OnePlus 6T Trades the Headphone Jack For Better Battery Life (techradar.com)

OnePlus CEO Carl Pei confirmed to TechRadar that the OnePlus 6T won't have a headphone jack. Instead, it will feature a larger battery that will be "substantial enough for users to realize." From the report: Our first line of questioning was obvious. Why? Why ditch the jack? Why ditch it now? For Pei, it's about timing, and creating the best smartphone experience. "When we started OnePlus, we set out to make the best possible smartphone, but making a great phone doesn't mean putting every component available into the device," he said. "You've got to make decisions that optimize the user experience, and understand that at times things that provide user value can also add friction. "We also had to think about the negative side [of removing the headphone jack] for our users. We found 59% of our community already owned wireless headphones earlier this year - and that was before we launched our Bullets Wireless headphones. "If we were to do that [remove the jack] two years ago, the percentage [of wireless headphones owners] would have been much lower and it would have caused a lot of friction for our users."

Pei went on to explain that there are user benefits to the removal of the port, which should bring some comfort to OnePlus fans already pouring one out for the headphone jack. "By removing the jack we've freed up more space, allowing us to put more new technology into the product," he said. "One of the big things is something our users have asked us for, improved battery life." Pei wouldn't be drawn on what the "new technology" will be, but we already know the OnePlus 6T will feature an in-display fingerprint scanner, which will eat up some of the space left by the exiting jack. Pei did mention they will include an adapter in the box to allow users to use wired headphone.

Comments

Bad arguments

[sjbe]

They're idiots, all. It's not a "headphone jack," it's an analog audio jack.

It's used almost exclusively as a headphone jack by 99%+ of users. You are technically correct but calling it a headphone jack isn't actually wrong.

It works with headphones, but having bluetooth headphones doesn't help with connecting a phone to an older car or a stereo.

You can buy a bluetooth adapter with a 3.5mm jack to give any device this capability for less than $20. I did this with an older truck of mine that had a 3.5mm jack but no bluetooth. And it's a LOT easier to deal with that plugging in a loose audio cable to my phone every time I get in the vehicle.

BT audio is more complex, costly, and inconvenient.

Oh bullshit. The cost differential is a few dollars at most and your smartphone is going to have bluetooth anyway. It's not complex and it's actually FAR more convenient in a lot of use cases. Personally I absolutely hate wrangling cords which is ironic since I make wire harnesses for a living.

And the "we traded a jack for more battery life" is pure and simple bullshit.

Not really sure how you came to this conclusion. If they pulled out the jack and dedicated that space budget to a batter then it is the absolute truth. It's going to be a marginal improvement but it's one I personally would take every time since I don't use the jack. Obviously others feel the same way.

The DAC in that adapter sucks way more battery than the infinitesimal bit gained by removing the jack.

That is nothing more than an assumption on your part without evidence provided to back it up.