If it's a wireless future why are there wired headphones in the box?

[Rogifan]

Jony Ive talks about a wireless future. Phil Schiller says the #1 reason they got rid of the headphone jack is "courage". But Apple didn't put its money where it's mouth is. They didn't show courage by putting wireless earbuds in the box (and throwing in the adapter for those who still want to use wired headphones). If Apple wanted to show true courage why didn't they make a pair of cheaper wireless in the box with AirPods as an upsell? Not all wireless headphones are super expensive. I don't see how Apple can say wireless is the future but then stick proprietary wired headphones in the box. No evidence that there's anything special about these lightning EarPods. So mixed messaging in Apple's part.

 

[Spink10]

Great point. I don't care they dropped it. But that is funny.

 

[ramonabynes]

not sure. definitely shows incomplete vision. should have waited until they could put bluetooth in the box and/or implement wireless charging.

 

[spinedoc77]

I was going to blast the OP, but then realized he's right. Apparently Apple only has courage when it benefits their bottom line.

 

[steve knight]

cause apple is cheap why else?

 

[bmms8]

Because people would have a field day.

I see your point but keep in mind they understand they need to take baby steps too when it comes to certain things.

 

[ArkieBiker]

It gives WHINEY people something to talk about.

 

[CaptOblivious]

Why do we have to plug it in to charge? Wireless is the future just not now apparently.

 

[Rogifan]

Because people would have a field day.

I see your point but keep in mind they understand they need to take baby steps too when it comes to certain things.

That's why I said include adapter in the box. You can't say it's a wireless future and then stick a wired product in the box.

 

[rawlus]

Because the unwashed masses can't handle the slightest change too well... The legacy earbuds are training wheels until you can get used to freedom....

That and nobody would likely pay an extra $150 for airpods in the box as the only option...

That and at $150 airpods are probably the most advanced/least expensive wireless earbuds out there currently.... They are far beyond $25 Bluetooth workout earbuds which I have and love. Lol.

 

[ramonabynes]

Because the unwashed masses can't handle the slightest change too well... The legacy earbuds are training wheels until you can get used to freedom....

I can't get with this.. just snatch the bandaid off if you have so much "courage".. There wouldn't have been anything wrong with including a low cost bluetooth option in the box (like you mentioned). This roll out will never make sense

 

[menist]

Much like wireless charging, it doesn't come with the wireless charger.

 

[Nikos]

Because people would complain even more if headphones weren't included, and it's not cost effective to include wireless headphones.

 

[Puonti]

The way I see it, Apple probably wouldn't want to include in the box something that was worse quality-wise than what they had before. Sure, right now that means they have to put a pair of wired headsets in there despite all the talk about a wireless future, since they can't yet produce a sub-$30 stereo bluetooth headset with the features and price premium they want and at the same or better sound quality as the previous generation EarPods. No doubt in the future they'll do that, as long as those requirements are met.

You'll notice that prior to the Apple Watch, for example, Apple didn't have any wirelessly charging products in their lineup. With the AirPods they'll now have two. It's a direction they're heading in true Apple fashion - slowly. Even they can't just wave a magic wand and make everything wireless while maintaining whatever quality parameters they follow. Yet.

 

[rawlus]

It's courage because Samsung and the others didn't have the stones to just delete the mini jack and promote wireless by making something that's been around for 30 years less convenient. Samsung and the others wait for Apple to make these plays, and when they are then proven visionary, they follow along in a me too fashion....

 

[boltjames]

So mixed messaging in Apple's part.

Lot's of mixed messaging yesterday. A few of my faves:

It's courageous to believe in a wireless world. But Apple didn't innovate a new wireless protocol. Apparently, 'wireless' means "same old Bluetooth that you've rejected for the past 10 years". Yeah, that's definitely courageous, trying to convince us that the Bluetooth headphones we didn't like last month are now the answer to our prayers.

It's we evil consumers that made Apple kill the headphone jack. We keep asking them for new and better features, you see, and they needed the room for that. And then they give us an artificial home button and toilet protection like that's what we were just dying for. "Look mom! My home button isn't actually a button! It's a simulated surface that feels like a button!"

It's digital that will make your music sound better, thus the Lightning port for non-analog sound. But then with their "future is wireless" schtick they shove crappy Bluetooth at us which lacks dynamic range, has drop-outs, has hiss, and eats battery like a pig.

They've gone from the worlds greatest innovators to the world's worst marketers.

BJ

 

[Knowimagination]

duh... it's a wireless future..

We are in the present man...

 

[ramonabynes]

duh... it's a wireless future..

We are in the present man...

 

[Zetaprime]

I still don't understand all the complaining about the lack of a headphone jack. They include a small, rather inconspicuous adapter that allows older headphones to be plugged in if you don't want to just plug in the included pair of lightning earbuds. I hardly ever use them anyway so it makes zero diff to me. Also one less hole for crap to get into. More important to me is that the speakers will be stereo and have double the volume.

 

[boomhower]

Why put wireless in the box when you can charge $169 for it? This is apple after all.

 

[garyleecn]

because apple gives a 'open and use' experience.
like all other stuff they sell, you just open the box and it works. if there was no headphone, it breaks the experience


imagine this, someone walks out of the apple store, got back home and only find he can't listen to music without bothering his roommate. then he has to head back to the store and get a headphone. that's not good
plus, in this case he may not buy an apple headphone, just a regular cheap ones. and i think you remember how apple headphone became a living advertisement for iPods right?

 

[rawlus]

Lot's of mixed messaging yesterday. A few of my faves:

It's courageous to believe in a wireless world. But Apple didn't innovate a new wireless protocol. Apparently, 'wireless' means "same old Bluetooth that you've rejected for the past 10 years". Yeah, that's definitely courageous, trying to convince us that the Bluetooth headphones we didn't like last month are now the answer to our prayers.

It's we evil consumers that made Apple kill the headphone jack. We keep asking them for new and better features, you see, and they needed the room for that. And then they give us an artificial home button and toilet protection like that's what we were just dying for. "Look mom! My home button isn't actually a button! It's a simulated surface that feels like a button!"

It's digital that will make your music sound better, thus the Lightning port for non-analog sound. But then with their "future is wireless" schtick they shove crappy Bluetooth at us which lacks dynamic range, has drop-outs, has hiss, and eats battery like a pig.

They've gone from the worlds greatest innovators to the world's worst marketers.

BJ

i have not seen detailed specs on the airpods to know if it's same old Bluetooth or something else... They did say they made a chipset because nothing existed that could do what they wanted to do... But even if it's Bluetooth, using a universal standard is okay, BT5 is supposed to be 2x distance and 4x speed over 4.x so I don't think Bluetooth is dead...

And the phones still have to be able to communicate with a billion BT devices besides Apple airpods... So there's that.

Did you catch the remark about Apple being the #2 watch maker in the world behind only Rolex in terms of revenue and #1in smart watch? With their first product, in their first year... With a product naysayers universally said was awful. That smart watches would never catch on....

It's innovation..... Not coincidental.

 

[boltjames]

i have not seen detailed specs on the airpods to know if it's same old Bluetooth or something else...

Did you catch the remark about Apple being the #2 watch maker in the world behind only Rolex in terms of revenue and #1in smart watch? With their first product, in their first year... With a product naysayers universally said was awful. That smart watches would never catch on....

It's innovation..... Not coincidental.

The EarPods are Bluetooth, the cord-cutting for the sake of the supposed "wireless future" is 10 year old Bluetooth, Apple innovated nothing.

Being the #2 watchmaker in the world is misleading, they are showing topline unit sales, not profits. It's also a very fragmented industry, there is Rolex and then there is everyone else. It is no surprise that in Year 1 of a techy accessory to a huge iPhone populous that it will be successful, I'm actually quite surprised they did not surpass Rolex (I'm a collector) who has introduced nothing new of note, whose average retail is $5,000, and in a depressed luxury market getting crushed by the Euro where very few born after 1995 has even worn a watch they still succeed at #1.

Let's see that slide for Year 2, sales of the watch have been dreadful post-launch, they are scrambling and desperately repositioning as a Fitbit clone, I bet Apple won't even put those metrics up at the keynote a year from now. And, for the record, Apple could launch any iPhone accessory and see it become tops in it's niche. That's what 1,000,000,000 units in consumers hands can do for you. They could launch iPhone Sandwich Bags and become the #2 maker of sandwich bags in the world, doesn't mean they are 'innovators' who 'disrupted an industry'.

BJ

 

[roland.g]

You are correct that including wireless charging and wireless headphones would have made the case even better.
However Apple loves its profit margins and the cost of a pair of earbuds vs even cheap wireless earbuds is substantial. They would want to make it cool and have features like the AirPods which makes them pricier and Apple isn't going to sabotage sales by increasing the price of the phone. You can remark on the whole courage line, but the truth is Phil Schiller is not a great presenter, none of them really hold a candle to Steve, on top of which Phil gets somewhat crappy lines. Either way his delivery sucks.

And yet none of that matters, they'll still sell the crap out of them.

 

[boltjames]

You are correct that including wireless charging and wireless headphones would have made the case even better.
However Apple loves its profit margins and the cost of a pair of earbuds vs even cheap wireless earbuds is substantial. They would want to make it cool and have features like the AirPods which makes them pricier and Apple isn't going to sabotage sales by increasing the price of the phone. You can remark on the whole courage line, but the truth is Phil Schiller is not a great presenter, none of them really hold a candle to Steve, on top of which Phil gets somewhat crappy lines. Either way his delivery sucks.

And yet none of that matters, they'll still sell the crap out of them.

You had me right up until the last line.

They won't sell iPhone's like they used to, the iPhone 7 is going to be way off prior launches. It's simply too expensive and too underfeatured. The only hope Apple has is that the carriers have their new no-money-down monthly installment plans which rip off customers but allow them to get into a phone they can't afford. Nice to see Apple supporting a scam akin to student loan debt and revolving credit cards.

BJ