If they want money for their work, they should stick to their paper magazine rather than publishing to the web which was intended to be about the free dissemination of information.
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
If they want money for their work, they should stick to their paper magazine rather than publishing to the web which was intended to be about the free dissemination of information.
Interesting strategy for the continuous earbud user. Though with a 5 hour battery life, they'd have to be rotated every 2.5 hours.
Tell that to Amazon.
I think a part of what you say may be true, but I don't see anyone coming close to Apple in innovation except in the minds of some users and a very biased media that sets different standards for Apple and everyone else. It's like the C student who gets a B gets kudos while the A student who gets a B is reprimanded.
The glowing Pixel reviews is a perfect example of that... Imagine if Apple released the Pixel with its unimaginative design, no stereo speakers, lack of water-resistant design, no 3D Touch, no Taptic Engine, no secure enclave, much slower performance, etc. and priced it the same as the iPhone 6s and called it the iPhone 7?
Over the last 5 years, Apple has introduced some pretty amazing tech: Apple Pay, Touch ID, Force Touch Trackpad, Apple Pencil, 3D Touch, Taptic Engine, AirPods, W/A/M chips, HomeKit, Research Kit, CarPlay, Apple Watch, ATV4, Hand Off/Continuity, Swift, etc. Users and the media just need to put it into perspective and stop expecting Apple to revolutionize industries with every keynote.
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.
That's why all such systems have buffering before DAC, which introduces latency and usually a lip sync issue unless it's compensated properly on the phone side, so you only need to synchronize playback down to few microseconds to avoid phasing issues, which should be quite trivial for Apple to implement. In Bluetooth there are separate profiles for playing audio vs making phone calls, last time I checked reviews of all true wireless headphones such as Bragi, Android-only Samsung's IconX and so forth nobody complained about problems with audio sync - which confirms the theory that audio sync is a trivial thing - but lots of people complained that phone call audio on all those headphones comes out only from one bud so that it acts like a mono headset. So apparently nobody was able to crack that one yet, and makes me wonder if this alleged sync issue has something to do with Apple trying to solve this for phone calls rather than having a generic sync issue - like the half-brained source of this stupid rumor is implying. I'm also wondering about motivation of the people who leak this kind of stuff - they either get paid some bread crumbs by the media, which means they are willing to sacrifice their low-paying job at Apple in case they are tracked down and fired, and/or they are too low in the food chain over there that access to any scientificantly sounding mumbo-jumbo is an opportunity for them to shine by reiterating it in front of non-technical audience and stroke their ego. In either case they don't seem to be qualified to interpret the information they got access to and leaked, and the rumors have no technical credibility whatsoever. Watching too much "Snowden" apparently.
While I'm definitely not defending the path Apple has gone down since Tim took over, that's exactly what they did with the iPhone. It wasn't even really functional when Steve unveiled it.
Hope not too many people fall for this scam, and shell out their money to beta test these things until Apple really figures this stuff out, and puts out a revised version.
Well, at least Apple caught this before releasing the earphones. We can't complain when they release buggy hardware and then complain when there is delay in release to sort out bugs.
However, this rumour seems a little implausible. I presume there is some sort of buffering, in which case the issue is simultaneous playback, not reception. Radio waves travel rather fast, even in air, and the distance between AirPods in minimal when that speed is taken into account.
However, this rumour seems a little implausible. I presume there is some sort of buffering, in which case the issue is simultaneous playback, not reception. Radio waves travel rather fast, even in air, and the distance between AirPods in minimal when that speed is taken into account.
Now that's a good explanation with some very sound points I hadn't considered. I hadn't really had any issues with my bluetooth experiences, but I see that others have.
For what it's worth, I'm sorry that I was ill mannered to the individual I argued with.
False. IBM promised a G5 at 3.0GHz one year after the 2.0 shipped, and completely failed to deliver.
Here's some history you can brush up on: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Apple/3GHz-PowerPC-G5-Eludes-IBM
I appreciate where you're coming from, but I'd argue that there have been many years like that at Apple, where they didn't release anything exciting and even "fell behind" others in the market. I'm not worried about many of the things you mentioned. Apple has never been one to throw **** against the wall and see what sticks, so I appreciate that they haven't jumped into AR/VR, for example. If anything, I think they are too unfocused now as is, trying to make the Watch happen and launching a variety of services.
I can excuse not releasing an AR/VR product, not having an Echo competitor, limping along in the TV department (after all, they can't wave a magic wand and make everyone cooperate...the landscape was much different when they revolutionized music)...
But I CANNOT excuse neglecting the Mac! Sure, there are a lot of newbie Apple fans who came to love Apple through the iPhone, but these are not people who have supported the company for multiple decades, who have served as evangelists and tech support gurus within their communities, and who have kept Apple in business during lean years when the competition had eclipsed them in many respects.
Apple is foolish to neglect the Mac. The new MacBooks are weak. The Mac Pro was questionable three years ago and it's pathetic today. The Surface Studio BLOWS the iMac away. It feels like Apple is intentionally allowing the Mac to wither on the vine and I think this will come back to haunt them. Mac users, not iPhone fans, are Apple's core evangelists. The tech industry is littered with the remains of consumer electronic companies that were bested by a competitor. Apple's resilience was entirely due to the passion of Mac users. If we go away, how long until someone comes along with a better iPhone and Apple is the next Blackberry?
Apple is touting the w1 chip and showing some pairing that's pretty sophisticated. Presumably their wireless protocol is a superset of Bluetooth or something else with Bluetooth protocol as a fallback.
With that in mind, do you think Apple could have gotten themselves into a situation where there isn't a playbook out there for the syncing? That my guess.
Yes, floppies were something of an obsolete format. My point was simply that when they were removed, some people were inconvenienced and needed to buy new hardware. For most people, it was a non-issue.
Just like removing the headphone jack is an inconvenience for some, but a non-issue for most. I wager that most people use the headphones that come with their iPhone. That is my experience anywhere I go. I rarely see someone not using the bundled white headphones. When I do see such people, their headphones are almost always Bluetooth.
How often do you charge your phone and listen on headphones? I'm sure a handful of people do this occasionally. Are they enough a reason to keep the jack? I don't think so.
It all comes down to whether or not you believe Apple when they said that the headphone jack was removed in order to accommodate other hardware. If you think this is a lie and it is really some nefarious plot to sell Bluetooth headphones, I can't argue with that. I just disagree. Otherwise I think we need to look at it for what it is, an occasional, minor inconvenience at best. And the AirPods delay isn't some giant catastrophe worthy of Tim Cook's resignation. It's a (small) bump in the road.
If people are using wireless headphones by then, it won't matter what port the iPhone has. Heck, it won't even matter whether it even has a port or not.
The raison d'etre for headphones is audio convenience NOT quality. For a small niche market, quality is the driver. No argument. For the majority of headphone users, however, it's about convenience. They're listening on the subway, at the gym, while cleaning the house, when they're out for a run, etc. They are listening to audio that is anything but top quality in origin (ie: Apple Music) unless, of course, they are a purist, only use lossless audio, rip it themselves, and probably don't use an iPhone anyway but rather some purist audio player that has the world's greatest DAC.
Again, NOTHING prevents you from using your existing wired headphones with an iPhone 7. Apple gives you an adapter and the problem is solved. Lose it or need a second one for the office or the gym bag? $10. Big deal.
Apple says they removed the headphone jack to accommodate other hardware. Do you believe this to be an outright lie? Because your extreme view seems grounded in the idea that Apple somehow removed the headphone jack to sell AirPods and they now deserve to be crucified because AirPods are late. I find that point of view borderline absurd.
I think Apple made a compromise. They know wireless headphones are the future. I'm sure they crunched the numbers on high-end wireless vs. wired headphone sales. They know most people use the headphones that come with the iPhone. They wanted to get legacy hardware out of the device and use that space for other things. So they weighed out the pros and cons and decided the headphone jack was unnecessary. I don't see anything more here than a mildly controversial design decision.
Last edited:
There is a point being missed in this thread however, excuse me if I missed it. The same technology that is being utilized in the Made-for-iPhone hearing aids is what's being used with the W1 chip. I am a user of these hearing aids. There is an issue that Apple has been working on for quite some time and it deals with the problem where the bluetooth signal, if not able to reach the W1 causes both side to corrupt. This is the problem that they working on within iOS 10.2 beta. Version 7 of this beta has cleared up the issue almost 100% but it still needs work. I assume we will see a new beta version coming out any time now. I know they will fix the issue. They're almost there now.
Interesting article with a virtual and speculative "teardown" of the Airpods... including comments on synchronization:
http://www.nickhunn.com/airpods-a-speculative-teardown/
http://www.nickhunn.com/airpods-a-speculative-teardown/
Wireless headphones have crap audio quality.I would rather carry a dongle around then use them.Also do you realise the Bluetooth battery drain I would have on connecting both the Watch and the headphones ?If people are using wireless headphones by then, it won't matter what port the iPhone has. Heck, it won't even matter whether it even has a port or not.
When the first iPhone was released, critics pointed out how a physical keyboard was superior for typing compared to a software keyboard. They were absolutely right (and are probably still right today), and it turned out not to matter to the people actually using them, because the benefits of having a virtual keyboard which could be dismissed for more screen space was simply greater than having a dedicated keyboard.
Same here. You are probably right in that the sound quality from wired headphones will always be superior to a pair of wireless headphones in the same price point. However, there may come a point where consumers are largely indifferent to further improvements in the sound quality of headphones because they find it "good enough", and as such are willing to sacrifice added sound quality for other conveniences such as wireless connectivity. Or they might prize the convenience of not having to contend with wires enough that they don't mind sacrificing sound quality for it.
Yes, there will always be a group of audiophiles who will prize sound quality over everything else (just as there are still people who swear by vinyl records), but I believe they are few and far in between.
The trick here will be focusing on the benefits of wireless headphones and making consumers want and value these benefits enough such that they want to use them over wired headphones, regardless of what benefits the latter may offer.
Overstating the issue. I use some premium bluetooth headsets along with a watch. Battery life is fine. The convenience is awesome. I love not having wires dangling from my head.
Apple is famous for eat-your-dog-food so I doubt they would release something they would not be comfortable using themselves.