iPhone 7 and the Audiophile Case For Lightning Headphones

[Keerock]

The jack has nothing to do with the quality. The DAC before the jack and the speakers have to do with quality. The jack simply passes an analog electrical signal from one end to another. Moving the DAC doesn't make one bit of difference. Not with the distances involved. The typical cord used is a couple of feet long. Assuming the DAC in the phone is located at the top, using an adapter moves the DAC from the top to the bottom of the phone. Using larger headphones that have the DAC in the ear piece moves it 2 feet.

If Apple was truly concerned about sound quality, they's just use a better DAC, which would have the benefit of also improving the speaker sound quality.

So not one of you telling my how great the 3.5 mm plug is have had crackling headphones or other devices connected? I sure as heck have had that issue many times. The Lightning connector will either be on our off. Not good, somewhat good or bad.
[doublepost=1465585389][/doublepost]

You kind of shoot yourself in the foot with that second part, don't you. We're talking hardware here, physical methods of connection. Irrespective of what display technology is inside a TV, you are free to buy peripherals from any other manufacturer and connect them through a standard connector. Personally I have a Samsung TV, an ATV2, an LG BD player, a Google Chromestick, an Amazon Firestick, and an Onkyo Home theatre system. I can connect them all together because they all use the HDMI connector and standard EIAJ optical connector, even Apple. What is being suggested is the equivalent of Apple deciding on the ATV5 to have their own proprietary hardware connector that can only be connected to certain TVs either produced by Apple (as if that's ever really going to happen!) or where they have licensed the hardware design to a TV Manufacturer, thus limiting user choice.

So now that I'm back from surgery on my foot... do you believe that Samsung, Sony, Motorola (actually already doing it) and others are not working to swap out 3.5 mm plugs for USB-C or mini or some other proprietary connector? You do know that everyone is moving away from 3.5 mm jacks, right? And if I'm wrong, in 2 years, please come back to this thread and give me a "nah,nah, nah, nah nah." I'll be waiting.

Is the issue that Apple is not syncing up universally with some new standard or simply that they are moving away from 100 year old technology?
[doublepost=1465585486][/doublepost]

What exactly is crappy about the current jack? Please be specific.

crackle, crackle, crackle...

 

[AsherN]

Is the issue that Apple is not syncing up universally with some new standard or simply that they are moving away from 100 year old technology?

It's actually both. They are prematurely moving away from a universal standard, and not replacing it with another standard. Let's say that within 2 years, every new cell phone has moved to no 3.5mm jack in favour USB-C. And that every new computer has a USB-C included. I'm a manufacturer of middle of the road earbuds and headphones. You know, the ones that sell tons. Margins are thin. I can produce USB-C gear and reach 85% of the cell phone market and all of the computer market. Royalty free. Or I can have a separate production with Lightning for the other 15%, and pay Apple a royalty. Tough business decision.

 

[steve62388]

It's actually both. They are prematurely moving away from a universal standard, and not replacing it with another standard. Let's say that within 2 years, every new cell phone has moved to no 3.5mm jack in favour USB-C. And that every new computer has a USB-C included. I'm a manufacturer of middle of the road earbuds and headphones. You know, the ones that sell tons. Margins are thin. I can produce USB-C gear and reach 85% of the cell phone market and all of the computer market. Royalty free. Or I can have a separate production with Lightning for the other 15%, and pay Apple a royalty. Tough business decision.

But this shouldn't come as a shock to anyone. All other manufacturers use micro-USB (and soon to be USB-C), Apple uses its own proprietary connectors. Everybody knew that when they bought their iPhone so there isn't much point complaining about it now.

I have zero sympathy for people bemoaning the likely fact Apple will use Lightning instead of USB-C. Would USB-C be better? Probably, but you knew the 'rules of the game' when you bought Apple.

Apple made the right decision at the time. We have had the benefits of Lightning connectors for four years, which are superior to micro-USB. Other manufacturers are only now migrating to USB-C.

And besides that. Wireless is the future.

 

[Keerock]

It's actually both. They are prematurely moving away from a universal standard, and not replacing it with another standard. Let's say that within 2 years, every new cell phone has moved to no 3.5mm jack in favour USB-C. And that every new computer has a USB-C included. I'm a manufacturer of middle of the road earbuds and headphones. You know, the ones that sell tons. Margins are thin. I can produce USB-C gear and reach 85% of the cell phone market and all of the computer market. Royalty free. Or I can have a separate production with Lightning for the other 15%, and pay Apple a royalty. Tough business decision.

Just because a headphone company is not interested in licensing technology to be a part of the most lucrative product eco system in the world is not a great argument in my book. Some companies make their products Apple compatible, some don't. Some do it with official licensing, some don't. I'll shop with the ones who do.

So is your beef that Apple is not going with some new phantom universal standard?

Would you be happily surprised or upset if Apple got smart and used USB-C as the new port and connector standard for the iPhone "8" (really 7 - read below) next year?

Also, would you be surprised if Apple DID NOT remove the 3.5 mm on the new iPhone "7" this year?

Oh, and would you lose your mind if Apple announces the iPhone 6SE and SE plus instead of calling it the 7? You know, because it is not a new form factor, just upgraded internals?

Sorry for mixing in other topics... just honestly interested in your reaction, you seem very bright (not being sarcastic).
[doublepost=1465589577][/doublepost]

But you miss the point that these are Industry Standards that were agreed across a vast swathe of TV manufacturers, Camera manufacturers, Content Providers, Industry governing bodies around the world, etc that ALL had the same rights and had a concerted effort to move the consumer in an orderly way from one standard to the next standard.

Conversely, the rumour about Apple ditching the 3.5mm jack for the Lightning connector is one solitary manufacturer choosing to drop a worldwide industry standard for their own proprietary system. That's a completely different situation.

I get it, as long as the argument is that Apple is using their proprietary (Lightening) standard over a universal (3.5 mm) standard for connecting. But if it's that they should stick with 3.5 mm, I can't agree.
[doublepost=1465589730][/doublepost]

We go back to watching downsampled Netflix and YouTube videos on our smartphones?

Ha! Dam, you're right! But at least most Netflix content is formatted for wide screen.

 

[AsherN]

Just because a headphone company is not interested in licensing technology to be a part of the most lucrative product eco system in the world is not a great argument in my book. Some companies make their products Apple compatible, some don't. Some do it with official licensing, some don't. I'll shop with the ones who do.

So is your beef that Apple is not going with some new phantom universal standard?

At this point, no. My beef is the elimination of a cross industry standard with no benefits. The touted "better sound though Lightning" is already there.

Would you be happily surprised or upset if Apple got smart and used USB-C as the new port and connector standard for the iPhone "8" (really 7 - read below) next year?

Surprised, absolutely. Certainly not upset. Standards are good.

Also, would you be surprised if Apple DID NOT remove the 3.5 mm on the new iPhone "7" this year?

I'd be surprised.

Oh, and would you lose your mind if Apple announces the iPhone 6SE and SE plus instead of calling it the 7? You know, because it is not a new form factor, just upgraded internals?

Not at all. There is a point where you can only change the external of a slab of glass so much. I'd actually be please if the made the entire body thicker, so that the lens did not protude, and use the extra mm thinckness for more battery.

Sorry for mixing in other topics... just honestly interested in your reaction, you seem very bright (not being sarcastic).

Thanks.

I get it, as long as the argument is that Apple is using their proprietary (Lightening) standard over a universal (3.5 mm) standard for connecting. But if it's that they should stick with 3.5 mm, I can't agree.

It's it's a bit of both. replacing a standard with proprietary for no benefits at all makes no sense. Eliminate the 3.5mm and the Lightning connector in favour of USB-C, that would be bold.

 

[Mac 128]

But this shouldn't come as a shock to anyone. All other manufacturers use micro-USB (and soon to be USB-C), Apple uses its own proprietary connectors. Everybody knew that when they bought their iPhone so there isn't much point complaining about it now.

I have zero sympathy for people bemoaning the likely fact Apple will use Lightning instead of USB-C. Would USB-C be better? Probably, but you knew the 'rules of the game' when you bought Apple.

Apple made the right decision at the time. We have had the benefits of Lightning connectors for four years, which are superior to micro-USB. Other manufacturers are only now migrating to USB-C.

And besides that. Wireless is the future.

Agreed. The guy's assumptions are totally wrong.

Headphone makers will make DIGITAL headphones, agnostic of platform. They will all have DACs and amps built in, some will have batteries, and some will add wireless radios and antennas. They will all have an analogue bypass. There will be one hybrid port that a customer can plug any cable into. This idea that a headphone manufacture will have to make x% of USB-C, and y% of Lightning is moot. They make one set of headphones, and bundle them, or not with whatever cables they choose to manufacture. This idea of hard wired headphones is old school. Moreover, it opens the door to third parties creating custom cables to address niche markets. If a headphone maker sees that a large portion of its customer base is buying headphones for use with Apple, they merely pay the license fee to make more Lightning cables, which they can charge a premium for without including that as part of the cost of the headphone itself. This decision totally has no impact on them, other than whether they sell many OEM Lightning cables with the headphones or not.

 

[Mike_313]

This guy's assumptions are totally wrong.

Headphone makers will make DIGITAL headphones, agnostic of platform. They will all have DACs and amps built in, some will have batteries, and some will add wireless radios and antennas. They will all have an analogue bypass. There will be one hybrid port that a customer can plug any cable into. This idea that a headphone manufacture will have to make x% of USB-C, and y% of Lightning is moot. They make one set of headphones, and bundle them, or not with whatever cables they choose to manufacture. This idea of hard wired headphones is old school. Moreover, it opens the door to third parties creating custom cables to address niche markets. If a headphone maker sees that a large portion of its customer base is buying headphones for use with Apple, they merely pay the license fee to make more Lightning cables, which they can charge a premium for without including that as part of the cost of the headphone itself. This decision totally has no impact on them, other than whether they sell many OEM Lightning cables with the headphones or not.

If headphones are digital they have their own DAC and will need a cable mainly for charging or listning with low battery. Their standard use case will be wireless with no cable at all. And if you're connected wireless the phone can be charged while listening to music without any hassle or adapter to be required.

 

[MaloCS]

I don't understand why studies haven't been done on how the effects of long term, low power, microwave emissions affect the human body. As far as bluetooth headphones are concerned I have not found a definitive answer if once connected, do they turn into a receiving antenna only or do they still broadcast. If they broadcast then there is a transmitter just inches away from our brains slamming it with radio waves for long periods of time.

I own a pair of bluetooth headphones and I can attest that after a few hours of listening I get headaches. The headaches can last into the next day if I listen to them for extended periods of time. However, if I'm using my wired headphones I can wear them ALL day without any issues. The bluetooth headaches I experience can be reproduced at will, all I have to do is wear the phones for a few hours.

I may just be sensitive to the bluetooth radiation but I just don't feel comfortable wearing those wireless headphones. I would definitely do some research on the long term safety of these wireless devices.

 

[steve62388]

I don't understand why studies haven't been done on how the effects of long term, low power, microwave emissions affect the human body. As far as bluetooth headphones are concerned I have not found a definitive answer if once connected, do they turn into a receiving antenna only or do they still broadcast. If they broadcast then there is a transmitter just inches away from our brains slamming it with radio waves for long periods of time.

I own a pair of bluetooth headphones and I can attest that after a few hours of listening I get headaches. The headaches can last into the next day if I listen to them for extended periods of time. However, if I'm using my wired headphones I can wear them ALL day without any issues. The bluetooth headaches I experience can be reproduced at will, all I have to do is wear the phones for a few hours.

I may just be sensitive to the bluetooth radiation but I just don't feel comfortable wearing those wireless headphones. I would definitely do some research on the long term safety of these wireless devices.

There have been lots of very large long term studies on mobile phone radiation with no serious health issues reported. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health

Bluetooth radiation is even lower power than mobile.

If you're getting regular headaches it's probably more likely related to ill fitting headphones. Perhaps a band too tight or ear plugs too large. Maybe you have the volume too loud or just have very sensitive ears that don't like things in them. I would say all these scenarios would be more likely to cause your headaches than Bluetooth radiation and should be eliminated before you assume otherwise.

I guess an easy way to start testing would be to place a Bluetooth enabled product near your head for a while without putting the headphones on or in.

 

[MaloCS]

I guess an easy way to start testing would be to place a Bluetooth enabled product near your head for a while without putting the headphones on or in.

Uh.... No! I'll let you perform that test. The link you reference states:

"In 2011, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified mobile phone radiation as Group 2B – possibly carcinogenic (notGroup 2A – probably carcinogenic – nor the dangerous Group 1). That means that there "could be some risk" of carcinogenicity, so additional research into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones needs to be conducted."

This statement reaffirms my hesitancy of using radiation emitting devices next to my head and reproductive organs. Feel free to expose yourself though, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about.

 

[steve62388]

Uh.... No! I'll let you perform that test. The link you reference states:

"In 2011, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified mobile phone radiation as Group 2B – possibly carcinogenic (notGroup 2A – probably carcinogenic – nor the dangerous Group 1). That means that there "could be some risk" of carcinogenicity, so additional research into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones needs to be conducted."

This statement reaffirms my hesitancy of using radiation emitting devices next to my head and reproductive organs. Feel free to expose yourself though, I'm sure there's nothing to worry about.

Okay, well I tried to help but you better just put your tinfoil hat on then.

That's just a lazy quote taken out of context. You will note the word used is 'possibly', and that group includes caffeine. So if you drink tea, coffee, energy drinks, cola, or even eat Hersheys chocolate you better stop because they all include caffeine.

And stop using your mobile phone because it's pumping out a lot more power than Bluetooth.

Actually whilst you're at it stop eating processed or cured meat, stop using household cleaners, consuming MSG, artificial sweeteners (that covers a pretty big range), eating any deep fried food, eating or drinking anything that's been stored in plastic, using makeup, toothpaste, deodorant or a microwave and having oral sex or a BBQ (not necessarily in that order).

I can't be bothered quoting all the WHO statements about it's safety or the study results, if anyone else is curious read the article I linked.

 

[MaloCS]

Okay, well I tried to help but you better just put your tinfoil hat on then.

That's just a lazy quote taken out of context. You will note the word used is 'possibly', and that group includes caffeine. So if you drink tea, coffee, energy drinks, cola, or even eat Hersheys chocolate you better stop because they all include caffeine.

And stop using your mobile phone because it's pumping out a lot more power than Bluetooth.

Actually whilst you're at it stop eating processed or cured meat, stop using household cleaners, consuming MSG, artificial sweeteners (that covers a pretty big range), eating any deep fried food, eating or drinking anything that's been stored in plastic, using makeup, toothpaste, deodorant or a microwave and having oral sex or a BBQ (not necessarily in that order).

I can't be bothered quoting all the WHO statements about it's safety or the study results, if anyone else is curious read the article I linked.

LOL

I did read the article and it clearly states "possibly carcinogenic" as well as "further research is warranted". This was your source, not mine. The words "possible" and "further" make me take pause when it comes to long term exposure to radiation despite it's low power.

I wont stop using my cell phone because I don't strap it to my head for 12 hours at a time while I'm using it. I have, however, done this quite frequently with headphones over the years. I understand that the radiation we are talking about is technically low power. Despite this fact, I'm more worried about the proximity of the radiation in relationship to the time of exposure. This, in conjunction with the fact that I typically wear headphones 8 hours a day, equates to me not wanting to over expose myself to any sort of radiation, no matter how strong or weak.

You may be willing to wager your health for the convenience of wireless headphones but I'm not. Especially since, according to your source, the verdict is still out on if it is truly safe. If that makes me a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist than so be it.

 

[KPandian1]

All this angst - we still do not know that Apple is definitely dropping the audio jack - mini or 2.5mm!

 

[Mac 128]

All this angst - we still do not know that Apple is definitely dropping the audio jack - mini or 2.5mm!

It will never be a 2.5mm jack. Apple learned that lesson the hard way with the original iPhone. A 2.5mm jack still requires an adapter, and it will be one that does nothing but convert the same signal from one size to the other. Moreover, it's much more fragile than 3.5mm, especially considering it's a 4 conductor segmented plug.

 

[Mike_313]

LOL

I did read the article and it clearly states "possibly carcinogenic" as well as "further research is warranted". This was your source, not mine. The words "possible" and "further" make me take pause when it comes to long term exposure to radiation despite it's low power.

I wont stop using my cell phone because I don't strap it to my head for 12 hours at a time while I'm using it. I have, however, done this quite frequently with headphones over the years. I understand that the radiation we are talking about is technically low power. Despite this fact, I'm more worried about the proximity of the radiation in relationship to the time of exposure. This, in conjunction with the fact that I typically wear headphones 8 hours a day, equates to me not wanting to over expose myself to any sort of radiation, no matter how strong or weak.

You may be willing to wager your health for the convenience of wireless headphones but I'm not. Especially since, according to your source, the verdict is still out on if it is truly safe. If that makes me a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist than so be it.

And that's why I won't give any Bluetooth headphones to my kids. You can easily decide for your own health, but once your kids are involved it gets much harder.
That's my main reason for not following Apples wireless strategy. Even with our macbooks we prefer to use an ethernet cable over wireless. By the way Gbit ethernet is blazing fast compared to the airport connections.

 

[steve62388]

LOL

I did read the article and it clearly states "possibly carcinogenic" as well as "further research is warranted". This was your source, not mine. The words "possible" and "further" make me take pause when it comes to long term exposure to radiation despite it's low power.

I wont stop using my cell phone because I don't strap it to my head for 12 hours at a time while I'm using it. I have, however, done this quite frequently with headphones over the years. I understand that the radiation we are talking about is technically low power. Despite this fact, I'm more worried about the proximity of the radiation in relationship to the time of exposure. This, in conjunction with the fact that I typically wear headphones 8 hours a day, equates to me not wanting to over expose myself to any sort of radiation, no matter how strong or weak.

You may be willing to wager your health for the convenience of wireless headphones but I'm not. Especially since, according to your source, the verdict is still out on if it is truly safe. If that makes me a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist than so be it.

Well given the state of irrational response on this thread to removing a 3.5mm jack I guess I shouldn't be surprised it attracts people prone to hysteria.

PS Don't forget to give up all the things I listed otherwise the bogeyman might come to get you.

 

[Loge]

So, if the internal amp is bypassed, does that mean I will no longer be able to control the volume by using Apple watch?

 

[OllyW]

So, if the internal amp is bypassed, does that mean I will no longer be able to control the volume by using Apple watch?

That's correct, the amp and it's volume control will be located on the headphones.

 

[Mike_313]

So, if the internal amp is bypassed, does that mean I will no longer be able to control the volume by using Apple watch?

I bet, volume control from any apple device will work perfectly with a new breed of Apple Beats Headphones wireless and wired via lightning or usb-c. I guess there will be a usb-c port In the headphones and an usb-c-to-lightning-cable as accessory in the box. Connection to the macbook will be usb-c only. With 3rd party headphones it will depend on beeing apple certified or not.

 

[MaloCS]

Well given the state of irrational response on this thread to removing a 3.5mm jack I guess I shouldn't be surprised it attracts people prone to hysteria.

PS Don't forget to give up all the things I listed otherwise the bogeyman might come to get you.

LOL You crack me up. First, you post a link that confirms my worries and now you're calling me "crazy"? LOL

You posted the link that used the terms "possible" and "further" when talking about mobile phone radiation. You posted that link, not me. LOL

I don't know why my concern over mobile phone radiation bothers you so much. Why is that? Do you feel you need to protect society from my crazy ideas? Why do my concerns bother you so much? Are you the "white knight" swooping in on your stallion to protect the world from crazy ideas. LOL

You can belittle me and my concerns all you want but your attempts to shame me for my ideas won't work. Your source neither confirms or denies that low power mobile phone radiation is dangerous. It clearly states that further research is warranted. This is your source and here you are, trying your hardest to belittle me because I don't share your laissez faire attitude about mobile phone radiation. What do care if I use Bluetooth headphone or wired headphones. I just don't know what my opinion offends you as much as it does.

You must be a very worldly person. LOL

 

[Mac 128]

So, if the internal amp is bypassed, does that mean I will no longer be able to control the volume by using Apple watch?

Currently, Lightning based products rely on their own controls. However, there are apps that adjust these controls from within the phone. This likely points to Apple's forthcoming plans with respect to offering Lightning as a complete solution, which they don't currently. It is unlikely that Apple will remove the ability to control the headphones from the phone controls. And there's no need to really. All Apple needs to do is offer global software controls in the next OS update to allow the volume controls to operate they normally do when a digital headphone is plugged into it. The same is true for Bluetooth and other wireless headphones. It's a matter of remote digital control. Your watch is already doing a version of that. Now as someone else pointed out, Beats headphones will likely work perfectly with the iPhone out of the box. However, third parties will have to comply with the updated Lightning audio specs, and possibly be licensed to be able to access those controls in the OS. And I would expect all will have Apps to allow for fine tuning adjustments and incorporation into the OS.

People who tell you that you will lose the ability to control the headphones from your watch without having any idea what Apple's plans are, or even thinking about how this could be accomplished are just spreading FUD. You will likely have even more control over your Lightning headphones from your watch, than you ever did before.

I bet, volume control from any apple device will work perfectly with a new breed of Apple Beats Headphones wireless and wired via lightning or usb-c. I guess there will be a usb-c port In the headphones and an usb-c-to-lightning-cable as accessory in the box. Connection to the macbook will be usb-c only. With 3rd party headphones it will depend on beeing apple certified or not.

No, Apple will most likely add Lightning connectors to all Macs shortly after the iPhone comes out without the headphone jack. There is absolutely no way Apple will drop the headphone jack, and include a free pair of Lightning headphones in the box, that are not natively compatible with all of their new Apple products. Apple is not going to require a new MacBook customer to use an adapter or swap cables to use the same headphones they use with their new iPhones. And, assuming it's not proprietary to each manufacturer, I'll bet Beats uses a Lightning connector on the headphones, since Apple is using that across all of their products, and it doesn't matter what kind of connector is on the headphones. That's one way to get Lightning into Android customers hands, and also ensures your buddy with an android will have a Lightning to USB-C cable at his place when you're visiting and forget yours. But one reason to make it Lightning is seen in a pair of Beats headphones now -- a pass through that allows customers to daisy chain with each other and listen to music together -- which will encourage you and all your friends to buy Beats exclusively if you do that sort of thing. i suppose Beats could include on Lightning and one USB-C, and for that matter one 3.5mm Jack as well, but that doesn't really sound like Apple. I'd expect to see that kind of solution from third parties however.

 

[steve62388]

LOL You crack me up. First, you post a link that confirms my worries and now you're calling me "crazy"? LOL

You posted the link that used the terms "possible" and "further" when talking about mobile phone radiation. You posted that link, not me. LOL

I don't know why my concern over mobile phone radiation bothers you so much. Why is that? Do you feel you need to protect society from my crazy ideas? Why do my concerns bother you so much? Are you the "white knight" swooping in on your stallion to protect the world from crazy ideas. LOL

You can belittle me and my concerns all you want but your attempts to shame me for my ideas won't work. Your source neither confirms or denies that low power mobile phone radiation is dangerous. It clearly states that further research is warranted. This is your source and here you are, trying your hardest to belittle me because I don't share your laissez faire attitude about mobile phone radiation. What do care if I use Bluetooth headphone or wired headphones. I just don't know what my opinion offends you as much as it does.

You must be a very worldly person. LOL

Read much David Icke recently?

All I'm saying is that somebody who assumes the most unlikely scenario before exploring the more likely possibilities has an unbalanced point of view. Nothing I say is going to change your mind, you're one of 'those people'. I'm just making sure you're called out on it, pointing out how irrational your choices are so you don't get away with spreading misinformation based on nothing but your own biased preconceptions. Sensible people should do so more often.

 

[Mike_313]

Currently, Lightning based products rely on their own controls. However, there are apps that adjust these controls from within the phone. This likely points to Apple's forthcoming plans with respect to offering Lightning as a complete solution, which they don't currently. It is unlikely that Apple will remove the ability to control the headphones from the phone controls. And there's no need to really. All Apple needs to do is offer global software controls in the next OS update to allow the volume controls to operate they normally do when a digital headphone is plugged into it. The same is true for Bluetooth and other wireless headphones. It's a matter of remote digital control. Your watch is already doing a version of that. Now as someone else pointed out, Beats headphones will likely work perfectly with the iPhone out of the box. However, third parties will have to comply with the updated Lightning audio specs, and possibly be licensed to be able to access those controls in the OS. And I would expect all will have Apps to allow for fine tuning adjustments and incorporation into the OS.

People who tell you that you will lose the ability to control the headphones from your watch without having any idea what Apple's plans are, or even thinking about how this could be accomplished are just spreading FUD. You will likely have even more control over your Lightning headphones from your watch, than you ever did before.



No, Apple will most likely add Lightning connectors to all Macs shortly after the iPhone comes out without the headphone jack. There is absolutely no way Apple will drop the headphone jack, and include a free pair of Lightning headphones in the box, that are not natively compatible with all of their new Apple products. Apple is not going to require a new MacBook customer to use an adapter or swap cables to use the same headphones they use with their new iPhones. And, assuming it's not proprietary to each manufacturer, I'll bet Beats uses a Lightning connector on the headphones, since Apple is using that across all of their products, and it doesn't matter what kind of connector is on the headphones. That's one way to get Lightning into Android customers hands, and also ensures your buddy with an android will have a Lightning to USB-C cable at his place when you're visiting and forget yours. But one reason to make it Lightning is seen in a pair of Beats headphones now -- a pass through that allows customers to daisy chain with each other and listen to music together -- which will encourage you and all your friends to buy Beats exclusively if you do that sort of thing. i suppose Beats could include on Lightning and one USB-C, and for that matter one 3.5mm Jack as well, but that doesn't really sound like Apple. I'd expect to see that kind of solution from third parties however.

First of all headphones will be wireless. Bluetooth will be the standard connection for listening to music. Cables will only be used for charging or if the battery runs low. A lightning connected pair of headphones will always need a DAC and an amplifier. With all this electronics in the headphones it's no big deal to add a small battery and a blutooth circuit.
In consequence the headphones will not have a fixed cable anymore and I don't believe there will be any lightning port in the headphones. In my opinion the headphones will provide an usb-c port. So you can connect them with any standard usb-c cable to any usb-c port for charging and/or listening. To connect them with the lightning port on iPhone you will use a standard lightning-to-usb-c cable that can also be used to connect with the new macbooks and charge the iPhone form a usb-c charger. The current lightning-to-usb cable and usb-charger will simply be replaced with usb-c versions as usb will be completely replaced with usb-c on any device.

 

[zhenya]

First of all headphones will be wireless. Bluetooth will be the standard connection for listening to music. Cables will only be used for charging or if the battery runs low. A lightning connected pair of headphones will always need a DAC and an amplifier. With all this electronics in the headphones it's no big deal to add a small battery and a blutooth circuit.
In consequence the headphones will not have a fixed cable anymore and I don't believe there will be any lightning port in the headphones. In my opinion the headphones will provide an usb-c port. So you can connect them with any standard usb-c cable to any usb-c port for charging and/or listening. To connect them with the lightning port on iPhone you will use a standard lightning-to-usb-c cable that can also be used to connect with the new macbooks and charge the iPhone form a usb-c charger. The current lightning-to-usb cable and usb-charger will simply be replaced with usb-c versions as usb will be completely replaced with usb-c on any device.

I agree with this assessment. Look at how Apple handled the Apple Pencil. Their intention with that charging design is to make sure you can't be caught with a way to use the Pencil, but no way to charge it. I think the new headphones will work the same way. I was thinking that somehow they might have a lightning port in the headphone, but your option could be nearly as convenient (people generally have a cable with them to charge their phone) and fix the problem of USB-c compatibility on the Mac at the same time. Plugging the cable into the headphone and into the iPhone will switch to the Lightning interface for sound while also automatically pairing a given headset (like the Pencil) and charging it as well.

 

[maxsix]

I think that would make the iPhone 7 unappealing to a lot of people who don't want to throw away their existing headphones, or who want to charge their phones and use headphones at the same time

Making the iPhone 7 unappealing... Might wake Apple up.