Or they could have kept the headphone jack, and waited to go wireless next year as they continue their tests. Tim Cook thinks he have to revolutionize the computer industry in each keynote. Its ok to just bump the specs every now and then.
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 Delay Attributed to Apple Ensuring Both Earpieces Receive Audio at Same Time [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
From the sound of it they are ready, they just don't know how to make millions of them. To paraphrase Phil Schiller, "supply chain expert my ass"
Would you like to be the pot or the kettle? and i'm not calling anyone immoral - i totally get that we tech fans want our products, - but the calls for Tim and co. to be fired over this are so over the top ridiculous. . heck, I'm super excited to these things also - but i also realize that this is not the end of the world as we know it. And yes, its is a 1st world problem! it cannot be framed any other way.
Last edited:
Maybe the distortion is not perceptible yet above levels that Apple will accept.
The selling point of the W1 chip is that it lets you pair easily with any of your Apple devices, not just those with an NFC chip. One theory is that Apple simply views NFC as an inelegant solution to an inelegant problem. You won't be able to pair your Bose headphones to your iPad or your Mac because those lack NFC chips. You would be able to pair your airpods to those easily because of how Apple controls the underlying software and hardware.
It's also possible that Apple wants to lock you into W1 headphones. Which would be so very Apple. They give you one fixed solution to a problem, but the tradeoff is that any Apple-sanctioned solution is typically better than any third-party solution out there.
And according to Apple, the W1 chip also enhances the battery management. Its the reason the Beats studio wireless didn't get a W1 chip update.
Yes, because nobody compares Tim to Jobs and the expectations of him are really set very low.
I think no proper source had tested them and apart from a simpler pairing procedure they probably won't offer anything stellar, at least not in terms of sound if the current EarPods are any reference in any form. Convenience during pairing yes, but that is a small gain compared to good earphones already available on the market.
In my 30 plus years of living in the Apple orchard, two issues that my Apple products, both Macs ( iMacs and MacBooks ) and mobile ( iPad and iPhones ) have consistently had were bluetooth and wifi problems. These, to me, are the worst part of the Apple experience. I have both a wired keyboard and mouse connected to my MacBook Pro while using it in clamshell mode on my desk just for the times when the Pro decides it doesn't want to work with my "Magic Trackpad" and wireless keyboard. I gave up on using bluetooth headphones with a Mac years ago because wired "just works" versus bluetooth on a Mac which doesn't.
It's the surprise that Apple wants to pull off with the Airpods.
When they do, the cost of entry to do the same will be higher for anyone else attempting to duplicate.
Airpods may be the end of the beginning of an entirely new AI experience.
Many are hoping.
➰
I've had a different experience, I have Wi-Fi that the Wi-Fi keyboard and Wi-Fi speakers that all worked very well. However this is all been since 2012. The fact that they want to hold the product back in order to make sure that it works well I'm OK with. I'd rather have that then wait for updates to try to get it fixed.
Tim can't do the things Job does, just as Jobs likely can't do very well the things that Tim excels in. They are two very different people with entirely different skill sets, so any direct comparison wouldn't be very meaningful.
Tim Cook isn't the product visionary that Steve Jobs is, and Tim has never pretended to be one from the start. If anything, Tim has offloaded that responsibility to Jony Ive and his team, so if you want, you should be comparing Steve with Ive instead.
So it's not that Tim is faring poorly, but that people are using the wrong metrics to evaluate Tim Cook. For a clearer picture, I refer you to my earlier linked website, Aboveavalon, which analyses Tim Cook's role in Apple and his contributions and accomplishments.
https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/12/6/milking-the-iphone
They may not be as sexy as inventing the next iPhone, but it's no less impressive.
Interesting view of the years of Apple history - starting way back in September 2016!
If all else fails one can always try subscribing to the product in question...
File under "there's no free lunch": if enough people bypass paywalls *and* block advertisements, the "free" info will disappear since no one will be paying to create the content. Meanwhile those who do subscribe carry the freeloaders at a higher price. But never mind, perhaps we'll all become professional journalists. They do say necessity is the mother of invention. 
On the thread topic: good they're delaying the release until the product works as it should; the updated OP indicates it's a problem of manufacturing to scale, not engineering issues. So with some assembly tweaks and good QA it sounds like functional airpods should become available pretty soon. I'd like to try them but am somewhat concerned about misplacing them. otoh easy to misplace a dongle too so...
must try to up my game on keeping track of possessions?
Natural progression as markets increase and competition forces Apple's hands!
Definitely less impressive and not at all "sexy" as even the iPod - no comparison to the iPhone!
The objective of this thread, delivering sound to both ears at the same time, the industry had that solved a hundred years ago!
Without confirming this simple objective in audio delivery, this CEO took away an existing port that cost the company and the iPhone no pain!
Was the move to remove the "jack" to recoup the loss made by the stupid move that was made to acquire a "headphone company", Beats, for 3+ billion dollars? I believe so!
So stupid that they have 20 million Apple Music subscribers. That's recurring sales of at least $200 Million per month!!
When everyone drops their headphone jack and most phones and devices on earth use USB-C, Apple will have to cave and support USB-C on iOS devices. Which seems like common sense.
Yes, very impressive and not stupid at all! It is not a competition (sic), right!
Less than half of Spotify's numbers, to date.
Bluetooth is packetized data, so the devices have to receive, parse, and act on the data they receive. I don't think bluetooth audio works like an FM radio. Your intuition is right that it doesn't make physical sense, but in this case it's not a matter of analog signal processing
With packets of data it's not easy to make the end result of that process happen at the same time. That said, if anyone could do this, it would be Apple an it's absurd that they didn't account for the fact that this would be challenging. It's embarrassing for them, they've done relatively harder things in the past it seems.
Ahah, that's what I thought.
I usually make it a point not to respond to original posts like yours, with open ended general pleas for explanations, and I'm reposting the entire thread of responses from you as a reason why -- it escalated quickly to reveal you apparently were just looking for a reason to climb on your soapbox and make your point in a dismissive and demeaning way to others. And it's all here in black and white.
That said, let me point out why you're wrong -- BT is not popular with many people for several major reasons:
1) it's difficult to use, mostly revolving around pairing issues
2) it suffers from reliability issues like dropouts and lag
3) they tend to be bulky, with cables linking earbuds, etc.
4) battery life tends to be limited, and unpredictable, especially on more portable models
5) they tend to be expensive
6) there tends to be a lot of low quality offerings in the low-end of the price spectrum that have turned people off
7) they offer lower quality audio than wired alternatives
In removing the headphone jack, Apple needed to offer an alternative to ameliorate the removal of the headphone jack, about which Apple was on the defensive from the moment they took the stage, and offered little legitimate support for doing. Yes Apple offered an adapter to continue using the old 3.5mm headphones -- while that mitigates the decision somewhat, it was more akin to pouring salt into the wound. Then they bundle Lightning EarPods with it, which could have been a huge positive, but the fact they can't be used with anything else -- in particular a Mac -- makes them less than an optimal replacement for the headphone jack.
So Apple made their agenda clear -- wireless is the future. Not only that, but they tell us they understand that BT is a "bag of hurt" to use a phrase Steve Jobs once applied to another popular problematic technology for Apple. In response they give us AirPods which solves 6 out of the 7 issues most people have with BT:
1) Ridiculously simplified pairing between Apple devices
2) No more dropouts or lag
3) ultra slim and compact design
4) Apple offers the longest battery life available for such a tiny device, with quick charge boosts offering 3 hours for every 15 minutes, up to 24 more hours. It also offers single pod use thus extending mono listening up to 53 more hours, without interruption.
5) For the technology offered they are somewhat reasonably priced.
6) Apple is a trusted name in quality, and has produced a product specifically designed to work with the iPhone 7
So regardless of your obvious bias here, Apple had to release this product with the removal of the headphone jack to demonstrate that wireless was indeed the future, since the existing BT market is generally not good enough to satisfy the many potential customers who have tried BT and had a bad experience and rejected it, or are confused by the offerings and limitations, or frustrated by the limitations of power, reliability, and complications of pairing. Not to mention their paucity of support for Lightning options. The AirPods are a huge step forward. The Beats offerings are likewise important -- though the only two currently available come with the added inconvenience of using micro-USB connections rather than Lightning, not to mention added bulk and expense over standard earbuds. And since Apple couldn't really address the audio quality issues and cost at this juncture, they offered an alternative via the inexpensive adapter, or Lightning (albeit limited).
Since I completely disagree with your position and the manner in which you presented it, I won't respond further to you, as this is clear and definitive refutation of your simplistic viewpoint.
You realize that 15 min. of charging gets you an additional 3 hours of use? If you are listening to your EarPods for more than 5 hours straight without interruption, and can't even take a 15 min. break, then suffice it to say, Apple is not considering you a primary target for the AirPods. Even the most diehard music lover can take 15 min to go to the bathroom without listening to music every 3 hours. The Airpods also allow mono use, which means that you could charge one Airpod at a time for 15 min. each and keep listening to your audio program in mono. heck, Apple might even sell replacement buds individually, and a savvy AirPod user could have 3 buds they rotate every 3 hours so a pair is fully charged at all times.
First, for their size, no other earbuds I've seen introduced so far comes close to offering that kind of battery life. If the AirPod's really don't fit your lifestyle, there are several other options like the PowerBeats 3, and Beats Studio 3, the latter of which gives you 40 hours on one charge.
Doubtful. All rumors point to Apple moving towards wireless charging, removing all ports from the iPhone. USB-C doesn't offer anything for the iPhone that Lightning can't already do better or as efficiently. Lightning will persist until Apple goes port-less, thus sparing their customers another massive transition form one technology to another, which based on rumor is likely only going to persist for another year or two. They also spare them the pain of trying to find a USB-C out in the wild. Maybe in two years USB-C will be a more widespread, but by that time Apple will likely have no need for it on a the iPhone.