Lightning is capable of dynamic signal assignments now. If Apple permitted it, an analogue audio signal could be passed through the Lightning port. That's one of the advantages of Lightning over a 3.5mm Jack -- you can pass any signal from the phone needed. The 3.5mm could be set up to do something similar, like the iPod Shuffle, but then at a premium of space, and far more limited function -- not to mention unecessary duplication on a space starved mobile device. However, if Apple did pass an analogue signal from the internal DAC/amp, then every adapter would have to have the licensed chip to tell the iPhone what to do when such an adapter and headphone is plugged in, and the resulting expensive adapter would do little more than change the shape of the port from 3.5mm plug to Lightning, which is alsmost as bad as buying a $10 adapter with the original iPhone which only allowed non-Apple headphones to fit into the hole on the phone, if the plug housing was too thick. My solution back in the day was to whittle down the plastic collar around my headphone plug with a knife, until it fit, rather than spend a dime on such an adapter. I suppose if there was any benefit to that pointless adapter was to drive headphone makers to pay more attention to design and slim down their own cables and connectors, instead of slapping on bulky, generic, off-the-shelf plugs.
Now Apple currently pays around $18 for their entire I/O package of the iPhone, of which the DAC and headphone amp are a small part. This move also allows Apple to pay less by using lower quality parts required only to drive the low quality internal speakers. Will Apple charge us less? Likely not, but we will see it in other technological improvements, in much the same way the freed up space from the bulky, single function, 3.5mm Jack will allow them to as well. Apple will supply a Lightning connector set of earbuds inside the box. They will be the same size as the current earbuds, and why wouldn't they be? New BT earbuds contain a DAC, amp, radio, antenna, and 3 hour battery in the exact same size decice. Moreover, they will sound at least as good as the current earbuds, and will not use any more power than if they were using the internal DAC and amp. My bet is that these headphones will sound even better, not because they are necessarily using a batter DAC, but because they will be using a better amp, dedicated toward driving the chosen transducers. The whole thing will have a better sound than what Apple previously offered -- and they sort of have to, don't they?
While some surveys indicate most customers won't be affected by this move, Apple is nevertheless going to have to sell that percentage of customers, however small, that it's a good thing, and Lightning and wireless will be better. So they have to demonstrate to customers they're getting something better for the sacrifice. I have to laugh at all the FUD getting pitched around these forums, that Apple will somehow roll out a lower quality, less convenient alternative to what they have now, and expect their customers to be so memorized by the Apple brand that they won't notice, or lose market share. That perception is pure delusion. And it's right up there with the idea that Apple would arbitrarily do this in an incredibly competive market, one in which they are currently losing market share, without the need by its competition to do the same thing. If all phone makers don't switch to digital audio on their flagship phoneswithin a year of Apple doing it, then Apple will truly be doomed. And they simply can't be that stupid. Intel's current push for USB-C audio is one indication that Apple has a pretty good idea of what they are doing, and not only are they leading the charge as usual, the solution they offer will be well thought out, and anything but this idea of cheap parts, and worse experience.
