The headphone current and voltage a minimal. As long as the touch points don't wobble or rust / gather dirt, and analog connections are well-shielded, the thing could be nearly microscopic.
I see. What will provide the pressure to maintain contact? the smaller the jack, the less pressure to press against the plug. This is not conjecture, it's inherent in the materials. It is exactly why the failure rate is higher, the smaller the connector. Take a 3.5 mm jack apart once and verify.
You sound like one of those, who buy huge-diameter audio cables, and connect them to speakers have exclusively tiny strands running inside of them because an actual engineer calculated what is needed for a tiny resistance, and made the hardware take even that into account.
Perhaps to a dilletante I do sound like that, but you would be wrong. This isn't about Triple Crown Speaker Cable, gold plated fuses, and silly audiophile rocks or special wood volume control knobs. It's about a fundamental material property.
Even then, it is possible to design and build tiny jacks to function reliably. There can be spring mechanisms that apply pressure to the contact points in the plug that will give reliable results. It isn't rocket science. But it will increase the size dramatically, as well as the cost.
You will also need some pretty specialized workers servicing the reactor.
Shrug. Lots of industries have faced this sort of problem. Depending on the relative costs of training a "specialized worker" and training a "specialized worker called an astronaut," then either astronauts will be trained to service nukes, or nuke workers will be trained to be astronauts. Big deal neither way.
So you have 10 people. Each must be the absolute best in their field, because tehy must make decisions and carry out life sustaining operations in a place where no rescue will come for them.
So you figure that the best person for agriculture will also be the best person for working than nuclear reactor?
Your concept is okay if you don't have the severe limitations on personel. And I'll do a shrug of my own to the idea that this nuclear reactor will never break down. Having a Stirling engine, and having the effects of radiation on materials, and having all of the parts of the device exposed to the unshielded reactor, perhaps the ag expert or science expert will be called to sacrifice their life to keep the others alive if something needs fixed.
All so that a 3 KW reactor can be used to satisfy the fanbois at Slashdot. Sorry, bu t if they needed a lot of power, lik megawatts, maybe that would justify the weight of a reactor. But a reactor that provides less power than it takes to run a normal household? When there are other more powerful and lighter options that aren't spewing radiation? The drawbacks of this system are laughingly bad.
... was, is, and never will be a valid argument. Just like "average Joe Moron".
You and what army?
Because, remember, your statement swings both ways! It is that most people are just livestock with no will and passive thinking. That meansI can just as much make such people want what I want them to want, as "them".
In actual reality, it's just you, yourself, wanting that, because you are a spineless conformist coward.
Because other than said livestock, you are fully aware and hence do have a choice of picking the right side. Yet *you* did choose the wrong side. Actively! (Active passivity... a fascinating concept.)
So your character is essentially that of a "house n1gger" or other traitor to his own people and even to himself.
I've tried to parse this several times, and friend - I think you just had an existential meltdown, because I can't connect anything you wrote to this sub-thread. Carry on, and I hope your day gets better.
Do you mean president windbag who wants to "strengthen libel laws" for the shit people say about him he doesn't like?
captcha: streams...
He is trying to seize that power. It's going to be an issue because another group that brooks no criticism is also against him.
It is amusing though, as people on the left are proving as tone deaf as many on the right.
They are always going on about "teaching moments". And then they display breathtaking moments of intolerance. Will there be women only and men only water fountains springing up?
How about instead of firing a person for their opinion, engage them in that teaching moment that some folks are always talking about. I've found in life that when there is an over the top reaction to something, like firing a person who did not do anything but have an "illegal" opinion, there might have been something in that opinion that touches so close to the truth that allowing it destroys the ideology you preach. Be it right or be it left..
No, we have hated Apple since Steve Jobs announced (gleefully) that the Macintosh was a hacker proof computer. He meant in the old sense of 'hacker' that we nerds can appreciate. The Apple ][ was open, it was easy to do a lot of your own cool things with using hardware.
The Macintosh was designed to not allow us to do cool things with it. Unless you do it within the boundaries that Apple defines, you're screwed. And those boundaries were really fucking tight for the first decade of the Mac. It's nearly as tight today.
Its kind of funny. I have my MacOS and OSX machines before that, and I can play with them a lot more than the Windows 10 machine I reluctantly have. I recently started writing for the iPhone for a learning experience. and by golly, it is just sorta fun.
MacOS, being Unix, is quite capable. I use terminal every day for one reason or another, and it is as flexible as my Linux machines.
What the anti-Apple crowd has trouble with? My conjecture is that using Apple products tends to be a smoother experience overall So a person with less computer experience might enjoy the experience more. Not everyone wants to dig into the operating system. Now the Android is a generally smooth experience as well. Windows - mainly 10, is not so smooth what with the BOHICA update concept.
So whatever reasons you have for hating Apple, and how wrong they appear to be, I find that most Anti-Apple folk are just playing the old Ford Versus Chevy game. And there are plenty of Apple zealots for you to fight with, because wht fun is it to have a Ford Versus Chevy argument without the terrible person on the other end to fight with?
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Not without a converter, you can't. It won't take a quarter inch plug, which is still the standard for better than average cans. Nor a dual 3.5mm airplane/theatre plug, I'm sure.
You you are ruining the party with your geegaws, velocipedes and unvarnished truth.
Not the truth. Some people still assume that high impedance headphones are better, they are wrong..
Protip: If a person makes a comment starting with "GeeGaws, velocipedes and unvarnished ttruth", they are almost certainly not being serious, and you missed several other chances along the way to pick that up.
I don't know how to complain about companies ditching the 3.5mm jack without sounding like a Luddite.
I'm listening to your comment with my $350 Bose noise cancelling, wireless headphones, using the 3.5mm jack because farting around with Bluetooth audio is not how I like to spend my time.
Cables get damaged and the mechanical connection can get strained and damaged as well.
\You say that as if Bluetooth headphones aren't the most fragile things on the face of the planet.
they aren't as fragile as the wires on a wired headset, I've destroyed a few headsets in my day and wrecked jacks when they'd catch on something.
Bluetooth? I've had4 pairs now, two of the stupid star trek communicator looking things, and two Logitechs. The only problem is that the foam is starting to rot of old age on one of them. Bummer.
You are certainly free to not buy anything that doesn't have the specs you want. Unfortunately, there are millions of people who don't care about those specs, and will still buy the phone anyway. Once the manufacturers see that people are buying them, they will never go back to putting the ports in. The success of the headphone-jack-less phone has cemented their decision to remove it, and never put it back in.
Because it doesn't mean a thing to them. I wen't bluetooth a long time ago, mainly because I don't want wires. It's phone, I'll be using it as a phone, and the last time I used wired headphones not in a quality environment was trying out the dreaded adapter with a pair of wired headphones. Went back to the bluetooth headset. Which I would use on any phone.
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Not without a converter, you can't. It won't take a quarter inch plug, which is still the standard for better than average cans. Nor a dual 3.5mm airplane/theatre plug, I'm sure.
You you are ruining the party with your geegaws, velocipedes and unvarnished truth.
I'm beginning to think that a lot of slashdotters don't know abou the real toys out there.
Then again, if it was an android product that started this, they'd be extolling the virtues and forward thinking.
Old stereo equipment back to the early 1980's had this jack.
Mmmmh, no. In the 1980's, stereo equipment had a 6.35 mm jack connector, as had my Revox headphones. During the transition to the new 3.5 mm jack, we had to use dongles. Just like an recent iPhone needs a lightning dongle for the audio jack.
Exactly. But you are messing up the truthieness of his story bro!
And my good equipment still has the bigger jacks.
The problem today is not that a new standard is coming, but that I can't figure yet what is the safe choice for the next 5-10 years. Until then, I will stick to the 3.5 mm jack and dongles.
I'm almost all on Bluetooth for my phone. If I need really high quality music, I'll not be listening on my phone anyhow, so a fair to middling pair of bluetooth phones is just fine. But I fail to see how people have trouble with that adapter, and the archetype 5 dollar Big Lot's earbuds headphones they want to plug into their phones.
People are brand-loyal and seem incapable of 'choosing not to buy.'
Me too! I/am/ brand-loyal. Loyal to the trusty 3.5mm I know so well. The little connector I've soldered many times to splitters, converters, and sometimes to weird things.
There is no argument for this, the manufacturers are in cahoots, they've formed a racket
I've worked a lot with 3.5 mm plugs and jacks. Poor quality which is inherent in the size and design. If they are adequate for your purposes, then use them. Only buy phones with the most important feature. But it isn't brand loyalty, its just something you demand, but the rest of us-aside from the wailers on Slashdot - don't give a hoot about.
Some can. For example, my wife is an iPhone person - Has been for many years - But when it comes time to upgrade her iPhone 6 she'll be leaving Apple and buying a replacement phone with a headphone jack.
Is it a matter of being too difficult to plug the provided adapter into the headset into the adapter and plug that into the phone? I'm curious. I normally listen via Bluetooth, but out of curiosity, plugged a 3.5 mm headset into the adapter and then into the phone. Took about 2 seconds, and didn't give a verygood sound, but that was the fault of the cheap headphones.
However, she's in what appears to be a small minority.
People are brand-loyal and seem incapable of 'choosing not to buy.'
Rather many people simply don't see this as a problem. The undercurrent on Slashdot is that "Goddammit! Apple sucks, They took out that 3.5 mm Jack, and now I'll never buy one! Goddamned Hipster assholes anyhow!"
When they simply hated Apple because of Ford versus Chevy, and it was a handy talking point, while most people shrug their shoulders because the unforgivable sin means nothing to them. I use Bluetooth because I didn't go wierless to have wires hanging off my phone to my head, just to get yanked and sometimes broken when they catch on something. And if I had a Samsung, I'd still use Bluetooth instead of that crappy 3.5 mm jack.
Of course they can. But this is kind of like the replaceable battery problem. While some turn red and blow smoke out their ears in hellfire anger because a phone doesn't have a battery cover where they can simply pop open to replace it, few people really care. I'm an old school tinkerer, and I sure don't. It's only a phone, and the present business model is replacement every few years.
And for all of the uproar from some people, I don't think that screaming and yelling as loud as you can actually increases the number of people who give a damn. If an adapter to plug the mythical 5 dollar Big Lot's earbuds with the holy 3.5 mm plug on them is a bridge too far a descent into hell that cannot be abided, there are probably a lot of knockoff Chiniese phones that have the required jack to plug those in without the unholy adapter.
Please world, make this nonsense stop.
Perhaps we should have stopped at feature phones, Or discrete transistors, or vacuum tubes. or Spark gaps or Carbon arc lamps.
Despite slashdotters worshipping the small jacks, they are exceptionally poor connection systems. Going away is a good thing, and in the end, those 5 dollar Big Lot's ear buds might become even cheaper to plug into that knockoff phone.
But industry standard is an understatement. This jack was used by much more than smartphones and tablets. It was the standard on PCs. Old stereo equipment back to the early 1980's had this jack. Walkman cassette players. Car entertainment systems use this jack. MP3 players and personal video pod type players. I can just barely describe how widely used this jack was and for how long. This jack was used everywhere on the entire planet. It was way more standard than electrical outlets which vary by country.
So in the 50th century, we will have to use this same shitty little plug and jack?
I had 1980's stereo equipment. It had 1/4 inch plugs and jacks. I still have professional radio and audio equipment. Not a 3.5 mm to be found. 1/4 inch and XLR connectors abound. I have cheap stuff with has those 3.5 mm plugs and jacks. My Studio headsets are 1/4 inch. I do have a headset that has 3.5 mm, So if I use it on the good stuff, I use an adapter, and don't suffer apoplexy for using it.
My iPhone came with an adapter to plug a 3.5 mm headphone into it. Not a problem. I don't use it much though, because when I need headphones, I use Bluetooth.
But y'all arguing about how wonderful that crappy little 3.5 mm connector is, and wailing and gnashing your teeth over it remind me of people yapping about how awesom VHS recording is.
By the way, the reason a 1/4 inch jack is a lot better is that it has increased sprein strength of the contacts. The smaller you get in plug size, the less reliable the contacts become, because tehy cannot provide neough pressure, and the mini's contacts aren't very good. The micros are even worse, and to me, are useless.
Can we get a Trabant vs Yugo discussion going here?
It's a bridge too far, and civilization is doomed. DOOMED I tell you!
But wait!
You people and your sissy 1/8th inch jacks think you own the world. The real standard is the 1/4 inch jack, or even better for the people who really know their headphones - direct wires into Fahnstock clips. That's what I'm talkin'about.
All sarcasm aside, time moves on the 1/8th or 3.5 mm for the better people, jack and plug, is the VHS tape of connectors. It's shit, and just like VHS, it deserves the fate of shitty standards.
And instead of going nuts, only buy a phone that has the Plug and jack that is the only one you accept. Then you'll be - oh hell, that might make you a hipster.
Just don't pretend that it is the best thing going when you are yelling at people to get off your lawn.
Sarcasm off, sorry if I made boo-boo feelings amoung the faithful.
I wouldn't be afraid of that in particular since it would most likely be non-serviceable anyway (hell, it's even supposed to be totally unshielded - you can't even approach it in operation!). If your needs are low enough, one can make a long-lived unit like that. But it would still be heavy and expensive.
Unshielded? Shades of the old atomic airplane. Shades of SLAM and Project Pluto. This is sitting still, and not sputtering out radiation over large areas, but I'm tepted to ask "What could go wrong?" It must be interesting to have an unshielded reactor powering a Stirling engine. And if something breaks? Nah, nothing ever breaks. In addition, this is supposedly safe because of fuel expansion? Is there no provision to Scram it? Shades of SL-1?
An unshielded reactor that puts out a paltry 3KW, a fraction of the output of solar panels of the same payload weight. Apparently because it is so hard to remove dust from a solar panel. Nuclear hubris is apparently alive and well.
So if I read you right, anyone can run a nuc reactor? Point is that if you have to have a specialist in one area, you lose one in another. Then number of people going is rather restrictive.
Can you design or build from scratch a TV or smartphone or computer or car?
Can you operate them?
Good point, As Samsung has so ably shown, high energy dense devices can go boom. Hot stuff, flames, a fireworks show for hte masses. Now add to that a reactor with it's extra fun stuff spewing out.
Nuc submarines and ships are often brought up as how people can manage reactors. These guys and gals are higly trained, motivated - especially on the subs - and they are extremely bright. And unless things ahve changed, they don't work in the mess hall slinging slop.
You will also need some pretty specialized workers servicing the reactor.
Not a problem. Example, the US Navy manages to train plenty of people to service nuclear power plants for its ships and submarines (Russians and Chinese got 'em too). and you're not sending untrained/untrainable people into space anyways.
So if I read you right, anyone can run a nuc reactor? Point is that if you have to have a specialist in one area, you lose one in another. Then number of people going is rather restrictive.
Anyhow, since I first posted, I've seen of this reactor is that it might not need a specialist. Seems to be set and forget. If it breaks there might be an issue. It apparently has a Stirling engine which I doubt is user serviceable. . So when it "runs out" it just sits there.
Turns out Mars has significant amounts of Thorium, particularly near a latitude recently found to have significant amounts of ice. The ice could be melted by and cool a thorium reactor, and electrolyzed to produce rocket fuel. There's plenty of open space on Mars to put a thorium reactor without any NIMBYs nearby worrying about strong gamma emitters or long-lived nuclear waste contaminating the environment..
Wow, a Thorium zealot and someone needing to take a jab at NIMBY's on another planet!
Amazing that some folks think that the purpose of going to Mars is to use a Nuc reactor.
1 KW is about what you'd need to run a popup toaster or a blow dryer. This is, from a NASA engineer's perspective, a huge amount of power, but you couldn't run your neighborhood hair salon on it.
But on a Base station perspective, it is pretty lean. My Emergency Generator is 3 KW and it runs my place, but I have to be careful about the induction motors in the fridge and freezer. There is also the furnace. If all three kick on at the same time, or just the Fridge and Freezer, it will stall the generator. Only lasts for a second ot two of high current draw, but that's enough. And that is just one energy efficient house., not a base.
They probably would have solar backup, at least enough to survive. Wouldn't want to rely on one technology or one unit when you are a year away from resupply...
The solar panels on the rovers had issues with dust, but for a permanent static installation that is solvable.
Slashdot Mirror
The headphone current and voltage a minimal. As long as the touch points don't wobble or rust / gather dirt, and analog connections are well-shielded, the thing could be nearly microscopic.
I see. What will provide the pressure to maintain contact? the smaller the jack, the less pressure to press against the plug. This is not conjecture, it's inherent in the materials. It is exactly why the failure rate is higher, the smaller the connector. Take a 3.5 mm jack apart once and verify.
You sound like one of those, who buy huge-diameter audio cables, and connect them to speakers have exclusively tiny strands running inside of them because an actual engineer calculated what is needed for a tiny resistance, and made the hardware take even that into account.
Perhaps to a dilletante I do sound like that, but you would be wrong. This isn't about Triple Crown Speaker Cable, gold plated fuses, and silly audiophile rocks or special wood volume control knobs. It's about a fundamental material property.
Even then, it is possible to design and build tiny jacks to function reliably. There can be spring mechanisms that apply pressure to the contact points in the plug that will give reliable results. It isn't rocket science. But it will increase the size dramatically, as well as the cost.
Shrug. Lots of industries have faced this sort of problem. Depending on the relative costs of training a "specialized worker" and training a "specialized worker called an astronaut," then either astronauts will be trained to service nukes, or nuke workers will be trained to be astronauts. Big deal neither way.
So you have 10 people. Each must be the absolute best in their field, because tehy must make decisions and carry out life sustaining operations in a place where no rescue will come for them.
So you figure that the best person for agriculture will also be the best person for working than nuclear reactor?
Your concept is okay if you don't have the severe limitations on personel. And I'll do a shrug of my own to the idea that this nuclear reactor will never break down. Having a Stirling engine, and having the effects of radiation on materials, and having all of the parts of the device exposed to the unshielded reactor, perhaps the ag expert or science expert will be called to sacrifice their life to keep the others alive if something needs fixed.
All so that a 3 KW reactor can be used to satisfy the fanbois at Slashdot. Sorry, bu t if they needed a lot of power, lik megawatts, maybe that would justify the weight of a reactor. But a reactor that provides less power than it takes to run a normal household? When there are other more powerful and lighter options that aren't spewing radiation? The drawbacks of this system are laughingly bad.
... was, is, and never will be a valid argument. Just like "average Joe Moron".
You and what army? Because, remember, your statement swings both ways! It is that most people are just livestock with no will and passive thinking. That meansI can just as much make such people want what I want them to want, as "them".
In actual reality, it's just you, yourself, wanting that, because you are a spineless conformist coward. Because other than said livestock, you are fully aware and hence do have a choice of picking the right side. Yet *you* did choose the wrong side. Actively! (Active passivity ... a fascinating concept.)
So your character is essentially that of a "house n1gger" or other traitor to his own people and even to himself.
I've tried to parse this several times, and friend - I think you just had an existential meltdown, because I can't connect anything you wrote to this sub-thread. Carry on, and I hope your day gets better.
Do you mean president windbag who wants to "strengthen libel laws" for the shit people say about him he doesn't like?
captcha: streams ...
He is trying to seize that power. It's going to be an issue because another group that brooks no criticism is also against him.
It is amusing though, as people on the left are proving as tone deaf as many on the right.
They are always going on about "teaching moments". And then they display breathtaking moments of intolerance. Will there be women only and men only water fountains springing up?
How about instead of firing a person for their opinion, engage them in that teaching moment that some folks are always talking about. I've found in life that when there is an over the top reaction to something, like firing a person who did not do anything but have an "illegal" opinion, there might have been something in that opinion that touches so close to the truth that allowing it destroys the ideology you preach. Be it right or be it left. .
No, we have hated Apple since Steve Jobs announced (gleefully) that the Macintosh was a hacker proof computer. He meant in the old sense of 'hacker' that we nerds can appreciate. The Apple ][ was open, it was easy to do a lot of your own cool things with using hardware.
The Macintosh was designed to not allow us to do cool things with it. Unless you do it within the boundaries that Apple defines, you're screwed. And those boundaries were really fucking tight for the first decade of the Mac. It's nearly as tight today.
Its kind of funny. I have my MacOS and OSX machines before that, and I can play with them a lot more than the Windows 10 machine I reluctantly have. I recently started writing for the iPhone for a learning experience. and by golly, it is just sorta fun.
MacOS, being Unix, is quite capable. I use terminal every day for one reason or another, and it is as flexible as my Linux machines.
What the anti-Apple crowd has trouble with? My conjecture is that using Apple products tends to be a smoother experience overall So a person with less computer experience might enjoy the experience more. Not everyone wants to dig into the operating system. Now the Android is a generally smooth experience as well. Windows - mainly 10, is not so smooth what with the BOHICA update concept.
So whatever reasons you have for hating Apple, and how wrong they appear to be, I find that most Anti-Apple folk are just playing the old Ford Versus Chevy game. And there are plenty of Apple zealots for you to fight with, because wht fun is it to have a Ford Versus Chevy argument without the terrible person on the other end to fight with?
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Not without a converter, you can't. It won't take a quarter inch plug, which is still the standard for better than average cans. Nor a dual 3.5mm airplane/theatre plug, I'm sure.
You you are ruining the party with your geegaws, velocipedes and unvarnished truth.
Not the truth. Some people still assume that high impedance headphones are better, they are wrong..
Protip: If a person makes a comment starting with "GeeGaws, velocipedes and unvarnished ttruth", they are almost certainly not being serious, and you missed several other chances along the way to pick that up.
So dear sir, you win the whoosh of the week
I don't know how to complain about companies ditching the 3.5mm jack without sounding like a Luddite.
I'm listening to your comment with my $350 Bose noise cancelling, wireless headphones, using the 3.5mm jack because farting around with Bluetooth audio is not how I like to spend my time.
It is so hard.
Cables get damaged and the mechanical connection can get strained and damaged as well.
\You say that as if Bluetooth headphones aren't the most fragile things on the face of the planet.
they aren't as fragile as the wires on a wired headset, I've destroyed a few headsets in my day and wrecked jacks when they'd catch on something.
Bluetooth? I've had4 pairs now, two of the stupid star trek communicator looking things, and two Logitechs. The only problem is that the foam is starting to rot of old age on one of them. Bummer.
Vote with your wallet against this crap.
You are certainly free to not buy anything that doesn't have the specs you want. Unfortunately, there are millions of people who don't care about those specs, and will still buy the phone anyway. Once the manufacturers see that people are buying them, they will never go back to putting the ports in. The success of the headphone-jack-less phone has cemented their decision to remove it, and never put it back in.
Because it doesn't mean a thing to them. I wen't bluetooth a long time ago, mainly because I don't want wires. It's phone, I'll be using it as a phone, and the last time I used wired headphones not in a quality environment was trying out the dreaded adapter with a pair of wired headphones. Went back to the bluetooth headset. Which I would use on any phone.
Today I learned that my Sennheiser HD 560 Ovation II headphones are not quality headphones.
You will be disappointed to know that you will need the dreaded Dongle to plug them in to quality equipment.
Errr-merrr-gerd, my phone is 5-6mm thick, but I can replace the battery in 15 seconds, add storage using an SD card, and use any set of headphones made in the last few decades.
Not without a converter, you can't. It won't take a quarter inch plug, which is still the standard for better than average cans. Nor a dual 3.5mm airplane/theatre plug, I'm sure.
You you are ruining the party with your geegaws, velocipedes and unvarnished truth.
I'm beginning to think that a lot of slashdotters don't know abou the real toys out there.
Then again, if it was an android product that started this, they'd be extolling the virtues and forward thinking.
I use a fleshlight for that, and it only costs a fraction of the CAT S60.
Just make sure to clean up afterwards.
And if you sterilize it in the microwave, wait at least 5 minutes before use.
Old stereo equipment back to the early 1980's had this jack.
Mmmmh, no. In the 1980's, stereo equipment had a 6.35 mm jack connector, as had my Revox headphones. During the transition to the new 3.5 mm jack, we had to use dongles. Just like an recent iPhone needs a lightning dongle for the audio jack.
Exactly. But you are messing up the truthieness of his story bro!
And my good equipment still has the bigger jacks.
The problem today is not that a new standard is coming, but that I can't figure yet what is the safe choice for the next 5-10 years. Until then, I will stick to the 3.5 mm jack and dongles.
I'm almost all on Bluetooth for my phone. If I need really high quality music, I'll not be listening on my phone anyhow, so a fair to middling pair of bluetooth phones is just fine. But I fail to see how people have trouble with that adapter, and the archetype 5 dollar Big Lot's earbuds headphones they want to plug into their phones.
People are brand-loyal and seem incapable of 'choosing not to buy.'
Me too! I /am/ brand-loyal. Loyal to the trusty 3.5mm I know so well. The little connector I've soldered many times to splitters, converters, and sometimes to weird things.
There is no argument for this, the manufacturers are in cahoots, they've formed a racket
I've worked a lot with 3.5 mm plugs and jacks. Poor quality which is inherent in the size and design. If they are adequate for your purposes, then use them. Only buy phones with the most important feature. But it isn't brand loyalty, its just something you demand, but the rest of us-aside from the wailers on Slashdot - don't give a hoot about.
Can't the public push back and choose to not buy?
Some can. For example, my wife is an iPhone person - Has been for many years - But when it comes time to upgrade her iPhone 6 she'll be leaving Apple and buying a replacement phone with a headphone jack.
Is it a matter of being too difficult to plug the provided adapter into the headset into the adapter and plug that into the phone? I'm curious. I normally listen via Bluetooth, but out of curiosity, plugged a 3.5 mm headset into the adapter and then into the phone. Took about 2 seconds, and didn't give a verygood sound, but that was the fault of the cheap headphones.
However, she's in what appears to be a small minority.
People are brand-loyal and seem incapable of 'choosing not to buy.'
Rather many people simply don't see this as a problem. The undercurrent on Slashdot is that "Goddammit! Apple sucks, They took out that 3.5 mm Jack, and now I'll never buy one! Goddamned Hipster assholes anyhow!"
When they simply hated Apple because of Ford versus Chevy, and it was a handy talking point, while most people shrug their shoulders because the unforgivable sin means nothing to them. I use Bluetooth because I didn't go wierless to have wires hanging off my phone to my head, just to get yanked and sometimes broken when they catch on something. And if I had a Samsung, I'd still use Bluetooth instead of that crappy 3.5 mm jack.
So yeah, your wife is definitely in a minority.
Can't the public push back and choose to not buy?
Of course they can. But this is kind of like the replaceable battery problem. While some turn red and blow smoke out their ears in hellfire anger because a phone doesn't have a battery cover where they can simply pop open to replace it, few people really care. I'm an old school tinkerer, and I sure don't. It's only a phone, and the present business model is replacement every few years.
And for all of the uproar from some people, I don't think that screaming and yelling as loud as you can actually increases the number of people who give a damn. If an adapter to plug the mythical 5 dollar Big Lot's earbuds with the holy 3.5 mm plug on them is a bridge too far a descent into hell that cannot be abided, there are probably a lot of knockoff Chiniese phones that have the required jack to plug those in without the unholy adapter.
Please world, make this nonsense stop.
Perhaps we should have stopped at feature phones, Or discrete transistors, or vacuum tubes. or Spark gaps or Carbon arc lamps.
Despite slashdotters worshipping the small jacks, they are exceptionally poor connection systems. Going away is a good thing, and in the end, those 5 dollar Big Lot's ear buds might become even cheaper to plug into that knockoff phone.
But industry standard is an understatement. This jack was used by much more than smartphones and tablets. It was the standard on PCs. Old stereo equipment back to the early 1980's had this jack. Walkman cassette players. Car entertainment systems use this jack. MP3 players and personal video pod type players. I can just barely describe how widely used this jack was and for how long. This jack was used everywhere on the entire planet. It was way more standard than electrical outlets which vary by country.
So in the 50th century, we will have to use this same shitty little plug and jack? I had 1980's stereo equipment. It had 1/4 inch plugs and jacks. I still have professional radio and audio equipment. Not a 3.5 mm to be found. 1/4 inch and XLR connectors abound. I have cheap stuff with has those 3.5 mm plugs and jacks. My Studio headsets are 1/4 inch. I do have a headset that has 3.5 mm, So if I use it on the good stuff, I use an adapter, and don't suffer apoplexy for using it.
My iPhone came with an adapter to plug a 3.5 mm headphone into it. Not a problem. I don't use it much though, because when I need headphones, I use Bluetooth.
But y'all arguing about how wonderful that crappy little 3.5 mm connector is, and wailing and gnashing your teeth over it remind me of people yapping about how awesom VHS recording is.
By the way, the reason a 1/4 inch jack is a lot better is that it has increased sprein strength of the contacts. The smaller you get in plug size, the less reliable the contacts become, because tehy cannot provide neough pressure, and the mini's contacts aren't very good. The micros are even worse, and to me, are useless.
Can we get a Trabant vs Yugo discussion going here?
Would someone tell me how this happened?
Sarcasm alert.
It's a bridge too far, and civilization is doomed. DOOMED I tell you!
But wait!
You people and your sissy 1/8th inch jacks think you own the world. The real standard is the 1/4 inch jack, or even better for the people who really know their headphones - direct wires into Fahnstock clips. That's what I'm talkin'about.
All sarcasm aside, time moves on the 1/8th or 3.5 mm for the better people, jack and plug, is the VHS tape of connectors. It's shit, and just like VHS, it deserves the fate of shitty standards.
And instead of going nuts, only buy a phone that has the Plug and jack that is the only one you accept. Then you'll be - oh hell, that might make you a hipster.
Just don't pretend that it is the best thing going when you are yelling at people to get off your lawn.
Sarcasm off, sorry if I made boo-boo feelings amoung the faithful.
When you want to know who has power over you, look only to those who you are not allowed to criticize.
I wouldn't be afraid of that in particular since it would most likely be non-serviceable anyway (hell, it's even supposed to be totally unshielded - you can't even approach it in operation!). If your needs are low enough, one can make a long-lived unit like that. But it would still be heavy and expensive.
Unshielded? Shades of the old atomic airplane. Shades of SLAM and Project Pluto. This is sitting still, and not sputtering out radiation over large areas, but I'm tepted to ask "What could go wrong?" It must be interesting to have an unshielded reactor powering a Stirling engine. And if something breaks? Nah, nothing ever breaks. In addition, this is supposedly safe because of fuel expansion? Is there no provision to Scram it? Shades of SL-1?
An unshielded reactor that puts out a paltry 3KW, a fraction of the output of solar panels of the same payload weight. Apparently because it is so hard to remove dust from a solar panel. Nuclear hubris is apparently alive and well.
So if I read you right, anyone can run a nuc reactor? Point is that if you have to have a specialist in one area, you lose one in another. Then number of people going is rather restrictive.
Can you design or build from scratch a TV or smartphone or computer or car?
Can you operate them?
Good point, As Samsung has so ably shown, high energy dense devices can go boom. Hot stuff, flames, a fireworks show for hte masses. Now add to that a reactor with it's extra fun stuff spewing out.
Nuc submarines and ships are often brought up as how people can manage reactors. These guys and gals are higly trained, motivated - especially on the subs - and they are extremely bright. And unless things ahve changed, they don't work in the mess hall slinging slop.
You will also need some pretty specialized workers servicing the reactor.
Not a problem. Example, the US Navy manages to train plenty of people to service nuclear power plants for its ships and submarines (Russians and Chinese got 'em too). and you're not sending untrained/untrainable people into space anyways.
So if I read you right, anyone can run a nuc reactor? Point is that if you have to have a specialist in one area, you lose one in another. Then number of people going is rather restrictive.
Anyhow, since I first posted, I've seen of this reactor is that it might not need a specialist. Seems to be set and forget. If it breaks there might be an issue. It apparently has a Stirling engine which I doubt is user serviceable. . So when it "runs out" it just sits there.
Turns out Mars has significant amounts of Thorium, particularly near a latitude recently found to have significant amounts of ice. The ice could be melted by and cool a thorium reactor, and electrolyzed to produce rocket fuel. There's plenty of open space on Mars to put a thorium reactor without any NIMBYs nearby worrying about strong gamma emitters or long-lived nuclear waste contaminating the environment. .
Wow, a Thorium zealot and someone needing to take a jab at NIMBY's on another planet!
Amazing that some folks think that the purpose of going to Mars is to use a Nuc reactor.
1 KW is about what you'd need to run a popup toaster or a blow dryer. This is, from a NASA engineer's perspective, a huge amount of power, but you couldn't run your neighborhood hair salon on it.
But on a Base station perspective, it is pretty lean. My Emergency Generator is 3 KW and it runs my place, but I have to be careful about the induction motors in the fridge and freezer. There is also the furnace. If all three kick on at the same time, or just the Fridge and Freezer, it will stall the generator. Only lasts for a second ot two of high current draw, but that's enough. And that is just one energy efficient house., not a base.
They probably would have solar backup, at least enough to survive. Wouldn't want to rely on one technology or one unit when you are a year away from resupply...
The solar panels on the rovers had issues with dust, but for a permanent static installation that is solvable.
I wonder if the new Martians might dust them off?