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 Predicted to Adopt Lightning Headphones Without Noise-Canceling Capabilities
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can someone spell out to me why a phone needs to be thinner than a 6s? The 3.5mm as has been laid out, is useful for more than one thing besides headphones- but is there a compelling reason for a phone to be thinner than it currently is?
[doublepost=1455396288][/doublepost]
One more thing to carry/lose?
[doublepost=1455396288][/doublepost]
One more thing to carry/lose?
Well there is no other solution for people who have already invested significantly into equipment that does not have USB-C, and buy headphones to use with their new USB-C equipped Android phone. They are still going to need an adapter to use their legacy devices, either on the phone, or the other equipment. You can't have it both ways. And the average life of such equipment suggests it would take the better part of a decade before all legacy equipment is replaced with the new standard. So adapters will be required by almost everyone, whether USB-C or Lightning connectors.
Some people do. A high end pair of headphones manufactured 30 years ago is just as good today as it was then, just like speakers, and most high end audio gear.
And whatever comes after USB-C will be compatible via an ADAPTER.
And how is Android not forcing their customers into using an adapter? What a headache it's going to be when none of your other devices have a USB-C port.
Do you seriously think wireless audio is never going to improve? That people will always be the tethered to wired audio because it's always going to be noticably superior to wireless? It's already improved dramatically in the last 5 years. Once there's an increased demand for it, I would expect even more dramatic improvements more quickly.
You are citing your own experience with Bluetooth battery life, but if that's such an issue in a particular situation, there are BT headphones that have 20+ hour battery life now. And of course, in situations that demand it the option to use a native Lightning cable to plug into those very wireless headphones, or an inline adapter to plug your 3.5mm wired headphones into the lightning port. If android adopts USB-C standard tomorrow, you're going to have to buy a brand new set of USB-C headphones to use with that phone, or an adapter for your old headphones. And in the case of the former, you're going to have to buy an adapter to use those new USB-c headphones on anything but your phone. I really don't see how that better.
And you've still got a pair of Bluetooth headphones to manage. Maybe the best bet would be to buy a new pair of wireless headphones, with longer battery life and optional cables for 3.5mm, Lightning, or USB-C. Let people decide what they need on a daily basis. Because despite this confusion you say will affect most consumers, I'm hard pressed to imagine this complex world of multiple devices that people go around plugging their headphones into throughout the day, and even if that's true for the vast majority of consumers, USB-C isn't going to solve the need for adapters to navigate such a world, for at least a decade -- and that assumes USB-C 3.1 connector doesn't change again during that time.
I feel the natural progression of the smartphone is for it to get thinner and thinner. I think in 10 years time, for example, we will look back at current smartphones and marvel at how thick and heavy they were.
I also think thin and light resonates with consumers, and so does Apple. Look at the way they focus on this factor in their marketing.
If the next iPhone were to look and feel roughly the same as the current iPhone, but say offer 20% more battery life, would it sell as well as a new iPhone that looks different and is noticeably thinner and lighter but offers roughly the same battery life as current iPhone's? I would say no despite the fact that there is obviously a strong audience for an iPhone that lasts longer. (I feel this is more true of the 6/6S users versus the 6/6S Plus ones.)
Also look at the fact that this formula of a new iPhone every 2 years that is thinner and lighter has worked wonders for Apple. Changing the course now, IMO, would be risky.
Lastly there is the competition. If the iPhone stays the same size and weight next fall then their rivals will continue to go thinner and lighter and can boast that they have this advantage. It would also be noticeable if you go to a store that features a variety of different smartphone models.
I can only speak as a 6 Plus user. I'm very happy with the daily battery life and would rather they give me an iPhone 7 Plus that was thinner and lighter with the same battery life versus the same size and weight but more battery life.
I also think Apple's answer to people who want more battery life is for them to purchase a battery case. Especially now that they make their very own.
[doublepost=1455399755][/doublepost]
That people will always be the tethered to wired audio because it's always going to be noticably superior to wireless?
Can you please stop doing this? Do I take your responses and make ridiculous conclusions? No. Of course not. That would be childish and stupid. So can you please not do that with mine???
For legacy headphones, yes, you'll have to use an adapter. That's pretty obvious. I don't know why you are even bringing that up. I never said adapters were out of the question in all scenarios. I'm simply stating why Apple going USB-C makes more sense then hanging onto Lightning. Just because you'll need an adapter for legacy equipment isn't a reason to embrace a different port for future devices. Also the audience that uses headphones for 30 years is rather niche. Let's be realistic here.
Why are you insisting that the future step past USB-C will require an adapter? How do you know such a thing? Why can't the future port post USB-C be compatible with USB-C?
Of course wireless audio will improve? Can you not be so condescending? Show me something along the lines of the Bluebuds X's that can last 20 hours and I'll take that point back. Otherwise we are far away from the days where bluetooth earbuds are a viable option for long hours of usage. Also a lot of wireless headphones don't have the option to be used in conjunction with a lightning cable.
What headphones are wireless and offer the option to use 3.5mm/Lightning, and USB-C? And your answer is to purchase such headphones and bring a series of cables to use with each device as needed? That's your solution?
You seriously don't see this as a complex problem for consumers? The 3.5mm jack made headphones a non-issue. Getting rid of it will very much complicate things. And telling people to bring around a series of wires or an adapter isn't the answer (if) it can be prevented in some scenarios.
Let me just make something clear. Yes, there are scenarios where an adapter will be necessary. That was never my point, despite your need to go off in that tangent. What I said from the very start is that Apple going USB-C instead of Lightning will push things forward for mass USB-C adoption (moving forward) and will make things easier for Apple consumers who will instead now be forced to use an adapter when in reality they shouldn't have to. (Unless they have legacy headphones or for some reason want to purchase wired headphones that use a 3.5mm port and can't use other cables.)
So all I'm saying, despite your rather unnecessarily long responses, is that going USB-C for the future iPhone would make this less of a headache for consumers. This is irrefutable.
More painful than being able to just plug the device in without having to remember to bring your dongle.
And you can apply that to Apple's latest fetish of removing ports from their notebook computers as well. Another case of high-horse aesthetics vs function.
Why would you use something outside of the MFI spec anyway? Is the extra 10$ savings worth messing up your iPhone?
The iPhone 6s is thicker than the previous generation, so Apple do not make the iPhone thinner for every generation.
Also Samsung Galaxy S6 is thinner than iPhone 6s, so Apple is not alone in going for thinner devices.
I would not buy a phone without headphone jack. I like the dangling wires when I am working out at the gym because it tells all the chatty types to go away while I listen to what I want. I like being able to plug in a square to run credit cards while my wife sells art at an outdoor show. I like being able to quickly plug in some speakers at a meeting so all can hear what is on my phone. I like being able to quickly plug in wired headphones of different types for different circumstances like when my bluetooth headphones need to be charged. So I like having the option of going wired or bluetooth depending on the situation.
Well, 25-35 per cable is way to expensive for cable. Huge percentage of the price goes to Apple for licensing cost. Most manufacture has really thin margins.
I would buy MFI cable, but really, Apple just came up other way to get more money.
[doublepost=1455454732][/doublepost]
You will able to plug in your headphone, but you need a adaptor. Only thing I found about adaptor is that adaptoer tends to break often. So I need the buy very once a while.
For square trade reader, I am sure you can use it with adaptor or one with lightning port.
[doublepost=1455455789][/doublepost]
I do not know about you. But it is common for people have iPhone and/or Android and other devices at same time. While industry moving to USB Type C and more USB Type C headphone comes up, it makes sense for Apple to go for USB Type C instead for pushing lightning
Now, iPhone users will have to either use several adaptors (lightning to 3.5mm and lightning to USB Type C) or buy different headphone with different connectors.
Even Apple is embracing USB Type C with their MacBook. I think going to USB Type X on iPhone is logical, becuase any USB Type C headphone will automatically compatible with new iPhone and MacBook. But if Applw goes for lightning, then it will force people to buy adaptors that not necessarily need.
I have not seen many Android phone without 3.5mm. The only phone I remembered without 3.5mm was Oppo R3 (or R1, I cannot remember). It came with MicroUSB to 3.5mm adaptor.
The only thing I hate about adaptors is adaptor tends to break easily. Depending on how user use adaptor, the wire can be frayed or broken alm together. Also adaptors can be lost very easily, that add up cost of ownership
..times 3 or 4. One for car, one for home, one to carry around "just in case" and one at the office. Cool, My new phone just got $200 more expensive and every place is full of stupid little dongles.
Looking at the bright side: I save loads of money when I don't have to bother with iPhone 7. Or probably any other Apple phone after that. Couldn't care less about subpar lightning headsets or bluetooth stuff. I already have one set of bluetooth phones that work well enough when I'm walking outside, but other than that I prefer to use what I've already paid for rather than buy apple-only crappy lighting sets.
http://www.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-...ng-Cable/dp/B010S9N6OO/ref=zg_bs_6795233011_1
Boom, way less than 25-35.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Wow, talk about a rather unnecessarily long response...
"Irrefutable"? Of course it's refutable. Such hyperbole.
How do I know any future step beyond a USB-c 3.1 connector will require an adaptor? How do you know it won't? I'm basing it on actual past development, what are you basing it on? There are at least 6 different common USB connectors on the market now. All are compatible with each other electrically, but all require adapters to use between the incompatible connectors. I seriously doubt USB-C 3.1 connector will survive unchanged forever, if even a decade, and while electrically the standard will be compatible it will require an adaptor, based on what we've seen over the last 17 years. If history has shown us nothing, connectors get smaller and more streamlined. USB-c 3.1 will eventually be replaced by something better.
Again, you are making sacrifices to use your specific earbuds, which are somehow the benchmark for everyone, despite what else is on the market. People make the exact same kinds of sacrifices in quality with a pair of wired earbuds versus a full-sized set of wired headphones. You're comparing apples to oranges. There are always trade offs. And nobody is forcing you to use Bluetooth exclusively if it doesn't serve your needs, just as it is now.
Your ultimate solution to switching from an analogue to digital standard seems to be to buy a new set of USB-C headphones and carry an adapter around to use with legacy 3.5mm equipment. Not sure I see how that's better than anything I have suggested. Everyone will deal with this in their own way. The most perplexing part of your responses in this thread is that on the one hand you seem to be saying removing the 3.5mm Jack is going to make customers lives unnecessarily complicated, and blaming this on Apple, despite understanding that it other phone makers will likely do the same thing whether Apple makes the first move or not. Then you seem to be saying that's OK as long as USB-C is the "standard" that everybody including Apple uses, despite the fact customers are still going to need adapters for years to comes. Yet, even though adapters are OK, needing more than one adapter to use with Apple versus Android, versus legacy, is somehow a bigger problem, despite the fact we already live in a world full of micro USB adapters already that people seem to be able to cope without issue.
If my summary of your position is wrong, I truly apologize, as I've really lost the focus of your point, other than it being seemingly "irrefutable" that doing nothing is less of a headache for consumers than doing anything. And even that I'd refute.
[doublepost=1455469325][/doublepost]
Way to take a random baseless assumption and build on it hysterically.
For starters, any adapter Apple offers is only going to cost around $20 based on DAC equipped docks they have previously sold. Further, third parties will offer even less expensive adapters. I can see them going for less than $10 with more or less the same quality as the current iPhone built-DAC. Second, why do you need more than one adapter? I lived through the switch from 1/4" to 1/8" audio equipment connectors in the 80s & 90s. The adapter lived on the end of my headphones. Never came off unless I needed to plug it into legacy equipment. Never even noticed I had an adapter.
Finally, if Apple goes this route, the other phonemakers will follow suit, because they are in the same boat as Apple -- they are running out of room inside their phones to add new features and improve battery performance. So what will you do when you will have to have an adapter to use your new Android, or Samsung? Will you just keep limiting your phone technology by the manufacturer which still includes a 3.5mm jack?
I don't know it won't. But you also can't claim it will. Perhaps if USB-C becomes the standard moving forward there will be an effort made so that the successor to USB-C will be cross compatible with USB-C. Assuming it becomes the standard for headphones in the future it will be the first time in history that this adaptor will take on such a responsibility. Effort and attention will be made to make the successor to USB-C cross compatible with its future. I do not know this for sure of course. I'm simply saying it's possible. Again, this is no reason not to push forward and make USB-C the new standard for headphones in the future. The alternative, which is Lightning, USB-C, and adapters, is clearly a lot more messy.
You really are going to keep up this negative condensing talk aren't you? Are you incapable of responding to people on this forum in a respectful tone? I'm seriously asking you. Did I ever say the Bluebuds X's are the standard here? No. But they arguably the gold standard wireless headphones for activity, so why wouldn't I use them as my example? Again, unless you can show me otherwise, there are no bluetooth earbuds that provide the 20 hours you referenced in an earlier post. So how can you possibly bring up wireless headphones as a viable option? Sure, one day we will have earbuds that offer 20+ hours of use. Unless you can prove me otherwise, that time is far away from coming so it's pretty irrelevant to your argument.
I never said anyone is forcing me to use bluetooth. You are the person that brought up wireless headphones as a viable alternative. I'm simply replying to your point here. I find it bizarre how I will respond to something you say and then you twist it like I'm stating something out of the blue here.
My suggestion is not to use an adapter. Again, where are you coming up with this? I simply said there will be people who need to use an adapter to support current legacy headphones. Or, if a consumer chooses to purchase a set of headphones that must be used with a 3.5mm jack for some reason then yes, they will need an adapter. There is no way around this. And again, I was stating this fact because in a previous post you somehow implied that I was stating there would be no need for adapters. What I'm actually saying is that a push towards USB-C will eliminate the need for adapters in the long run. The more people pushing USB-C means less of a need for adapters overall.
For some reason you seem to find it impossible to comprehend and address what I said from my very first reply to you. So let me make this crystal clear.
Apple will make things a lot easier for consumers moving forward if they adopt USB-C with the iPhone and iPad. This will be a huge step moving forward with respect to pushing USB-C as a universal headphone port in the future. By sticking with Lightning Apple is further complicating things by forcing their customers to use an adapter (for anything not iPhone or iPad) and will bring about an influx of 3rd party Lightning wired headphones. If Apple were to stick with USB-C and not create a large Lightning wired headphone market then it will be a much simpler market for the consumer in general. Over time we will see a large push by companies to adopt USB-C wired headphones as the new gold standard. You will be able to use iPad's, iPhone's, Android devices, Macs, PC's, and all devices sporting USB-C ports will zero hassle. This is obviously a much better environment for the consumer versus having to still deal with Lightning and hence adapters and the like. If you don't understand this then I'm done responding to you. It's what I said from the start and it's a very simple concept to comprehend.
I agree.
Not once have I failed to upgrade to the newest iPhone from the original... Till the 6S which didn't impress me. But I did buy two at family members request. So to check my decision I used my wife's 6S Plus for a couple of weeks before we swapped it taking her 5S out of service.
Now I'm even happier that I kept my iPhone 6 Plus since my thoughts were right. There's simply no benefit from having a 6S Plus. Speed difference is so minimal day to day that it's not a deal maker. Nor are the other "new features."
Reading about the controversial potential features of the iP7, and taking into consideration how ideally my 6 Plus suits me, I'll happily pass on the iP7. This is a trend some of my co-workers have also embraced.
The financial gain is also a very nice benefit.
Thinking long term, I see foldable displays becoming the norm (Samsung is expected to bring such a product to market as early as this year). The thinner they become, the more portable and pocketable. I think that we will gradually see fewer physical ports and switches. Removing the 3.5mm port before that switch makes the transition a bit easier. People will likely gravitate toward wireless over time for convenience. Then when thin foldable displays become commercially viable, there won't be any expectation that it will have a headphone jack.
Well that was an unnecessarily complicated and confusing diatribe, to basically get back to the same contradictory Place you started. Yup that's clear as mud. I wouldn't even know what to agree to diasgree with you about here. So I guess we're done here?
Clear as mud? I could not possibly be more clear.
I don't understand how my original point can even be argued. By adopting USB-C Apple becomes a leader in the potential transition for it as a standard headphone port in due time. Nothing you have written combats this. You are simply saying that Apple forcing their consumers to use adapters when in reality they wouldn't have to in cases of USB-C/iOS is A OK in your book. That's all your saying. So yeah, I'm done having this back and forth as your responses have consisted of being condescending and going off in tangents, which I address, and in turn angers you. If you want a world where Apple continues using Lightning where the competition embraces USB-C for smartphones and tablets, then, good for you. We all will suffer in turn.
It makes sense that it would eventually disappear, but the transition period, especially for those who paid a lot for premium headphones, will hurt when they're forced to use somewhat awkward & given Apple's history, pricey adapters or going the bluetooth/wireless route. Personally, I'll be a little glad to see the end of dangling wires.
USB-C is overkill for the iPhone (iPad Pro is another story), and as others have pointed out, it could create confusion since it would create the consumer expectation that any USB-C device would work with the iPhone, which is not the case. I do think we'll eventually see the USB 3.0 version of Lightning make its way to the iPhone, if only to enable faster charging.
I haven't said anything of the sort. And the very premise of what you inferred is in conflict.
USB-c is not a standard yet.
It is primarily a desktop bus.
If Apple removes the 3.5mm jack, users have the option to use lightning with or without an adaptor. Nobody is forced to do anything.
If Apple, and the rest of the industry adopted USB-C instead, and removed the 3.5mm, customers absolutely would be faced with the same option to use USB-C with or without an adaptor.
In either case an adaptor will be required for use with legacy equipment. And unless a customer upgrades all of their equipment to be USB-C compatible from day one, the vast majority of them will be using an adapter, and even then for use with somebody else's legacy equipment.
You don't have a problem with adapters so what is the problem with Ligutning instead of USB-C?
I personally don't believe the USB-C connector is the future of wired audio, or even the future of data connectors. So during the transition, it makes no difference to me.
Since Apple may be the first to market, I'm happy to see how this shakes out. Frankly I am likely in agreement with Apple that a universal port on all devices will lead to incompatibilities, and potentially damage to peripherals not designed for a specific device, which in turn will lead to confusion among consumers -- more than having two different ways to connect wired audio, neither of which eliminates adapters.
Why? USB-C was specifically developed with small mobile devices in mind.
They sell a Lightning-to-USB camera adapter that doesn't work with arbitrary USB devices either. They also put a USB-C port into the Apple TV that doesn't work with common USB-C devices. Not to mention phones with USB-C ports from other manufacturers whose users seem perfectly capable of handling the confusion.
You don't need USB 3 for faster charging. The possible charging current also depends on the battery capacity (a bit simplified, larger batteries can take higher currents).
[doublepost=1455492950][/doublepost]
Of course it is. Not that I'm a big fan of it, but if you are going to replace a widely used industry standard, USB-C would be a much better choice than replacing it with a proprietary system that nobody else uses like Lightning.
Last edited:
Of course USB-C is not standard yet. It's in its very early stages. But it's clear that it's being embraced by OEM's.
Is it really not clear? By eliminating Lightning there will be less need for adapters in total.
What makes you think USB-C isn't the future of wired audio? It makes no difference to you because you personally don't see it as the future? That's great. Duly noted. The alternative is a world of 3.5mm, Lightning, and USB-C. Three ports instead of one. Sounds like fun.
Confusion and frustration comes when you purchase a new iPhone and iPad but you can't connect your wired headphones to your multiple devices so you have to spend money to buy an adapter and hope you don't lose it.
Nothing would be simpler than embracing USB-C as the future of wired audio. And nobody could push that forward faster than Apple.
I will say it once again, the fact that adapters will still exist is not a reason for Apple to refrain from fully embracing USB-C.
[doublepost=1455498160][/doublepost]
I honestly don't think that would be an issue. People in general have a good idea as to what they can and can't plug into their iPhone's and expect it to work in conjunction. And that certainly is not a reason not to embrace USB-C with the iPhone and iPad.
I don't know why people say things like this. It is absolutely a standard. The specification was finalized by the USB implementers forum in 2014.