Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AirPods Have Captured One Quarter of Wireless Headphone Spending Since Launching
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interestingly enough Colorware doesn't have any on their site either.I really want a pair, but not in white, i want black, and they don't do black
I think next iPhone will have USB c and they will sell USB c AirPods and continue selling lighting too. Also I think the premium iPhone will be called the iPhone pro. You heard it here first
People could use the adapter that comes with their iPhone 7 to use existing headphones.
But they're choosing to go wireless instead. Wireless will soon outsell wired, and Apple saw that coming. Airpods and other wireless headphones are selling like hotcakes. It was a smart idea and competitions are removing the headphone jack from their phones now.
I do love my QC35. Amazing when travelling (or to filter out the kids and wife
).I know they are not the best according to audiophiles, but lucky for me, I don't have audiophile ears. That would be both a blessing and a curse, imho.
About the AirPods, I was sceptical, but colour me surprised. I wouldn't get them, though. I use earphones for the gym and buy cheap ones because I sometimes forget them in my short pockets and wash them... Surprisingly, they do last 2-3 washings!
I wasn't originally considering the AirPods but after all the great reviews and record sales I might jump in. The normal pods fit well on my ears so I see no issues with the wireless ones. The price is not so bad. Good job Apple.
Can't really say I'm surprised they've sold well. That said I prefer headphones with more controls that fit my ears properly. At least they're bringing other people joy.
Interested in getting them, but I'm hesitant because I don't want to upgrade from El Capitan to Sierra on my late 2015 iMac. I hear there are too many problems and slow-downs.
I suppose I can pair them to El Capitan via Bluetooth (right?), though it won't take advantage of the W1 chip. Does it matter?
I suppose I can pair them to El Capitan via Bluetooth (right?), though it won't take advantage of the W1 chip. Does it matter?
10 hours battery life and I'll buy a pair
[doublepost=1484168011][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1484168011][/doublepost]
I'm running a 2012 mac mini and Sierra is working fine. I think you can pair them with any bluetooth device including Android phones and tablets
I have a set on order that won't deliver until Feb 28th.
[doublepost=1484168124][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1484168124][/doublepost]
You get 24 total with the case battery. You can top them off in 15 minutes to get another 3 hours of listening time, 1 hour to fully charge. That is not bad.
None of my sub-$20 bluetooth headphones have actual brands.
[doublepost=1484170794][/doublepost]
I think he's going on the suspicion that the next iPhone will switch to USB C. It's a suspicion I kinda share.
[doublepost=1484171377][/doublepost]
And the best part about this whole thing is that with this push, the market will probably produce these within a year or so.
I'm repeating a sentiment from an earlier post in another thread. Apologies if you've heard it before. The Icon X sounds the way it does because of what it is: essentially a faceless smartwatch to jam in your ear. Samsung and everyone else, save Apple, did the expedient thing. They took the fitness aspects of smartwatches and adapted it to a headphone. Unnecessarily. Apple smartly realized there's no need for all of the extraneous accouterments in a wireless headphone. The AirPod is decent speaker, microphone, and control architecture. That's all that was needed. The next iteration of the Icon X will have a decent speaker, microphone, and control architecture. The same goes for everyone else. Bragi's already gone down that road with The Headphone. When Sammy gets rid of all the extras, there will be more room for the most important aspect of any headphone, better sound. Like you, I think the Icon X's look much better than the AirPods. But if they don't sound good, what's the point.
Is this for "existing" bluetooth or the new v5 -would/could that be a simple firmware update pushed out by Apple? What's the data spec on dynamic range and frequency response for Bluetooth headphones/airpods? Is it like turning an uncompressed 24/192 BWF into a VBR mp3 by the time the analog signal hits your ear canal? Or is this now factored into the mp3/AAC conversion assuming that it will be streamed via Bluetooth? -Which could mean "harder compression" for this new tech so that the hardware doesn't have to work as hard recompressing the file for streaming?
It makes me wonder if there's any point in studios spending huge amounts of money on Neumanns, Royers, and Neve Mic pre's and DAWs that produce mix stems that can go way beyond 24/44.1 -or 48khz in Post. Maybe we can just slap an L1 on the Master bus, bounce it, use the Mastered for iTunes droplet (which is quite impressive if you tweak the settings to 320 CBR) and call it good.
Apparently convenience and fashion now trump audio quality. -But if consumers are just listening to (insert latest pop/rap here) and not orchestral or solo piano music, then they won't notice much difference anyway. I'm all for convenience, but it's kind of sad knowing that there's a whole generation (including part of my own) that has:
[a] Never experienced great recordings without data compression.
Have listened to so much mp3 and mp4 material that they have lost their ear-training.
[c] It's a+b and only recording engineers care about this of which I write.
Read if you like. The articles are still relevant:
http://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/what-data-compression-does-your-music
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_compression#Audio
Check for lint in the connector. My iPhone 5 is nearly 3.5 years old and anytime there is a flaky connection it has always been lint. It will be so packed in there that it won't look like anything is there but if you dig around (with something non conductive is best) you will get stuff out.
As long as it's an apple product people will buy it. If they were beats the same people would've been trashing it.
I had a pair of X2's and they definitely last the 8 hours quoted, i use to spend all week on my commute without charging them.
I currently have a pair of Jaybird freedom's which the company sent me for free after my X2's stopped working on one side.
the thing that has turned me off to Jaybird is their new charging method, the little clip that has to be added on in order to charge is a bit of an inconvenience and I'm afraid it's too easy to lose when traveling. Also what if I forget it at home when I go away? now I don't have headphones for my whole trip.
lol Business strategy is what I do, and I'm quite good at it. Although any discussion about a strategy that doesn't understand the full road map is inherently flawed, a comparison between the iPhone and the iPod is sophomoric at best, but likely just plain dumb. The iPhone was a new category of product, not a product line within the same product category. That's a difference you seem to miss in your fallacious analogy. The iPhone created new category that wholly encompass multiple old categories, and that is the natural order of technological advancement, hence it's a perfectly valid strategy.
My observations is about Beats. Allowing a product from the Beats brand to remain stagnant, thus creating space for competitors to make more compelling products and thus grow their market share... well, that's just poor. When a new product comes out that is an entirely different line within the headphone category, and it eats away at sales from disparate lines within the company's portfolio... well, that's just not promising.
[doublepost=1484174104][/doublepost]
I agree with you. They sound horrible. Same with the Sol Republics. That bass on the Sol's are far better than anything out now, but there's an electronic distortion that erodes audio quality. I took both the Samsung and Sol's back. I love my AirPods. They are the right balance of audio quality, fit, and tech.
[doublepost=1484174290][/doublepost]
Short term gains are not interesting at all, particularly with how Apple's new product launches work. This is pretty par for the course for new product lines. Anyone with any experience in long term business strategy will immediately jump to the loss in market share they experienced from more mature product lines that should not really compete with AirPods. The Beats product line has no direct competitor for the AirPods, so losing market share in their lines while your competition grows market share is what actually looks interesting.
[doublepost=1484174476][/doublepost]
I hope they didn't expect to cannibalize too much... the AirPods don't compete with any Beats headphones. Totally different audience and user. These aren't workout headphones, so the PowerBeats line shouldn't lose much. They are over-ear, so the Studios and Solos shouldn't lose much. They are losing share to Bose and then losing to their own (cheaper) AirPods. Any company that releases a product that generates less revenue (and my assumption here, less profit) than it's existing lines will be in trouble long term. Do I think Apple is in trouble? No. But do I think there is not much to celebrate here, and actually some signs of concern? Yep.