for listening purposes, Bluetooth now can produce sound that no human can tell the difference.
My experience has been the opposite. I've yet to see Bluetooth earbuds that produce audio that qualifies as "good" compared to the similarly priced non-Bluetooth earbuds.
This might be different with cans, where there's more space for components, but I am not interested in using cans with my phone.
the jack, dac and amp are going to add about $2 to a phone's cost.
In the world of mass-produced consumer electronics, $2 counts as "very expensive".
I've worked with companies who put a great deal of time and effort into eliminating 20 cent parts, because that translates to a huge amount of money when you're making millions of something.
this is not about cost saving.
If it's not, then I am utterly confused as to why they're doing it at all.
Every major competitor to Google I can think of has already dumped the headphone jack
And yet, there are still numerous smartphones that have them. Until there's an adequate replacement for the jack, I'll be buying one of those, or buying a used, older model.
Again, I don't mind the idea of losing the jack. My problem is that the current replacements for the jack suck. When that's no longer true, I'll be on board with it.
I think you should have a chat with an actual nutritionist. "Empty calories" means no vitamins. Those calories are still used to fuel your body, though.
Perhaps you are expecting too much from your smart device?
Is expecting that they will perform as well as older models expecting too much?
If you use your phone for audio at home
I don't. I have a real sound system for home use. (And I'm not an audiophile.)
Now is that time for the 3.5mm socket.
Not yet, it's not. Most smartphones still have them, and they will likely be available for a few years yet. If they aren't available when the time comes to replace my phone, and if nobody's come up with a system that can adequately replace the jack, then I'll have to start carrying a separate device for music. It just seems wrong that we'd have to go back to how we we did things a decade ago and start carrying multiple devices.
In a couple of years time we might be lamenting the demise of the fingerprint sensor over face recognition...
I won't, because those features aren't appealing to me in the first place and I don't use them.
I was just using your figure that "half of users don't use the jack". As if the other half is unimportant.
The ability to use wired headphones remains in all cases, and the (often included) dongles haven't proven to be a problem to hundreds of millions of users.
We sorta have to ignore Apple's experience, because their user base is atypical (they tend to have an emotional connection to Apple that forgives a lot of sins). But perhaps you're right, most people will deal with this. Still, it will be hard to know how many sales Google will lose because people will buy a phone that has a jack instead, so this is all pretty much wild speculation all around.
Personally, the lack of a jack is a huge deal because it's a real reduction on functionality. I've not found a bluetooth audio solution that provides sound quality that is as good, and the dongles are a poor workaround -- better than nothing, but it's still a reduction of the quality of the experience.
I'm probably 3 years or so away from replacing my current phone, so I only have one last hope: that by the time I need to buy a new one, the wireless audio solutions will actually be good by that time, or that there are still adequately powerful phones that have a headphone jack.
I'd really hate to have to start carrying around a second device to play music. Or third, given that it seems inevitable that removable batteries are going away and I'll have to carry around a damned power bank.
All of these advances are driving us back to the bad old days when we had to carry multiple devices and a bag of cables around all the time.
If I ever got to a point where I could do whatever I wanted and never worry about paying another bill or forgoing any sort of activity, I'd be pretty happy.
Me too.
The counterintuitive thing is that having too much money means you have to worry about money, too.
Yes, there is a "sweet spot" for wealth. If you're in the sweet spot, the money doesn't make you happy directly, but the money does resolve other problems that make you unhappy.
That sweet spot is the amount of wealth it takes for you to be able to live without having to spend mental/emotional energy to meet your physical needs. In other words, you don't have to worry about how you're going to eat, have shelter, etc.
Having an wealth above that sweet spot makes you increasingly unhappy. This is because to maintain that much wealth requires you to have to start worrying about money again.
Like most things in life, this is a bell curve situation.
I have to admit, with the direction that Microsoft and Google are going, that Apple is getting more and more attractive every day.
I don't like Apple's user interfaces and have avoided them because of that, but there comes a point at which the UI isn't the most important thing anymore.
Agreed. Google burnt its last bridge with me by pushing the EME through. Same with Netflix. Microsoft had burnt its last bridge with me many years ago.
I thought that the comment "Did you feel the same way about 3.5inch floppy disks?" was saying "Were you pissed off about 3.5 inch disks because it meant 5.25 inch disks were going away?"
You're right, this isn't a zero-sum game (to an extent -- the nature of our economic system is such that it requires there to be losers), and there's certainly no shame in making yourself better off.
But I take issue with the notion that making yourself better off is the best way to make others better off. It is important to take care of yourself -- it's hard to lift other people up if you're flat on the floor -- but simply being better off, all by itself, is not helping your fellow man. You actually have to, you know, do things that help.
(Carbs have no nutritional value; you could eliminate them completely from your diet, and get along just fine.)
This is simply and plainly not true. Carbs are an important energy source for your body. Yes, if you cut them out completely your body will get energy from proteins and such, but there will be health impacts over the long haul, primarily with your central nervous system.
What is true is that the typical American eats far, far more carbs than is required, and reducing them will often bring health benefits.
when "the jack is moving to a common accessory" would have prevented most complaints/arguments.
Maybe it would, but in my view, this is the same as "killing off the headphone jack". I don't use a case, and don't want a case. I think even a dongle would be less objectionable than being forced to use a case.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, they are pretty hideous. Personally, though, that doesn't matter much to me.
for listening purposes, Bluetooth now can produce sound that no human can tell the difference.
My experience has been the opposite. I've yet to see Bluetooth earbuds that produce audio that qualifies as "good" compared to the similarly priced non-Bluetooth earbuds.
This might be different with cans, where there's more space for components, but I am not interested in using cans with my phone.
Does anyone care? I have never heard anyone using it.
I don't, but some people clearly do.
the jack, dac and amp are going to add about $2 to a phone's cost.
In the world of mass-produced consumer electronics, $2 counts as "very expensive".
I've worked with companies who put a great deal of time and effort into eliminating 20 cent parts, because that translates to a huge amount of money when you're making millions of something.
this is not about cost saving.
If it's not, then I am utterly confused as to why they're doing it at all.
Every major competitor to Google I can think of has already dumped the headphone jack
And yet, there are still numerous smartphones that have them. Until there's an adequate replacement for the jack, I'll be buying one of those, or buying a used, older model.
Again, I don't mind the idea of losing the jack. My problem is that the current replacements for the jack suck. When that's no longer true, I'll be on board with it.
I think you should have a chat with an actual nutritionist. "Empty calories" means no vitamins. Those calories are still used to fuel your body, though.
3.5" and 5.25" floppies came out in the early 80s at about the same time.
Umm, no. 5.25 inch floppies were around for years before 3.5 inch. 5.25 hit the market in 1976, 3.5 in the early '80s.
Perhaps you are expecting too much from your smart device?
Is expecting that they will perform as well as older models expecting too much?
If you use your phone for audio at home
I don't. I have a real sound system for home use. (And I'm not an audiophile.)
Now is that time for the 3.5mm socket.
Not yet, it's not. Most smartphones still have them, and they will likely be available for a few years yet. If they aren't available when the time comes to replace my phone, and if nobody's come up with a system that can adequately replace the jack, then I'll have to start carrying a separate device for music. It just seems wrong that we'd have to go back to how we we did things a decade ago and start carrying multiple devices.
In a couple of years time we might be lamenting the demise of the fingerprint sensor over face recognition...
I won't, because those features aren't appealing to me in the first place and I don't use them.
Experts actually say that if you think everybody requires the same number of hours of sleep, you're deluding yourself.
Why do people keep calling these things "speakers"?
Because calling it a "spy portal" didn't score very well in focus groups.
I'm good with this not having a speaker jack, as there's no way one of these devices will ever be in my home anyway.
Remember, the entire point of the "I, Robot" stories was that things like the Laws of Robotics can't actually work as intended.
I was just using your figure that "half of users don't use the jack". As if the other half is unimportant.
The ability to use wired headphones remains in all cases, and the (often included) dongles haven't proven to be a problem to hundreds of millions of users.
We sorta have to ignore Apple's experience, because their user base is atypical (they tend to have an emotional connection to Apple that forgives a lot of sins). But perhaps you're right, most people will deal with this. Still, it will be hard to know how many sales Google will lose because people will buy a phone that has a jack instead, so this is all pretty much wild speculation all around.
Personally, the lack of a jack is a huge deal because it's a real reduction on functionality. I've not found a bluetooth audio solution that provides sound quality that is as good, and the dongles are a poor workaround -- better than nothing, but it's still a reduction of the quality of the experience.
I'm probably 3 years or so away from replacing my current phone, so I only have one last hope: that by the time I need to buy a new one, the wireless audio solutions will actually be good by that time, or that there are still adequately powerful phones that have a headphone jack.
I'd really hate to have to start carrying around a second device to play music. Or third, given that it seems inevitable that removable batteries are going away and I'll have to carry around a damned power bank.
All of these advances are driving us back to the bad old days when we had to carry multiple devices and a bag of cables around all the time.
I trust AI more than I trust large corporations.
If I ever got to a point where I could do whatever I wanted and never worry about paying another bill or forgoing any sort of activity, I'd be pretty happy.
Me too.
The counterintuitive thing is that having too much money means you have to worry about money, too.
Yes, there is a "sweet spot" for wealth. If you're in the sweet spot, the money doesn't make you happy directly, but the money does resolve other problems that make you unhappy.
That sweet spot is the amount of wealth it takes for you to be able to live without having to spend mental/emotional energy to meet your physical needs. In other words, you don't have to worry about how you're going to eat, have shelter, etc.
Having an wealth above that sweet spot makes you increasingly unhappy. This is because to maintain that much wealth requires you to have to start worrying about money again.
Like most things in life, this is a bell curve situation.
I have to admit, with the direction that Microsoft and Google are going, that Apple is getting more and more attractive every day.
I don't like Apple's user interfaces and have avoided them because of that, but there comes a point at which the UI isn't the most important thing anymore.
fuck Google.
Agreed. Google burnt its last bridge with me by pushing the EME through. Same with Netflix. Microsoft had burnt its last bridge with me many years ago.
They can all go rot.
I thought that the comment "Did you feel the same way about 3.5inch floppy disks?" was saying "Were you pissed off about 3.5 inch disks because it meant 5.25 inch disks were going away?"
You're right, this isn't a zero-sum game (to an extent -- the nature of our economic system is such that it requires there to be losers), and there's certainly no shame in making yourself better off.
But I take issue with the notion that making yourself better off is the best way to make others better off. It is important to take care of yourself -- it's hard to lift other people up if you're flat on the floor -- but simply being better off, all by itself, is not helping your fellow man. You actually have to, you know, do things that help.
You chuckleheads need to get over the fucken headphone jack thing, because in a few years they won't exist anywhere.
Hopefully, in the next few years there will be an adequate replacement for it. When there is, I won't care that there's no headphone jack.
But I'm honestly curious -- why do you care whether or not people "get over" the jack?
(Carbs have no nutritional value; you could eliminate them completely from your diet, and get along just fine.)
This is simply and plainly not true. Carbs are an important energy source for your body. Yes, if you cut them out completely your body will get energy from proteins and such, but there will be health impacts over the long haul, primarily with your central nervous system.
What is true is that the typical American eats far, far more carbs than is required, and reducing them will often bring health benefits.
Oops, I meant "... and retained that half of your user base".
If only half of your users use of the jack, then you've wasted both the space and the part.
... and half of your user base.
when "the jack is moving to a common accessory" would have prevented most complaints/arguments.
Maybe it would, but in my view, this is the same as "killing off the headphone jack". I don't use a case, and don't want a case. I think even a dongle would be less objectionable than being forced to use a case.