Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So will the lightning port be changed to output analogue, or is every adapter and headphone also going to need it's own DAC?

Even though Lightning is capable of dynamic signal assignment and could supply analogue audio over the port, it's unlikely because it would have to be backward compatible with all Lightning ports which may conflict with other devices. Moreover, I believe this move is intended to drive wireless adoption, and to a lesser extent digital wired solutions. If Apple offers a cheap analogue solution, then customers will have to use an adapter without necessarily getting any other benefits. Pushing the DAC onto the headphones means Apple is relieved of the responsibility of anything but supplying a quality digital signal true to the file source, and gives everyone a reason to move toward wireless and digital, which they otherwise wouldn't do if they can get a cheap adapter for a lot less.

Why not ditch lightning in favor of USB-C?

Because Apple doesn't want customers buying a desktop peripheral and plugging it into their iPhone complaining that it doesn't work, or worse causing damage. Likewise plugging Apple iOS peripherals into a PC. Also, USB-C is not yet a standard, and even if it becomes one, who knows how long it will be a round. It also takes up considerably more internal space than the Lightning connector.

No, my point is to run the digital audio through the 3.5 mm connector that's already there.
The phone can check what headphones are plugged in for a sign they are Apple digital phone or plain analog phone. Do you honestly think it takes 7 pins to deliver digital audio?

Apple could do them as optical digital right now. There have been Macs for years with hybrid analog/optical 3.5 mm jacks.

Also -- why is is necessary to get rid of either connector? How about Apple just release these new headphones for the lightning port that's already on the iPhone and leave the 3.5mm jack as is. What does removing the 3.5mm port accomplish? Not like they're gonna put extra battery in that space. /smirk

That clears it up. But merely running digital audio through the headphone jack just creates more redundancy, since digital audio can already be run through Lightning as it is. The reason I said there needed to be 9 poles is to accomplish the functions of Lightning via the headphone jack (Lightning has 9 conductors), which is why I specifically mentioned the iPod Shuffle which has 4 poles (tip/two rings/sleeve) which acts as a USB-A connector.

Apple is trying to reclaim over 240 cubic mm of space inside the phone from a redundant port that only provides one function. And yes, betray is one possible reason for reclaiming that space. But also new features, without making the phone larger. Every generation is a dance that shrinks the existing components, improves efficiency of the existing battery, and removes redundant processes. They're trying to hit a particular design sweet spot that maximizes the size of the phone for as many customers in as few models as possible, a strategy which has what has arguably made Apple so successful since Steve Jobs returned.

You don't have to agree with it, but there's valid strategy behind it. In fact as I've said before, I'll bet the competition would love to eliminate the 3.5mm jack for the very same reasons, they just don't have the balls or loyal fan base to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sracinas and Scrump
There is a perfectly good excuse. They want their margin on the iPhone to go even higher and with falling NAND prices that just helps them out even further.
And they couldn't think of a better way to do it...?

Let's face it, a 4K camera on a phone with only 16GB of storage is like a bad joke. You can literally only shoot a few minutes of video before you've used all of the storage. They really should have moved it to 32GB and just included a lower-spec camera or something on the base model. That way they don't piss of millions of customers AND gives them a big incentive to upgrade past the base model.

But no, apparently that solution is a bit too creative for the clueless MBA executive types that run Apple these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bliss1111 and milo
Seems like iPhone is going through an awkward puberty stage again. The more I hear the more I want to wait, see, then decide.
 
A second speaker in an iPhone is the LAST thing they will do. They are eliminating the 3.5mm jack to make room for other features, larger battery, etc. The quality of a speaker the size required in an iPhone is so low, not to mention the spatial separation being so close, as to make the inclusion of a second speaker pointless.

I would agree that the quality of the speakers is quite low, but I wouldn't say that the spatial separation is pointless. For media consumption, the lack of stereo speakers is somewhat obvious on the 6s plus. I've played plenty of games on Nintendo DS and 3DS - which are much smaller side to side - where the sound stage has been good enough that you could easily tell which side the sound was coming from. The stereo on that device really does add to the experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. Donahue
This is an opportunity for Apple to sell multiple quality levels of Lightning to 3.5mm adaptors. The best one will, of course, only be available wrapped in a Hermès leather case.
[doublepost=1455302935][/doublepost]

Apple should reduce the base iPhone to 4GB. That would help cover the cost of removing the headphone jack and really push iCloud.

How does removing the jack cost anything? How does shrinking flash save anything (significant)? What is stopping Apple from offering multiple lighting audio adapters now?
 
I would agree that the quality of the speakers is quite low, but I wouldn't say that the spatial separation is pointless. For media consumption, the lack of stereo speakers is somewhat obvious on the 6s plus. I've played plenty of games on Nintendo DS and 3DS - which are much smaller side to side - where the sound stage has been good enough that you could easily tell which side the sound was coming from. The stereo on that device really does add to the experience.

6S Plus is a different issue. There is plenty of room inside the 6S Plus to do anything they want, including higher quality speakers. That's why it has mechanical optical stabilization, and over 1/3 better battery life. They could leave the 3.5mm jack in the Plus, but to be consistent they're likely not going to, especially if what you suggest is true and adding a second speaker does make that much difference. But they can't do this on the 6S, and especially not the "6c".

Not being a gamer, I can't begin to understand how spatial aural separation makes a bit of difference to playing a game, unless it's a game where you have to be able to hear whether something is coming from the left or right, in which case, being able to distinguish that on such a tiny device is probably not going to be easy anyway. In which case I'd expect a serious gamer would be using headphones to make the experience more immersive anyway.

That said, if that's the rationale for adding stereo separation to such a low quality audio experience, I have to say I'm a little concerned that the gamer market is now what's driving the iPhone platform features, and not the average consumer, or business and Enterprise.
 
They can't charge licensing fees on Blue Tooth or Wifi either.
[doublepost=1455312130][/doublepost]

So you're saying there's not another way to get audio out of the iPhone? I can think of three.
They can charge fees on a new wireless protocol they invent to get around the limitations of BT.

Again, BT is crap for quality, and Lighting is proprietary nonsense. Until and unless a new STANDARD is developed for audio connections, 3.5mm will remain the best option.

I've said it from the beginning: 3.5mm can be replaced. It should be replaced. But the replacement must be something that a) provides equal or better audio quality, and b) the entire INDUSTRY agrees on.
 
Last edited:
So you're saying there's not another way to get audio out of the iPhone? I can think of three.
No, I was saying it isn't redundant as it's still widely used. I'm not a betting man but I would confidently place a wager that loads more people plug their headphones into the 3.5mm jack than those who listen through the Lightning port and over Bluetooth combined.
 
Why would you want to use an adaptor to listen to music. SERIOUSLY, why?

I said I don't mind, very different from wanting to use one. If they feel ditching the 3.5mm port is necessary for the design then I personally don't care as long as they include an adaptor in the box. Is that clear for you now?
 
Because Apple doesn't want customers buying a desktop peripheral and plugging it into their iPhone complaining that it doesn't work, or worse causing damage. Likewise plugging Apple iOS peripherals into a PC. Also, USB-C is not yet a standard, and even if it becomes one, who knows how long it will be a round. It also takes up considerably more internal space than the Lightning connector.

Don't you think ditching the 3.5mm jack and sticking with Lightning (and not adopting USB-C) is going to be a mess? What is the solution for people who use the 3.5mm jack on other devices (laptops, desktops, Android tablets, etc)? An adapter? That doesn't sound like a good solution.

I know you are saying USB-C takes up more internal space but it's the obvious solution IMO with respect to adapting a universal headphone port for the future. The alternative is just going to be a headache for countless consumers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: milo
Apple is trying to reclaim over 240 cubic mm of space inside the phone from a redundant port that only provides one function.

Aren't there other devices (SquarePay adapter) that also use the headphone port?

And yes, [battery] is one possible reason for reclaiming that space.

Apple has already decided that the iPhone battery life is what they want, and I don't need to quote an Apple executive to show that -- actions speak louder than words, and you only need to look at the iPhone's design. iPhone models continue to maintain about the same battery life year-over-year (250-300h standby) while Apple continues to make the design thinner.

...also new features, without making the phone larger. Every generation is a dance that shrinks the existing components, improves efficiency of the existing battery, and removes redundant processes.

If Apple really wanted longer runtime, the obvious thing to do is continue their optimizations on iOS and hardware design but keep the phone the same thickness so it can have a larger battery. They would even save money since they wouldn't have to re-engineer the case for the new thickness.

If Apple had followed this course of action, "Bendgate" wouldn't have happened.

They're trying to hit a particular design sweet spot that maximizes the size of the phone for as many customers in as few models as possible...

No one is asking for a thinner phone, and it's reaching a point where it is compromising the durability of the device.
 
I'm not convinced that Apple is really going to remove the headphone jack just yet. If they were, I'd expect to see Apple selling headphones with Lightning connectors by now. On the Apple website they are selling one set, and it's a $720 set from Audeze.

It's one thing to remove legacy features when they are obsolete. The floppy drive had been replaced by CDs. CDs were replaced by digital downloads. Apple didn't introduce these new technologies. They just adapted to them and abandoned the technologies they replaced faster than anyone else, but they replaced them with already established standards. They didn't remove the floppy drive and then tell everybody to use their new proprietary portable storage system.

If Apple wants to replace the headphone jack, great, but get Lightning established as an alternative. Then remove it after people have seen that it's a better solution. In the very least start selling headphones that will be compatible with your upcoming flagship phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: milo
Bring on the Lightning headphones.

Won't be an issue for me anyhow, my next headphones are the wireless Master and Dynamic MW60 anyhow.
 
very pleased they are waiting to 2017, more time for apple inc to change their mind & keep the _world standard_ 3.5mm headphone jack.

Maybe Apple plans to release a more significant redesign next year (2017) that drops the 3.5mm headphone jack, adds OLED/mLED and call it the iPhone 8??? I'm basing that assumption on the previously released rumor that the iPhone 7 will look similar to the 6/6s with the only major visual differences being the removal of the antenna lines and making the camera flush with the body. That would also be important for marketing purposes since Apple would have a iPhone 8 competing with Samsung's Galaxy S8 and a not a "numerically inferior" iPhone 7s. That may sound silly to people here, but we know in marketing, you need to avoid any possible negative perceptions, including the name/model nomenclature.
 
A lightning headphone is not necessary. Just give us a decent wireless headphones and get rid of the old 3.5pin jack.
 
Even though Lightning is capable of dynamic signal assignment and could supply analogue audio over the port, it's unlikely because it would have to be backward compatible with all Lightning ports which may conflict with other devices. Moreover, I believe this move is intended to drive wireless adoption, and to a lesser extent digital wired solutions. If Apple offers a cheap analogue solution, then customers will have to use an adapter without necessarily getting any other benefits. Pushing the DAC onto the headphones means Apple is relieved of the responsibility of anything but supplying a quality digital signal true to the file source, and gives everyone a reason to move toward wireless and digital, which they otherwise wouldn't do if they can get a cheap adapter for a lot less.
That clears it up. But merely running digital audio through the headphone jack just creates more redundancy, since digital audio can already be run through Lightning as it is. The reason I said there needed to be 9 poles is to accomplish the functions of Lightning via the headphone jack (Lightning has 9 conductors), which is why I specifically mentioned the iPod Shuffle which has 4 poles (tip/two rings/sleeve) which acts as a USB-A connector.

The phone still needs a DAC for making phone calls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: milo
Neither FireWire nor Thunderbolt replaced the Mac's USB ports. Nor did they ever achieve anywhere near the same popularity as USB, even among diehard Mac users.

The iPods and iPhones never used a standard data connector. That's different from going from a standard to a proprietary one.
The original iPod used FireWire, which was technically a "standard" data connector, albeit virtually proprietary as I mentioned before.
 
Why not ditch lightning in favor of USB-C?
Because then people will complain that they need to "throw out" all their old Lightning cords, just as they did 3.5 years ago when Apple finally replaced the outdated 30-pin port. Also, USB-C takes up too much room inside. Apple can simply add the functionality that they want to Lightning like they did with the iPad Pro, which supports USB 3.0 with a special cable (that is currently limited to the camera adapter).
 
Because then people will complain that they need to "throw out" all their old Lightning cords, just as they did 3.5 years ago when Apple finally replaced the outdated 30-pin port. Also, USB-C takes up too much room inside. Apple can simply add the functionality that they want to Lightning like they did with the iPad Pro, which supports USB 3.0 with a special cable (that is currently limited to the camera adapter).
Throwing away a crummy proprietary connector like lighting is nothing compared to throwing away 3.5mm headphones.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.