iPhone 7 May Ship With Lightning-Connected EarPods, New Wireless Earphones Also Under Development

[ChrisNH]

I've gone through FOUR sets of bluetooth headphones, all of them ceasing to operate after only a couple months of use. That, my friends, is a TREND. And it's against THAT body of evidence that Apple wants to FORCE me into a FIFTH set of bluetooth headphones when I can buy perfectly fine SkullCandy ones for 12 bucks on Amazon? I don't THINK so.

 

[mpavilion]

The wheel was invented thousands of years ago, lets retire that already.

The Apple Car 5 will abandon wheels in favor of magnetic levitation. The solution for consumers? Just buy a new house in an Apple Beats™ Subdivision, where mag-lev rails will be pre-installed for convenience.

 

[DevNull0]

And why exactly is that?
I have absolutely no problem with Apple removing the ancient 3.5 connector. If it was for people, we would still be using cassette, video tapes and what not! People are always afraid of letting go an old technology for a newer one. But changes have to me made and some companies have to be first to do it.

Why is ancient automatically bad? 3.5mm audio pin headsets are still superior to wireless in every way (sound quality, comfort, ease of use, price).

Audio cassettes didn't go anywhere until CDs (which were superior in every way, including recordable, price, sound quality, random access) had dominated the market, which still took years. Same for DVD over video tape. And optical media on computers didn't go anywhere until USB sticks were well established, and that is still in transition, optical discs are still everywhere (outside the mac ecosystem). I personally burn 10-20 discs a week for work (in a government enterprise environment where we use approx 250 discs a week overall).

3.5mm is not going anywhere until something completely superior replaces it, and even then the transition will take years. I would love to see what happens if Apple removes it when only inferior niche alternatives exist.

 

[OllyW]

Odds that Samsung will be the first? I'd bet a tenner on it.

They might even do it properly and go totally wireless because they don't have a proprietary port to protect.

 

[Elvergun]

Spurred on by a market which had been accelerated and inflated by the iPhone 7, just like what happened with USB when the iMac came out.

Someone's got to make the first move each time this kind of thing comes to pass, and it's nearly always Apple every time.

Or the iPhone 7 will continue with the trend of lower iPhone sales. Most audiophiles will shy away from a device with no 3.5mm connector. I would actually go for a totally wireless iPhone with no connectors. That would be progressive. I would adapt. Offering only lightning feels like Apple is trying to squeeze more money out of their users and third party manufacturers. The iPhone is a driving force in the market, but Cook should be careful. After all, Android is in more phones being sold around the world. Disaster can strike at any company, just like what happened with BlackBerry when the iPhone came out.

 

[akbarali.ch]

Eh I really don't care about this change. However what I do care about is the thinness march which is just unrelenting. Keep it the same thickness, pack a battery into that space or something.

None of the posters have ever said they want device to be any thinner, i dont know why they (Apple) keep doing it. Watching people with a smartphone attached to a powerbank is almost a common thing now. At one point i would've laughed at the idea but now its as needed as the smartphone itself. The day is very close when people would walk with solar panels around and still not look funny.

 

[Elvergun]

3.5mm is not going anywhere until something completely superior replaces it, and even then the transition will take years. I would love to see what happens if Apple removes it when only inferior niche alternatives exist.

An inferior but possibly lucrative alternative. After all, they did spend a ton of money to buy a headphone company. Gotta try to make lemonade out of them lemons.

 

[thermodynamic]

Bring on the change!

I love it when people say that and "look to the future!" like good complacent followers, not realizing they will be paying a lot more. Most parasites love prey that say those things...

Don't worry, Samsung, will make sure their 2017 devices have no headphone jack. I expect a commercial around September/October 2016 saying how the Note 6 and S7 can connect to any headphones, while your new iPhone cannot. Lol.

Look up the articles saying how Apple copied from Samsung or from open source or from Xerox or even how previous CEOs grinned on camera and admitted they stole. Keep reading, you'll eventually discover that all these companies borrow and steal. So it must be okay or else none of them, not even holier than thy worst hypocrite Apple, would be doing it.

I've gone through FOUR sets of bluetooth headphones, all of them ceasing to operate after only a couple months of use. That, my friends, is a TREND. And it's against THAT body of evidence that Apple wants to FORCE me into a FIFTH set of bluetooth headphones when I can buy perfectly fine SkullCandy ones for 12 bucks on Amazon? I don't THINK so.

Bluetooth makers and landfills love you. If Apple made these things reliably, and not so wastefully... how does their board approve of shoddily made trash with their label on it? Oh, more profit than they would otherwise get. Just spin it and say "carbon credits balance it out" or some other bs and lots of people will blindly believe that too.

 

[zhenya]

I've gone through FOUR sets of bluetooth headphones, all of them ceasing to operate after only a couple months of use. That, my friends, is a TREND. And it's against THAT body of evidence that Apple wants to FORCE me into a FIFTH set of bluetooth headphones when I can buy perfectly fine SkullCandy ones for 12 bucks on Amazon? I don't THINK so.

Well, that's what you get when you try to cram batteries, a DAC, amplifier, bluetooth hardware, charge cable, plus, let's not forget, the headphones, into something that costs $20-30. It's better for the consumer though right?

 

[Elvergun]

Well, that's what you get when you try to cram batteries, a DAC, amplifier, bluetooth hardware, charge cable, plus, let's not forget, the headphones, into something that costs $20-30. It's better for the consumer though right?

And the ones which cost a lot more than $30? Well, the first couple of months they will last, at best, around 8 hours between charges. After a year, that will be reduced to 4 or so hours. After two years, to the trash they go. Now that's progress. Meanwhile, those Luddites who bought their Sennheiser HD600s 15 years ago will keep on rocking. They might even be able to pass those headphones on to their sons and daughters, who will probably be using their 100th Bluetooth headset (which will be on its last legs).

 

[luckyjat]

None of the posters have ever said they want device to be any thinner, i dont know why they (Apple) keep doing it. Watching people with a smartphone attached to a powerbank is almost a common thing now. At one point i would've laughed at the idea but now its as needed as the smartphone itself. The day is very close when people would walk with solar panels around and still not look funny.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again here: I totally want a thinner device!

 

[iSunrise]

It's technically impossible to beat good (read not $10 junk) analogue headsets/headphones with regards to longevity. Apart from accidental cable defects, a digital wireless headset will need batteries, additional electronic circuits to even function correctly and we are not even talking about sound quality.

What Apple instead wants is to market consumer-grade equipment from their Beats brand to everyone that already has an iPhone or iDevices in general to adhere to their premium consumer-grade standards. While this may not be an issue at all with the mass audience, just like their Macbook Pros which traded sufficient connectivity options for thinness and looks, it is with a certain high-end audience, which also don't agree with buying compressed versions of songs that should instead be lossless.

Apple can do this, because of their influence in today's market and the consumer's awareness that Apple just does things differently than everyone else does and as such there will be support from the target audience.

Apple simply does not care about enthusiasts, since this would effectively cripple them.

 

[DevNull0]

Good enough for me! The real win for me is not having to deal with that wire!

Well if it's good enough for you, it ought to meet every possible use case for every possible person. Let's get rid of that 3.5mm plug right now!

 

[Ron Johnson]

That fact is, keeping or removing this jack will not sell more phones. IF anything it will hurt sales.

If they can make a lightning port waterproof than they can make the headphone jack waterproof.

If they implemented USB-C it may be a different story. At least then, the headphones wouldn't be proprietary if they used that as a connection.

However doing this would create even more issues, because all people do is bitch whenever there is a new port implemented.

To conclude, there is not a benefit on removing this port. There are android phones in the same size bracket with better battery life. Battery technology should be what is worked on not removing something to make a bigger battery. I for one will be looking at Android devices in such situation, and I don't really even need the port. I just refuse to give more of my money to buy proprietary **** and adapters.

This may be only for the 4" iphone which many people probably haven't thought of. Also many people buying phones without the port probably won't even know, until weeks later and make a trip to the Apple store and ask "Wheres the plug for my headphones?"

 

[Pilgrim1099]

I can't wait to quote you this back in five years to show you how wrong you are.

By then major Android handsets will have also dropped the jack too. Just watch.

And within five years, Timmy Cook will be gone. And whoever replaces him will truly be driving the company to the ground.

Removing the Jack is a very stupid thing to do. It removes the alternative for headphones. If you don't like wires, cry me a river " Kylo Ren ".

 

[firewood]

None of the posters have ever said they want device to be any thinner, i dont know why they (Apple) keep doing it.

Apple doesn't care what poster's say. Apple cares about the tens of millions who put their money on the table and buy thin iPhones, and at a very nice profit margin, as opposed to the much smaller numbers (a few posters here?) who buy thicker less profitable mobile devices from the competition.

That's why Apple does it. And will keep doing it.

I'll change my tune when some competitor (are you starting a company?) sells more of a thicker mobile device at a nice profit. Like Apple did after a few years of Samsung selling mobile phones with larger displays.

 

[Mac 128]

Is it impossible to imagine 3rd Party (or even Apple's own Beats) Bluetooth headphones coming with multiple cords - one Lightning, the other USB-C (some new phones like the 6P even come with two different cables)? That would solve everything, including connecting to future Macs - which I believe will add USB-C rather than Lightning.

Is that possible? Who knows? Again, we'll see.

It's already being done. As the elimination of the 3.5mm jack in Apple devices will promote competition and innovation, the manufacturers who want to be used with Apple devices will include BT and Wired headphones with optional cables. BT would have an analogue and digital input on the headphones that can be used with whatever cable the customer chooses. Wired headphones will similarly have an analogue and digital input. Of course the advantage with BT is that when the battery runs out, you'll still be able to use the headphones, and with higher fidelity, when it counts. For wired headphones, there's not a lot of advantages, other than a digital connection allows powered features such as noise cancellation to be used without the bulk of an additional battery.

Besides the lack of wires (which is offset anyway by the more wires needed to charge the bluetooth headphones/charge the device when the additional power drain of bluetooth takes the battery down quicker. Oh and the connectivity issues of bluetooth, and the bother of turning bluetooth on and off etc.

People were not forced off ethernet onto Wifi through removal of ethernet, they were pushed over by the fact that it was good enough to pay more for. If Bluetooth headphones etc were that good, they would be in majority use without Apple having to remove the 3.5mm port.

Bluetooth technology will advance much more quickly now as competition and innovation is boosts by the necessity of customers needing an alternative to the 3.5mm hardware. So those complaints will go away just like every major transition from one technology to another.

Ethernet is superior to Wifi in every way. Yet Apple denies me the ability to use it without an adapter on the MacBook, and to use it at all on iOS devices. When the Wifi only iPhone was introduced, Wifi was nowhere near the same quality, reliability, or low cost of Ethernet. They weren't jumping onto it because it was good enough, they embraced it because they weren't tethered to a cable anymore. There's tremendous value to that. BT is still not an acceptable replacement for Ethernet, especially considering the size of todays files, yet people still prefer the convenience to being tied to a fixed access point.

Ok, but wired headphones are not a big problem for a lot of people.

That is all possible without the removal of the 3.5mm jack and you can't push the entire industry forward if the Lightning connector is not available to the entire industry.

Again, it's not about Lightning, it's about BT and its successor.

Well if I can make one criticism it has too much grip for modern devices. With a Walkman or a gameboy a sudden jerk would rip the jack out, but that same jerk can make a phone go flying.

So yeah, I actually think it would be a good idea to replace the jack just for safety's sake. But NOT with lightning.

Now you're just making things up. A 3.5mm jack has to be very tight, as gaps allow for poor contact and intermittent connections. Add to that the 3.5mm jack is considerably longer than the Lightning jack, which results in more difficulty withdrawing it, particularly at an angle. Now let's discuss how much a Walkman weighed compared to an iPhone. I'd like to see anybody yank a 3.5mm cord connected to an iPhone, and watch the cable pull out without yanking the iPhone off the table as well. On the other hand, to the extent that the Lightning connector has "too much grip", maybe that's a safety measure so that when the phone falls out of your pocket, the cable prevents it from falling and hitting the ground and shattering. Much better than a connector prone to static due to a loose connection, or falls out with slight force.

Here's a better option for your particular "safety" concern. Get rid of the cable altogether and go wireless.

It's quite funny that these so called old fashioned connecters are still used in studios during the actual recording of music but are deemed too old hat to be used when listening to the music on a phone.

Right, just like Server Farms all connect to the network via Wifi, and not the far superior Ethernet. You let me know when the iPhone has the same quality equipment and listening conditions that a professional recording studio has, and pro studios start using iPhones to record music. Then we can talk.

Why are Apple being luddites and hanging on to the wired Lightning port then?

The Lightning port is for the Luddites, so they can plug in their superior wired headphones so they can listen to lossy audio transmitted from a generic DAC.

Be careful with your condescending wishes. The future of audio is not solely in Apple's hands. At first there will be adapters for 3,5mm to Lightning, while Android/Win phones still have their jack. If USB C takes off by the end of the year and the first headphone makers create USB C headphones, there will be adapters for Lightning to USB C. And in two years new adapters for Lightning to new thinner Lightning 2. I could easily be iPhone users, who will be the idiots that always have to carry an adapter.

Again, IF USB-C takes off as a mobile standard, or even a desktop one. And then what happens when USB-C Moves to USB-D, so then all those android users will need adapters for their adapters. And why on Earth would Apple move to Lightning 2? The whole point is they are in control of Lightning. They have the roadmap. Wireless is the goal. While Apple contributed to USB-C, it's an open standard the rest of the PC market will decide the fate of, not Apple. Look at Firewire. It never really became an industry standard, despite being superior to much cheaper and widespread USB-A, or even 3.0, and despite Apple's efforts, it became less and less relevant such that even Apple had to abandon it. The exact same thing could happen to USB-C, and that's the last place they want to be when putting the customers into a new technology for something as evergreen as headphones and stereo equipment.

I've gone through FOUR sets of bluetooth headphones, all of them ceasing to operate after only a couple months of use. That, my friends, is a TREND. And it's against THAT body of evidence that Apple wants to FORCE me into a FIFTH set of bluetooth headphones when I can buy perfectly fine SkullCandy ones for 12 bucks on Amazon? I don't THINK so.

And yet my experience has been exactly the opposite. It's a TREND for you, but without knowing how much you spent, what brand, your user habits, etc. it's meaningless information. And to the extent it represents a commonality within the industry, I'd argue it will continue until competition increases to force manufacturers to take greater care with their products, and better manufacturers into the business. Of course that doesn't stop Cheap Chinese knock-off companies from thriving selling inferior Lightning products to customers who want to spend as little as possible. It's like buying a Mercedes 4WD and putting cheap tires on it. Moreover, if you think $12 headphones give you suitable quality for listening to music, then that more than offsets the cost of the adapter you'll need to buy to keep using them with the iPhone.

 

[Jsameds]

And within five years, Timmy Cook will be gone. And whoever replaces him will truly be driving the company to the ground.

Removing the Jack is a very stupid thing to do. It removes the alternative for headphones. If you don't like wires, cry me a river " Kylo Ren ".

Ohhhh.... Kayyyyyyy....

*Backs away slowly*

 

[doelcm82]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again here: I totally want a thinner device!

Thin for thin's sake is not good enough. But I can totally get behind thinner and lighter.

 

[SSDGUY]

Time it would take for me to lose one or both of the earbuds: About a day.

 

[Dangerous Theory]

If this happens to be true, I think Apple may be quite happy to have this information leaked early. It prepares more people for change so there won't be as many going "what the ****?" when they eventually say "We've removed the 3.5mm port to shave off 1 whole micron off the massive iPhone body!".

 

[Serban]

lets face it, for a lot of people its hard to say bye bye for something that is using for decades...but this is Apple and you felt it first time with floppy disk and so on..
If Apple will not remove it, im afraid no one else will do...and lets face it it is an old and good technology but its time you know..

 

[pianophile]

You probably would keep the irony a bit lower if you for example had $1000 custom made in-ear monitors (because you care about great sound quality) for which will need a fricking dongle when you want to use them with your next iPhone...

If you cared so much about audio quality, would you really be listening to music on a phone?

 

[mantan]

Apple doesn't care what poster's say. Apple cares about the tens of millions who put their money on the table and buy thin iPhones, and at a very nice profit margin, as opposed to the much smaller numbers (a few posters here?) who buy thicker less profitable mobile devices from the competition.

That's why Apple does it. And will keep doing it.

I'll change my tune when some competitor (are you starting a company?) sells more of a thicker mobile device at a nice profit. Like Apple did after a few years of Samsung selling mobile phones with larger displays.

The overwhelming majority of iPhones I see are in a case. There are ton of reasons Apple sells a lot of iPhones - but I have a hard time buying that a significant percentage is picking iPhones over an alternative because it is thinner. Or if they didn't make the iPhone 7 thinner it would be seen a disappointment.

 

[Mac 128]

3.5mm is not going anywhere until something completely superior replaces it, and even then the transition will take years.

Again, I think this isn't true either. The reality is, every year Apple squeezes more and more tech and features into the phone, all of which require more and more battery. At some point miniaturization and processor efficiency are not going to offset the need for real space.

So let's look at this realistically. Apple has four redundant ways to get audio out of the iPhone: 3.5mm, Lightning, Bluetooth, and Wifi. Three of which are standards, one is proprietary. Three are multifunction, one is audio only. Now, let's say you have to choose one to get rid of in order to make room for some must have new tech. And let's say for the sake of argument without getting into the merits of each, that you keep the standards, and lose the proprietary Lightning jack. Instead, the 3.5mm jack becomes a multi-function jack like the iPod Shuffle. It offers data transfer and charging though a digital controller, and audio. I'm not sure the iPod Shuffle can charge and be used for audio at the same time, so maybe Apple has to go to a 5 conductor plug adapter for that situation, as they have to maintain universal compatibility with everyone else. Now you don't reclaim as much room as keeping Lightning instead, especially if you have to make it bigger so you can charge and listen at the same time, but you keep everybody happy by keeping the universal audio standard.

So is that a better solution for everyone who are insisting the 3.5mm jack shouldn't be removed? I'm pretty sure the data transfer is going to be much slower, but there's always wifi right? And Apple is also pushing for the cloud. Any device that can be used over Lightning should also be able to be adapted to a 4 or 5 conductor pin too, right? Am I missing anything here?

If this happens to be true, I think Apple may be quite happy to have this information leaked early. It prepares more people for change so there won't be as many going "what the ****?" when they eventually say "We've removed the 3.5mm port to shave off 1 whole micron off the massive iPhone body!".

I tend to agree with this. In fact I would not be surprised to find the 4" iPhone is released this Spring without a 3.5mm jack. By all accounts the rumored 4" phone will likely pack most of the 6S tech into a thinner 5S-sized case. And rumors suggest it will have a larger capacity battery. So in my mind something redundant had to go (and even at that I doubt it will have 3D Touch). If this is really going to happen, the 3.5mm jack is the perfect thing to go on a phone that already doesn't have enough space to meet the flagship features. And it's a really good test, because Apple knows there's a pent up demand for a 4" phone. Recent surveys show something like 40% of the installed iPhone base is using the 5s or smaller. Given that, customers may embrace the new 4" phone with most of the new flagship features, and not care about the 3.5mm jack. If it ends up being a non-issue for the 4" that will truly pave the way for a smooth 7 rollout, as well as get manufacturers up to speed with great new products for Lightning and Bluetooth. And regardless the mere fact we're debating it now, will give everyone time to get used to the idea, as well as manufacturers an opportunity to prepare.

And let's face it, the 6 and 6S phones will still be available, which will be sold to customers who can't afford the latest and greatest iToys. So from that perspective, they will still have those 3.5mm ports to use with their cheap headphones, or ones they spend a month's salary on they can't afford to replace. But the 7 customers are usually on the cutting edge, and are the customers who can most afford to buy a new set of headphones to use with their cool new phone. Both the 7 and 7S will give at least two years to the iPhone market, without necessarily sacrificing sales for developers and manufacturers to catch up with technological innovations which will make both wireless technology more desirable for most, and Lightning products more exciting than what's available for Android and Samsung. Of course by then they will have likely dropped their 3.5mm jack to, because it's quite likely that Apple's competitors have likewise hit a wall between offering new features and the space to implement them.