I wonder why Apple chose a headphone port instead of a 2nd USB

[Mac 128]

From my limited experience, all bluetooth speakers (and presumably headphones) have a slight audio delay, which makes them really annoying for watching anything video-related. Or have some of them now got to the stage where there's no delay?

I'm perfectly happy with the one port thing - if they got rid of the headphone jack, I simply wouldn't have bought this notebook. We're not even close to the point where the headphone jack can be removed, imo.

I don't believe that for one minute. All it would require is a simple $29 adapter (for instance http://hifimediy.com/tiny-dac ) to convert the USB-C port to an analogue jack for your wired headphones, assuming wireless headphones actually aren't up to your standards. So you're saying that you would give up the lightest and smallest MacBook ever built, the only sub-portable with a Retina display, along with all its other postive attributes; because you would have to buy a dongle for your headphones, even though that dongle would greatly improve the audio quality output from that Mac? It's actually an unbelievable statement.

And would you care to qualify why we're not even close to the point where the headphone jack can be removed? People use wireless connections every day without any complaints. Apple is marketing their bluetooth headphones for watching videos. Would they do that if it didn't work flawlessly? There's no wired headphone on the Watch. So clearly we are well past the point where the headphone jack can be removed.

 

[zhenya]

I don't believe that for one minute. All it would require is a simple $29 adapter (for instance http://hifimediy.com/tiny-dac ) to convert the USB-C port to an analogue jack for your wired headphones, assuming wireless headphones actually aren't up to your standards. So you're saying that you would give up the lightest and smallest MacBook ever built, the only sub-portable with a Retina display, along with all its other postive attributes; because you would have to buy a dongle for your headphones, even though that dongle would greatly improve the audio quality output from that Mac? It's actually an unbelievable statement.

And would you care to qualify why we're not even close to the point where the headphone jack can be removed? People use wireless connections every day without any complaints. Apple is marketing their bluetooth headphones for watching videos. Would they do that if it didn't work flawlessly? There's no wired headphone on the Watch. So clearly we are well past the point where the headphone jack can be removed.

A $29 DAC is not going to outdo what is already in the Macbook. Apple already makes this device for lightning, at about that price point, and it sounds sub-par.

Again, I don't have much doubt that Apple will eventually get rid of the audio jack, but when they do, it will be on the iPhone, not on a niche device like this.

If you don't think people use the headphone jack on their Macs, you need to pay attention. Mobile users at libraries, cafes, airports, etc. are using the headphone jack ALL the time wherever I travel.

 

[Dark Void]

I'm not justifying a headphone jack over a USB-C port, but wouldn't it be sort of counter-productive to add multiple ports to a laptop that is marketed towards wireless users?

One port makes sense to offer the versatility of being able to use a flash drive or other peripheral if you're the type of person that only needs one once in a blue moon, but starting to add more ports to an ultrabook that is designed around Bluetooth, WiFi and cloud computing sounds like it goes against the agenda of the design, even if it only sacrifices a few millimeters in design. That's why other options exist.

I understand what is being discussed here in terms of having it instead of an existing port, but a headphone jack is completely different from a USB-C port.

 

[Badrottie]

Most of us need a headphone port! You can't take that away.

Yeah all music lovers or DJ like Shaq still use headphones on their MBP.

 

[Mac 128]

A $29 DAC is not going to outdo what is already in the Macbook. Apple already makes this device for lightning, at about that price point, and it sounds sub-par.

Again, I don't have much doubt that Apple will eventually get rid of the audio jack, but when they do, it will be on the iPhone, not on a niche device like this.

If you don't think people use the headphone jack on their Macs, you need to pay attention. Mobile users at libraries, cafes, airports, etc. are using the headphone jack ALL the time wherever I travel.

First, I'm not aware of Apple offering a lightning audio dongle, so please provide your source for that. And if they do, I find it extremely difficult to believe it is of inferior quality to the limited chip they can provide onboard. Besides, the whole point of the dongle is to spend whatever you want in order to get the best quality audio a person desires -- cheap audio for those who don't care, excellent audio for those who do. And finally, if you've actually heard the quality over this dongle, then we've only got your opinion about the quality of one such option -- hardly conclusive proof of a whole class of devices.

Second this is the perfect device to lose the headphone jack on. The MacBook as I've already said is the least convenient mobile device to use headphones on. They should be using wireless with a MacBook, and it's already equipped to do so. People are only using the audio jack because it's there. Just like every other port Apple has discontinued, people will use something else instead.

And frankly, you are reinforcing my point by your observations. People who use their headphone jacks on a laptop in those situations would be better served by wireless headphones, and to the extent they insist on using the antiquated wired technology, there's a dongle available for them.

I understand what is being discussed here in terms of having it instead of an existing port, but a headphone jack is completely different from a USB-C port.

You're right. It does one thing, and not particularly well. A USB-C port would offer much needed redundancy, especially now that there's no more MagSafe to prevent accidental damage to the only port, as well as eliminate the need to continue making the MBA, for those who do not currently work entirely wirelessly. And if offers the opportunity to improve the quality of the audio output for wired headphones, over the headphone jack.

Yeah all music lovers or DJ like Shaq still use headphones on their MBP.

And he could still use it with a DAC dongle, which would also improve his audio quality. Its not like he's moving around with the MBP while he's listening so a dongle is an even more practical solution, although a wireless headphone is even better.

 

[hans1972]

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I was just looking at the Apple MacBook site and it's clear Apple intended the rMB to be a completely wireless device. These screenshots make it even more perplexing then that Apple included an antiquated 1/8" stereo audio jack instead of something far more useful like a 2nd USB port, which could also be used with a wired headphone with a DAC adapter or otherwise, with far greater audio quality.

Apple has maybe the power to get rid of the audio port, but the Macbook is not the device you start such a battle with. When Apple wants to remove the audio port, they will start with the iPhone. Compared to mobile phones all PCs and Macs are niche devices when being used to listen to music etc.

So why did they not add a second USB-C port? It was their design goal to have zero, they could only get it down to one. Two would have been a failure.

To quote Phil Schiller from his John Gruber interview:
"[...]Because what the design team first envisioned when we started working on MacBook was to say, "If all we do is incremental, slight change—where's the excitement, and where's the value of Apple pushing things forward? We need to take bold risks. If people don't like it, well they can keep buying the MacBook Air, they can keep buying the MacBook Pro—but why don't we design a product that's around this wireless world, that has, really, no physical connection that you need. You can get by without ever needing that. Wouldn't that be a better world?"

And in doing that, we realized "Yeah, but we do need to charge it, so let's go create this one port that can charge, and be USB, and be your video out, and that way, if you need to connect, you can—you're not giving that up—but this is really designed..." And if you do that, how far can you push it? How thin can it get, how light can it get, how aggressive a design can it be?"

The reason they added an audio port is that they felt that too many people use a headset with their Mac and they thought going USB for headset was not a good solution yet.

To me, it would have been marvelous if they had gotten rid of the audio ports also, just to make a statement.

The 13" rMBP has 8 ports, the 11" MBA has 5 and the new rMB has only 2. That is pretty good. Maybe in a few years time we can get to zero ports.

 

[hans1972]

So yes, with respect to a laptop computer, it's an obsolete solution. Moreover, invoking Apple's own design mandates, it's inelegant and wasteful of premium design space.

The audio port is not a big problem on notebooks yet. Even on the Macbook they found room for one. The biggest problem is in the iPhone and if Apples decides to ditch the audio port it will be on the iPhone. Ditching it on the Macbook will not make many people buy wireless headset. Changing it on the iPhone will make people do that. Or maybe Apples comes out with a Lightning headset, or maybe they change the iPhone to use USB-C and then comes out with a USB-C headset.

The only thing that ditching the audio port on the rMB would achieve, would be making room for another USB-C port. Clearly, Apple do not want that.

 

[Mac 128]

Ditching it on the Macbook will not make many people buy wireless headset.

Well that's an interesting comment. I'm not sure the goal is to make people buy a wireless headset. But the question is, will it make people not buy a MacBook? And I don't think it will. People will still buy the MacBook and to the extent they want to continue to listen to their music on their old set of headphones, they buy the USB adapter. Or, they invest in new wireless headphones. Either way Apple stands to get a piece of that. So in my mind the MacBook is the perfect place to lose the headphone jack.

Now, I totally agree that the iPhone and iPad is the place that will make the greatest statement. As it is, a wire is not a major issue when using an iPhone, or even an iPad since both devices are portable enough to carry around as you're wired into them. And certainly for those who still want to use their existing wired headphones, a simple lightning dongle is easy enough to include, though I have never seen one offered by Apple. Though it adds more bulk to the highly portable devices than to the MacBook. And of course most people are already using Apple's free earbuds included with the iPhone, so offering a lightning connected pair would instantly solve the problem for most iPhone users. The drawback is that the headphones couldn't be used with any non Apple products, though I'm not sure why Apple would want that anyway. Newer MacBooks could replace the audio jack with a lightning connector, which serves the same purpose as the USB-C port, though in a more limited way. Now that would be an improvement. Again the question here is would people not buy an iPhone if Apple took the 1/8" audio jack away? And I have to think the answer is the same.

So it's interesting that Apple hasn't made the move yet, since it seems all the pieces really are in place to do it. Watch users already have to buy a pair of wireless headphones. Wired solutions aren't even an option. So maybe the iPhone 7 introduction will be the year they transition, once all new customers have received their free lightning connected earbuds.

 

[tbirdparis]

Apple has a pretty good track record with choosing which shifts in technology to get behind and when to do it. Till now they've kept the jack on all of their devices, including their latest "most radical" new laptop design. Speaks volumes.

 

[Mac 128]

Apple has a pretty good track record with choosing which shifts in technology to get behind and when to do it. Till now they've kept the jack on all of their devices, including their latest "most radical" new laptop design. Speaks volumes.

If Apple's track record on this were unblemished, I might agree with you. However, they removed the FireWire port from their latest and greatest Mac at the time, and in less than a year it was back.

Moreover this is a totally different Apple than it was before 2012, and by many estimates, a much more conservative one. As I've outlined, Apple is in the perfect position to eliminate the audio port now, so their decision to leave it seems conservative, especially given they way they are marketing the new rMB. Their latest and greatest new product has no user accessible ports at all. So perhaps this is a harbinger of things to come.

I'm certain Apple has discussed all of this for every one of their latest products. Whatever their reasons for keeping the port, attributing it solely to Apple's expertise, is not necessarily the reality.

 

[tbirdparis]

Yep but I agree with their thinking on it and happen to think they're right on the money. Have already made my case about it, no need to go over it again.

 

[Mac 128]

Yep but I agree with their thinking on it and happen to think they're right on the money. Have already made my case about it, no need to go over it again.

Except, we really don't know their thinking in order to agree with it, or not. They could think the 1/8" analogue port is the most indispensable port in existence, and every device they ever make will include one. Or they could think it's incredibly long in the tooth, and the only reason they didn't remove it on this MacBook was because they had too many other fish to fry to take that one on with the Watch and all. Dunno.

 

[tbirdparis]

They just went over their latest design with the finest toothed comb imaginable to make the most finely-tuned personal laptop they could conceive of - even going as far as redesigning given standards like the way the keyboard works. But they just forgot about the audio jack. Don't think so. It was a choice.

 

[zhenya]

First, I'm not aware of Apple offering a lightning audio dongle, so please provide your source for that. And if they do, I find it extremely difficult to believe it is of inferior quality to the limited chip they can provide onboard. Besides, the whole point of the dongle is to spend whatever you want in order to get the best quality audio a person desires -- cheap audio for those who don't care, excellent audio for those who do. And finally, if you've actually heard the quality over this dongle, then we've only got your opinion about the quality of one such option -- hardly conclusive proof of a whole class of devices.

Second this is the perfect device to lose the headphone jack on. The MacBook as I've already said is the least convenient mobile device to use headphones on. They should be using wireless with a MacBook, and it's already equipped to do so. People are only using the audio jack because it's there. Just like every other port Apple has discontinued, people will use something else instead.

And frankly, you are reinforcing my point by your observations. People who use their headphone jacks on a laptop in those situations would be better served by wireless headphones, and to the extent they insist on using the antiquated wired technology, there's a dongle available for them.

The lightning to 30-pin adapter is a dongle with a built in DAC, taking the digital (only) signal from the lightning port, and converting it to analog for compatibility with old devices. The fact that it's doing so for 30-pin is immaterial, the size, price, and concept are all identical to what you are suggesting. Apple's on-board DAC's and amplification stages are widely considered to be of extremely high-quality. Peruse the Portable Audio forums at head-fi, where I have been a member for over a decade, and you'll see that for the most part, iOS and Apple devices in general are considered to have excellent stock audio output. Improving upon that generally requires a DAC starting at about $100, if not considerably more, most of them quite bulky. Even then, using IEM's that run $1000 or so, I and most other people, can barely discern a difference. The 30-pin adapter, however, is quite simple to identify when it's added to the chain.

I'm glad you are so confident to tell people that they would be 'better served' by wireless headphones, LOL. I know I would not be. Nor would most of the people I observe with headphones attached to their Apple laptops, which are usually the ones that were included with their iPhones.

I'm saying it again, the loss of the audio jack will start with the iPhone, not a niche laptop where its addition comes nearly for free design-wise so long as they wish to include speakers and a microphone. The headset jack is merely a tiny extension of that.

 

[Traverse]

I will NOT buy a MacBook without a headphone jack unless there is a really cheap adaptor. I have too many headphones for that.

 

[Mac 128]

They just went over their latest design with the finest toothed comb imaginable to make the most finely-tuned personal laptop they could conceive of - even going as far as redesigning given standards like the way the keyboard works. But they just forgot about the audio jack. Don't think so. It was a choice.

I never suggested it wasn't a choice -- clearly it was a choice. I stated that we don't know the reasons behind that choice, which you are in complete agreement with. You are in agreement wi your own inference about the motives behind that choice, just not what the choice it.

 

[Mac 128]

The lightning to 30-pin adapter is a dongle with a built in DAC, taking the digital (only) signal from the lightning port, and converting it to analog for compatibility with old devices. The fact that it's doing so for 30-pin is immaterial, the size, price, and concept are all identical to what you are suggesting. Apple's on-board DAC's and amplification stages are widely considered to be of extremely high-quality. Peruse the Portable Audio forums at head-fi, where I have been a member for over a decade, and you'll see that for the most part, iOS and Apple devices in general are considered to have excellent stock audio output. Improving upon that generally requires a DAC starting at about $100, if not considerably more, most of them quite bulky. Even then, using IEM's that run $1000 or so, I and most other people, can barely discern a difference. The 30-pin adapter, however, is quite simple to identify when it's added to the chain.

I'm glad you are so confident to tell people that they would be 'better served' by wireless headphones, LOL. I know I would not be. Nor would most of the people I observe with headphones attached to their Apple laptops, which are usually the ones that were included with their iPhones.

I'm saying it again, the loss of the audio jack will start with the iPhone, not a niche laptop where its addition comes nearly for free design-wise so long as they wish to include speakers and a microphone. The headset jack is merely a tiny extension of that.

Oh I didn't know you were an audio engineer. Well then. You are of course right. And you've obviously gone up to all those people you've observed using headphones with their MacBooks and conducted a comprehensive study to determine that each of them made a choice to use their free Apple earbuds that came with their iPhone, after a comprehensive assesment of the distinction between wireless headphones, wired headphones, and DAC dongles. /s

Please. The people using the free headphones that came with their iPhones wouldn't know the difference between the sound quality of that 1/8" audio Jack from the rMB, and the cheapest DAC dongle made. And they're probably listening to 128kbps ripped MP3s, but in any case certainly not lossless. Moreover, this idea that it would take a $1000 DAC to notice the difference over the MacBook's onboard hardware is bunk. I recently was involved in an audio installation where the quality of the MacBook 1/8" audio jack was not acceptable to the user. The solution, which produced noticeably improved results was a $79 DAC USB converter.

As for your claims about the 30-pin AV devices, well please do show me the critical studies where this has been shown to be substantially deficient over the MacBook's built-in DAC. Actually, never mind -- if you'd stopped to think, there's a much more obvious lightening to 1/8" audio jack converter already being sold in the Apple Store, the Lightning dock. Clearly that hasn't been discussed on your audio afficianado forums, nor likely tested, or you would have mentioned it. Please get back to me when it's been critically evaluated by your elite audio forum experts. I have one in my desk, and I'm here to tell you using the free Apple earbuds that came with my iPhone, there is no audible difference from that port vs. listening directly to my iPhone, in fact it might be a little better.

On second thought don't get back to me. You keep calling the rMacBook a niche product, when Apple doesn't make niche products. It's clearly the foundation for what's to come. If anything is niche here, it's your needs for high quality audio from a portable device. The audiophile market, of which you seem to be a part, and basing your remarks, may be high end, but it is absolutely niche. The average consumer doesn't care as long as it's loud enough for me to hear it from their headphones at the gym, and has enough bass to vibrate their fillings.

 

[zhenya]

Oh I didn't know you were an audio engineer. Well then. You are of course right. And you've obviously gone up to all those people you've observed using headphones with their MacBooks and conducted a comprehensive study to determine that each of them made a choice to use their free Apple earbuds that came with their iPhone, after a comprehensive assesment of the distinction between wireless headphones, wired headphones, and DAC dongles. /blah blah blah blah

You completely missed the point - which was of your own making by the way:

Second this is the perfect device to lose the headphone jack on. The MacBook as I've already said is the least convenient mobile device to use headphones on. They should be using wireless with a MacBook, and it's already equipped to do so. People are only using the audio jack because it's there. Just like every other port Apple has discontinued, people will use something else instead.

And frankly, you are reinforcing my point by your observations. People who use their headphone jacks on a laptop in those situations would be better served by wireless headphones, and to the extent they insist on using the antiquated wired technology, there's a dongle available for them.

It's all about convenience here - not quality. My point was 100% that most people are already using the headphones they have, which is what's most convenient, which is why the Macbook still has an audio jack. If and when Apple decides to provide something else, then I presume we will see those same people using whatever the currently provided headphones are.

I also love how in one sentence you tell me about how you just were involved in a situation where you used an outboard DAC 'which produced noticeably improved results' and in the very next sentence you are insisting on 'critical studies' to show how such a device could sound different! Cognitive dissonance much?

 

[Mac 128]

It's all about convenience here - not quality.

Well you seemed awfully concerned about quality in your post. Nevertheless, Apple has never been concerned about convenience when it comes to design, especially when it comes to laptop ports. Case in point, moving the headphone jack to the bottom of the iPhone -- 'if your dock doesn't accommodate that, buy a new dock'.

If and when Apple decides to provide something else, then I presume we will see those same people using whatever the currently provided headphones are.

As long as the port exists, people are going to use whatever they already have. Take away the port and they will buy a dongle, or new headphones. Just like when they took away Ethernet, or any other port still in wide use. All the more reason to implement it on the MacBook first, which is likely to impact the fewest number of headphone wearers initially, compared to the iPhone.

I also love how in one sentence you tell me about how you just were involved in a situation where you used an outboard DAC 'which produced noticeably improved results' and in the very next sentence you are insisting on 'critical studies' to show how such a device could sound different!

Clearly you too missed the point, which is, I didn't have to pay $1000 for an outboard DAC that sounds noticeably better than the onboard MacBook's DAC, as you asserted.

Asking for an actual study which concludes the inferior quality of Apple's 30-pin related dongles compared to their on-board DAC implementation, and particularly an actual 1/8" audio jack implementation by Apple, goes toward your claims, the latter of which devices I don't personally agree with from actual experience.

 

[tbirdparis]

I never suggested it wasn't a choice -- clearly it was a choice. I stated that we don't know the reasons behind that choice, which you are in complete agreement with. You are in agreement wi your own inference about the motives behind that choice, just not what the choice it.

The point I was making is very clear, anyone who reads my posts should have no trouble understanding exactly my position and reasoning on it all, whether they agree with it or not.

 

[zhenya]

Clearly you too missed the point, which is, I didn't have to pay $1000 for an outboard DAC that sounds noticeably better than the onboard MacBook's DAC, as you asserted.

I never asserted any such thing. I suggest you take the time to read people's posts more carefully before responding in the way that you do.

I said that it takes a DAC costing at least $100 or so, and generally being bulky, to improve on the stock system. And even then, using In-Ear-Monitors (high-end earphones) costing $1000, it is very difficult to tell the difference from any DAC, no matter the cost. That's how good the stock Apple design is.

iOS and Apple devices in general are considered to have excellent stock audio output. Improving upon that generally requires a DAC starting at about $100, if not considerably more, most of them quite bulky. Even then, using IEM's that run $1000 or so, I and most other people, can barely discern a difference.

 

[fisherking]

i'm late to this discussion, and not sure what's going on lol. but i can tell you this: the built-in audio is good, but a separate DAC absolutely makes a difference. am an audio pro (mixing/mastering), and, while that doesn't mean i'm right, i stand by my words. built-in audio: good; an external DAC: great.

 

[ctyrider]

I'm glad you are so confident to tell people that they would be 'better served' by wireless headphones, LOL. I know I would not be. Nor would most of the people I observe with headphones attached to their Apple laptops, which are usually the ones that were included with their iPhones.

Curious - what issue(s) do you see with wireless headphones? After using Bluebuds X over the last year or so - I couldn't imagine going back to using wired earbuds. Just dealing with tangled cords and wires running between my ears and the phone in my pocket.. seems so 2008-ish to me now. Not to mention Bluebuds X reproduce sound considerably better than Apple's stock earbuds.

I am fairly certain that wireless headphones is where Apple sees things ending up, all the debates about quality and external DACs notwithstanding. It's only a matter of "when", not "if".

 

[fisherking]

Curious - what issue(s) do you see with wireless headphones? After using Bluebuds X over the last year or so - I couldn't imagine going back to using wired earbuds. Just dealing with tangled cords and wires running between my ears and the phone in my pocket.. seems so 2008-ish to me now. Not to mention Bluebuds X reproduce sound considerably better than Apple's stock earbuds.

I am fairly certain that wireless headphones is where Apple sees things ending up, all the debates about quality and external DACs notwithstanding. It's only a matter of "when", not "if".

in the present, there are about a million more options with wired headphones and earbuds. and the audio quality is still superior with wired 'phones. so, for example, someone who wants the best possible quality will still go with a wired set. personally, i like the simplicity of my earbuds...nothing to charge, lightweight. simple.

fwiw, i see a lot of people with speakers plugged into the headphone port; not everyone's wireless that way yet either...

but 'when', definitely. just not for a while yet...

 

[theSeb]

Right after the event, there were a few people on here who actually thought they didn't include a headphone port. The backlash would have been way worse than the people complaining about just one port!

You actually need a headphone port. Most people still used wired headphones. Besides, it's a lot easier to include than an actual USB port.

That's because Shil Philler wasn't told that there was a headphone port and he made it sound like there wasn't one. That's where the confusion came from.