Slashdot Mirror
Apple Removed Headphone Jack From New iPhones Because It Owns Largest Bluetooth Headphone Company (theverge.com)
Apple's new iPhones -- the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus -- don't have the headphone jack. The company's SVP Phil Schiller said the move signifies "courage" from the company to put a 100-year-old audio standard to bed. But there could be one more reason for this transition to a Bluetooth/Wireless headphones future: it owns the largest Bluetooth headphones company -- Beats. The Verge reports: More likely is that the lack of a headphone jack on the iPhone -- and increasingly, on Android phones as well -- will lead to an uptick in sales of Bluetooth headphones. And it just so happens that Apple owns the number one Bluetooth headphone company, Beats. Beats brings in more revenue from Bluetooth headphones than LG, Bose, or Jaybird, according to NPD figures released in July. In terms of unit sales, it controls over a quarter of the Bluetooth headphone market. Bluetooth headphones are also disproportionately profitable among headphones. NPD has them accounting for 54 percent of all dollars spent in the market, despite representing only 17 percent of units sold in the U.S.. These headphones sell at high prices with high margins, and Apple's company is making the best of it so far. Sales of Bluetooth headphones are already growing, with units up 64 percent year over year according to NPD's US figures. And Apple's removal of the headphone jack is likely to give them another boost.
Yeah and they sure don't let ethics get in the way either.
I think TFA has the cause and effect backwards. Apple likely bought Beats because they were planning to remove the audio jack, expected Android to eventually follow their lead, and figured that, therefore, a bluetooth headphone company would be a good investment.
They didn't remove the audio jack because they own Beats.
They bought Beats because they were planning to remove the jack.
Hardly, the adapter they give you for free lets you do exactly 1/2 of what you could before.
Today you can plug in an aux cable into almost any recent smartphone as well as another cable to charge when going for a drive. You will have to spend at least $40 more for an awkward, third party adapter (plus another cable) to do the same job... once the adapter is released.
Tell you what... I'll do that... if you agree to pay for every ticket and auto insurance bump I get from using them in the car when driving (where I normally care about using an aux jack).
I could go buy some BT adapter (yeah! spending even more money to get back to where I was!!!) for my 2011 vehicle (which has BT, just not A2DP), however I've yet to find one that doesn't suck big time.
Or... I just won't buy an iPhone 7.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
The iPhone "Jack off". Suits the product and it's customers perfectly.
No, they bought Beats because Beats is _exactly_ the same style of business that Apple is and a perfect match. They make high-margin pieces of shit electronics which command high prices because they're fashion accessories.
I expect it is a chicken and egg.
The 3.5mm Audio port was made around 1964 was designed for technology that had its covering material thicker than the full devices today. The port is now huge compared to what is needed. That space could be used for extra battery, or more sensors...
I am sure Apple has been seeing this engineering problem.
So it would make sense for them to encourage the growth of bluetooth, so they can get to a point where they can get by without making a port.
Apple tends to be the first company to ditch old technology. Usually with a bunch of people complaining at first, then shortly realize it isn't that big of a deal. As apple usually offers an alternative.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Don't forget to mention with a simple piece of wiring between phone and speakers there's no need to replace batteries or have to recharge the earbuds often.
Sounds more environmentally responsible too.
home
Well, that is one very cynical view. Of course they might have reasons that benefit users.
Everything you can do with the new headphone-jackless iPhone 7 could have been done with the previous models. The iPhone 5/5S/6/6S, and SE all have Lightning ports and bluetooth, so there was zero reason Apple had to remove the headphone jack if they wanted to start shipping dongles and AirPods instead of wired earphones.
They didn't do anything with the space the 3.5mm jack was before, just added a (non-functional) speaker grille for aesthetic reasons. They could have added a second Lightning port to the phone, so you can use the headphone dongle and charge your phone at the same time. But why spend a couple dollars more in parts when you can make the consumer spend $40 to do the same thing instead?
Headphones, and your ears, are analog. The signal gets converted from digital to analog before you can hear it, and is amplified. So, do you want to use the amplifier in the phone, which has a nice big battery and a powerful amplifier that can also drive the speaker, and that can easily dissipate any heat from the amplifier, or the amplifier in your headphone, which if it's an in-ear one is going to have limitations regarding the battery and the amplifier.
It is not even theoretically possible for a Bluetooth headphone to make better sound. At best, it's the same. The only benefit is that you lose the cord.
This was an astonishingly cynical move and I hope that Apple loses customers over it.
Bruce Perens.
I bet you just love the way Apple knows you're so cool and tech savvy you'll never need to choose between charging your phone and listening to music.
And the convenience of having a pair of headphones that work on just about any device anywhere in the world capable of producing sound kind of sucks, too.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Headphones do not come with 0% career financing like cell phones. Someone who owns one expensive wired pair to use at home and other for exercise may well be tempted to check out Android offerings rather than putting up with the hassle of two dongles to listen and charge at the same time.
Don't forget to mention with a simple piece of wiring between phone and speakers there's no need to replace batteries or have to recharge the earbuds often.
Shhhhhhhhh, don't mess with their business model!
Also, what happens when the batteries degrade to where they're no longer any good? You get to buy a new pair (yippee!) or pay to have them repaired/replaced (yippee!).
The worst part? The sewers will be filled with these as they fall out and go bouncing off into the gutter, sewer, toilet, heating vent, tall grass, etc etc. Stick your head out the window? Whoops, there they go. Lose one on a beach or out in the woods? Good luck finding it.
I can't count the number of times that the wires have kept me from losing an earbud.
And no, you probably won't be able to buy just a left or a right...because that would just be wrong. You'll have to buy both, leaving you with a extra, completely useless one. If they get mixed up at a party or whatever and you end up with two right-side units somehow, well, too bad for you. But hey, they're only another $160 bucks per pair, so stop whining!
Next up for sale: the Apple "iTether", a pair of sturdy white wires that attach to the earbuds so they don't get lost when you drop them. BRILLIANT!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I am sorry, I wasn't aware you were being forced to buy Apples products. I can certainly see why you are so upset with the change and not being given the option to buy someone else product instead.
Like a lot of technologies, people cling to it because it's familiar, unchanged, simple.
Wired headphones never need to be recharged. That is vastly more important to me on a day-to-day basis than dealing with a cord, which has never really been a problem.
If you really care about audio quality, you should be pretty excited about headphones that can draw power from the lightning connecter... that allows for better processing, better noise cancellation, and so on all for headphones that never need a battery.
That's something that couldn't happen if Apple stuck with audio jacks.
This doesn't make sense. The DAC is the most important component of digital audio quality. Moving it to the headphones does none of these things (digital processing is still in the phone) and takes the control of audio quality entirely out of Apple's hands. This seems counter to their general philosophy.
As for the wireless part, it seems like Apple is trying to make that as nice as possible, with as high a quality as possible. That too is better if you care about audio at all.
So why so down on such an obvious improvement that helps wired AND wireless users?
This also doesn't make sense. Bluetooth compression is known for reducing audio quality, even if you ignore the various reported connectivity issues.
Replacing an old standard without an improved solution (even if proprietary) is very unlike Apple. My only conclusion is this is a money grab. It shows them struggling to differentiate themselves in the market. I think they may have jumped the shark.
If you care about audio quality you use a USB DAC+Headphone amp, and a real pair of wired headphones.
If you care about convenience, there were plenty of BT headphones before, this just removes the option for people who find wires more convenient than fiddling with headphone batteries.
Speaking of DACs, can anyone recommend a good USB => line level DAC, instead of a headphone amp? I want something to hook speakers to rather than headphones, and paying for a headphone amp just to get the DAC seems wasteful.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I never used the headphone jack on my phone. While I go running, I use a BT headset and my car also has BT connectivity.
Besides, an adapter is included. It's not that big of a drama.
The biggest complainers fall in the category of either:
- "I will never buy an iPhone, but now it lost the headphone jack, I will certainly NEVER going to buy one!!", raging fists included.
- People who consider everyone who buys this as "dumb" or "sheeple". However, the missing audio-jack is not a deal-breaker for most current iPhone users. There are lots of other interesting upgrades that makes current iphone users consider upgrading.
- People who, for some reason, are offended that other people buy products that they personally don't like.
The only users who have real reasons to complain, are the ones who use both the audio-jack and the lightbolt adapter at the same time (like when your car doesn't have BT yet, and use the aux-in option). But that's like 1 or 2 percent of the current iPhone users.
Oh, and I'm not an Apple "fanboy" btw, so spare me the insults
...You are over-qualified and under-paid. If we give you a raise, we will break the cosmic balance of the universe.
"Few ever buy MS for the software."
I disagree, people don't buy MS products for the OS, they certainly do for the software, as more of it runs on Windows then any other OS.
If you bought your computer for the fashionable OS the you bought the equivalent of a decorative hammer. Computers are tools, and I am a firm believer that the OS should get out of your way so your software (the whole reason you have a computer) can do it's work.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
IMO Apple should have waited one more iteration, because Bluetooth 5 is just around the corner and will have HD audio as part of the spec and there would be less issues, better compatibility with other device.... Wait, nevermind. I see what they did there.