Early iPhone 7 Case Has No Headphone Jack and Stereo Speaker Cutouts

[lagwagon]

No one craps on an Android with two speakers, because they didn't remove the universal 3.5mm headphone jack to include them.

There's no way around the reality that if Apple is removing the 3.5mm jack, which is at least half the size of any second speaker they could be adding to the phone, if not less, that the jack is being removed from the phone to make room for the speaker.

THEY ARE NOT FILLING TEMPORARILY EMPTY SPACE WITH A SPEAKER that they will have to remove when the 7s comes out a year later!! If those speakers go in there, they are staying!

What you are proposing has yet to make any sense. They remove the headphone jack in anticipation of some piece of hardware they needed to make room for a year later, but isn't ready. So temporarily they add a second speaker, which will improve the sound of the iPhone in the interim, to temporarily fill the empty space (with the rationale that they have to fill every void inside the case or it's a "stupid waste of space"), but then have to remove the second speaker a year later, to put in the thing they removed the 3.5mm jack to accommodate in the first place!? That's so unbelievably convoluted I don't know where to begin.

If the speaker goes in this year, it doesn't go away a year later. In which case, it REPLACES the 3.5mm jack,because they will have to make more room next year to include whatever new tech they're adding. End of story.



I'm not disputing that. It's the only reasonable thing you've said. They design the 7s, then back out of the design to the 7 until the new tech is ready, otherwise they have themselves an impossible task of squeezing new unplanned features into a pre-existing case, and it's the Apple /// all over again.

But look at what you're suggesting -- they don't include the new wireless tech in the 7, but instead fill the unused space with a second speaker that they replace with the wireless tech a year later? That's not going to happen. Whether that's why they dropped the 3.5mm jack for future tech, they still have to account for all the internal space for the new tech. And if they add a speaker, they are still going to have to come up with more room for the new wireless tech next year. So yes, no matter how you slice it, they replaced the 3.5mm jack with a second speaker in your scenario, and it's a poor choice considering the negligible impact on quality and performance.

I'm not saying that they would only put the speaker in for one year and then remove it for the 7s to add wireless charging. Wireless charging probably does not require that space. The reason of why wireless charging being the reason behind it are that it could have caused interference (audio noise) The speaker would stay. Not sure how you got that out of what I said. You even later don't dispute that they wouldn't back out of a design cycle.

Not sure why you keep assuming two speakers 100% means worse quality. If they split the highs-lows it could actually sound better than the one current speaker.

Have you even heard an iPad Pro? How it splits highs and lows makes a world of difference.

 

[Mac 128]

I'm not saying that they would only put the speaker in for one year and then remove it for the 7s to add wireless charging. Wireless charging probably does not require that space. The reason of why wireless charging being the reason behind it are that it could have caused interference (audio noise) The speaker would stay. Not sure how you got that out of what I said. You even later don't dispute that they wouldn't back out of a design cycle.

Not sure why you keep assuming two speakers 100% means worse quality. If they split the highs-lows it could actually sound better than the one current speaker.

Have you even heard an iPad Pro? How it splits highs and lows makes a world of difference.

So in your scenario are you saying that the 7 will have wireless charging? Or that they will implement it on the 7s? If the former, then the jack has been removed to make room for the speaker, as the wireless hardware is already incorporated elsewhere in the phone. If the latter, then they will have to replace the speaker with the wireless charging hardware since there's no other space for it.

The iPad Pro is significantly bigger enclosure, and those speakers are huge. How can you possibly equate it with a phone 1/4 its size? There is no way to make the iPhone speakers sound significantly better, even with a crossover scenario you propose, to justify removing the headphone jack.

As for wireless charging interference, if they can't effectively isolate that noise from a 3.5mm jack, or vice versa, then there is no way they could isolate it from the built-in speakers either.

Sorry, your scenario still doesn't work.

 

[lagwagon]

So in your scenario are you saying that the 7 will have wireless charging?

Ugh....

No, once again not what I said.

- The design lasts two years
- If something planned (like wireless charging) in the second year of the design required something to be removed to work. The design would have to be there from the beginning (in the7.) Thus not having to change the design mid cycle (changing the whole look by removing the jack, adding new a speaker and moving antennas)

Pretty simple and not exactly a hard concept to grasp.
[doublepost=1457749419][/doublepost]

The iPad Pro is significantly bigger enclosure, and those speakers are huge. How can you possibly equate it with a phone 1/4 its size? There is no way to make the iPhone speakers sound significantly better, even with a crossover scenario you propose, to justify removing the headphone jack.

I'm not comparing the fact the iPad Pro has bigger speakers and chambers. The splitting the highs and lows also contributes to the sound difference. And could be a benefitting thing for two speakers in a phone. One (new, smaller one) acts basically like a tweeter and the current existing one acts as a mid and low. Removing its responsibility to also handle highs.)

 

[Mac 128]

Ugh....

No, once again not what I said.

- The design lasts two years
- If something planned (like wireless charging) in the second year of the design required something to be removed to work. The design would have to be there from the beginning (in the7.) Thus not having to change the design mid cycle (changing the whole look by removing the jack, adding new a speaker and moving antennas)

Pretty simple and not exactly a hard concept to grasp.

Once again, if something has to be removed to accommodate a change for the second year, which change will also have to accommodate more internal space, then the headphone jack has been removed for speakers, since the speakers take up more room than the headphone jack to begin with, and since you say they will stay after the 2nd year change.

Your argument to remove the headphone jack is based entirely on some alleged interference caused by wireless charging that would cause the jack to be removed, thus leaving free space they have to fill with something. But there's no reason to remove a headphone jack for any interference that wouldn't also affect a speaker. Therefore, they have simply chosen to replace the jack with a speaker in your scenario. And that is a poor trade.

I'm not comparing the fact the iPad Pro has bigger speakers and chambers. The splitting the highs and lows also contributes to the sound difference. And could be a benefitting thing for two speakers in a phone. One (new, smaller one) acts basically like a tweeter and the current existing one acts as a mid and low. Removing its responsibility to also handle highs.)

I'm not disputing the effectiveness of a cross-over network, which has been proven over decades of hi-fi audio systems. What I am contesting is your belief that such a cross-over network will have a significant impact on the sound quality of such a small device. The trade off will be negligible, compared to the loss of the headphone jack. So while this arrangement has a notable benefit to a larger device with higher quality speakers, it won't make much difference at all to the iPhone and it's low-quality speakers.

If Apple makes this trade off, it's a bad decision.

 

[lagwagon]

Once again, if something has to be removed to accommodate a change for the second year, which change will also have to accommodate more internal space, then the headphone jack has been removed for speakers, since the speakers take up more room than the headphone jack to begin with, and since you say they will stay after the 2nd year change.

You're still not understanding what I mean at all.

Design for iPhones last two years. If a second year feature already planned to be in the second year of that design requires things to move or be removed. Those changes have to be in the design from the beginning.

That means the design of the 7 has to match the design of the 7s and vice versa. If the 7s requires things moved or removed for whatever reason (wasn't saying interference was THE reason, just a possible scenario) then because the 7 is the start of the new design two year cycle, it has to also have those things moved or removed so that the design from 7 to 7s DOES NOT CHANGE.

I'm not saying the space the jack takes up was required for wireless charging. I'm saying perhaps their wireless charging technology (since its new and said to be able to go through metal, which no other phone has been able to do yet.) required it gone for any kind of technological reason.

That in no way means it would removed for a speaker, because the reason would still always be removed for something planned in the 7s.
[doublepost=1457753073][/doublepost]

m not disputing the effectiveness of a cross-over network, which has been proven over decades of hi-fi audio systems. What I am contesting is your belief that such a cross-over network will have a significant impact on the sound quality of such a small device. The trade off will be negligible, compared to the loss of the headphone jack. So while this arrangement has a notable benefit to a larger device with higher quality speakers, it won't make much difference at all to the iPhone and it's low-quality speakers.

If Apple makes this trade off, it's a bad decision.

There would still be an improvement.

Please tell me what else would go in that space in the scenario of the jack being removed? Can't put battery, because I'm pretty sure you can't do odd shaped batteries like that. (Can't add a little chunk to extend down that isn't the same width of the actual battery.)

There is pretty much nothing else logical besides a speaker to fill the empty spot.

 

[ValO]

I saw a patent from Apple , using speaker coils for wireless charging, perhaps that is the reason they are using one more speaker instead of 3.5mm

Patent is here:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...unctionality-wireless-inductive-charging.html

 

[oldmacs]

And stereo speakers would be largely disappointing addition in justifying the removal of the jack.

All of hell froze over and I agree with you I think stereo speakers are a terrible use of space and fairly pointless on a phone. I guess I don't have the numbers but I can't imagine a huge number of people use their phones speakers compared to those who use headphones.

 

[Mac 128]

You're still not understanding what I mean at all.

Design for iPhones last two years. If a second year feature already planned to be in the second year of that design requires things to move or be removed. Those changes have to be in the design from the beginning.

That means the design of the 7 has to match the design of the 7s and vice versa. If the 7s requires things moved or removed for whatever reason (wasn't saying interference was THE reason, just a possible scenario) then because the 7 is the start of the new design two year cycle, it has to also have those things moved or removed so that the design from 7 to 7s DOES NOT CHANGE.

I'm not saying the space the jack takes up was required for wireless charging. I'm saying perhaps their wireless charging technology (since its new and said to be able to go through metal, which no other phone has been able to do yet.) required it gone for any kind of technological reason.

That in no way means it would removed for a speaker, because the reason would still always be removed for something planned in the 7s.

I understand exactly what you are saying. It's you who haven't thought this through. You keep saying that they designed the 7s to include more technology than they deliver with the 7. And I agree that's how it's done.

But then you say, they removed the headphone jack to accommodate this future technology in the 7s. Now, when they deliver the 7s, that means necessarily that it must have empty space where the future technology will go in the 7s, as well as empty space where the 3.5mm jack was. Now you say that rather than leave empty space where the 3.5mm jack was, they install a 2nd speaker -- which is bigger than the 3.5mm hardware requiring them to remove even more internals -- so as not to leave any "wasted" space until the 7s comes out to utilize it. But then you say the speakers are going to stay in the 7s, despite the need to free up new space in the 7s to accommodate this new technology they originally designed the phone for, but didn't implement. So now they have to free up space for this new technology elsewhere in the phone.

No matter how you slice it, the 3.5mm jack is being replaced by the 2nd speaker. You're introducing new technology in the 7s that you acknowledge does not use the space freed up by the 3.5mm jack. Instead, not only are they introducing this new technology, but they are also introducing a second speaker. But the speaker is replacing the the 3.5mm jack (and then some), not the new technology which you say is also there somewhere as well. They've somehow squeezed even more technology in the new phone than removing the 3.5mm jack would make room for, in a device that is likely to get slimmer (but in any event not larger), and in the process squeezed in a second speaker that will have negligible quality and performance benefits for such a small device; while removing an industry standard to accommodate it, which is going to upset many of their customers, and give their competition a marketing advantage if they are not also pressed with the need to remove the 3.5mm jack (which your scenario eliminates).

There would still be an improvement.

Please tell me what else would go in that space in the scenario of the jack being removed? Can't put battery, because I'm pretty sure you can't do odd shaped batteries like that. (Can't add a little chunk to extend down that isn't the same width of the actual battery.)

There is pretty much nothing else logical besides a speaker to fill the empty spot.

Improvement is relative to the sacrifice.

Just out of curiosity, are you an engineer? An audio professional? Or is this just all your "gut" hypotheticals?

Because I can't argue with "I'm pretty sure" when you have significant examples right in Apple's own family that disprove your reasoning. It's time you did a little research.

MacBook retina with custom contoured battery shape to make the new MacBook as thin and light as possible, with the maximum amount of battery possible.

[doublepost=1457797192][/doublepost]

I saw a patent from Apple , using speaker coils for wireless charging, perhaps that is the reason they are using one more speaker instead of 3.5mm

Patent is here:

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...unctionality-wireless-inductive-charging.html

Interesting patent. That would certainly be a reason to replace the headphone jack with a speaker (as well as making even more space for it). However, the iPhone already has a pretty large speaker, and a haptic engine (the inclusion of which already reduced battery capacity), which fulfill the needs of this patent. The thought does occur to me that if the speaker is being used in charging mode that one would be unable to use it as a speaker while charging, making a second speaker somewhat useful (in which case there go any benefits from having two speakers paired in a cross-over network). But considering Airplay, and BT can also be used to transmit to a better external speaker in such circumstances, not to mention a 3.5mm attached external speaker, or headphones; removing the 3.5mm jack to add a speaker for use primarily during charging, seems to be the least practical solution. I would argue requiring an adapter to use a standard set of headphones, is a bigger problem than perhaps carrying around a tiny iPhone quality external speaker (or better) for those who need that in some limited situations. Then you have the argument that other phone makers have inductive charging without giving up any of these common features. If Apple removes the headphone jack, I would hope it would be for more than to add a speaker, whether it's accommodating the absence of one when performing double duty or not.

L-R: iPhone 6 - iPhone 6s with haptic engine.

 

[lagwagon]

I understand exactly what you are saying. It's you who haven't thought this through. You keep saying that they designed the 7s to include more technology than they deliver with the 7. And I agree that's how it's done.

But then you say, they removed the headphone jack to accommodate this future technology in the 7s. Now, when they deliver the 7s, that means necessarily that it must have empty space where the future technology will go in the 7s, as well as empty space where the 3.5mm jack was. Now you say that rather than leave empty space where the 3.5mm jack was, they install a 2nd speaker -- which is bigger than the 3.5mm hardware requiring them to remove even more internals -- so as not to leave any "wasted" space until the 7s comes out to utilize it. But then you say the speakers are going to stay in the 7s, despite the need to free up new space in the 7s to accommodate this new technology they originally designed the phone for, but didn't implement. So now they have to free up space for this new technology elsewhere in the phone.

No, again you're still not grasping what I'm saying. You keep twisting or making up things that aren't what I said or even mean.

IF what is planned for the 7s requires things that alter the design in order to work (not fit like you keep twisting my words around with. In order to WORK) that means that design has to be a part of the 7 as well. Because design lasts two years. With what I have been saying and not getting understood is removing jack is NOT "to free up space" but to make something WORK. (IE whatever this new wireless technology Apple is working on, because it's new and supposed to go through metal unlike anything anyone else has done. Since it's new and no one has seen it, we don't know if something like the jack caused issues with it or it caused issues with the jack.) With what I'm saying, that new space opened wouldn't be utilized by the wireless charging technology, therefore wasted space, so put something (like a speaker) to fill that space. Whatever the charging tech is, it might only be something placed over the back of the battery and may not need all that much extra space to begin with.

You're still also hung up on "because the current speaker is larger than the 3.5mm then that means speaker #2 has to be as well." Not necessarily true. It can and could be small enough if its duty is basically a "tweeter" only handling highs. You're also assuming no changes to the current speaker.

I'm not going to bother with you anymore. I'm not going to waste my time to explain it to you another 4-5 times.

Everything I'm saying no doubt can and could be 100% wrong and not even close to Apple's real reasons. But at least I'm trying to think out of the box as to "why", instead of throwing a fit like some have over a jack. Seriously, it's just a jack. I don't use BT or have Lightning headphones currently and I'm still pro removing the jack. Because I know they wouldn't just do it for giggles and would have actual legit reasons behind it. They know what they have planned 1-3 years technology wise. I trust its for good reasons in the end.
[doublepost=1457815056][/doublepost]

mprovement is relative to the sacrifice.

Just out of curiosity, are you an engineer? An audio professional? Or is this just all your "gut" hypotheticals?

Because I can't argue with "I'm pretty sure" when you have significant examples right in Apple's own family that disprove your reasoning. It's time you did a little research.

I'm well aware about their tiered battery in the MacBook. But that's not the same.

(See image) I drew in red the odd shape I was talking about. I don't think that kind of shape is possible. THEN there is the fact that the Taptic Engine is in the way and you can't even extend the battery down into that space to begin with.


So I still ask. In the scenario of the jack being removed for legit reasons. What else could possibly go there. Doesn't look like more battery can. Nothing else really in the rumour mill that could re-fill the newly opened space. A speaker is the only logical choice.

 

[HVDynamo]

I'm well aware about their tiered battery in the MacBook. But that's not the same.

(See image) I drew in red the odd shape I was talking about. I don't think that kind of shape is possible. THEN there is the fact that the Taptic Engine is in the way and you can't even extend the battery down into that space to begin with.


So I still ask. In the scenario of the jack being removed for legit reasons. What else could possibly go there. Doesn't look like more battery can. Nothing else really in the rumour mill that could re-fill the newly opened space. A speaker is the only logical choice.

They could very well rearrange other components to absorb that extra space into the "rectangle" that houses the battery. Just because they remove one component doesn't mean that the replacement has to fit that space exactly. That said, The inclusion of an extra speaker, wireless charging, or well just about anything is not worth the trade off of removing the headphone jack. I use mine frequently, and I do not want to have to use an adapter for something I use all the time. If they need more space, make the damn thing one or two mm thicker.

 

[tuxmelvin]

Ok looking at the graph for Music and Podcasts.
And as you've pointed out. Doesn't have the under 18 group. Is a 12-15 year old more likely to have 3rd party headphones vs using what's bundled? Probably not.

Have you ever even met a 12-15 year old? What's bundled is quickly lost, stolen, destroyed, etc. Go to your local drugstore and look at all the cheap headphones for sale. It's a huge market.
[doublepost=1457882554][/doublepost]

- The design lasts two years
- If something planned (like wireless charging) in the second year of the design required something to be removed to work. The design would have to be there from the beginning (in the7.) Thus not having to change the design mid cycle (changing the whole look by removing the jack, adding new a speaker and moving antennas)

This isn't even true. There's no reason they couldn't keep the headphone jack and remove it on the 7S. The external design mid-cycle generally stays the same, but not completely. There are differences. The 6S is thicker than the 6, for example. And internally there are always design changes.

 

[I7guy]

Have you ever even met a 12-15 year old? What's bundled is quickly lost, stolen, destroyed, etc. Go to your local drugstore and look at all the cheap headphones for sale. It's a huge market.
[doublepost=1457882554][/doublepost]

This isn't even true. There's no reason they couldn't keep the headphone jack and remove it on the 7S. The external design mid-cycle generally stays the same, but not completely. There are differences. The 6S is thicker than the 6, for example. And internally there are always design changes.

Maybe this is why a drivers license minimum age is 18 in a number of states.

 

[richwoodrocket]

I can't wait to hear people bashing apple because they bought the iphone without knowing it didn't have a headphone jack.

 

[lagwagon]

This isn't even true. There's no reason they couldn't keep the headphone jack and remove it on the 7S. The external design mid-cycle generally stays the same, but not completely. There are differences. The 6S is thicker than the 6, for example. And internally there are always design changes.

Uhhh....Adding 0.2mm to thickness that does not change the design whatsoever is NOT the same as actually changing the design by getting rid of a jack completely and filling it's space with a speaker. They have never done anything like that ever.

Hand someone a non rose gold 6s, then ask them to tell you if it's a 6 or 6s. Probably won't be able to tell you without looking at the back to see the "S" or attempting to use 3D Touch.

 

[tuxmelvin]

Uhhh....Adding 0.2mm to thickness that does not change the design whatsoever is NOT the same as actually changing the design by getting rid of a jack completely and filling it's space with a speaker. They have never done anything like that ever.

Hand someone a non rose gold 6s, then ask them to tell you if it's a 6 or 6s. Probably won't be able to tell you without looking at the back to see the "S" or attempting to use 3D Touch.

Making the iPhone 6S thicker while retaining the same general design is orders of magnitude harder than simply removing the headphone jack and replacing it with whatever needs to go there on the 7S. The latter hardly requires any exterior design change at all. As an engineer I'd much rather get the task of "remove the headphone jack" than "we need to redesign the 6S to make sure it doesn't bend easily and also we're adding 3D Touch. But the end user shouldn't be able to notice." I mean, it's literally a hole. Don't include the hole. Done.

 

[lagwagon]

Making the iPhone 6S thicker while retaining the same general design is orders of magnitude harder than simply removing the headphone jack and replacing it with whatever needs to go there on the 7S. The latter hardly requires any exterior design change at all. As an engineer I'd much rather get the task of "remove the headphone jack" than "we need to redesign the 6S to make sure it doesn't bend easily and also we're adding 3D Touch. But the end user shouldn't be able to notice." I mean, it's literally a hole. Don't include the hole. Done.

What? Adding 0.2mm to thickness so that a thicker screen panel can fit is not even close to the same as literally altering the design of how the phone looks. Which is something they've never done. They have never change the appearance of a phone mid cycle in their two year designs. The 3GS looks the same as the 3G, the 4s looks the same as the 4, the 5s looks the same as the 5, the 6s looks the same as the 6. Waiting until the 7s IF the jack needs to be removed for whatever reason the 7s brings will not make it look the same as a 7.

 

[richwoodrocket]

What? Adding 0.2mm to thickness so that a thicker screen panel can fit is not even close to the same as literally altering the design of how the phone looks. Which is something they've never done. They have never change the appearance of a phone mid cycle in their two year designs. The 3GS looks the same as the 3G, the 4s looks the same as the 4, the 5s looks the same as the 5, the 6s looks the same as the 6. Waiting until the 7s IF the jack needs to be removed for whatever reason the 7s brings will not make it look the same as a 7.

Actually, the iPhone 4s and iPhone 4 have different antenna breaks (the black lines), the iPhone 5s has Touch ID, while the 5 does not. They do not look the same as their s variant. These are noticeable differences, though minor.

 

[Mac 128]

No, again you're still not grasping what I'm saying. You keep twisting or making up things that aren't what I said or even mean.

IF what is planned for the 7s requires things that alter the design in order to work (not fit like you keep twisting my words around with. In order to WORK) that means that design has to be a part of the 7 as well. Because design lasts two years. With what I have been saying and not getting understood is removing jack is NOT "to free up space" but to make something WORK. (IE whatever this new wireless technology Apple is working on, because it's new and supposed to go through metal unlike anything anyone else has done. Since it's new and no one has seen it, we don't know if something like the jack caused issues with it or it caused issues with the jack.) With what I'm saying, that new space opened wouldn't be utilized by the wireless charging technology, therefore wasted space, so put something (like a speaker) to fill that space. Whatever the charging tech is, it might only be something placed over the back of the battery and may not need all that much extra space to begin with.

Oh, I see you're back to the mysterious interference from the new inductive charging technology (that takes up no internal space no less), requiring the removal of the headphone jack, but not the loudspeakers for some reason, thereby conveniently opening up completely wasted space that Apple has no other use for. Got it (never mind this is not an issue for the competition).

You're still also hung up on "because the current speaker is larger than the 3.5mm then that means speaker #2 has to be as well." Not necessarily true. It can and could be small enough if its duty is basically a "tweeter" only handling highs. You're also assuming no changes to the current speaker.

You've more or less confirmed that you are not an audio professional. There are so many reasons why this would not be an ideal solution, if only the unintended stereo effect with unbalanced highs. Whether they could actually squeeze some kind of tiny high pass speaker with even matching quality as to what's in there now into the space or not, the replacement is absolutely pointless with respect to what's being given up for such a ridiculously marginal improvement, if any.

I'm not going to bother with you anymore. I'm not going to waste my time to explain it to you another 4-5 times.

Probably for the best.

Everything I'm saying no doubt can and could be 100% wrong and not even close to Apple's real reasons. But at least I'm trying to think out of the box as to "why", instead of throwing a fit like some have over a jack. Seriously, it's just a jack. I don't use BT or have Lightning headphones currently and I'm still pro removing the jack. Because I know they wouldn't just do it for giggles and would have actual legit reasons behind it. They know what they have planned 1-3 years technology wise. I trust its for good reasons in the end.

I didn't realize your definition of "out of the box" meant ignore reality, and engage in fantasy speculation, pulling rainbows out of unicorn's behinds.

I'm pro removing the jack too, as long as there is a reason (and maybe even if there isn't to a certain extent), but let's not make ridiculous justifications that have no bearing in reality.

I'm well aware about their tiered battery in the MacBook. But that's not the same.

(See image) I drew in red the odd shape I was talking about. I don't think that kind of shape is possible. THEN there is the fact that the Taptic Engine is in the way and you can't even extend the battery down into that space to begin with.


So I still ask. In the scenario of the jack being removed for legit reasons. What else could possibly go there. Doesn't look like more battery can. Nothing else really in the rumour mill that could re-fill the newly opened space. A speaker is the only logical choice.

You're even inconsistent in your debate. On the one hand you say: "I'm not going to bother with you anymore.", but then turn right around and say: "So I still ask." Which is it?

I'm not sure how the MacBook battery design is irrelevant here, since it's an example of a custom shaped battery Apple has innovated to solve a space problem. But, you've more or less confirmed you're not an engineer by presenting this very illustration. You're looking at the iPhone internal PCB design as some kind of Tetris game. Removing one component and replacing it with another of the exact same dimensions. When nothing could be further from the way such devices are designed. Perhaps you recall the headphone jack used to be at the top of the iPhone? If you think they just swapped modules from opposite ends, you'd better have a look at the illustration below. I'm further confused by your apparent understanding of this by suggesting they might redesign the existing speaker to allow more room for a larger second speaker. Yet, the internal components here are somehow fixed in their current positions, despite a complete redesign of the iPhone 7.

Actually, the iPhone 4s and iPhone 4 have different antenna breaks (the black lines), the iPhone 5s has Touch ID, while the 5 does not. They do not look the same as their s variant. These are noticeable differences, though minor.

Those antenna break changes are important in countering lagwagon's poorly thought out arguments. As well as the SIM card slot on the 4. The first Verizon model didn't have one, yet the 4s did. That's actually a major design change of the type lagwagon is arguing the speaker/headphone jack is, further discrediting his poorly researched argument.

 

[lagwagon]

Oh, I see you're back to the mysterious interference from the new inductive charging technology (that takes up no internal space no less), requiring the removal of the headphone jack, but not the loudspeakers for some reason, thereby conveniently opening up completely wasted space that Apple has no other use for. Got it (never mind this is not an issue for the competition).



You've more or less confirmed that you are not an audio professional. There are so many reasons why this would not be an ideal solution, if only the unintended stereo effect with unbalanced highs. Whether they could actually squeeze some kind of tiny high pass speaker with even matching quality as to what's in there now into the space or not, the replacement is absolutely pointless with respect to what's being given up for such a ridiculously marginal improvement, if any.



Probably for the best.



I didn't realize your definition of "out of the box" meant ignore reality, and engage in fantasy speculation, pulling rainbows out of unicorn's behinds.

I'm pro removing the jack too, as long as there is a reason (and maybe even if there isn't to a certain extent), but let's not make ridiculous justifications that have no bearing in reality.



You're even inconsistent in your debate. On the one hand you say: "I'm not going to bother with you anymore.", but then turn right around and say: "So I still ask." Which is it?

I'm not sure how the MacBook battery design is irrelevant here, since it's an example of a custom shaped battery Apple has innovated to solve a space problem. But, you've more or less confirmed you're not an engineer by presenting this very illustration. You're looking at the iPhone internal PCB design as some kind of Tetris game. Removing one component and replacing it with another of the exact same dimensions. When nothing could be further from the way such devices are designed. Perhaps you recall the headphone jack used to be at the top of the iPhone? If you think they just swapped modules from opposite ends, you'd better have a look at the illustration below. I'm further confused by your apparent understanding of this by suggesting they might redesign the existing speaker to allow more room for a larger second speaker. Yet, the internal components here are somehow fixed in their current positions, despite a complete redesign of the iPhone 7.

Those antenna break changes are important in countering lagwagon's poorly thought out arguments. As well as the SIM card slot on the 4. The first Verizon model didn't have one, yet the 4s did. That's actually a major design change of the type lagwagon is arguing the speaker/headphone jack is, further discrediting his poorly researched argument.

I never claimed to be an expert. You're obviously not one either. And I never claimed any of the ideas as facts for why they're doing it. I've just been putting ideas out there to at the very least get people thinking of the "why" and "maybe it's for legit reasons" or "tecnological reason" rather than "OMG They're doing it to make it thinner and less battery and a second speaker! Rawr!!! My life is ruined!"

So get off your high horse. You don't know any better and aren't coming up with any kind of reasons why 3.5mm will be removed. Instead you're just arguing with everyone.

 

[Mac 128]

I never claimed to be an expert. You're obviously not one either. And I never claimed any of the ideas as facts for why they're doing it. I've just been putting ideas out there to at the very least get people thinking of the "why" and "maybe it's for legit reasons" or "tecnological reason" rather than "OMG They're doing it to make it thinner and less battery and a second speaker! Rawr!!! My life is ruined!"

So get off your high horse. You don't know any better and aren't coming up with any kind of reasons why 3.5mm will be removed. Instead you're just arguing with everyone.

I've come up with a lot of reasons the 3.5mm jack will be removed. You just haven't read them. I have even come up with ways to justify and support your second speaker theory, as have others. But you haven't read those either.

 

[dampfnudel]

I'm in a position where I'm just waiting to see what Apple will do with the wired audio output...
I agree on your point: if they will remove the 3.5mm port, what benefit the user will have? Are they going to provide an adapter in every package? Let's see...

If Apple did that, they would be expected to include an adapter with the 7s, future iPads, maybe even the iPhone 8. It's more likely there won't be any included and you'll have to purchase one (or just use the lightning earphones or purchase a BT headphone).

 

[Mac 128]

If Apple did that, they would be expected to include an adapter with the 7s, future iPads, maybe even the iPhone 8. It's more likely there won't be any included and you'll have to purchase one (or just use the lightning earphones or purchase a BT headphone).

Agreed. But also, it's not in Apple's best interest to keep customers using cheaper 3.5mm technology. They might not ever try a pair of Lightning headphones, much less bluetooth. Putting an adapter in the box gives people no incentive to think about an alternate way of listening to music. If they have to make the decision to buy an adapter, they may instead put the money toward upgrading their headphones. They may still buy an adapter to use with legacy ports, but at least they will consider a move toward wireless or Lightning.

I hold out some hope that Apple comes up with a clever Lightning connector on the free headphones, with a built-in 3.5mm plug that folds out or something, allowing an Apple customer to use the Lightning headphones on legacy equipment, like their recently purchased Macs. That might be a stretch too, but it helps make the switch a bit more friendly, while showing third parties innovative ways to embrace Lightning for a broader base.

 

[lagwagon]

Agreed. But also, it's not in Apple's best interest to keep customers using cheaper 3.5mm technology. They might not ever try a pair of Lightning headphones, much less bluetooth. Putting an adapter in the box gives people no incentive to think about an alternate way of listening to music. If they have to make the decision to buy an adapter, they may instead put the money toward upgrading their headphones. They may still buy an adapter to use with legacy ports, but at least they will consider a move toward wireless or Lightning.

I agree 100% on this and was even thinking the same thing earlier today (Yes, I ponder too much)

People are creatures of habit. Even if they're told something else is better, they will keep using what they know and have been using.

Seems like the most likely reason as to why they would remove the jack. They want to promote whatever hi res audio for iTunes and Apple Music they're said to be releasing as early as this year. Remove the jack so that more people are led into trying Lightning and hearing the hi res digital audio vs not caring and continuing to just use 3.5mm.

I would have to find the article again but I did read that 3.5mm is only capable of roughly cd quality, while Lightning can get equal or very close to studio quality levels.

I know you love when I mention interference, but moving to digital does eliminate any crosstalk and interference that effects analog from cellular, wifi or anything else. It's fact all analog can experience RFI (radio frequency interference), digital does not.

 

[musiciscool]

They really need to keep the headphone jack! Removing functionality is not an improvement. I have an old MacBook that has all the ports, cd/DVD SuperDrive etc, and I love it, if I'm on a trip, I can pop in a disk someone hands me, I can plug into stuff and get stuff done. Making the new ones into glorified iPads is depressing. So now the phone won't have an earphone jack? If that's true, my iPhone 6 Plus will be my last iPhone. I'd rather do oldschool Nokia with snake game, than have no headphone option!

 

[mountain]

Not buying this.