Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This one is VERY different than those examples. The superior replacement was already on hand in those. And the replacement was a public standard, not one completely controlled by a single corporation. If this newer way is better, why isn't everyone already gushing about the superiority of the consumer experience via Lightning-terminated headphones already available?

Roll out the next iPhone with both options and let the superiority of the replacement rule. If it's really better, people will enjoy that better and roll with adapters to make Lightning earbuds also work with other products- like the Apple Macs we already own.

The superior replacement was not already on hand. Apple took away the floppy disk in the iMac and didn't give customers another built-in writable/removable option for 4 years, when the prices came down low enough to put a CD-RW for the same price. Sorry but I was there, and this is the exact same situation. Wireless is the future of audio, and just like Floppy's & serial and SCSI, better or not, there was no established infrastructure in place, nobody was buying these next generation devices that were there, and developers languished. I read somewhere that in 1998, 80 new manufacturers jumped into the CD drive business. Gee I wonder why? And I'm sorry, Firewire was a PUBLIC standard?

And you know why Apple isn't going to include both. The main reason they are likely even considering it at this juncture is because they need the room. Not to make the iPhone thinner, but to add new features, improve the battery life, and try to not make it bigger. And then there's creating demand for a better standard, which is wireless, not Lightning. But for those who must have the highest quality sound on their iPhones, there will be adapters. Macs will all add Lightning ports on the next refresh, so those exclusively using Apple products will have full compatibility going forward.

Those aren't similar at all.

Of course they are. Not in terms of the size of the contribution, but in the advancement of the technology. The future of audio is wireless.

Floppy drives could easily be connected externally for desktops, and remained available internally for Apple laptops until more than a year after USB thumb drives came on the market (which were far superior to floppy disks in every way)

There was one USB floppy drive capable with the iMac when Apple dropped the internal one. And after the customer paid $1299, they were supposed to for over another $150 for an external floppy drive, which many still needed. And what Apple PowerBook exactly had built in floppy drive after the iMac came out? And yes USB thumb drives were far superior to floppies but they were also incredibly expensive. More importantly, USB was a new standard, that even if someone did shell out the money for a flash drive, they weren't likely to have anywhere they could use it. I have to ask, were you there? Because I was. And it was nothing like the paradise you describe.

SCSI ports were replaced by a far superior technology—FireWire—and were rarely used on portable devices, making adapters a much more palatable solution for anyone who needed to maintain backwards compatibility.

You really need a history lesson. When Firewire came out there were no products for it. And what there were were incredibly expensive, and buggy as it took time for drivers to be fixed. Moreover, people weren't about to throw out thousands of dollars of perfectly good SCSI peripherals that worked just as well as Firewire, at the time, so Firewire to SCSI adapters appeared, and were hard to get they were in such demand. As for the use on portable devices, would you be surprised to learn that Apple used Firewire on the first TWO generations of iPods? And then replaced it with the 30-pin dock connector and screwed all the first gen customers by breaking compatibility with Firewire a year later.

So in both cases, Apple was replacing an inferior technology with a vastly superior one. That's not at all true here.

Of course it is. In the end, wireless is absolutely superior to wired, all thing being equal. At this point, the quality of wireless is at the same place as the quality of USB, and Firewire devices was in 1998. For a direct comparison there's Wifi, that also appeared in the mainstream in 1998, and it was just as inconvenient, expensive, buggy, and problematic. Today it is the primary way we all connect to the internet, yet, Ethernet is still a superior standard. Yet Apple removed Ethernet jacks from their MacBooks, and iOS devices can't even connect with an adapter. Funny how a superior technology has been supplanted by an inferior one for the average consumer.

Lightning ports are not superior to 3.5mm mini jacks. They are:
  • Less robust. Headphones get yanked pretty hard on an ongoing basis. A headphone jack has to be tough. Lightning isn't. And that same jack has to charge your phone, so the risk here is considerable.
  • Less compatible. There are hundreds (thousands?) of companies that manufacture headphones, and all of them use a 3.5mm mini plug. That means everybody who uses wired headphones will end up carrying around an adapter for no good reason.
1) You're stating this like a fact, without citing your evidence. but I'll bet it's just your opinion based on some anecdotal experiences. My experience has been vastly different. I've never had a Lightning connector break and I must plug and unplug my iPhone over a dozen times a day. On the other hand, I've had headphone jacks go bad routinely, cables go bad, and sometimes even a plug itself. As long as wires are in the mix, there will always be problems like this.
2) No, everybody who uses a 3.5mm headphone will need an adaptor. I would wager the typical iPhone customer uses almost exclusively the white earbuds Apple bundles with the phone. New Phone, new lightning earbuds. Problem solved for many users. Many more will decide to upgrade to wireless, or Lightning, and the falling prices and improved technology thanks to increased demand and competition will make even good wireless headphone affordable to those who wouldn't consider them now solely based on price.

Nor is Bluetooth superior. Although the wireless aspect is nice in some situations, it has:
  • Higher latency
  • Lower sound quality (typically)
  • Additional power requirements (e.g. batteries that run down, or 12V power for a new receiver in your car)
  • Restrictions on use in some aircraft by some air carriers
  • Safety concerns (proximity of wireless transmitter to your brain)
1) Will be improved
2) Matter of opinion
3) My Bluetooth headphones run for 8 hours on a single charge. Some run for up to 20. And that's only going to improve over time. $20 BT Adapters will do just fine, no need to replace your receiver. THat's just spreading FUD and you know it.
4) Not a problem in the US, and that too will eventually be a thing of the past as more airlines certify their planes for use.
5) Again more FUD. Studies have proven this is just not true, and for those who believe this superstitious mumbo jumbo, they can buy a wired set of Lightning headphones.

It's not the same situation. Not even close.

Yeah it's exactly the same.
 
It'll probably be usb c as usbc supports analog audio pass through.

That aside lightning does have a few advantages over the 3.5mm.

1) better audio quality because lightning can transfer several times more audio data compared to 3.5mm. Which makes it possible to do 24 bit audio. Note: these headphones are already available.

2) enable more interesting headphones. Because lightning power as well as data you can have noise cancelling headphones or headphones with built in dsp without having batteries in the headphone itself. Thereby decreasing the weight and price of said headphones.

3) enables oems to implement different controls on their headphones. I.e. We don't need to stick with only controls for volume, siri etc; for example apple could implement a button on the remote that when press tells you if you have any notifications or not.

4) enable better built in microphones on the headphones (refer to point 1)

So lightning does have its advantages.

As you mentioned, some of these technologies are already available...and they are available on existing iPhones. It's not like a 3.5 jack is going to impede the implementation of newer technologies. And what's the point of these great advantages if you can only use them with an iPhone? You will not be able to use those incredible headphones with a Macbook or and iPad or a Toshiba laptop or a Samsung TV. If Apple replaces the 3.5 jacks with lightning ports on all their devices, Apple users will not be able to use headphones manufactured by Sennheiser and Beyerdynamic and Audio Technica and Sony. Now that is a sandbox I don't want to play in.
 
That's ridiculous. How is the rest going to follow? Do you think Samsung and Sony and Sennheiser and LG are going to pay Apple so they can release products with lightning connectors? Get real. Or do you think that the next generation of Lenovo and HTC and Toshiba devises are going to ship with their own, proprietary connectors instead of 3.5 jacks? Everyone will follow? You really believe that? More importantly, do you really want us to believe this nonsense?:rolleyes:

No. Android and Samsung are having the exact same dilemma as Apple. They are running out of space inside their devices to add new features and increase battery life. I would bet that's why Samsung makes so me of the biggest "phablets" on the planet. But they don't have the balls to remove a redundant standard like the 3.5mm jack even though it would help push the industry toward wireless.

So when Apple takes the plunge, a year later you'll see them doing the same thing, albeit they will use mini USB, not Lightning. But the result will be the same.
 
Personally i think, if they're going to remove the 3.5mm jack they might as well remove lightning port and replace it with Usb 3.1c. At least then you can use your new headphone on newer pc/laptops and other phones, while getting all the benefits of faster charging, data transfer and potentially more port on you laptop, since the 3.5mm jack is made redundant. But no......apple won't do that, as they want to have the market by the balls, since such a high number of the general population has a iPhone.
 
I don't understand where people get this nonsense. Moving the DAC and amplifier from the phone into the headphone cable does nothing whatsoever to improve audio quality. And nothing keeps you from using an internal DAC capable of processing 24-bit audio with headphones connected via a 3.5mm headphone jack. There is a reason why this connector has been around since 1978: It's very good at what it does. It's small, robust, and provides an excellent contact surface.

Manufacturers can pair the DAC to their equipment for quality and color, and adjust the electronics for a specific response. With the way things are now, they have to anticipate what any particular DAC in any particular device will output.
 
Quality is improved because lightning can pass several times more data than 3.5mm
OK. Please explain how much "data" the analog 3.5mm jack can pass.
[doublepost=1452311343][/doublepost]
Manufacturers can pair the DAC to their equipment for quality and color, and adjust the electronics for a specific response. With the way things are now, they have to anticipate what any particular DAC in any particular device will output.
Headphone makers can do what they have always done, from cheap $10 earbuds to $2000 high end headphones: Design their headphones for a standard flat response.

The biggest issue when using headphones with mobile devices is not a lack of matching "specific response", but the relatively high output impedance. But that is mainly related to the limited power supply in mobile devices and will again not be solved by moving components from the phone into the cable.
 
Last edited:
Personally i think, if they're going to remove the 3.5mm jack they might as well remove lightning port and replace it with Usb 3.1c. At least then you can use your new headphone on newer pc/laptops and other phones, while getting all the benefits of faster charging, data transfer and potentially more port on you laptop, since the 3.5mm jack is made redundant. But no......apple won't do that, as they want to have the market by the balls, since such a high number of the general population has a iPhone.

Until USB 3.1c becomes the standard, there's still going to be an adapter. And there's no guarantee this will become the next standard, nor how long it will persist. Apple can at least control Lightning, and keep it around as long as necessary, so people don't end up with a bunch USBC headphones that will be out of fashion in a few years. The long game here is wireless, so Apple really only needs to keep it going until wireless reaches a point where convenience and quality are close enough to current wired technology. And besides cross compatibility with PCs, and Android phones, which Apple doesn't really want to encourage anyway, what other benefits are there? The iPhone is unlikely to be able to use and desktop peripherals, and it might cause confusion, and or damage. Lightning is small, it's durable, and has the throughput of USB 3.1. So it makes a great optional second connecter on products like the MacBook Retina.
 
As you mentioned, some of these technologies are already available...and they are available on existing iPhones. It's not like a 3.5 jack is going to impede the implementation of newer technologies. And what's the point of these great advantages if you can only use them with an iPhone? You will not be able to use those incredible headphones with a Macbook or and iPad or a Toshiba laptop or a Samsung TV. If Apple replaces the 3.5 jacks with lightning ports on all their devices, Apple users will not be able to use headphones manufactured by Sennheiser and Beyerdynamic and Audio Technica and Sony. Now that is a sandbox I don't want to play in.

My personal opinion is that if lightning can do everything 3.5mm can do and more, why keep it? Wouldn't that be a little redundant?

You could use adapters. They'll probably cost less than 50 as that's what the current lightning dock costs now. Not ideal but doable.

There would be lightning headphone.

And to be fair a lot of those higher end headphones cannot be driven by the iPhone's amp as they are high impedance.
 
If they do this...how about Including:
  • quick charging
  • wireless charging
then I wouldn't complain about:
  • loss of 3.5mm jack
  • loss of having my lightning port for charging as it is now occupied by headphones
 
[doublepost=1452311343][/doublepost]Headphone makers can do what they have always done, from cheap $10 earbuds to $2000 high end headphones: Design their headphones for a standard flat response.

The biggest issue when using headphones with mobile devices is not a lack of matching "specific response", but the relatively high output impedance. But that is mainly related to the limited power supply in mobile devices and will again not be solved by moving components from the phone into the cable.

And yet, every headphone sounds different on every device its plugged into. A bad DAC can make a $2000 set of headphones sound like crap. Wouldn't it be nice if the source was simply an unaffected sound file, which the amp manufacturer adjusts for the sound reproduction product they are selling, matching the quality of the DAC with the quality of the product they are selling?
 
My personal opinion is that if lightning can do everything 3.5mm can do and more, why keep it? Wouldn't that be a little redundant?

You could use adapters. They'll probably cost less than 50 as that's what the current lightning dock costs now. Not ideal but doable.

There would be lightning headphone.

And to be fair a lot of those higher end headphones cannot be driven by the iPhone's amp as they are high impedance.
Lightning ports cannot send a signal to 95% of the headphones in existence. I could use an adapter, but if I forget it at home then I'm out of luck. And why should I give Apple another $50 just for the hell of it? And to be fair, the iPhone is able to drive those higher end headphones. Sure, and external amp will power them a lot better. Also, to be really fair, a lot of those higher end headphones are not high impedance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frosties
Dear Apple,

Please remove ALL ports from your devices. Going all wireless would be revolutionary. People no longer need to be tethered to things with cables. This is 2016. Every problem has a wireless solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dekadent
Of course it is. In the end, wireless is absolutely superior to wired, all thing being equal.

Really? The best wireless IEMs sound like crap compared to relatively cheap wired ones like the Bose SoundSport, and I try out a lot of earphones. Maybe if you stick with the crap that comes with your iPhone or $2 earphones from aliexpress you don't know better, but do yourself a favour and try out something good. Your ears will appreciate it, but you'll never be happy with wireless again. Here's a hint, if it's remotely decent, you aren't even aware of the earphones, it feels like you're in a room filled with natural sound and don't feel anything on/in your ears. If you close your eyes and it doesn't feel like the band is in the room playing live around you, your headphones aren't good enough (and it's under $100 to reach that quality these days, I'm not talking crazy-expensive audiophile stuff).

Plus wireless are bulky, uncomfortable, the weight of the buds make them fall out constantly, and an hour of wearing them is painful. You have another battery to keep charged. It screws up other devices; my phone syncs by bluetooth to my cordless phone set at home. If I need to keep it paired with the earphones just to listen to music, I lose that.

You say wireless is absolutely superior. I don't think there's a single way that it is.

But...I really, really hope Apple does get rid of the audio plug. I won't buy one, but I'll have a blast watching the disaster and I can always pick up a 7s with the audio port back.
 
Don't even try to explain it to them. Data moves in mysterious ways in Lala Land.
One issue is the bandwidth of audio cables, which I won't go into here. As for audio ports, assume a soundcards with a maximum sample rate of 44,100 or 48,000 samples/s at 16 bits/sample/channel, resulting in a maximum bandwidth of 22.05 or 24 kHz (basically a result of the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, though for sound sampling, the sampled signal would also have to be continuous-amplitude for this theorem to apply) and a transfer rate of 176.4 or 192 kBps for stereo.

According to Studio Six Digital, the line-in on the iPhone supports a max sample rate of 48 kHz. The mic on the 3G version also runs at 48 kHz, while the 1st gen iPhone's mic sampled at 8kHz. I haven't been able to find bit depth specs for the iPhone, but I believe it uses 16 bit samples. 24 bit samples is the other possibility.

According to Fortuny over at the Apple forums, who was quoting an Apple Audio Developer Note, the line-in on a MacBook support up to 24 bit samples with a 96 kHz sample rate, for a data rate of 576 kBps. Apple's MacBook External Ports and Connector's page lists the max sample rate as 192 kHz, but they may have switched that with the max sample rate for digital audio using the optical port.

For a rate comparison, phone systems had a sample rate of 8 kHz at 8 bits/sample mono, resulting in a max data rate of 8 kbps. FM has a sample rate of 22.05 kHz at 16 bits/sample/channel and is stereo, resulting in a data rate of 88.2 kBps.

Of course, the above calculations ignore the problem of synchronizing the data stream and error detection and correction, all of which will consume a portion of the signal.

Source: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2181476/bandwidth-from-headphone-microphone-jack

In comparison lightning runs at usb 2 speeds which is around 480mbps so it can transfer about 400x more data than 3.5mm

[doublepost=1452312390][/doublepost]
Lightning ports cannot send a signal to 95% of the headphones in existence. I could use an adapter, but if I forget it at home then I'm out of luck. And why should I give Apple another $50 just for the hell of it? And to be fair, the iPhone is able to drive those higher end headphones. Sure, and external amp will power them a lot better. Also, to be really fair, a lot of those higher end headphones are not high impedance.
You do realize that driving higher impedance headphones like this affects the frequency response and thus the audio quality right?

Well you got a point there.

But than wouldn't it be nice for headphones makers to pair the amps that best matches their headphones within the headphones rather than having headphones makers trying to guess the type Dac and amp on the output device?
 
Last edited:
I've been a loyal Apple fan for almost ten years now but this will be what forces me to an android phone... I regularly charge my phone and listen to music at the same time and I don't feel that I should be forced to pay a headphone premium for the privilege due to Apple's obsession with thinness. Hopefully this is just a rumor
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Agreed but it ain't happening.

I can just see the negative publicity now if Apple does end up going without a headphone jack.
Apple could easily spin it into something positive. "Our cables work with all your friend's cables!"
 
Isn’t it amazing how much people are bitching about retiring quite literally 100 year old technology. I mean take a look at photographs from the early 1900s showing people wearing headsets with braided cords plugged into their radio sets. Only back then it was 1/4” jacks instead of 3.5mm jacks. Analog baby!

“If Henry Ford had asked customers what they wanted before starting his assembly line they would have said, “A better buggy whip.”” attributed to Steve Jobs


Yeah because everyone buys a new Phone every few months iPhone 7 and than iPhone 7s than the iPhone 8. No one is not asking for improvements but how about the people who don't want to change their phones it's like Apple TV 3 love how they stopped updating the OS when they could have added Apple Music app on it. The new magic mouse rechargeable one is great but sucks for me because my iMac uses old Bluetooth so I guess after 3 years I should always upgrade my iMac because of new hardware compatibility. I don't see this happening with PCs running Windows seems like Apple always looking into the future but never about customers who like to have a budget. Most of the hardware's on iMac can still a lot of things and removing the Optical Drive to make thinner iMacs is great if you have iCloud Music or Apple music or you are stuck using your iPhone space.
 
Apple, while I appreciate you continuously trying to blaze a trail, this is a stupid idea. What is going to become of all my legacy headphones and speakers? I'll have to use them with some clunky adapter.
Worse still, will all headphones now be sold in Apple (Lightning) and Android (micro-USB) versions? That's just silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
One issue is the bandwidth of audio cables, which I won't go into here. As for audio ports, assume a soundcards with a maximum sample rate of 44,100 or 48,000 samples/s at 16 bits/sample/channel, resulting in a maximum bandwidth of 22.05 or 24 kHz (basically a result of the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, though for sound sampling, the sampled signal would also have to be continuous-amplitude for this theorem to apply) and a transfer rate of 176.4 or 192 kBps for stereo.

According to Studio Six Digital, the line-in on the iPhone supports a max sample rate of 48 kHz. The mic on the 3G version also runs at 48 kHz, while the 1st gen iPhone's mic sampled at 8kHz. I haven't been able to find bit depth specs for the iPhone, but I believe it uses 16 bit samples. 24 bit samples is the other possibility.

According to Fortuny over at the Apple forums, who was quoting an Apple Audio Developer Note, the line-in on a MacBook support up to 24 bit samples with a 96 kHz sample rate, for a data rate of 576 kBps. Apple's MacBook External Ports and Connector's page lists the max sample rate as 192 kHz, but they may have switched that with the max sample rate for digital audio using the optical port.

For a rate comparison, phone systems had a sample rate of 8 kHz at 8 bits/sample mono, resulting in a max data rate of 8 kbps. FM has a sample rate of 22.05 kHz at 16 bits/sample/channel and is stereo, resulting in a data rate of 88.2 kBps.

Of course, the above calculations ignore the problem of synchronizing the data stream and error detection and correction, all of which will consume a portion of the signal.

better audio quality because lightning can transfer several times more audio data compared to 3.5mm. Which makes it possible to do 24 bit audio.

You said lightning can transfer more audio data to the headphone, which would need a dac to convert the signal to analog. Sure, but you don't have to transfer anything. You can process the signal with the iPhone's internal dac, convert it to analog and then send that signal to a normal headphone. No need to send more audio data unless you believe that your headphone (with a dac) can do a better job of processing digital data. But again, you can already do that with your iPhone 6s.

You do realize that driving higher impedance headphones like this affects the frequency response and thus the audio quality right?

Well you got a point there.

But than wouldn't it be nice for headphones makers to pair the amps that best matches their headphones within the headphones rather than having headphones makers trying to guess the type Dac and amp on the output device?

Well, I never use my Sennheiser HD800 with my iPhone, but I do, every once in a while, use my Beyerdynamic T5p with my phone. Most of the time I use my iPhone with my car's bluetooth, yet it's nice to be able to use a normal headphone once in a while. Yesterday I took my girlfriend to the dentist. I listened to an audiobook on my iPhone while I waited with a pair of cheap headphones I always keep in my car. With the iPhone 7 I would need to also keep a lightning adapter (at an expense of $50, as you suggested) in the car for such a situation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I'm probably one of the biggest wireless EarPods desirers here on the forum. I'm all for it, I'm all for not having a headphone jack. But 4 hours simply won't be enough to get me through the day. I need way longer than that. Apple needs to shoot for more like 16 hours.
 
I'm probably one of the biggest wireless EarPods desirers here on the forum. I'm all for it, I'm all for not having a headphone jack. But 4 hours simply won't be enough to get me through the day. I need way longer than that. Apple needs to shoot for more like 16 hours.

The technology just ain't there yet. When it is, that's when we could start talking about removing the 3.5 jack (and I would still vote to keep the jack). Oh, and I bet a 3.5mm jack that those AirPods are going to sound like crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frosties
You said lightning can transfer more audio data to the headphone, which would need a dac to convert the signal to analog. Sure, but you don't have to transfer anything. You can process the signal with the iPhone's internal dac, convert it to analog and then send that signal to a normal headphone. No need to send more audio data unless you believe that your headphone (with a dac) can do a better job of processing digital data. But again, you can already do that with your iPhone 6s.

Well, I never use my Sennheiser HD800 to my iPhone, but I do, every once in a while, use my Beyerdynamic T5p with my phone. Most of the time I use my iPhone with my car's bluetooth, yet it's nice to be able to use a normal headphone once in a while. Yesterday I took my girlfriend to the dentist. I listened to an audiobook on my iPhone while I waited with a pair of cheap headphones I always keep in my car. With the iPhone 7 I would need to also keep an lightning adapter (at an expense of $50, as you suggested) in the car for such a situation.

Even if you process the convert the data to an analog signal on the phone you'll still be bottlenecked by the 3.5mm jack and the cable when playing higher quality audio.

Just keep the adapter attached to the headphones?
 
Even if you process the convert the data to an analog signal on the phone you'll still be bottlenecked by the 3.5mm jack and the cable when playing higher quality audio.

Just keep the adapter attached to the headphones?

there are no words that one can use to describe how wrong and ignorant you are that wont get them in trouble on theses forums. school has failed you.

All sound you hear is analog, all speakers are analog.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frosties
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.