Apple May Replace 3.5mm Headphone Jack on iPhone 7 With All-in-One Lightning Connector

[QquegChristian]

companies don't invest money towards the past, they invest money towards the future.

Thats the same thing as if your grandparents still wanted to use CDs in a brand new car rather then use their smartphone. the fact is that although the automobile industry had a more subtle approach in getting rid of the CD player (very slowly), they'll soon get rid of the AUX as well.


Apple is just doing it abruptly because it can. I'm sure damn well American automobile companies wouldn't dare make a bold move as to get abruptly get rid of the CD player early and shoot themselves in the foot. Nor would the Japanese companies want to do it early and give other competition (especially in the US) a chance to catch up.



Nearly all consumer industries could care less (unless their catered to, like senior apparel and technology for senior citizens) about the aging generations.

Companies that offer products like Apple and Toyota aren't going to base their mainline products on 'older generation'. It will always be geared for the future and younger generation.

But i do agree its a bit ballsy to get rid of the 3.5 jack like this and head for a more subtle approach like what the auto industry did with the CD player.


But apple does like to set the standard. They gave us the smartphone, so theres that.

Currently, cars give options and all consumers win. I bought a 2016 Honda Fit last month. It has Bluetooth, direct USB link, Aux, and a CD Player. I used Bluetooth and Aux on a recent road trip with friends. Bluetooth for my phone, Aux for my friend, because the Bluetooth pairing process on this deck is so annoying that I didn't want to keep having to do it each time we switched.

The direct USB connection through Lightning in the car is absolute garbage. It instantly starts playing an album from iTunes no matter what (and an album I don't even have on my phone) and won't play any sound from my SiriusXM or podcast apps. I had to go buy a car lighter USB port so I could charge my phone NOT in the car's built-in USB that makes this digital connection.

I wouldn't be surprised if plugging in Lightning cabled Beats automatically launches Apple Music in the future, even if you use Spotify. The USB-C audio schematics a few pages back state that kind of thing as the biggest advantage.

No matter what Apple does, it can do it with or without losing the old (but not out of date) standard.

 

[Mac 128]

Currently, cars give options and all consumers win. I bought a 2016 Honda Fit last month. It has Bluetooth, direct USB link, Aux, and a CD Player. I used Bluetooth and Aux on a recent road trip with friends. Bluetooth for my phone, Aux for my friend, because the Bluetooth pairing process on this deck is so annoying that I didn't want to keep having to do it each time we switched.

The direct USB connection through Lightning in the car is absolute garbage. It instantly starts playing an album from iTunes no matter what (and an album I don't even have on my phone) and won't play any sound from my SiriusXM or podcast apps. I had to go buy a car lighter USB port so I could charge my phone NOT in the car's built-in USB that makes this digital connection.

I wouldn't be surprised if plugging in Lightning cabled Beats automatically launches Apple Music in the future, even if you use Spotify. The USB-C audio schematics a few pages back state that kind of thing as the biggest advantage.

No matter what Apple does, it can do it with or without losing the old (but not out of date) standard.

Most of the problems you mention I have experienced. These are all software issues, which will presumably improve with time. Forcing the consumer down this path is only going to ensure manufacturers deal with them more quickly since the demand will be greater.

But I disagree that neither you nor I, nor anyone else is in a position to say whether Apple or any other manufacture are in a position to implement new standards without removing old ones. The fact that Intel is pushing USB-C for mobile audio is telling, and reinforces what I have suspected all along -- Apple needs space inside the iPhone to make improvements and add new features, and if Apple needs the space, so do the flagship phones of all the other manufacturers.

And if that's the case industrywide (which is the only scenario that makes sense if Apple removes the headphone jack vs. giving their competition an advantage who don't have to remove it), there's a palpable reason to get rid of the old standard.

 

[JulianL]

If one looks at the current lightning connector...

... one can see a fair bit of flat space behind the data pins. Couldn't Apple enhance the existing socket to provide connections onto those flat areas (because they are on both sides of the plug of course) to deliver regular analog audio to the connector? That would remove the issues of needing an external DAC that might not be as good as the one already in the iPhone and, since the external lightning to 3.5mm adaptor would now not need a DAC it should be relatively affordable (although knowing Apple I wouldn't count on that).

The upper and lower flat areas could both potentially be split in 2 to give a total of 4 contact areas for analog data or maybe one side is left for earth and the other split for left and right. The spec for the Lightning connector already has intelligence in the plug and protocols defined to cope with the connector being plugged in either way round so that same mechanism could be used to map earth, left and right channels correctly depending on the connector orientation when plugged in (which come to think of it would necessitate both sides being split to give 4 contacts which would dynamically map to left, right and two earths depending on connector orientation).

To me the above would be perfect and it does solve a problem, or at least it helps to. The problem is battery life. The space inside an iPhone is distinctly limited, especially with Jonny Ive making the thing thinner and thinner plus with all the requests for smaller bezels that internal space might well get smaller still. Absolutely every component that can be squeezed down in size or even removed altogether leaves more space to get in the biggest possible battery. I would happily pay an extra $30, which would be a one-off cost because I could use with every iPhone I buy, for a 3.5mm adapter if it allowed Apple to get an extra 100+ mAh of battery into every future generation of iPhone and iPad.

Edit - another possibility might be to use those indentations on each side next to the existing pins. Make those electrically active for audio L & R and use intelligent protocols to get them the right way round on insertion and, when the inserted lightening connector identifies itself as a headphone or a 3.5mm adapter, ground some or all of the existing pins to provide audio earth or perhaps still use the flat bits and permanently assert an audio earth onto those areas in future iDevices which wouldn't mess up any existing connectors.

 

[Mac 128]

If one looks at the current lightning connector...

... one can see a fair bit of flat space behind the data pins. Couldn't Apple enhance the existing socket to provide connections onto those flat areas (because they are on both sides of the plug of course) to deliver regular analog audio to the connector? That would remove the issues of needing an external DAC that might not be as good as the one already in the iPhone and, since the external lightning to 3.5mm adaptor would now not need a DAC it should be relatively affordable (although knowing Apple I wouldn't count on that).

The upper and lower flat areas could both potentially be split in 2 to give a total of 4 contact areas for analog data or maybe one side is left for earth and the other split for left and right. The spec for the Lightning connector already has intelligence in the plug and protocols defined to cope with the connector being plugged in either way round so that same mechanism could be used to map earth, left and right channels correctly depending on the connector orientation when plugged in (which come to think of it would necessitate both sides being split to give 4 contacts which would dynamically map to left, right and two earths depending on connector orientation).

To me the above would be perfect and it does solve a problem, or at least it helps to. The problem is battery life. The space inside an iPhone is distinctly limited, especially with Jonny Ive making the thing thinner and thinner plus with all the requests for smaller bezels that internal space might well get smaller still. Absolutely every component that can be squeezed down in size or even removed altogether leaves more space to get in the biggest possible battery. I would happily pay an extra $30, which would be a one-off cost because I could use with every iPhone I buy, for a 3.5mm adapter if it allowed Apple to get an extra 100+ mAh of battery into every future generation of iPhone and iPad.

Edit - another possibility might be to use those indentations on each side next to the existing pins. Make those electrically active for audio L & R and use intelligent protocols to get them the right way round on insertion and, when the inserted lightening connector identifies itself as a headphone or a 3.5mm adapter, ground some or all of the existing pins to provide audio earth or perhaps still use the flat bits and permanently assert an audio earth onto those areas in future iDevices which wouldn't mess up any existing connectors.

Not going to happen. Lightning is capable of dynamically reassigning pins now, and doing so to provide audio output when sensing an audio device has been plugged in, is possible now. But this is not Apple's goal.

Not sure how much you think an adapter would be. $19 is likely what Apple will charge for one with the same quality DAC and amp as is in its devices now. Chinese knockoffs will probably offer one for under $10 of similar quality, over time even less. The license for the Lightning connector right now is likely more than the cost of the DAC and amp.

And I'm really not sure why people make the assumption that third parties will put worse DACs and amps in their headphones than Apple's. If they do that, then people won't buy them, so what's the point?

 

[Burger Thing]

Not going to happen. Lightning is capable of dynamically reassigning pins now, and doing so to provide audio output when sensing an audio device has been plugged in, is possible now. But this is not Apple's goal.

Not sure how much you think an adapter would be. $19 is likely what Apple will charge for one with the same quality DAC and amp as is in its devices now. Chinese knockoffs will probably offer one for under $10 of similar quality, over time even less. The license for the Lightning connector right now is likely more than the cost of the DAC and amp.

And I'm really not sure why people make the assumption that third parties will put worse DACs and amps in their headphones than Apple's. If they do that, then people won't buy them, so what's the point?

19$ for an adapter with a DAC and Amp inside? From Apple? Good luck with that. A similar and older Lighting - 30 pin Adapter is already around 30 bucks.

But you knew that. Nobody can be that naive.

 

[tkermit]

19$ for an adapter with a DAC and Amp inside? From Apple? Good luck with that. A simple Lighting - 30 pin Adapter is already around 30 bucks.

That adapter also contains a DAC, right? If we take into account that four years have gone by since its introduction, I could conceive of Apple being able to offer similar technology at a much lower price point now if they really felt they needed to.

 

[falainber]

As someone already pointed out having DAC and amplifier in the headphones is not enough. Unless Apple adds some special protocol to lightning port and a controller to the headphones, the headphones would also at least need a volume control (the one on the phone won't work in remote DAC/amplifier scenario). And if you want to retain tone control functionality (better yet - an equalizer) you might need more than that (up to having a screen for equalizer with GUI which, of course, would be quite ridiculous).

 

[Burger Thing]

That adapter also contains a DAC, right? If we take into account that four years have gone by since its introduction, I could conceive of Apple being able to offer similar technology at a much lower price point now if they really felt they needed to.

You mean, just like with their prices for RAM, SSDs and other hardware? [/s]

Sorry for being a bit sarcastic here, but I have a hard time to imagine that TC and Upsell-Schiller will pass on the opportunity to make some big bucks on adapters.

 

[Mac 128]

That adapter also contains a DAC, right? If we take into account that four years have gone by since its introduction, I could conceive of Apple being able to offer similar technology at a much lower price point now if they really felt they needed to.

It also contains an ADC, and an amp, as well as providing data pass through and charging, not to mention an expensive 30-pin dock connector, that is only manufactured for adapters now. And despite all that, they manage to sell the adapter for $29. So now we're talking about a simple adapter to connect a pair of headphones -- 3.5mm Jack, DAC & amp. $19 seems about right. Not to mention the fact that there's incentive to make it available as inexpensively as possible considering how upset this is apparently going to make a sizeable percentage of potential customers.
[doublepost=1462171783][/doublepost]

As someone already pointed out having DAC and amplifier in the headphones is not enough. Unless Apple adds some special protocol to lightning port and a controller to the headphones, the headphones would also at least need a volume control (the one on the phone won't work in remote DAC/amplifier scenario). And if you want to retain tone control functionality (better yet - an equalizer) you might need more than that (up to having a screen for equalizer with GUI which, of course, would be quite ridiculous).

What are you talking about? You have no idea what protocols Apple is going to implement with digital controls -- it's all software. Apple can easily allow the volume controls on the iPhone to control the headphones. Likewise for software control of EQ. There's no real customizable EQ settings at the moment, so I would welcome a GUI EQ. And then there's the fact that the outboard DAC and amp will be matched to the headphones, requiring little adjustment for optimal sound.

 

[JulianL]

Not going to happen. Lightning is capable of dynamically reassigning pins now, and doing so to provide audio output when sensing an audio device has been plugged in, is possible now. But this is not Apple's goal.

Not sure how much you think an adapter would be. $19 is likely what Apple will charge for one with the same quality DAC and amp as is in its devices now...

OK. I'm confused then. What is Apple's goal?

If it's simply to make money, and if the Lightning connector can already negotiate and assert audio onto existing pins, then why is anyone talking about external DACs? Simply make headphones with lightning plugs at the end with the official Apple chip in the plug programmed to identify itself as an analog audio device and provide a simple pass through adapter with the same chip so that people can keep using existing headphones if desired. That would make Apple more money because most consumers won't even have a clue what a DAC is let alone start debating whether a pair of headphones or adaptor has one in. All they will think is "is this a reasonable price to pay for an adapter" If Apple can sell one at that "reasonable" (for the world of Apple accessories) price and avoid needing to put a DAC in that's all extra profit to Apple.

I suppose the one concern I had with asserting the audio onto existing pins was whether the surface areas would be big enough to get a good enough signal out to satisfy the more discerning customers. I don't know about that but thinking about it I suppose the connectors on a 3.5mm socket connect at a tangent to the circumference of the shaft of the plug so probably also have an extremely shall contact area so maybe that's not an issue.

I understand that wireless headphones obviously need a DAC but for me the issue is to keep using my wired headphones because I don't like having yet another thing I need to keep charged when travelling. Is that the point? Are you saying that Apple's goal is to drive wired headsets off the market and force everyone to go wireless?

 

[Tech198]

Go for the all-in-one...

People have gotten used to using adapters now.

OK. I'm confused then. What is Apple's goal?

Maybe to do both.... Force users to buy cables when they need it (maybe u can argue its better for convenience, since why would u have something u don't intend to use), but its also better for Apple because they make more money of us chumps... er.. i mean users

They are used to that..... Get people back into the store.. They disrupted us when everyone went from the the 30-pin connector to Lightning when we upgraded our phones. Lightning to 30 pin became available only after new phones were launched and did not happen over night.

 

[QquegChristian]

If one looks at the current lightning connector...

... one can see a fair bit of flat space behind the data pins. Couldn't Apple enhance the existing socket to provide connections onto those flat areas (because they are on both sides of the plug of course) to deliver regular analog audio to the connector? That would remove the issues of needing an external DAC that might not be as good as the one already in the iPhone and, since the external lightning to 3.5mm adaptor would now not need a DAC it should be relatively affordable (although knowing Apple I wouldn't count on that).

The upper and lower flat areas could both potentially be split in 2 to give a total of 4 contact areas for analog data or maybe one side is left for earth and the other split for left and right. The spec for the Lightning connector already has intelligence in the plug and protocols defined to cope with the connector being plugged in either way round so that same mechanism could be used to map earth, left and right channels correctly depending on the connector orientation when plugged in (which come to think of it would necessitate both sides being split to give 4 contacts which would dynamically map to left, right and two earths depending on connector orientation).

To me the above would be perfect and it does solve a problem, or at least it helps to. The problem is battery life. The space inside an iPhone is distinctly limited, especially with Jonny Ive making the thing thinner and thinner plus with all the requests for smaller bezels that internal space might well get smaller still. Absolutely every component that can be squeezed down in size or even removed altogether leaves more space to get in the biggest possible battery. I would happily pay an extra $30, which would be a one-off cost because I could use with every iPhone I buy, for a 3.5mm adapter if it allowed Apple to get an extra 100+ mAh of battery into every future generation of iPhone and iPad.

Edit - another possibility might be to use those indentations on each side next to the existing pins. Make those electrically active for audio L & R and use intelligent protocols to get them the right way round on insertion and, when the inserted lightening connector identifies itself as a headphone or a 3.5mm adapter, ground some or all of the existing pins to provide audio earth or perhaps still use the flat bits and permanently assert an audio earth onto those areas in future iDevices which wouldn't mess up any existing connectors.

I thought this exact thing... Especially considering the phone will STILL need a DAC to play sound out of the speaker. Current analog adaptors (for 1/4-inch etc) can be purchased for pennies online and $3 in stores.

I still think it is highly important that Apple retains control over the "sound" of the iPhone. Anybody that thinks that headphone manufacturers and knockoff adaptors will universally equal or beat Apple's DAC/amp should keep Apple's economy of scale in mind. Apple's current sound quality is pretty well regarded amongst mobile devices. Many other phone manufacturers have vastly inferior sound to the iPhone. If Samsung can't get equal sound in a $700 flagship that is going toe to toe with Apple, I wouldn't trust headphones under $100 in the future.

My wife and I briefly switched from the iPhone two years ago to the Galaxy Note 3. We actually both really liked the device, especially as we had no reference of just how bastardized TouchWiz is. When we moved all of our music onto brand new microSD cards we felt so great, having to no longer worry about external storage. Then we listened to the music and holy hell! That phone sounded absolutely terrible. It couldn't even power consumer earbuds at a decent volume. We liked the Note so much that I went on a hunt for super sensitive earbuds (I knew ALL over-ear headphones were out of the question). It didn't work out and we had to switch to the HTC M8 to get better sound. The M8 had probably the best reviewed sound of any Android phone and it sounded on par with the iPhone. However, it also had an annoying crackle from time to time that was driving the m8 community crazy. After that (and the terribly inaccurate color on both devices' screens), I went back to Apple with my tail between my legs. Android as a platform I could get used to (and was getting used to), but sound and color are a big deal.

Apple is FAR better off keeping their goods IN the phone. Move the conversion to the headphones and I can take those headphones to any device in the future. It would immediately take the pressure of audio off all other phone manufacturers. My Lightning headphones came with 4 cables for various phones. With this switch, Apple would equalize the entire market, rather than innovate ahead of it.

Final Note: about the Galaxy Note 3... There were multiple versions of that phone. The international/unlocked version had a very good Wolfson DAC. (As did many other Galaxy models). The USA Carrier versions had some nasty DAC that I believe was just part of the Snapdragon SOC. Just in case there's someone on here who had that device or another model of Note and thought it sounded great.