Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel Touts USB-C as Future of Digital Audio as Apple Set to Ditch Headphone Jack

Do some people think Apple is considering USB-C? The way I read the article it seems like the opposite: "Apple has adopted USB-C on the 12-inch MacBook, but new iPhones are expected to retain the proprietary Lightning connector in lieu of the open standard. USB-C, meanwhile, continues to see wider adoption in popular Android-based smartphones like Google's Nexus 6P and Samsung's Galaxy Note 7."
 
npmacuser5 said:
I really do not care which standard wins. What I do care is going to a standard. If Apple had its way, every plug in my house electrical would be different standard. The mess of cords, adapters, is not only a PIA but, causes unnecessary environmental waste, not to mention adding costs for us consumers.
Click to expand...
The retina macbook uses USB-C because the way it's designed only gave it enough space for two ports, and it made more sense to use a USB port for charging than to use a magsafe that would only act as a charger. I don't believe USB-C was even out yet when Apple switched to lightning, and if it was it was pretty barebones in what it could do. I assume the watch charger has something to do with helping keep water out of the watch.

I think the real issue is the amount of different ports that exist that people use. HDMI, HDMI mini, HDMI micro, display port, mini display port, USB, USB mini, USB micro, USB-C, VGA, ethernet, firewire, thunderbolt, and that's not even close to all of them. The real issue is we need a port that can handle everything, so that instead of having to rely on computers that are loaded with an over the top amount of ports, instead have just a few that are the same that we can connect anything/everything we need to with, but without needing adapters. Maybe some day.
 
shk718 said:
Intel is being a bit ridiculous. They say they're adding it - meaning USB C cant currently handle digital audio now. So how is Apple supposed to include it? Apple created lightning long before USB C was ready - and they've already added audio to it. I'm very curious how all of this will play out. Apple is not a stupid company - they know the ramifications of removing it. I'm assuming they have a good reason for it. We'll find out next month.
Click to expand...

It would have been better to include it in the spec earlier, but this change should be backward compatible (I hope). I'm sure Apple would have seen this change coming and looked at early versions of the spec update.
 
soupcan said:
Then build in a much better DAC and be done with it. Can't be that hard. Having to build in a DAC and an amp into every single headphone is only going to drive up the cost. You still need to get that digital signal converted to an analog one at some point.

Except for the older 2nd hand cars. And cheaper cars. And more expensive cars where Bluetooth is an option making it even more expensive.
Click to expand...

I'm currently using the headphone jack to get music from my iPhone to my 2010 subaru because my battery case and subaru argue about connecting over USB, and the bluetooth is only the low bandwidth version for hand-free speech and can't do stereo hifi. So, 6 year old car, no bluetooth, USB would require removing my case. The headphone jack has been a standard for my entire life and I still use it daily. A decent DAC in every iphone should still be the norm. I'm not ready to upgrade my car to match my phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gregoryalee
iReality85 said:
I don't see the big deal with getting rid of the 3.5mm audio jack. It's a big step forward to have the DAC on the peripheral (headphone) side, not the phone side. At least now if people want high fidelity in their music, they aren't limited by their phone's relatively cheap DAC. They can buy headphones with much higher quality DACs.
Click to expand...

Of course, this change doesn't get rid of the cheap (or great) DAC & AMP inside the phone, just the 3.5mm jack. Both the DAC & AMP continue to exist inside the phone too so it can be used as a phone. What this does deliver is redundancy: now there will be a DAC & AMP inside and an DAC & AMP outside of the phone. Certainly consumers could choose to pay up for the latter to buy a better quality D&A but consumers could also cheap out and actually downgrade the quality. If the latter, they might perceive that their new iPhone sounds WORSE than their old iPhone... perhaps not realizing that the fault is their choice of D&A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gregoryalee
HarryPot said:
The mayhem that would make, after all the money spent in purchasing dongles for the MacBook and USB-C.

To be honest, they have put themselves in a mess of a situation, and they eventually need to make a choice: either everything uses Lighting or everything uses USB-C.
Click to expand...

I don't really follow the mayhem argument. How would adding a Lightning port to the existing MacBooks, take away from USB-C dongles they've already purchased? It will only add options -- one significant option will be the ability to charge their MacBook with the same cable they use with the iPhone, and leave the USB-C ports open solely for data.

I also don't see the need to make a choice, especially if they make the leap to wireless everything by the time USB-C has reached any kind of critical mass. Otherwise, things will continue pretty much they way they always have with the Mac and iPhone.

Johnny907 said:
Because if they ditched Lightning in favor of an open USB-C standard, there goes the millions they rake in from (plus the ridiculous levels of control they exert over) third party accessory manufacturers via the MFI program.
Click to expand...

And in the process, Apple's customers will have to spend millions more to replace all of their Lightning cables and accessories with USB-C, which might even be unnecessary altogether within another 5 years.
 
Mac 128 said:
I don't really follow the mayhem argument. How would adding a Lightning port to the existing MacBooks, take away from USB-C dongles they've already purchased? It will only add options -- one significant option will be the ability to charge their MacBook with the same cable they use with the iPhone, and leave the USB-C ports open solely for data.
Click to expand...

Having two charging ports in a notebook?
I don't know, seems weird to me. Just stick with one and use that.
 
I've owned at least one of every single iPhone since its introduction (including the limited edition 4Gb model), except for the 6.

USB-C would be just the nudge I'd need to go ahead and get a 7+, otherwise I think I'll just wait till the 8.
 
I do see this happening, but at least not for a few years. Even so, I feel lightning will still be supported. It's to abroad not to be.
 
USB-C port can do exactly what lighting port can do. But USB-C port has more features and better spec. Also, lighting port is being used by Apple only while USB-C is being used by everyone. Lighting port can not survive that long since USB-C port is introduced which is lighting port killer.
 
No, iDevices are too popular for USB to be a Lightning killer. Instead, it and Lightning are consumer "just works" ubiquity killers. One ubiquitous standard that "just works" just fine gets fractured into 3 jacks. Everyone that desires a ready ability to connect one set of wired headphones to pretty much anything must deal with at least 2 adapters, 3 wires each terminating in a different jack type, or maybe one wire with multiple jack types at the end (can you say ugly and probably easily damaged going in & out of pockets?).

The killer is in the consumer aggravation to make this choice to fragment "just work" for all situations. And it will be a hassle for at least several years except for those that can get every bit of their audio-listening experiences out of a narrow group of devices that all share any one of these connectors.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: gregoryalee
HobeSoundDarryl said:
No, iDevices are too popular for USB to be a Lightning killer. Instead, it and Lightning are consumer "just works" ubiquity killers. One ubiquitous standard that "just works" just fine gets fractured into 3 jacks. Everyone that desires a ready ability to connect one set of wired headphones to pretty much anything must deal with at least 2 adapters, 3 wires each terminating in a different jack type, or maybe one wire with multiple jack types at the end (can you say ugly and probably easily damaged going in & out of pockets?).

The killer is in the consumer aggravation to make this choice to fragment "just work" for all situations. And it will be a hassle for at least several years except for those that can get every bit of their audio-listening experiences out of a narrow group of devices that all share any one of these connectors.
Click to expand...
One way that this could be a net positive... if all the smart phone vendors stop offering the 3.5mm jack, I will in fact end up getting a phone with no jack as some of the smart guys here have stated, but I will also get a phone with a lot smaller storage capacity as I will go totally audiophile and carry a high end music device with me and my high end headphones... you know... just like back in the 90s. Woo progress!
 
SpiderDude said:
God dammit.
The amount of people ok with this makes me sad.
This is not the same thing as the floppy disk. Stop making the comparison.
Think of people that just bought a new car, that has a USB port for charging and a 3.5 jack for aux input.
Adapters?
Screw'em?
LOL, poor people that don't buy cars with iCar or whatevs?
Bluetooth?

Come on, there is no actual scenario where this is beneficial for the costumer...
Turn off the ARDF (tm) for a minute.
Click to expand...


No problem, buy something else. It's all good.
 
bbyrdhouse said:
I've owned at least one of every single iPhone since its introduction (including the limited edition 4Gb model), except for the 6.

USB-C would be just the nudge I'd need to go ahead and get a 7+, otherwise I think I'll just wait till the 8.
Click to expand...

mavericks7913 said:
USB-C port can do exactly what lighting port can do. But USB-C port has more features and better spec. Also, lighting port is being used by Apple only while USB-C is being used by everyone. Lighting port can not survive that long since USB-C port is introduced which is lighting port killer.
Click to expand...

Are you both saying this because you already have so many USB-C cables and accessories you are currently using which you are planning on using on your new phone?

Seriously, if you needed to borrow a USB-C cable because you forgot yours, would anyone in your office have one?

The Lightning port doesn't have to survive that long -- only as long as it takes to move everything to wireless -- and that won't be long. By the time you can buy a USB-C cable at 7-11, there won't likely be a need for it.
 
Mac 128 said:
Are you both saying this because you already have so many USB-C cables and accessories you are currently using which you are planning on using on your new phone?

Seriously, if you needed to borrow a USB-C cable because you forgot yours, would anyone in your office have one?

The Lightning port doesn't have to survive that long -- only as long as it takes to move everything to wireless -- and that won't be long. By the time you can buy a USB-C cable at 7-11, there won't likely be a need for it.
Click to expand...

And are you saying that USB-C port is not welcomed for iPhone? IT IS A STANDARD. That's the big point. Also USB-C port can do more than lighting port can do. So, what's the point of keeping lighting port for?
 
Intel have got to be nuts then. The future for audio digital audio is Wireless. What's the point in bringing out yet another wired way of connecting headphones to a phone *now* when the 3.5mm jack works fine?

And if the rumors are correct, Apple have got to be nuts too. Wireless is great - but not for everyone. Many of the snags with it have been addressed. The quality is already good enough if your wireless headphones support AAC, and the battery life can be fine - 22 hours or so for some over-the-ears ones. But the price is way too high. And there are lag issues which preclude Wireless for listening to yourself playing live music.

It's to late to introduce a new wired standard, and too early to ditch the old one!
 
colinwil said:
Intel have got to be nuts then. The future for audio digital audio is Wireless. What's the point in bringing out yet another wired way of connecting headphones to a phone *now* when the 3.5mm jack works fine?

And if the rumors are correct, Apple have got to be nuts too. Wireless is great - but not for everyone. Many of the snags with it have been addressed. The quality is already good enough if your wireless headphones support AAC, and the battery life can be fine - 22 hours or so for some over-the-ears ones. But the price is way too high. And there are lag issues which preclude Wireless for listening to yourself playing live music.

It's to late to introduce a new wired standard, and too early to ditch the old one!
Click to expand...

It is future but not reliable yet. The audio quality can not be even compare from wired headphone. Also, there are only few wireless system so far. It's slow also.
 
I'm personally one of the people that wants to keep the 3.5mm headphone port regardless of the future of lightning.

With that said, I wouldn't mind seeing Apple move from lightning to USB-C, but I'm betting Apple likes its adaptor/cable/charger/MFI-certification income and will keep a proprietary port (lightning in this case).

I've never used USB-C before, can it plug in either direction like lightning? I love that about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back