT4.0 has a raw capacity on the order of 25Mpbs.
Correct me, if I'm wrong, but 25Mpbs figure is basically using AMP - Alternative MAC/PHY. Or in other words, using Bluetooth over a 802.11 transport (i.e.: over a Wifi transport).
That means the headset needs to have a more energy consuming "+HS" variant of bluetooth 3.0 that also features this "over Wifi" part.
(The same way that the low energy of Bluetooth 4.0 LE is bluetooth over WiBee)
This could mean shorter battery life on the wireless headsets.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Sounds good ... if there isn't a corresponding increase in battery consumption.
(i.e. you can't get something for nothing, especially when they constantly try to make phones thinner at the same time for some stupid reason)
From what I have read, Apple will be using a new, lower-power BT standard that boasts something like 4 X the battery life of current BT.
He also founded CL 9, maker of the first programmable universal remote control.
Among many other things.
"Hey, could you remove the earphone jack? I hate it!" Seriously, how can they even pretend this is what their customers want?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
I've attended two talks by him in person, some fifteen years apart, and they were essentially identical, filled with the same anecdotes about events from the 1970s, which were also in his biography.
Because that's what the people who ask him to speak at these events always want to hear.
Other than being a first class engineer and proven visionary?
You are a massive retard if you think he has any vision. Jobs had the vision. This moron was still pushing the Apple II well after it was obsolete. Every venture this guy has been in after he left Apple has been a massive failure.
Why don't you Log In and Repeat that Post, COWARD?
I was sitting in Arby's listening to music on my headphones, it got quieter, so I turned it way up... because I didn't realize the battery in the bluetooth headphones had gone dead, and I was now listening to the music through the phone speaker! So basically, I annoyed everyone around me for several minutes until I figured otu my headphones weren't working.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
When have you ever seen "Apple" and "sane decision" used in the same paragraph?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You're still relying on the audio hardware running in the headphone as opposed to the expensive device you payed for it in.
So, think of it the other way: At least you can make the audio better by purchasing different earbuds/earphones/DAC-adapter rather than having to rely on the luck-of-the-draw audio hardware in your expensive device. Afterall, who in their right mind purchases a phone primarily based on its audio fidelity?
Most mid-to-higher end Bluetooth headphones (including Beats until recently) have AptX. Sennheiser, JBL, AKG, Samsung, B&O, etc. It runs about $0.60 per headphone. And it has a definite improvement of audio quality, including in double-blind tests. I know Apple doesn't like to pay other license fees - but they LOVE to collect them (try including Lightning support without buying their chip AND paying a license fee...) A bit of hypocrisy. Just leave the 3.5mm jack and avoid it all...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Sounds good ... if there isn't a corresponding increase in battery consumption. (i.e. you can't get something for nothing, especially when they constantly try to make phones thinner at the same time for some stupid reason)
Low power bluetooth signal vs powering magnets that are physically driving a plastic cone? The phone's battery is powering the current ear buds. In a wireless scenario the the wireless device has its own battery.
So what if Apple does what some Android OEMs have done and adopt USB-C for the headphone out? Since no one knows for sure about any of this, why has everyone decided they don't like what Apple hasn't even announced?
Hell, Apple hasn't even made the product name public, or even admitted there is a new model yet, FFS!
Jobs was the face of Apple, not the heart of Apple. That heart lies in the engineering talent.
Hear, Hear!
Or as the Millenials say: This.
Jobs was the face of Apple, not the heart of Apple. That heart lies in the engineering talent.
Hear, Hear!
Or as the Millenials say: This.
Reposting to fix some sort of ridiculous Quoting fuck-up. Sorry!
I always turn my bluetooth off to prevent location tracking. Now Apple pushes for it to be on when listening to music.
Apple, I thought you were starting to take privacy seriously?
It's WiFi that can be used for Location-Tracking. Not so much Bluetooth. Its range is too limited.
Well, I started buying these devices back in the iPod days, so I very much think about what the sound is like when I purchase a device; third probably behind type of OS and screen size. On the other hand, I've bought $80 wired ear buds that sound spectacular but even with $200 bluetooth headphones, the sound seems flat in most that I have tried. Maybe if you go to the $500 range they start to sound ok but I'll just stop listening to music altogether before I spend that.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
having bluetooth enabled on the iPhone to play music is one of the quickest ways to kill battery.
Apple is reportedly using BT 5, which boasts quadruple the battery life of current BT.
It consistently rates higher than any other Bluetooth audio experience
Including the upcoming BT 5 that Apple is reportedly going to use?
From TFA he says he doesn't like what Apple are doing with their new phones, so he won't like it very much when he buys one.
Pardon?
Sensible people would say "I don't like what Apple are doing with their new phones, so I will buy something else.
but even with $200 bluetooth headphones, the sound seems flat in most that I have tried.
Please define "flat" in this context; since with audio reproduction, "flat" response is generally thought to be a good thing.
I very much doubt that is true. Without Wozniak, Jobs would have found some other techinically adept guy, and made squillions of dollars building computers. There's no doubt that building computers was Job's vision, and at the time it was a unique one. Being a technical guy, and doing amazing things with parts, was not a unique skill then, and it certainly isn't now.
He is right about that damn headphone jack though.
BT 5 is still not released as a spec. Expect hardware to follow in Q1 or Q2 next year (meaning not the iPhone 7). And to the best of my knowledge it requires a different chipset as the bandwidth through the modem is 4 times as high. Existing BT sets won't support BT 5 protocols. So in this case - the iPhone 7 will be crippled on an older protocol, without any clean way - short of a dongle - to use literally billions of existing headphones.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
No bass, mostly.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I have a Plantronics Focus UC headset that came with a bluetooth ver 4.0 USB dongle. I tried pairing the headset directly to to my laptop via the built in bluetooth 2.1 hub and it sounded flat. I then tried the Bluetooth 4.0 dongle supplied with the plantronics wireless headset and the sound was completely different (cinema quality HD). I suspect those complaining about the poor audio quality of bluetooth on their wireless headset either have a hub or headset that is bluetooth 2.1->3.0 and not 4.0 on or better on both sides.
Out of the iPhone buying demographic, Slashdot represents a very tiny percentage, one that actually cares about the problems this may cause (including the DRM). The vast majority of people will continue to queue up outside Apple stores to grab the new shiny, and obediently buy overpriced dongles or replace their existing headphones with the newer ones.
Sure, go ahead and boycott it, the enormous clout and marketshare of Apple will ensure that other manufacturers follow suit. Apple isn't even the first to propose this, Motorola and Leeco already have beaten them to it.
So look forward to a world where Android manufacturers also jump onto the bandwagon - of continuously restricting user choice, regardless of whether you boycott Apple over this or not.
The same thing is already happening on Android, from shipping phones without an SD card (started by Nexus and going on to the OnePlus 1/2/3), to getting rid of USB mass storage connectivity (HTC did this on some of their phones) and preventing apps from accessing the SD card.
"..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
> EE nazi here. ... grammar Nazis may now commence in attacking the previous sentence
Is that nazi or Nazi? Please decide. :)
> P.S. Fair game ... as well as this one.
Style guides differ on whether PS should be followed by a colon, if it it should be an en-dash.
Here's one even worse - I lied about the DAC voltage level too. :)
No bass, mostly.
Ah, so you mean "No thump", right?
You do realize, of course, that that comes from years of listening to everything with a Bass Boost, right?
Hey, I like "Thump", too; but it ain't an accurate frequency response. Just a "pleasing" one to many.
Why don't you go fuck yourself.
Won't reach.
I don't really understand what you mean about bass boost. I listen to a lot of electronic music, they do that on purpose.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
One huge advantage to wired headphones is that none of mine require batteries.
I do not need yet another accessory that requires batteries or charging.
BT 5 is still not released as a spec. Expect hardware to follow in Q1 or Q2 next year (meaning not the iPhone 7). And to the best of my knowledge it requires a different chipset as the bandwidth through the modem is 4 times as high. Existing BT sets won't support BT 5 protocols. So in this case - the iPhone 7 will be crippled on an older protocol, without any clean way - short of a dongle - to use literally billions of existing headphones.
According to the Bluetooth Technology site, BT 5 is due to be released as a spec "in late 2016 to early 2017." So obviously, they are pretty far along in the "Draft" process.
So, how can you be sure that this won't be like the 802.11n WiFi spec; where GOBS of devices were released based on the Draft spec, and then updated to support the finalized spec with a Firmware Update? Apple is perfectly capable of designing their own BT 5 chips based on the Draft spec, and it is doubtful that the lowest layers of the BT 5 protocol will change much, if at all, at this late date.
And if Apple includes their BT 5 earbuds based on the Draft spec, too, it at least partially answers the need for compatible BT 5 devices to use with the phone, and if the finalized BT 5 spec somehow renders the Apple earbuds incompatible (and assuming they cannot be updated themselves), Apple can continue to support their own earbuds as a variant of the BT 5 spec.
And of course, the phone would continue to support earlier versions of the BT spec, too.
So, it really doesn't matter if the last "i" hasn't been dotted and the last "t" crossed on the BT 5 spec; it is obviously far enough along that I would be shocked if Apple wasn't simply one among many who were in various stages of BT 5 product designs.
Left out the link for the August EP-650s:
https://www.aptx.com/products/...
Regarding availability of earphones with aptX support, most mainstream Android phone makers (Samsung, Sony, LG etc.) and the high-end audio brands (e.g. Sennheiser, Yamaha) have at least one pair listed, but a lot of the other bluetooth headset brands (Jabra, Skullcandy etc.) don't seem to have any listed on the AptX site.
Lots of Bluetooth soeakers and portable bluetooth speakers to choose from though.
I've never cared for ear buds, this last week I came across Skullcandy HESH 2 blue-tooth headphones. They are so sweet, the stereo separation is excellent, loud enough for me, acts as a headset for making phone calls, as well as tell the phone what to do.
I was told I couldn't be heard over the T.V., it was so low I could barely make it out, and they don't have a microphone.
It will connect to two devices, I fully expect it to connect to my son's PS4 and act as a headset with microphone for games (connects to my PS3 yet the receiver takes precedence).
They cost $80, but the store would meet or beat competitors prices, Walmart was selling them for $39 :).
The down side is they are rather large (much like older receiver headphones) but people ignore them, and the fact they are blue-tooth they won't pull in a FM station (need the ear bud wire as an antenna).
I've never really listened to music, now I'm changing music out on my SD card every few days.
My phone is an unlocked Alcatel onetouch POP 3, While 5.1.1 android they have tweaked the ROM to where a it's much better version.
The two work perfectly together, and the range apart was rather surprising.
kheldan (above) mentioned sound problems, MX Player (phone) will speed up it it finds it needs to to keep the music even. One problem alone is every now and again if I shake my head fast (on purpose) the music can get confused where it's place is in line (at least the way it seems).
Doesn't mean he isn't right.
Maybe, but he should do some research on Bluetooth before making recommendations. It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio.
From Wiki: Bluetooth 5 was announced in June 2016. It will quadruple the range, double the speed, and an eight-fold increase in data broadcasting capacity of low energy Bluetooth connections, in addition to adding functionality for connection-less services like location-relevant information and navigation
That's all well and good but are they putting it on?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
No, Job's vision was promoting Jobs at the expense of anything and anyone else. I cannot stand the sociopath worshipping that goes on around here, especially combined with dismissivness twoards tech talent.
You might as well say Woz would have found a sales guy to help promote his ideas if they'd never met. It's just as valid. Sales people with no ethics vastly outnumber people with true tech talent after all.
Fact is if Woz and Jobs had never met there would be no Apple. And the world would be a slightly better place because we wouldn't be having this debate about yet another stupid decision Apple is making. I guess the hipsters will love it but who cares what they think.
Every time I think about switching to a Mac something like this reminds me of what company I'd be dealing with.
"It appears that Bluetooth 5.0 may provide support for higher quality audio"
So the sane decision is to wait until BT5.0 is out, widely adopted, and stable, before cutting the cord, yes?
Sure. And since "widely adopted" means that the Device OEMs, not the Earbud OEMs, will drive that; how does one avoid the "Chicken v. Egg" problem that has doomed many a nascient technology for no good TECHNICAL reason? From what I have read, Apple is taking care of the "adoption" by supplying BT 5 earbuds with the new iPhone. And when Apple starts shipping iPhones (and presumably iPads and iPod Touches and Macs?) with BT 5, two things will happen: 1. Every single mobile device will also adopt BT 5 next model iteration. Don't EVEN think that won't happen. 2. A metric buttload of BT 5 headphones/earbuds and adapters will appear, magically taking care of the "widely adopted" issue.
Wait, why would they bundle bt5 earbuds with the new iphone and then start shipping phones with bt5? surely you'd do both at once, unless that's what you meant and the wording threw me off. But don't expect #1 to be true at all. Just because apple do something doesn't mean every single other player will do the same. There will be a good subset that would make one of their primary selling points still has 3.5mm and that on it's own would almost be enough for me. I've already decided next round I'm not bothering with a flag ship and get something decently priced that has an ok screen and good music playback that I can use without having to replace everything else. All I want is a phone/music player/internet browser that maybe has tetris on it. Everything else is fluff to me.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Low power bluetooth signal vs powering magnets that are physically driving a plastic cone? The phone's battery is powering the current ear buds. In a wireless scenario the the wireless device has its own battery.
Which need a separate charge cycle and power monitoring, If your headphones are dead but your device has a full charge you're shit out of luck. The power consumption of a standard pair or earbuds is negligible. Bigger headphones will use a bit more but not as much as your wireless which again have their own separate power considerations. I much prefer plugging my earbuds in and knowing that they will work regardless and I can plug them into basically anything with no faff.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Actually it is. It is short hand for:
* What have you done that is even 1/10 as meaningful as what Woz has accomplished? * Where are your devices that helped change the world? * Where is your computer langue? * Where were you when they were _creating_ the personal computer movement? * After starting a fortune 50 company why _isn't_ Woz allowed to "retire"? * Why are you so insecure that you must put down others? * Why do you criticize others when you're too afraid to even use a real name?
Only a troll criticizes a visionary and great engineer due to their own insecurity.
So because a person has had some success them immune from criticism? Is that how your world works?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Wait, why would they bundle bt5 earbuds with the new iphone and then start shipping phones with bt5? surely you'd do both at once, unless that's what you meant and the wording threw me off.
Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Just because apple do something doesn't mean every single other player will do the same.
At first, you might be right; but the major Android OEMs would most almost certainly follow suit almost immediately, and that would drag most, if not all, of the other OEMs along, too. Then at some point within the nextt 5 years, you will have to choose between a REALLY off-brand Android phone, or one without a 3.5mm jack. Of that I am relatively certain.
Hell, I can easily hear the difference between MP3, AAC, and lossless with just Apple earbuds. Try encoding the Blue Man Group "Audio" album. The cymbals are harsh/distorted even when encoded at high bit rates. Has been my codec test ever since. Only lossless has correctly reproduced the cymbals (of course). MP3 will have you ripping the earbuds out of your head as quickly as humanly possible.
The flight attendants will have to start checking that you have a wire to your headphones more than they do now.
For those that buy the iPhone 7, you're out of luck for listening while flying, unless there is an adapter.
I was considering getting the last one with a headphone jack and trying to wait it out until the jack is returned.
Maybe I'll have to go Android to get the usage model I want. I fly weekly, and noise cancelling headphones are my standard attire, they require a jack.
You can lose something that is loose, so tighten the loose item so you don't lose it.
You're that one person who always complains that their gazpacho soup is cold, right?
I thought that was Arnold Rimmer.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
The fix is very easy.
When you next need to replace your phone, ask yourself the following questions
1. What do I need to actually do with it.
2. Is it a device or a sign?
3. Do I have a few hundred spare $$$ lying around?
If your answers are something like
1. Look cool
2. A sign that I am an amazing person
3. Yes
Then you definitely want an iPhone. The lack of a socket will increase the effect for questions 1 and 2. If, however, your answers more resembles
1. Make phone calls, listen to music, use a tiny pocket computer to do stuff
3. OMG no
then an iPhone is not your best option. What you do get depends on just how enthusiastically you said no to question 4./p.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
That still leaves the many problems with Bluetooth itself and the devices. And rechargeable Li-Ion battery powered devices have a two year life max, due to chronological limit of Li-Ion batteries.
BT 5, which reportedly is what Apple will be using, aims to solve bandwidth, range, and battery life issues in one fell swoop. So, this is not going to be your father's Bluetooth quality.
And you are REALLY full of shit regarding Li-ion batteries. What you are used to is SHITTY charging circuits, that over-current the batteries in the name of fast charging. This overheats the batteries, which kills them dead. But in a properly designed device, Li-ion batteries are QUITE robust, and survive hundreds of charge cycles with negligible degradation. For example, my four year old iPad 2, which I am typing this on, gets HEAVY use on a daily basis, and if the battery capacity has dropped at all, it is not by a noticeable amount. I still get in the 12 hour plus world for surfing, emails, and posting on Slashdot,,,
Autos are 5 years behind the tech curve. You won't find a car with Bluetooth 5 before 2020.
So it doesn't help in this situation
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
How can I be sure? I'm working on two Bluetooth headphones right now for major consumer electronics companies - and BT 5.0 chipsets are not yet ready for use, not until Q1/Q2 of next year - and that's for sampling. So it's not going to be in the next iPhone.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
I make about four phone calls a month. I listen to music for about six hours a day.
Then you're still an idiot; for paying for cellphone service and a smartphone, when all you really need is an iPod Touch with a VoIP App. They have great audio. Or, since you have an irrational hatred of Apple, a Fiio with a pay as you go feature phone.
How can I be sure? I'm working on two Bluetooth headphones right now for major consumer electronics companies - and BT 5.0 chipsets are not yet ready for use, not until Q1/Q2 of next year - and that's for sampling. So it's not going to be in the next iPhone.
Unless, of course, Apple designs their own. I agree it would not be typical for that part of the design; but Apple can and does design quite a bit of silicon.
I agree it does sound like a bit of a long shot for this iteration; but for the next one?
I don't know what the licensing for Aptx is like; but Apple DOES support it in OS X. So maybe they'll just go that route for now...
But since that is, AFAICT, just a different CODEC riding on the same ol' BT Transport and PHY layers, how much improvement would that actually even bring, especially in the power-consumption metrics?
Oh, I finally re-found the article I was looking for. But I would put this firmly in the "rumor" category.
It is when the person asking the question has done _nothing_ of significance.
Why isn't Woz allowed to retire after starting a fortune 50 company?
Why does teaching kids not count ??
The OP asking was a troll.
Yeah that's true but I was more talking in general.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
You got this only partially right. Headphone driver amps, line input amps, line power amps, etc have a fixed gain to output. What that volume knob you turn does is change the input attenuation to the amp.
At max volume you get minimum attenuation. At minimum volume you get maximum input attenuation.
input_voltage x input_attenuation x fixed_amp_gain = output_voltage
So for a power amp we might have a fixed gain of 17.. so 1 volt input multiplied by attenuation of 0.1 is 0.1V to the amp... output is 1.7V.
If attenuation is 0.5: 1V * 0.5 * 17 = 8.5
That is how audio volume controls actually work. Otherwise your explanation of clipping, and other audio signal mismatching is correct.
Apple used Broadcom chips earlier, if they are doing their own - it's already in production (been taped out probably 3-4 months ago) well ahead of the spec release or approval. I would be very surprised if they did 5.0 support for the iPhone 7. Next generation? Sure - but then, everyone else will probably do the same thing as Broadcom, CSR, Qualcomm, Nordic will all have 5.0 chipsets out and in production.
And yes, OSX supports AptX which is why it is so frustrating doing headphones! With Apple, you have two different high-end CODECs to support. But then what do you expect from a company that released a USB-C only laptop and have a spec in-place (and stil there) that prohibits USB-C to Lightning cables - meaning you cannot make a cable that can directly plug your iOS device into their laptop (you must use a USB-C to Micro-USB, then a micro-USB to Lightning cable combination).
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Apple used Broadcom chips earlier, if they are doing their own - it's already in production (been taped out probably 3-4 months ago) well ahead of the spec release or approval. I would be very surprised if they did 5.0 support for the iPhone 7. Next generation? Sure - but then, everyone else will probably do the same thing as Broadcom, CSR, Qualcomm, Nordic will all have 5.0 chipsets out and in production.
And yes, OSX supports AptX which is why it is so frustrating doing headphones! With Apple, you have two different high-end CODECs to support. But then what do you expect from a company that released a USB-C only laptop and have a spec in-place (and stil there) that prohibits USB-C to Lightning cables - meaning you cannot make a cable that can directly plug your iOS device into their laptop (you must use a USB-C to Micro-USB, then a micro-USB to Lightning cable combination).
No, of course you can't have a USB-C to Lightning Cable. Apple doesn't allow that.
That's the thing: I actually check out other people's outlandish anti-Apple claims.
And your statement regarding an Apple designed-Chip being "taped-out" only 3-4 months ago is laughable. I doubt that even Apple could get evaluation/qualification units in that much time. But the fact that they bought Passif a few years ago strongly hints that they plan on moving away from Broadcom; so who cares what they are doing as far as BT 5 goes?
Cool, go check out Apple Accessory Interface Specification revs 20-24 (that I know of, I think that includes the latest one but a new one is out pretty soon) and you'll see that it explicitly prohibits 3rd parties from doing USB-C to Lightning connectors. Apple will not allow a Lightning connector to anything other than a Micro USB Type B or full size Type A connector. Oh, and you have to follow that spec if you want to pass through Apple Certification Testing to get your Lightning chips. Doesn't surprise me that Apple bans others from doing it (via their specs and tests) and they do it themselves...
Oh, and BT certification testing is typically a 45-60 day effort. I've only done it a dozen times or so...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Cool, go check out Apple Accessory Interface Specification revs 20-24 (that I know of, I think that includes the latest one but a new one is out pretty soon) and you'll see that it explicitly prohibits 3rd parties from doing USB-C to Lightning connectors. Apple will not allow a Lightning connector to anything other than a Micro USB Type B or full size Type A connector. Oh, and you have to follow that spec if you want to pass through Apple Certification Testing to get your Lightning chips. Doesn't surprise me that Apple bans others from doing it (via their specs and tests) and they do it themselves...
Oh, and BT certification testing is typically a 45-60 day effort. I've only done it a dozen times or so...
No, of course Apple would never allow 3rd party USB-C to Lightning cables. Afterall, it's well known that Apple made its vast fortunes selling $25 cables, while simultaneouslt denying others from doing so.
And I wasn't talking about the BT certification process, I was referring to Apple's OWN Certification and Qualification process for a new chip, regardless of what it is used for.
Grey markets exist for MFi chips - especially those Chinese units. Don't see the Kensington, Logitech, and other name-brand cables, do you? Just the Chinese knock-off units. Go check the Apple spec - it's not allowed. Doesn't mean you can't buy some grey market chips and build the cables, but Apple says you can't. My guess is you can't look it up because you don't have access to the MFi Developer network, and thus have to just go by your fanboidom for Apple, rather than the real facts about the Apple spec.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Grey markets exist for MFi chips - especially those Chinese units. Don't see the Kensington, Logitech, and other name-brand cables, do you? Just the Chinese knock-off units. Go check the Apple spec - it's not allowed. Doesn't mean you can't buy some grey market chips and build the cables, but Apple says you can't. My guess is you can't look it up because you don't have access to the MFi Developer network, and thus have to just go by your fanboidom for Apple, rather than the real facts about the Apple spec.
After you pointed that out, I did a quick check for Belkin and Logitech cables. Long story short, you appear to be correct. Those aftermarket cables on Amazon likely are made with bootleg MFi chips.
I am an embedded designer by trade, and technically a registered iOS Dev; but I haven't done any iOS stuff for quite a while, and am not really familiar with the spec you cited, since I was not developing a piece of hardware at the time.
So, bottom line: We were both partially right, and partially wrong: You CAN directly connect a USB-C equipped Mac to a Lightning equipped iOS device without going through an adapter-fest; but to do so "legally" requires the purchase of an Apple-only cable. Although I'm not sure a consumer breaks any laws by innocently purchasing and/or using a bootleg pseudo-MFi cable...
People use smartphones as mobile Internet terminals.
Making calls is so last century.
If you didn't notice, my explanation was intended for easy understanding. It was high-level view avoided any technical terms like "attenuation", RMS or even "ohms". In this high-level view, the gain control (which works by attenuation) is part of the amplifier circuit. The fact that it's often physically a seperate chip is quite irrelevant to the topic of clipping.
It depends on _how_ the question is asked. The OP came across as a total condescending prick with shades of the pot calling the kettle black. Why even insult Woz ? All that does is make one look like a tool / fool.
Instead of putting Woz down, showing a little respect and humility would have gone a long ways. i.e.
"I admire Woz for his tech genius but I'm curious what he has done with his life post-Apple. Does anyone know?"
See -- the tone is completely different. We can respect the person asking the question because they have given respect.
But to answer your question, yeah, it is usually insufficient. It depends on context. Sometimes mirroring the same behavior the person used will help them understand that their might be a different way to behave.
Oh brother, what has /. become when I'm giving communication lessons ...
Isn't OPUS mainly developed for speech applications in mind?
It was mainly developed for *internet* in mind.
(main key-points where extremely low latency, and possibility to deploy everywhere due to lack of patents).
1 of the (lower bandwidth) algorithm available to OPUS is more voice optimized.
OPUS can smoothly switch between available algorithms based on available bandwidth.
There are tuning parameters that can optimize more for human voice, or more generic sound.
At high bandwidth (>192kbps according to some ABXing done at Hydrogen audio) OPUS "sounds lossless" for complex music, etc. (not only human speach).
OPUS still caps at 20kHz sounds by filtering, so it's useless for dogs or bats (but perfectly enough for humans).
Meaning, it's not lossless either and behaves much like aptX.
The common point with aptX:
- extremely low latency
The differences are:
- OPUS is an open standard, aptX is proprietary and patented
(- OPUS also scales better at lower bitrate, it could be still perfectly usable for speech as a low bandwidth headset)
For lossless, there's FLAC.
Yup. In the "best of the world", upcoming Bluetooth 5.0 should mandate for a special mode where FLAC is used to compress most of the audio, but could optionnally degrade to lossy high bandwidth OPUS, whenever FLAC exceeds maximal allowed bandwidth. (just the way aptX works now, but with free and open standards).
Or an OPUS 2.0 could feature an extra "lossless" algorithm in its sleeve (with basically most of FLAC rolled in).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Apple only bought Next because Bee vastly overestimated their value.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Thank you for that. I develop hardware for lots of platforms, and often find these little things in the specs. I'm sure it's an oversight on Apple's part, but per their own spec - you cannot make a Lightning to USB C cable and pass Apple cert. It's kind of crazy, but having worked a bit with them in the past, it's not unexpected. The different divisions have slowly drifted further and further apart in terms of coordination, so you get these kinds of specs where they say there are only certain cable connections allowed.
Another one is that connectors can only be used for their original intent, so you cannot repurpose a micro HDMI cable for a non-AV application even if it works great (meaning - new connector time!). And you technically cannot have more than one connector per end of cable, so no splitter cables are allowed, or those "back-to-back type B/type A" connectors on one end. Those all fail the spec. It's really pretty draconian, unfortunately. Makes developing hardware for the iOS platform a bit of a pain... :)
No laws are broken when you use a 3rd party "non approved" cable, but then again it's not allowed per Apple so who knows what that would do to any warranty claims that might arise later. You used a non-approved/authorized cable? Sorry, we cannot help you with your connector fail.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Thank you for that.
No problem. I may be an Apple fan; but I'm not an idiot.
The different divisions have slowly drifted further and further apart in terms of coordination, so you get these kinds of specs where they say there are only certain cable connections allowed.
Yeah, that is pretty crazy; but you're right: When companies get to be the size of Apple, especially when they become that size kind of "organically", rather than as a result of some Grand Plan, there is always a struggle to keep everyone on the same page, philosophically, technically, and internal-politics-ly. I honestly don't think it was the result of some evil plan to take over the world of adapter cables. And the nonsensical prohibition against USB-C to Lightning will probably be phased out of the spec as Apple transitions more products from USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt to USB-C (with TB over USB-C).
And you technically cannot have more than one connector per end of cable, so no splitter cables are allowed,
Well, after having to deal with devices that had a "splitter" cable to provide an "injection point" for power, I can't say I hate that one...
However, is that an iOS-only spec? Wasn't there a "dual-head" video cable for the Mac mini?
Actually, it's a spec for all cables. Apple often violates their own specs (see the Lightning-to-USB C cable you linked) but prohibit 3rd parties from doing official versions. Yes, you can get cables that are USB A on one end and Lightning/USB micro B on the other, but those are not Apple-approved. Per the accessories spec, a cable can only have two connectors on it, only certain combinations of connectors are allowed, and the connectors must be used only for their original purpose (no repurposing connectors).
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!