Absolutely. If there is a way to produce quality images that doesn't use "camera" technology, I'd be all for it. Imagine if the entire phone surface could be used as a detector that would allow you to create a high res three dimensional model of your surroundings, then generate the image using software...why would you want to stick with 1800's technology? And batteries? How about capacitors that can be charged in an instant, or a phone that pulls its energy from the environment? How about a lightweight power source that can power the phone for a decade? Why would you need a heavy battery?
I hope this switch from 3.5mm to lightning is equivalent to the incredible steps from camera and battery "as is" to capturing "three dimensional models" and "instant charge capacitors" or "pulling energy from the environment." I suspect if anyone else could expect to see (no hear) THAT big of a difference in THIS change, the sentiment for this change would be very different. The trick is that we've ALREADY had the ability to connect via Lightning (and Bluetooth) for at least a year+. Anyone able to experience such a dramatic improvement akin to your other examples there would have reported it and probably motivated the masses to ALREADY shift to Lightning or Bluetooth. That hasn't happened though. So it seems likely that the relative gains are not equivalent.
The 3.5mm port is one of the last single-purpose ports out there in the consumer computing world. Back in the day, a computer had maybe a dozen unique ports labeled or color coded so you'd know where to connect your mouse, keyboard, modem, printer, scanner, monitor, etc.
Yes, and all of those were replaced by the universal port replacement called USB. Another issue HERE is that instead of embracing USB with what will likely be the entirety of the rest of tech world that wants to "evolve" away from 3.5mm, Apple will stand alone with Lightning... setting up scenarios where there is no possible way to get by without dongles or us Apple people will need to get used to just doing without unless one can get every bit of their listening experiences with Apple hardware... and then perhaps
only Apple iDevice hardware (as I'm not so sure Macs seemingly trying to go the 1 port route will dedicate the precious port space to adding a Lightning port for headphone use). So even between Apple iDevices and Apple Macs, we probably need a dongle... or dual connectors via wires... or we just settle with the generally inferior sound quality of bluetooth.
Since I'm not one of those people who can happily consume audio only from Apple iDevices, I will miss the ubiquity of 3.5mm. The ability to "just plug in" to about any audio-generating device in the world and it "just works" will be sacrificed- probably for many years at least- requiring anyone wanting that flexibility to be sure they are carrying an extra piece(s) of hardware with them. For example, I have near zero expectations of Airlines adding Lightning ports to their in-flight hardware for many years (and connecting via Bluetooth seems even further away). By the time entities like that might be ready to embrace it, Apple themselves will have "thinner"d it out of their own products, hopefully for USB but probably for the "thinner" (but still proprietary and thus profitable) Lightning 2.
Non-Apple hardware makers won't want to pay the license to install a proprietary jack and further enrich Apple when they can make the comparable- and Intel endorsed- evolution with USB (making THEIR new headphones plug right into Apple's own MACs easier than Apples new option, unless Apple rolls out new Macs with Lightning, which seems plausible... but do we really want precious port space dedicated to a Lightning port for headphone use? I know I'd rather have an extra USB port if Apple is going to add ports to Macs).
All the places where one would get added utility out of their headphones will now require that dongle to be available... or we just don't get to hear the audio. As the NBA playoffs were underway, I found myself flying multiple flights on multiple (game) nights. Sure I could have just locked into listening to ONLY the (other) audio output by my Apple iDevice. But the games were on and readily available. Unjack from iDevice and plug right into the various Airplane's 3.5mm jacks. That's the power of ubiquity. But let's give that up for the apparent superiority of niche proprietary that has already been available for a year+ and has apparently NOT changed the world for the audio enthusiasts... nor even caught on because one can hear the obvious superiority of audio delivered through that channel vs. 3.5mm.
Obviously, I'm not a fan of this change. I can't see any obvious gains for us consumers here... just gains for Apple and AAPL. I realize that many of us here feel compelled to support anything Apple wants to do- even if it seems to work against Apple's own customers- so I hope all those people enjoy rolling with this change, as they come to realize how much it affects them in the "real world." I don't see any scenario where even 10 years from now, Lightning will be as ubiquitous as 3.5mm is now. Bluetooth seems to be marching slowly and I doubt it is THE (as) ubiquitous solution either.
If this was another company- say Google or Samsung or Microsoft- pushing such a change to proprietary with Apple staying locked on non-proprietary ubiquity, I'm certain we'd be shouting "fragmentation," bashing dongle requirements to no end, etc. But now that we're buying that Apple is really going to do this,
we're fragmented... with the usual suspects rationalizing it as hard as they can because Apple is always right. I hope we can enjoy how right Apple is with this change as it actually affects our own use of our future tech. I think those that only listen to audio through headphones via iDevices will feel no effect. Everyone else gets to roll with some level of hassles... some more-to-much-more than others.
