iPhone 7

[Hoofbite]

Precisely. I think the issue is that they're easier to lose and will cost $160 to replace therefore increasing the average cost of ownership for an iPhone.

Well, you don't have to buy them so the average cost of ownership is much the same as it would be if the wireless ear buds didn't exist.

 

[KJJ]

Considering going from the iPhone 6 plus to the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge. Anyone have one and what do you think?

 

[JoeyBoy718]

So did they actually do away with the headphone jack? Someone was saying you could buy an adapter to be able to use wired headphones, but how would that be possible if there's nowhere to plug it in?

 

[Cowboy Brian]

e

Well, you don't have to buy them so the average cost of ownership is much the same as it would be if the wireless ear buds didn't exist.

You don't have to but many people will, so the average goes up, the required cost doesn't.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

So did they actually do away with the headphone jack? Someone was saying you could buy an adapter to be able to use wired headphones, but how would that be possible if there's nowhere to plug it in?

It works through the lighting port... supposed to produce superior sound as well

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

I don't get the big deal about wireless ear buds or losing the headphone jack. If you want wireless headphones just buy a bluetooth headset and your done.

They loss the headphone jack to eliminate another way moister can get into the phone.. in their bid to make it water proof..
although wont insure for water damage...(they wont officially call it water proof)

go figure.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

I've never gone wireless with my iPhone 6 but a friend of mine who has said it breaks ups which is why I haven't gone wireless with it. One problem with Apples earbuds is when the wire bends at the bottom the music you're listening to can start to breakup. This happened to me and had to purchase some new buds. Maybe Apple has improved the technology where there won't be any breaking up with their wireless buds.

it depends on the quality of the cans or speaker... I have a pair of sony mdr-x's i don't have much problem walking from room to room.

 

[TheCount]

They loss the headphone jack to eliminate another way moister can get into the phone.. in their bid to make it water proof..
although wont insure for water damage...(they wont officially call it water proof)

go figure.

There are "waterproof" phones out there with headphone jacks, so I don't think that's the reason.

 

[nobody]

It works through the lighting port... supposed to produce superior sound as well

A good enough pair of headphones is all you need. The human ear isn't THAT sensitive that a new kind of port would need to be invented. Besides, since it's a converter, it would degrade the superior sound by going into a jack anyway.
Any stereo jack is good enough for the human ear. It's all in the quality of the headphones.

There are "waterproof" phones out there with headphone jacks, so I don't think that's the reason.

To me, the real reason was to reduce costs, provide a new revenue (The converter), and increase profit margin for shareholders.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

A good enough pair of headphones is all you need. The human ear isn't THAT sensitive that a new kind of port would need to be invented. Besides, since it's a converter, it would degrade the superior sound by going into a jack anyway.
Any stereo jack is good enough for the human ear. It's all in the quality of the headphones.

You may be right, but according to THEM... its the reason:

Lightning connectors were designed from the outset to handle high-quality audio, Apple vice president Phil Schiller told the audience, addressing concerns about the headphone jack removal.

Jim Dalrymple, who knows his music and doesn't want anyone messing with it, brings up this point on The Loop:

"If you look at the way Apple typically does things when introducing new technologies like this, there is no reason you wouldn't be all for this new plan. They make it better, not worse.

I would fully expect that if Apple did implement this idea, the audio would sound better through the Lightning connector than the older headphone jack. Not only because Apple can add technology to the chip (noise cancelling, etc.), but because the headphone jack is not very efficient. It's been around forever and hasn't really improved how we listen to audio in a long time. A fully digital connection would improve everything."

There are "waterproof" phones out there with headphone jacks, so I don't think that's the reason.

Again... you may be right... but thats that the call... also "paves the way for future innovations":

Analysts said Apple's move has benefits. Ms Karissa Chua, consumer electronics analyst at market research firm Euromonitor International, said the headphone jack was removed so that it is easier to waterproof the gadget and to make way for future hardware innovation.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

To me, the real reason was to reduce costs, provide a new revenue (The converter), and increase profit margin for shareholders.

Absolutely, even if its short term.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

To me, the real reason was to reduce costs, provide a new revenue (The converter), and increase profit margin for shareholders.

While that is a bi-product of the no head phone hole. It's not the real reason.

It's a "wireless" advance.

Apple is very design driven company and will think nothing of changing a port design to fit a new design. Most of the time, it's the right decision.

Bi-product = To make their products thinner and lighter and to ensure that accessories still need to be bought and they can sell the license to proprietary ports to accessories.

 

[YosemiteSam]

They loss the headphone jack to eliminate another way moister can get into the phone.. in their bid to make it water proof..
although wont insure for water damage...(they wont officially call it water proof)

go figure.

Actually, in truth. That had nothing to do with it. It had everything to do with control. When audio leaves through a jack like that. There is no way to prevent anything from happening like recording the analog sound. This is just Apple implementing another way to force DRM. Of course, that's like locking a door from the outside when you can still exit through breaking the window.

The side effect of it is they can now charge a lot more for the accompanying headphones. Yay to Apple iPhone users!

 

[TheCount]

To me, the real reason was to reduce costs, provide a new revenue (The converter), and increase profit margin for shareholders.

They wouldn't have done it if there was no financial incentive, but a $9 adapter that a million third party manufacturers will be knocking off in weeks for a third of the price is probably not the business coup it might seem.

A digital connection for headphones makes sense - it actually opens the door to a lot of cool features. I just don't believe lightning should be the standard. If you're going to do something like that, you need to choose a universal format - like USB-C.

 

[nobody]

They wouldn't have done it if there was no financial incentive, but a $9 adapter that a million third party manufacturers will be knocking off in weeks for a third of the price is probably not the business coup it might seem.

A digital connection for headphones makes sense - it actually opens the door to a lot of cool features. I just don't believe lightning should be the standard. If you're going to do something like that, you need to choose a universal format - like USB-C.

Third party manufacturers will have lawsuits on their hands if they do a knockoff too soon, assuming Apple holds the patent on the port. Usually, they have to wait a year or two to make knockoffs.

 

[TheCount]

Third party manufacturers will have lawsuits on their hands if they do a knockoff too soon, assuming Apple holds the patent on the port. Usually, they have to wait a year or two to make knockoffs.

There are already lightning to 3.5 audio jacks on the market, I'm just talking about the options that will be available for a third the price.

 

[YosemiteSam]

They loss the headphone jack to eliminate another way moister can get into the phone.. in their bid to make it water proof..
although wont insure for water damage...(they wont officially call it water proof)

go figure.

These guys say they want the holes so their product can permeate the device making it waterproof.



That's a pretty cool technology. The real question is. Is it a viable option? What is the downside?

 

[YosemiteSam]

lol.

This should be Apple's iPhone 7 ad!

https://lh3.***BROKEN***/-JmSpGUI3e5Q/V9q-jQz6YdI/AAAAAAAGYAo/tuJGa6YiSMskg7JI8ST_sZhf2h3Xu_dYwCJoC/w346-h192/2016%2B-%2B1