Enough with the thiness! How about they focus on battery life. With smartphones becoming more and more powerful the battery life suffers. Apple needs to be focuses on battery size and life instead of trying to lose weight.
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.
iPhone 7 May Feature Thinner, Waterproof Body With No Headphone Jack and Wireless Charging
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple have neither stated that the 3.5 is gone, or that they will replace with them with a lighting headphone alternative.
Apple want us wireless, the solution they provide out of the box will be wireless. And of course BT headphones etc will continue to improve in quality and latency reduced. DACs in the headphones, rather than in the phone, give the potential for better sound quality also, given time and development.
I'd buy 'lightning headphones' if provided by a third-party supplier for their advantages however - voltage and data passthrough - controls on headphones/cables, digital displays with track info, latest text message - there is a lot of potential here. But I don't see Apple taking that route as they will clearly phase out all ports and mechanical switches from the iPhone as soon as technically feasible. This is their opportunity to lose a cable, not change one.
[doublepost=1452261277][/doublepost]
Apple are focussed on battery life. and weight. and thinness. and every aspect of design and user experience. It's not one or another, it's all aspects in balance. Battery life is not just about battery capacity. More efficient components, improvements in iOS are all just as important. A bigger battery is no more the only solution to battery life than a bigger internal hard drive is the only solution to storage.
The 3.5, if dropped, will not just be about device thickness/weight. Think outside the box a little.
Lol - I'm sure including a pair of BT headphones with each phone sold will save no money at all, nor will the dropping of a 2cent component. What they gain is potential increased water resistance, more room for battery and the potential for more evolved headphones and better audio quality.
Plenty of reasons.
Here's how it goes...
Rumors: many complain and say they'll never buy an Apple product again.
Launch... many complain and proclaim disappointment and "fail".
3 Months later... iPhone sells at record numbers and Samsung announces their version of the same.
2 years later... everything people complained about 2 years prior they now accept as the "norm" and claim Apple stole the idea from someone else.
This is how it works... accept it.
And somewhere between launch and the three month mark their comments regarding the headphone jack are deleted and "iPhone 7 128GB Space Gray" is added to their sig
The trouble with your whole argument is that you are making a very big assumption - namely that the sole reason Apple would ditch the 3.5mm jack is to make the phone thinner.
A switch to lightning would actually have multiple benefits:
- it would allow higher quality digital audio.
- it may or may not make the phone easier to waterproof
- it would enable a thinner device
If Apple did go down this route, it will far more likely be because they have weighed up the pros and cons, and decided the pros outweigh the cons.
Nor do I believe it will be driven by profit, for several reasons:
1. Any new iPhone will include earphones anyway.
2. If people want to use existing third party headphones, there will undoubtedly be third party adapter they can buy.
3. Even if people do buy Apple adapters, its difficult to imagine that being anything other than the smallest drop in Apple's bottom line.
4. For every lost sale because people wanted a new phone with the 3.5mm jack, Apple would need to sell a shedload of adapters.
My wife had read something about this on Facebook the other day, and mentioned something about how Apple were about to screw everyone over - seeing as people don't actually have to buy an iPhone, I don't see how - and yet that's the impression presumably a lot of people are now under.
[doublepost=1452262274][/doublepost]
Exactly.
I think its more about people's obsession with Apple's apparent obsession with thinness, than it is about Apple's obsession with thinness.
Absolutely false. The existing headphone connection is not and will never be a limitation to the audio quality, and the existing Lightning port already outputs a digital stream if you want to connect your own outboard DAC.
No need to ditch the 3.5mm jack for this as it's is already supported.
Battery life has either increased or stayed the same with every iPhone iteration, and is now approximately double that of when iPhone first launched.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_iOS_devices
True, but in a notebook that doesn't really count as a port. Even Apple on its website advertise the MacBook as a single port notebook. Go check yourself in the Design section.
Attachments
Okay, so Apple has not stated the 3.5 is gone, so I shouldn't opine about this, but then you state that "the solution they provide out of the box will be wireless." At least my contention has a rumor to back it up, but there has not been even a rumor that Apple will provide a wireless solution for the 3.5 jack being gone.
Do you really think Apple is going to include free Bluetooth headphones or something with a new iPhone? I hope they do, of course, but I don't really see that happening. Maybe the current headphones with a lightning connector.
Like I said, I'm ready for going totally wireless. I was just suggesting that people should use this opportunity not to buy headphones that are limited to one device, but instead to just go wireless. Which I think is a good thing. I don't like 3.5.
I agree with the generic statement of your post. People do have different needs.
However, what we have here is the tactic "I create a problem in order to sell you the solution afterwards".
What I mean is based on the following 2 facts (regarding - at the very least - the last 2 versions of iPhone):
1. Nobody asked for an even thinner iPhone
2. Everyone would love a longer battery life (even people that can live with the current one)
Water proof is great, I love that idea, but I'm not so sure about it being thinner. I think my iPhone 6 plus is too thin. I don't mean just from a bending phone perspective but rather how it feels in your hand. I think having a phone with some depth makes it more holdable (if that makes sense)
rMB 2 is coming out this year as well. Actually, we'll see new laptops well before the iPhone 7, so we'll see if they come with a lightning port.
OK - maybe that wasn't the correct terminology, but from some stuff I have read, there does seem to be some suggestion of benefits, e.g. from here:
http://www.cnet.com/uk/news/would-i...to-remove-the-headphone-jack-on-the-iphone-7/
"What are the benefits? Well, not only are you getting a direct digital connection, but the headphones can draw juice from your device to power components in the headphone, which could include an internal DAC (digital-to-analog converter) and amplifier that bypass the internal DAC of the iPhone and/or active noise-cancellation circuitry."
If this rumor turns out to be true, Apple is heading in completely different direction than the rest of the smartphone manufactures. This might work, but they could face a cheaper, universal and probably more practical competition. At the CES USB C played already a major role as new universal interface and even cheap Android smartphones will probably pick it up this year. If this really becomes mainstream, we could also see the first USB C headphones (with or without included high end DAC). And even Bluetooth headphones will probably pick up the interface for charging.
So in the future we could use the same cable for audio and charging of our phones and headphones (right now you need an extra USB 2.0 cable to charge Apples own Beats Studio). Adapters would be only needed for a relatively short transition phase and that's it. I would really like Apple to embrace USB C for all their products. It's really not that much bigger than Lightning, which seems to be its only advantage (besides licensing fees for Apple and that's probably the reason, why this scenario won't happen):
So in the future we could use the same cable for audio and charging of our phones and headphones (right now you need an extra USB 2.0 cable to charge Apples own Beats Studio). Adapters would be only needed for a relatively short transition phase and that's it. I would really like Apple to embrace USB C for all their products. It's really not that much bigger than Lightning, which seems to be its only advantage (besides licensing fees for Apple and that's probably the reason, why this scenario won't happen):
Last edited:
Those aren't facts. These are facts:
1. I asked for a thinner iPhone.
2. I would love a longer battery life ONLY if it could be achieved without adding size or weight to the iPhone. Otherwise a thinner iPhone with the same battery life is okay with me.
My view is probably that I would love better battery, but it is rarely an issue for me - my phone (a 5S) gets through the day and I charge it at night. Assuming the batter in the 7 is going to be better than the battery in a 5S, then i can't see battery life being a problem for me.
Design wise, I think if they can get the iPhone into the design of the iPod touch it will almost be the endgame. (Although obviously there is always something around the corner, but it would be difficult to imagine many more improvements in design once it gets to that point, with the no antenna bands, and I guess if possible no protruding camera.
[doublepost=1452263947][/doublepost]
OK - so why are so many media outlets citing this as a benefit of lightning over the 3.5mm jack?
Design wise, I think if they can get the iPhone into the design of the iPod touch it will almost be the endgame. (Although obviously there is always something around the corner, but it would be difficult to imagine many more improvements in design once it gets to that point, with the no antenna bands, and I guess if possible no protruding camera.
[doublepost=1452263947][/doublepost]
OK - so why are so many media outlets citing this as a benefit of lightning over the 3.5mm jack?
Many are confused about Apple's iPhone goal and thinness. It is about reducing weight, not absolute thinness. Consistent with that goal, is specing a battery capacity that will serve the needs of the many, rather than the few. It's about decent user experience, making design choices (all of which have consequences) that satisfy a large range of customer needs.
I had better be able to use the headphones of my choice... whether that be traditional wired, bluetooth, or whatever. I would also like to continue to be able to play my music from my phone through a stereo, my car's aux input, or a PA system. This would be an absolute stupid move by Apple.
As a shareholder, I am concerned about this decision - should it be true.
It's one of the advantages of the digital output through the Lightning port but it already does it and doesn't require the elimination of the 3.5mm jack.
These current Lightning connected headphones have their own DAC and amps. The Sony has a rechargeable battery because it includes multiple connections to allow it to work across a wide range of products but the Philips headphones are powered from the Lightning port as they only work with iOS devices.
http://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/headband-headphones/mdr-1adac
http://www.philips.co.uk/c-p/M2L_00/fidelio-fidelio-headphones-with-lightning-connector
Nobody. But Apple never listened to customers. As a famous quote by Jobs goes, customers don't know what they want.