Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Wants to Replace 3.5mm Headphone Jack With USB-C Audio
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The difference between this is the 3.5mm audio jack was first used in 1964. That means you can use your headphones for your dad's original walkman without an adapter.
And the main issue - audio is analog. The USB-C/Lightning plug just moves the DAC from inside your phone to inside your headphones...which just means that all USB-C/Lightning headphones are going to be more expensive. Audio manufacturers are probably foaming at the mouth right now because in 5 years with a new plug form factor they can sell all new headphones to the same people.
I'm all in for USB-C adoption (Typing this on a 12" macbook right now) but eliminating a tiny plug that has been a standard for 50+ years just seems like a terrible idea (Unless you are on the money making side of this deal.)
My question is why are we wasting time trying to "improve" wired audio? Why not create a lossless transmission system for wireless headphones?
Technology moves on. The headphone jack will be consigned to history and yes some people will huff and puff but ultimately they will move on and get used to it, just like people are getting used to the USB-C port.
Do you have sales numbers for the new MB? because I haven't seen any. I suspect Mac sales are down across the board because they haven't released a new design MBP and iMac for years. They are both in serious need of a makeover.
So how much time until Apple moves from Lightning to USB-C on iDevices? 
They should never have come up with Lightning in the first place imo... the market fragmentation is about to get ugly.
They should never have come up with Lightning in the first place imo... the market fragmentation is about to get ugly.
You raise some interesting points. It could be that Apple are happy to go down this path simply so they can justify the high price of their Beats headphones and rake in more profit. I wouldn't put it past them lol.
Not this again...
Ok, so let's remove the headphone jack, buy adapters with dac inside, even if there's already one inside the iPhone (it's not going to be removed because the built in speakers need it), lose them, buy new headphones, maybe wireless, charge them constantly and notice a quality difference to wired and update all your hifi and car audio inputs. To get what? A phone that's 0.5 mm thinner? Explain that to consumers...
Ok, so let's remove the headphone jack, buy adapters with dac inside, even if there's already one inside the iPhone (it's not going to be removed because the built in speakers need it), lose them, buy new headphones, maybe wireless, charge them constantly and notice a quality difference to wired and update all your hifi and car audio inputs. To get what? A phone that's 0.5 mm thinner? Explain that to consumers...
So how much time until Apple moves from Lightning to USB-C on iDevices?
They should never have come up with Lightning in the first place imo... the market fragmentation is about to get ugly.
I would say that was very likely given that most other manufacturers have so far refused to adopt Lightning. Moving to USB-C would at least move Apple back into the mainstream and make it easier for customers to connect peripherals to their Apple devices. In that sense it would actually be a good thing.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Because it's not proprietary. Because we've learned that Apple licensing of proprietary is expensive and thus unlikely to get mass adoption. So if the audio jack standard is actually going to change, which of the two is most likely to be universally adopted beyond just mobile & computing devices? The cheaper one. Which is that? The NON-proprietary one.
Besides, while I appreciate your point about evolving USB, why do you have faith that Lightning will persist for more than about 2 more iterations of iPhone? Look at it's thickness vs. iPhone now. How many more cuts of "thinner" before it proves too thick to remain THE jack for iDevices? I predict 2 more iterations. Then we'll get the "thinner" Lightning 2 and get to rebuy all this again.
Good point but don't forget it doesn't actually move the DAC out to the headphones, it creates a redundancy of a second DAC. iPhones will still have to have a DAC inside to work as a phone without headphones/earbuds. There's no way around that if an iPhone is going to continue to be a phone. So what this is doing is just duplicating that bit of hardware, shifting when a digital audio signal becomes an analog signal we can actually hear by as little as a few inches further down the pipe (toward the headphone speakers).
I still think the better overall option would be to stick with a universal, ubiquitous standard with virtually nill licensing fees (if any???) instead of embracing a proprietary one owned & controlled by a single company that we all know won't cut the licensing fees low enough to give it any chance to become THE standard on every other kind of device to which one might also want to connect their headphones. So now we get iPhones with "tails" (adapters) and will need to carry around adapters (and yes, that's plural) if we want to use one set of headphones with the various kinds of jacks that will now be in play. Or we can carry around multiple sets of headphones. Either way, we carry around more accessories. For what gain?
Think about the business trip and carry along only one set of headphones:
- Client wants you to plug into their equipment for the conf call. Not lightning, probably 3.5mm.
- Want to jack in to listen to the airplane's audio while the movie plays. Not lightning, probably 3.5mm
- Need to listen to something on your own Mac? Not lightning, probably 3.5mm or maybe USB.
- Step forward a little bit when this push for USB-C with other hardware takes hold. Hook into that. Not lightning, USB3C.
If the argument is for better quality audio, the 3.5mm jack is NOT the problem. Build a better quality DAC inside the iPhone. Analog is analog. Moving the DAC an inch or three further along the pipe is not going to make any difference we can hear... unless a better quality DAC is doing the conversion and then some of us MIGHT be able to hear some difference. However, the phone will still have to have a DAC inside it too. It's not the couple of inches that would make the difference in quality, it's the quality of the DAC.
The Bluetooth alternative argument seems weak to me too. Even if one can set aside the obvious tradeoff in audio quality for the convenience of wireless, again, take the Bluetooth headphone on the business trip. How to wirelessly jack into the airplane's audio to hear the movie? Can you count on every client having a bluetooth setup and willingness to connect you so you can participate in the conf call? Etc.
So again, adapters, adapters, adapters. Or maybe multiple kinds of headphones to lug along. For what exactly that can't be covered much more ubiquitously with a perfectly fine, perfectly functional, everywhere option paired with a better-quality DAC inside the next iPhone?
This is not about replacing "old, outdated" analog with "new, "the future" digital. Audio must be converted to analog for us to hear it. Based on how some of us are trying to rationalize this, perhaps Apple should bottle Water as a product- replace the old, outdated standard of H2O now with Apple's newer, proprietary, somehow "thinner" H2O proprietary blend... a far superior incarnation of water because it's newer... and Apple says so.
Last edited:
It seems to me Apple and all the other brands are going to start pushing bluetooth more aggressively to counter the "can't charge and listen" argument. I wouldn't be surprised at all if Apple intro'd a new BT headset with their jackless iPhone. Their first entry in the horribly named "hearables" <-- yes, that is what they're calling it - category. Other brands have already jumped on the band wagon with Bragi's Dash, Motorola's Hint, and Samsung's soon to be released Icon X. Battery life shouldn't be an issue as I think all of those brands avg 17 hrs. Bluetooth will help mitigate the transition pains, but it has to get better sound. There are some nice BT headphones/buds but the sound doesn't quite compare to wired sound. At least to me it doesn't. If BT can get comparable sound, I wouldn't care about charge and listen. As it stands now, I would care. Attachments, dongles, adapters, or other accouterments aren't the answer either.
Last edited:
My Jaybird BlueBuds X last 7 hours+ on average.
=====================
Also intrigued by that Smart Connector rumour on the next iPhone - charge and listen may live on.
I'm not paying Apple, Bose or Beats a premium price for first generation lightning or USB-C headphones. When the new standard(s) are at the same price points as current 3.5mm offerings I'll jump on board.
Musicians do not approve. Did the powers that be ever consider how many adapters would be needed to account for all of the equipment and hardware that have headphone jacks in any given studio? I suppose we're just supposed to buy new hardware
Musicians have a hundred different cable types laying around, with adapters for everything from headphones to phantom powered mic cables to cable building kits. This doesn't even really affect that world anyway, unless you're confounding the term musician with someone who plays an iPad for an instrument.
I hope you at least would worry about the health of that poor sheep!
Yup, this move would piss off a lot of people who have invested a bunch of money in high end headphones (or even just overpriced ones *cough*beats*cough*)
Yup, and when your phone runs out of juice at 5pm, you're going to stuff the dock in your jacket pocket along with your phone and battery so you can listen to music or take a call on your walk/ride home?
And to those who think Bluetooth will solve this... Maybe in some situations. But not on a crowded subway car or bus where 50-200 people are all trying to connect with their phones on the same narrow band of frequencies. Not to mention the additional charging headaches for the headset and the additional battery drain on the phone itself.
Even before I used Bt headset, can't remember a single time charging a phone and listening to the music at the same time . I usually charge my phone at night when am at sleep. So zero issue for me.
A lot of people understood that the floppy drive was too slow, too small in capacity, too large in size, too fragile, ...., for their future needs. At the time it was also stopping to be useful altogether due to its limited sizes.
The headphone jack isn't going to be dropped for anything better. Just more annoying.
Because it's not proprietary. Because we've learned that Apple licensing of proprietary is expensive and thus unlikely to get mass adoption. So if the audio jack standard is actually going to change, which of the two is most likely to be universally adopted beyond just mobile & computing devices? The cheaper one. Which is that? The NON-proprietary one.
Besides, while I appreciate your point about evolving USB, why do you have faith that Lightning will persist for more than about 2 more iterations of iPhone? Look at it's thickness vs. iPhone now. How many more cuts of "thinner" before it proves too thick to remain THE jack for iDevices? I predict 2 more iterations. Then we'll get the "thinner" Lightning 2 and get to rebuy all this again.
Good point but don't forget it doesn't actually move the DAC out to the headphones, it creates a redundancy of a second DAC. iPhones will still have to have a DAC inside to work as a phone without headphones/earbuds. There's no way around that if an iPhone is going to continue to be a phone. So what this is doing is just duplicating that bit of hardware, shifting when a digital audio signal becomes an analog signal we can actually hear by as little as a few inches further down the pipe (toward the headphone speakers).
I still think the better overall option would be to stick with a universal, ubiquitous standard with virtually nill licensing fees (if any???) instead of embracing a proprietary one owned & controlled by a single company that we all know won't cut the licensing fees low enough to give it any chance to become THE standard on every other kind of device to which one might also want to connect their headphones. So now we get iPhones with "tails" (adapters) and will need to carry around adapters (and yes, that's plural) if we want to use one set of headphones with the various kinds of jacks that will now be in play. Or we can carry around multiple sets of headphones. Either way, we carry around more accessories. For what gain?
Think about the business trip and carry along only one set of headphones:
Adapters, adapters, adapters... even to share headphones between your new iPhone and the Macs you already own.
- Client wants you to plug into their equipment for the conf call. Not lightning, probably 3.5mm.
- Want to jack in to listen to the airplane's audio while the movie plays. Not lightning, probably 3.5mm
- Need to listen to something on your own Mac? Not lightning, probably 3.5mm or maybe USB.
- Step forward a little bit when this push for USB-C with other hardware takes hold. Hook into that. Not lightning, USB3C.
If the argument is for better quality audio, the 3.5mm jack is NOT the problem. Build a better quality DAC inside the iPhone. Analog is analog. Moving the DAC an inch or three further along the pipe is not going to make any difference we can hear... unless a better quality DAC is doing the conversion and then some of us MIGHT be able to hear some difference. However, the phone will still have to have a DAC inside it too. It's not the couple of inches that would make the difference in quality, it's the quality of the DAC.
The Bluetooth alternative argument seems weak to me too. Even if one can set aside the obvious tradeoff in audio quality for the convenience of wireless, again, take the Bluetooth headphone on the business trip. How to wirelessly jack into the airplane's audio to hear the movie? Can you count on every client having a bluetooth setup and willingness to connect you so you can participate in the conf call? Etc.
So again, adapters, adapters, adapters. Or maybe multiple kinds of headphones to lug along. For what exactly that can't be covered much more ubiquitously with a perfectly fine, perfectly functional, everywhere option paired with a better-quality DAC inside the next iPhone?
This is not about replacing "old, outdated" analog with "new, "the future" digital. Audio must be converted to analog for us to hear it. Based on how some of us are trying to rationalize this, perhaps Apple should bottle Water as a product- replace the old, outdated standard of H2O now with Apple's newer, proprietary, somehow "thinner" H2O proprietary blend... a far superior incarnation of water because it's newer... and Apple says so.
This comment is spot-on. Besides the obvious problems of wireless headphones (quality, lip sync, unreliable connection), the charging/fallback port situation is also messy. What will it be in the future? Micro USB, USB C or Lightning? And what will work when those headphones batteries are empty? 3,5mm? USB C? Lightning? Goodbye simple cross compatibility and hello adapters and multiple charging cables.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Which one do you buy when they hit the same price? The one that terminates with lightning or the one that terminates with USB3C? Both?
IMO, even if they do achieve the same pricing- which frankly, I don't see with headphones terminating a proprietary (lightning) jack- the choice of which to buy is complicated. Do you get the ones that terminate for your Apple equipment even though that means you'll need an adapter(s) to use them with just about anything else? And if so, how do you connect them to your Macs when you need to tap into that audio via headphones?
Do you get the USB3C-terminated headphones which will probably have the better chance of being the next audio standard jack if 3.5mm really must be rejected. If so, you might have some phones that can directly connect to one kind of Mac but not the others... and of course, it can't directly connect to iDevices without an adapter.
Do you carry more than one kind of headphone/earbud around to cover these multiple bases? Is "thinner & lighter" now about the device only... not how much extra we have to carry around because traditional utility is getting pushed OUTSIDE of the new "thinner & lighter" devices (but that external weight doesn't get counted)? If one just about MUST carry adapters to cover bases traditionally covered by hardware INSIDE devices, I think the weight should count. In other words, eventually, Apple could push the battery OUTSIDE of an iDevice in the name of "thinner & lighter". Yes, that would make it a lot thinner and a lot lighter but one would need a battery case to make it work as it has traditionally worked. Since one would have to carry that case around, is that battery-less iPhone actually "thinner & lighter"? While extreme, is this much different?
Even the maximum Apple fan must encounter non-Apple audio hookups sometime. Maybe you do want to watch the movie on the plane and thus need to jack into the plane's system (definitely not lightning nor likely to be lightning)? Maybe you need to be able to jack into a client's hardware and that client doesn't already worship at the alter of Apple (definitely not lightning nor likely to be lightning)? Maybe bluetooth will be available and accessible but maybe not?
I see this as a big mess- a solution in search of what is nobody's problem, though, of course, there's a number of "us" here trying our best to spin what Apple has decided it wants to do as the ONE and only right way forward. We'll make up stuff (like how eliminating this hole might support waterproofing while ignoring the much bigger hole in the same device). We'll spin how it's about "better quality audio" and then bluetooth wireless in the same pitch, ignoring how one is basically the opposite of the other. We'll spin "the future" vs. "antiquated"- even share dates of standards- while ignoring that our ears can only hear audio as analog and the distance of headphone cable is not so great that preserving an audio signal another inch or three before converting it to analog will make some huge difference.
My opinions are these:
- another solution in search of nobody's problem
- since Intel has decided USB3C, the vast majority of future computers will embrace USB3C, not lightning, far outnumbering all future Macs that might add a lightning port
- since lightning is proprietary and will thus be much more expensive to embrace than USB3C, all the fence-sitters who want to support one of the other will likely support the non-proprietary, cheaper option. That means about everything else to which one might connect headphones with a wire will likely adopt USB3C if THEY choose to embrace anything other than 3.5mm
- lightning as is is already almost as thick as current gen iDevices. When near-term generations want to thin- and we all know Apple will want to thin them- it won't be long until Lightning 1 must become the thinner Lightning 2, at which point investments in proprietary will require rebuying and/or buying new adapters.
- The implication that getting rid of the 3.5mm jack may mean bigger battery is just spin- Apple always spins "same great battery life". It seems when they get the chance to free up some space, they fill that space with "thinner" instead of "more battery"
- if the big brains at Apple and Intel actually believe that the world needs to drop 3.5mm for a "better standard", I wish Apple would embrace USB3C too so that us consumers could adopt a new standard without necessarily having to grapple with adapters.
Last edited:
I see what you're saying, and eventually it does have to go away. It's just that the solution to the problem isn't clear. Floppy drives had a clear replacement by the time they were phased out. Nobody is quite sure what will replace this now, which creates more worry and fear. The other big factor is that this jack has been around since the 1800s for phone switch operators, and has been used for headphones probably as long as headphones have existed. So it's firmly entrenched, not only in all hardware but psychologically.
--
I'm just not sure about USB-C. It's clearly the most superior of the USB, but I just wish Apple had opened up their Lightning connector as I think it's the best, most sturdy design available. It's going to suck if there's the entire headphone industry, and then a marked-up subset just for Apple users. That's a great way for Apple to lose users. You can only contain people so much before they break free. They're going to need to be very careful with how they handle this.
I don't want something else to charge! This is all related to DRM. They want control! Believe me, there is nothing wrong with the headphone jack. Our ears can only hear in analogue. A 'full Digial experience' is nothing short of nonsense.
Oh great, we'll end up with 3.5 mm audio jacks, Lightning audio ports and USB-C audio ports. That's 3 ports for the same thing instead of the 1 we have now. Audio must be analog before it reaches the speakers anyway, so one way or the other it has to go from digital to analog, might as well have your updateable, expensive computer do the conversion rather than your cheap headphones. Keeping in mind that connecting 3 wires from an audio jack directly to headphones is as cheap and simple as it can be, while having a digital-to-analog converter built into your headphones will make it more expensive, more prone to failure and incompatible with old devices, or devices of a different brand. Currently all headphones are directly compatible with pretty much everything. This will no longer be the case.
It already sucks that Apple puts the line-in port and the headphone port in the same jack, making it impossible to connect an external mic because it refuses to recognize it as a mic. Now you'll have to buy an expensive adapter just to connect pretty much anything that isn't already expensive.
If your iPhone will use Lightning for audio, and your Mac will use USB-C for the same thing, how the hell is that going to work out? Are you supposed to carry 2 adapters with you just in case you want to listen to music on your Mac with your iPhone headphones? This is going to be such a mess. The 3.5 mm jack is tiny, reversible 360º, simple, ubiquitous, well-adopted, cheap, reliable... what more do people want?
Also, if you want digital audio out, can't you already do that with USB??
It already sucks that Apple puts the line-in port and the headphone port in the same jack, making it impossible to connect an external mic because it refuses to recognize it as a mic. Now you'll have to buy an expensive adapter just to connect pretty much anything that isn't already expensive.
If your iPhone will use Lightning for audio, and your Mac will use USB-C for the same thing, how the hell is that going to work out? Are you supposed to carry 2 adapters with you just in case you want to listen to music on your Mac with your iPhone headphones? This is going to be such a mess. The 3.5 mm jack is tiny, reversible 360º, simple, ubiquitous, well-adopted, cheap, reliable... what more do people want?
Also, if you want digital audio out, can't you already do that with USB??
Queue 'Digial Headphone' wars. Totally rubbish! Nothing short of a con. In terms of audio, digital is NOT better. Let's keep the DAC's inside the device and allow us to use our headphones where we like. And if people want to use external DAC's then fine. Connect to USB, Lightening or whatever you like and plug your headphones in. I do this already on my Mac with an Apogee Duet. The sound difference is astonishing.
I'm not really excited to ditch the 3.5 jack, however, if Apple does it I PRAY they just make the jump to USB-C. The "lightning" cable is slow compared to USB-C and is also non-standard. Furthermore, 3rd party lightning cables are absolutely horrible...and Apple branded ones are overpriced.
I really doubt Apple will dump the lightning cable...however, the fact that they adapted it for the MacBook gives me a sliver of hope.
I really doubt Apple will dump the lightning cable...however, the fact that they adapted it for the MacBook gives me a sliver of hope.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Yes.
Or buy new Macs rumored to come with a Lightning jack.
But even then, you still need adapters to be able to use those new Lightning headphones with anything else.
Apparently, whatever Apple decides they want us to want. Resistance is futile.
Yes.
And if one believes Bluetooth is better, they can already use Bluetooth for audio too.
And if one believes Lightning is better, they can already use Lightning for audio too (there are already lightning-terminated headphones)
But none of that matters until Apple drops the ubiquitous 3.5mm port and tells us that Lightning-terminated or Wireless headphones are "the future" and that future is now available on the new iPhone 7.
The pile up of rumors saying Apple is dropping 3.5mm is such that those who work so hard in Apple marketing around here (many apparently for no compensation) are hard at work spinning why we desperately need "the future" and why we need to jettison 3.5mm. That will only get louder as more rumors pile up that supports Apple's decision on this. That it will pretty negatively affect so many of us in so many ways does not matter. What matters is whatever Apple wants to do. They are (always) right and any dissenting consumers- even those who buy lots of Apple products- are wrong... or "trolls"... or "Samesung shills", etc.