Intel Wants to Replace 3.5mm Headphone Jack With USB-C Audio

[Rocketman]

Apple already made multi-contact 3.5mm-1/8" phone plugs. Why not add lightning like contacts to it as well and keep backward compatibility with all the many devices out there. Design it to be sealed of course for waterproof capacity. The cylindrical section near the mouth is available for such a thing. It could have a keyway on the lightning enabled devices for pin alignment or have rings.

 

[ignatius345]

From a consumer perspective, this could mean collectively spending billions of dollars replacing millions of sets of perfectly good headphones.

Corrected this.
[doublepost=1461855707][/doublepost]

Apple already made multi-contact 3.5mm-1/8" phone plugs. Why not add lightning like contacts to it as well and keep backward compatibility with all the many devices out there. Design it to be sealed of course for waterproof capacity. The cylindrical section near the mouth is available for such a thing. It could have a keyway on the lightning enabled devices for pin alignment or have rings.

Because this is all about making us all replace the equipment we have so that devices can keep getting thinner (which we never asked for).

 

[69Mustang]

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.

Hey, you're preaching to the choir. {Congregation say Amen... Amen} I have several headphones/buds and the idea of replacing them is not appealing. Neither is the idea of an adapter. I'm in the process of deciding on a new phone to replace my S5. Flipping a coin between the S7 and the M10. Both have 3.5mm jacks, but the M10 also has USB-C (best of both worlds). In 2018/19 when I'm ready for a newer phone, the transition should be mostly over and easier to take. Plus the newer headphones should be less costly by then.

 

[Kajje]

Meh. Can't charge and listen at the same time without getting adapters to carry around...

Dude stop complaining and just buy the converter cab... what? how much?
[doublepost=1461856530][/doublepost]

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.

MBr arrived 2 days ago and I've ordered some USB-C goodies: C-C cable, C-micro cable, C-A A cable, C-micro3 cable and a C-LAN cable. Damage was less than $20 including transport. The Asian market has catched up with USB C quite fast.

 

[ToomeyND]

Bright side - the next MacBook might actually get a second USB port now.

 

[hiddenmarkov]

Dude stop complaining and just buy the converter cab... what? how much?

tied to that is the joke well it can make stuff smaller and lighter. Not really doing that when you carry all this crap around.
As yes...some do still need 3.5 so we'd carry it. I have video gear that says 3.5 is very much alive and well. Gear I kind of listen to for sound checks. House power nearby on intermissions and such...the copying and staging and review in FCP can begin on site. And I like my consistency. Same 3.5 studio monitors from sound check through editing.



That and still not seeing the technical reason these can't exist side by side. 3.5 is neither the longest, widest or tallest port on my MBP or any computer I have seen out there. And I know from running an external preamp for my video hobby intel is not putting this quality of tech inside the box to control 3.5 signals. Its not huge but its not small either. The components in this preamp....are not on my PCB's inside the MBP. Using a pack of cancer sticks as a measuring tool my MBP would be about 1.5-2 packs in height if so. Or wider if they spread out the components.

 

[oneMadRssn]

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.

What difference does it make? Using USB isn't free you know. Companies that make USB devices do have to pay the USB Consortium some royalties, and the USB controller chips that Intel makes aren't free either. Not to mention the royalties for the codecs involved. The only distinction I see from your post is that one is a consortium of several companies and one is lead by one company. I think you're making a distinction without a difference though. The only standard that is truly open and free is the current 3.5mm jack.

I am also not sure that USB will be the cheaper one. Compare a quality branded and licensed lightning cable with a quality branded and licensed USB-C cable on Amazon (figuring this is the closest thing we can get to a raw comparison of just the standard, removing all audio or accessory aspects of it). The USB-C cable isn't much cheaper, and in many cases more expensive. If anything, implementing the Apple standard would be cheaper due to less overhead because you only deal with one party for everything - it's an all-in-one bundle. Apple manufactures the lightning connectors and chips for you, you only have to pay one company and you get full interchangeability with their devices. With USB, you have the consortium to deal with, but I believe you have to license the codecs separately, the controller chip from someone else, and there is no assistance with regard to manufacturing.

Also, I think stability trumps all of the above anyway. USB will come out with Micro USB-C next year or some such nonsense and all of this will be moot.

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.

If there is any truth about Apple, it's that it moves slowly and methodically. Dock connector lasted 10 years. Apple used Firewire from 1999-2012 mainly, but still offers one model with it today. USB2.0 was the standard for just as long, but when Apple did go to USB3.0, they made sure the switch was easy unlike their competitors.

The lightning plug itself is about 1mm thick. In teardowns, it looks like the port itself is barely any thicker. Not sure what your point is here. Indeed, both the plug and port are thinner than the USB-C counterparts.

While Lightning might not last as long as the dock connector did (it would need to make it to 2022 to beat that record), I would feel a lot more comfortable today dropping $200 on lightning headphones than USB-C headphones. In terms of which will last longer, I would bet on lightning.

 

[Karma*Police]

I'm all for Apple removing the headphone jack. I think even the Lightning vs USB-C debate will be moot at some point when most headphones go wireless.

I think others will quickly follow Apple's lead... it just feels inevitable... Why keep a single purpose port that takes up so much space when there are other methods to achieve the same or better result more efficiently?

Sure, there will be short term pain for some but that's true of most tech transitions.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

What are these "same or better result" options?

And how are they "more efficient"?

 

[centauratlas]

I'm just glad I chose to go wireless...

The problem with wireless is having that little transmitter right next to your head.

 

[darkknight14]

Yes it is VERY different.

Remove a floppy drive and use say a USB key, or something else. Smaller, faster, higher capacity etc.

Remove small lightweight headphones that draw their power from the analog socket and replace them with what?
BlueTooth ones that last a hour or two?
Large ones with DAC's in them and battery packs?

If you can buy tiny headphones that are powered by this new socket then great

Yes my thoughts exactly, I can see no advantage at the moment to Apple removing the headphone jack, or perhaps the only 'advantage' being thinner designs

 

[JorgTheElder]

Remember when Apple removed the floppy disk drive? This is no different, yet people seem to be having a much stronger reaction to companies getting rid of this jack.

I disagree. With the floppy drive, it was being replaced with better technology. In this case it is just moving a expensive component, the DAC into the headphones. That does not make any sense. Now instead of making sure that the phone has a good DAC (iPhones have always been middle of the road) so all your headphones have a chance of sounding good, you now have to pay more for every set of headphones because you are not only paying for the drivers, but he whole digital to analog pipeline. Just seems stupid to me.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The problem with wireless is having that little transmitter right next to your head.

And quality of audio.

And batteries/charging.

And compatibility with anything not bluetooth to which you might want to listen

Etc.

 

[Gasu E.]

Yes it is VERY different.

Remove a floppy drive and use say a USB key, or something else. Smaller, faster, higher capacity etc.

iMac without floppy-- 1998

First USB flash thumb drive-- 2000

[doublepost=1461860375][/doublepost]

I disagree. With the floppy drive, it was being replaced with better technology.

Which better replacement technology are you referring to? When the iMac was introduced, there were no USB thumb drives nor built-in superdrives. Apple made the move to remove the floppy ahead of the market.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I disagree. With the floppy drive, it was being replaced with better technology. In this case it is just moving a expensive component, the DAC into the headphones. That does not make any sense. Now instead of making sure that the phone has a good DAC (iPhones have always been middle of the road) so all your headphones have a chance of sounding good, you now have to pay more for every set of headphones because you are not only paying for the drivers, but he whole digital to analog pipeline. Just seems stupid to me.

And again, it's not really moving the DAC as the iPhone will still need another DAC inside it anyway to work as a phone. What happens here is we get to buy an extra DAC inside new headphones or inside a new adapter.

Just think how much easier this would be if Apple simply put the better DAC inside a new iPhone and stuck with the ubiquitous jack. But there's so much more profit in selling adapters and new equipment terminating with a proprietary jack than adding a tiny bit of cost to pay up for the "plus" or "pro" DAC instead of the <pro DAC that will still have to be built inside anyway.

Besides, must... get... thinner. Now "thinner" is apparently so important that kicking "just works" ubiquity out and/or protrusions here and there is THE way to support the most important "innovation" in each iteration of iDevices.

I think Apple should kick the battery out next. Batteries are also old, antiquated technology (haven't batteries been around longer than this standard audio jack?) and we should all be happy to buy an external "powering" adapter (sold separately of course) should Apple make such a decision. The battery is most of the heft of the iDevices. Just think how much thinner & lighter they would be without a battery! Sure, they wouldn't function without adding a battery but why should we care about that? Whatever Apple wants to do is what we want. If we have to buy extra stuff that used to be built inside, so be it. That's what money is for. And Apple needs more of it.

 

[NikeSG]

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.

This move away from today's standard headphone jack is creating extraneous segmentation, with almost no real-world benefit. And you make a point, musicians do have a hundred different cable types, but I'd argue most of which have justifiable reasons to exist. I see the potential real-world practicality of having usb-c serving a nearly endless number of functions, but at the end of the day, usb-c is bulkier than what we have now as an audio out, and is going to force the mass market to adopt millions and millions of adapters if the mass market ever wishes to use their "outdated" 3.5mm headphones again. ... That's ridiculous. There is no need or desire from the consumer. The problem is, there is no problem with the 3.5mm headphone jack. It's small, as ubiquitous as air, and is highly functional.

We were becoming entrenched in usb by the time floppy was killed. USB-C is not so common at this point, and won't be in everyone's devices for quite some time. The iPhone will almost certainly never have USB-C, as with most other phones I would imagine, so what, we need adapters all the time? Or go Bluetooth and be tethered and reliant on power? The whole situation creates a bunch of undesired consequences, and for what? Because the powers that be have an unjustifiable hatred for 3.5mm jack.

 

[_mdavenport]

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.

Adapters, adapters, adapters... even to share headphones between your new iPhone and the Macs you already own.

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.

Good points.

 

[Mac 128]

My biggest issue with this is that the 3.5mm jack is the ADA Approved Standard for listening devices. If you take away that jack you either have to make a USB to 3.5mm adaptor or get ADA approval to not having the jack on your device.

Of course there will be an adapter, Apple already has to deal with these restrictions and power charges in the EU, where they have a micro USB to Lightning adapter in the box with the phone.

Again, they want to ditch headphone jack.
But then? Move DAC to headphone? And what about those in-ear earphone? Integrate a sound card in the middle of earphone line?

Wireless earbuds not only have a DAC and amp in them, but also a battery, radio and antenna. And they are not much bigger than a wired earbud. This is a non-issue.

My question is why are we wasting time trying to "improve" wired audio? Why not create a lossless transmission system for wireless headphones?

They aren't. They're offering a wired alternative to the new audio standard which is indisputably wireless. By eliminating the 3.5mm jack out of necessity to regain the space inside mobile devices, they are creating demand for an alternative method of audio, which in turns creates competition, innovation, improves quality and lowers prices, bringing wireless technology to more customers who can presently afford it, or require higher quality on the way to becoming the new standard.

Apple already made multi-contact 3.5mm-1/8" phone plugs. Why not add lightning like contacts to it as well and keep backward compatibility with all the many devices out there. Design it to be sealed of course for waterproof capacity. The cylindrical section near the mouth is available for such a thing. It could have a keyway on the lightning enabled devices for pin alignment or have rings.

First that doesn't reduce space significantly in mobile devices which is the reason I see this being implemented. Second, it would require a significant redesign of that interface with major R&D to ensure it works reliably, and cannot be damaged by inserting some manufacturers poorly designed 3.5mm plugs. In essence you're suggesting something similar to the iPod Nano which both charges and passes data via the 3.5mm headphone jack. But it also requires designing an entirely new connector which is not compatible with anything else, requires a significant investment on Apple's part, doesn't eliminate space concerns, and perpetuates an older technology that doesn't spur innovation in the wireless audio industry.

 

[duervo]

Since the majority of the responses in this thread revolve around the alleged "death of the 3.5mm audio jack", let me assure you:

There will be a d-o-n-g-l-e to buy. One with a USB-C or lightning connector on one end, and a 3.5mm audio jack on the other.

Everybody can calm down now, and go about your lives as before.

You're welcome.

 

[Sonic]

there is no good way to spin this

 

[JorgTheElder]

iMac without floppy-- 1998

First USB flash thumb drive-- 2000

[doublepost=1461860375][/doublepost]


Which better replacement technology are you referring to? When the iMac was introduced, there were no USB thumb drives nor built-in superdrives. Apple made the move to remove the floppy ahead of the market.

In Apple's mind, it was a writeable optical drive. For the rest of us, it was burnable CDs. I agree with your point, Apple was early.

 

[Shirasaki]

Yeah. Talking about wireless earbuds, they are small enough. Very good.
However, zero latency advantage as a wired device is always there and it will not change anytime soon.
If Apple and Intel could try to lower the price of wireless earbuds, then I would like to consider buying one. Of course, needs decent audio quality as insurance.

 

[JorgTheElder]

Since the majority of the responses in this thread revolve around the alleged "death of the 3.5mm audio jack", let me assure you:

There will be a d-o-n-g-l-e to buy. One with a USB-C or lightning connector on one end, and a 3.5mm audio jack on the other.

Great, so we can spend more money for another adapter to carry around so that Apple can make a thinner phone.

 

[mtbgtr]

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.

Who are these people who are getting used to the USB-C port? The majority of Mac users haven't purchased a device with that port yet. Not everyone has the means or even needs to uograde to every iteration. This is a solution looking for a problem.

 

[0007776]

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...

Yep, there is no benefit to eliminating the headphone jack and there are plenty of downsides, the ones you mentioned, plus the fact that there will be many different standards to replace them, so it'll be harder to get headphones that you can use on multiple devices.