iPhone 7 Predicted to Adopt Lightning Headphones Without Noise-Canceling Capabilities

[NT1440]

By standard I mean universally adopted by all smartphones, etc.

And how in the world does an industry get in gear to transition to a standard if no one takes the leap first?

Apple is in a great position to push new standards as the leader in mindshare by a mile.

 

[Mac 128]

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.

Talk about condescending -- this is all your opinion, much of which doesn't take into consideration anything other than your experience. No more right than mine, which at least attempts to take into consideration the realities of the implementation of changing technological standards over the last decade, and how people actually deal with them.

And you're talking out of both sides of your mouth -- on the one hand consumers are going to be frustrated and confused by not being able to plug their old headphones into their new iPad or iPhone -- which is exactly what's going to happen when they try to plug their old headphones into a phone that only has USB-C. Exactly the same problem you are so concerned about with Lightning. But somehow USB-C makes it all better.

Then you decide people have a good idea what they can and can't plug into their iPhones. Which is it? They're so perplexed by not having a 3.5mm Jack that they're going to be confused and frustrated, or they have a pretty good idea what they can and can't plug into their phones?

 

[Rigby]

By standard I mean universally adopted by all smartphones, etc.

Well, what makes it a standard is that the major industry players have agreed on the specification. There is little doubt that it will succeed micro-USB as the most widely used smartphone connector. It can be implemented as a straight USB 2 or 3 connector (i.e. without fast alternate modes and power delivery) for basically no additional cost compared to micro-USB, and you gain the advantage of the reversible plug and extensibility.

 

[blairh]

And how in the world does an industry get in gear to transition to a standard if no one takes the leap first?

Apple is in a great position to push new standards as the leader in mindshare by a mile.

Absolutely.
[doublepost=1455502504][/doublepost]

Well, what makes it a standard is that the major industry players have agreed on the specification. There is little doubt that it will succeed micro-USB as the most widely used smartphone connector. It can be implemented as a straight USB 2 connector (i.e. without fast alternate modes and power delivery) for basically no additional cost compared to micro-USB, and you gain the advantage of the reversible plug and extensibility.

I agree.
[doublepost=1455502770][/doublepost]

Talk about condescending -- this is all your opinion, much of which doesn't take into consideration anything other than your experience. No more right than mine, which at least attempts to take into consideration the realities of the implementation of changing technological standards over the last decade, and how people actually deal with them.

And you're talking out of both sides of your mouth -- on the one hand consumers are going to be frustrated and confused by not being able to plug their old headphones into their new iPad or iPhone -- which is exactly what's going to happen when they try to plug their old headphones into a phone that only has USB-C. Exactly the same problem you are so concerned about with Lightning. But somehow USB-C makes it all better.

Then you decide people have a good idea what they can and can't plug into their iPhones. Which is it? They're so perplexed by not having a 3.5mm Jack that they're going to be confused and frustrated, or they have a pretty good idea what they can and can't plug into their phones?

This response is so ridiculous that I'm not even going to bother speaking to you ever again. It's funny how so many people in this thread understand what I'm saying and yet you keep fighting with BS.

You are going on my ignore list. A first in my 9 years on this site. Cheers.

 

[LovingTeddy]

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.

No. You guys are talking two different things.

1. No one is denying that going to USB Type C will need adaptor. That is not the question. Regardless lightning or USB Type C, removing 3.5mm will need adaptor.

2. Apple is now supporting to types of "new" connector. Lightning and USB Type C.

3. If Apple choice to use lightning headphone, then customer will have to buy lightning to 3.5mm adaptor and that is not gonna work with USB Type C and will not work with MacBook.

4. Base on past history, future USB standard will likely backward compatible with USB Type C. So current USB Type C adaptor will likely work with future USB standard.

5. it is smart for Apple to go USB Type C instead of Lightning, because it any USB Type C headphone will work on iPhone and MacBook. Lightning headphone will only work with iOS devices.

 

[tripmusic]

Mixed emotions about this... I see both sides. One thing I realized is that now the lightning connector has the potential to wear down faster, using it not only for daily charging purposes, but headphones as well.

 

[Osamede]

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?

Sales of an otherwise needless acccessory. And of course licensing of "compatible" headphones based on having removed a universal input. And the Beats garbage too..

This kind of thing should be illegal.

And no, more thinness does not help ergonomics at this point. Plus an even thinner device will have sh###ier sound because the volume of enclosure that the loudspeaker is sitting in has been reduced.

 

[Mac 128]

This response is so ridiculous that I'm not even going to bother speaking to you ever again. It's funny how so many people in this thread understand what I'm saying and yet you keep fighting with BS.

You are going on my ignore list. A first in my 9 years on this site. Cheers.

Talk about condescending -- this is all your opinion, much of which doesn't take into consideration anything other than your experience. No more right than mine, which at least attempts to take into consideration the realities of the implementation of changing technological standards over the last decade, and how people actually deal with them.

And you're talking out of both sides of your mouth -- on the one hand consumers are going to be frustrated and confused by not being able to plug their old headphones into their new iPad or iPhone -- which is exactly what's going to happen when they try to plug their old headphones into a phone that only has USB-C. Exactly the same problem you are so concerned about with Lightning. But somehow USB-C makes it all better.

Then you decide people have a good idea what they can and can't plug into their iPhones. Which is it? They're so perplexed by not having a 3.5mm Jack that they're going to be confused and frustrated, or they have a pretty good idea what they can and can't plug into their phones?

Says the guy with the sexist "trucker mud-flap" pin-up girl thumbnail representing his profile -- I should have known better than to engage with someone like that. Your response is to be expected from someone who is just plain wrong and confused. I couldn't be happier to end up on your ignore list. Now I can just comment on your ignorant rants without dealing with your murky ramblings and frustrated attacks.

 

[KPOM]

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).

I mean natively. iOS devices and the Retina MacBook charge based on standard USB protocols. Apple hasn't adopted the "quick charge" protocol that other manufacturers have, as it is a proprietary Qualcomm standard, and Apple generally doesn't adopt other party's proprietary standards.

 

[milo]

It’s 100+ year old technology. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass when you leave.

And it still works as well as any other port that can serve that function.

Anyone who dumps technology because it is old (as opposed to dumping it because a better alternative has come along) is a fool.
[doublepost=1455551573][/doublepost]

not waterproof

Is the lightning port waterproof? Seems like if they really want to go for waterproof they'd ship a phone with no ports at all and make everything wireless.

It's also not confirmed that the next phone will be waterproof, it's entirely possible they ship a phone without the port but it's still not waterproof. It also should be noted that there are already waterproof phones that still have the 3.5 jack.
[doublepost=1455551913][/doublepost]

It's not a redundant port, millions of people use it every day.

If someone is going to argue that the 3.5 is "redundant" you might as well argue that the lightning port is as well since the same things could be done with wireless connections. Hell, why not take off the speaker and mic since that's "redundant" with headset based options. It's often a GOOD thing to have more than one way to get something accomplished.
[doublepost=1455553287][/doublepost]

This response is so ridiculous that I'm not even going to bother speaking to you ever again. It's funny how so many people in this thread understand what I'm saying and yet you keep fighting with BS.

You are going on my ignore list. A first in my 9 years on this site. Cheers.

I don't know why he's so hung ho on dropping the 3.5 port but it's obvious he's going to defend it to the death regardless of what anyone else says. Even if the new phone ships without 3.5 and is no smaller, has no additional battery or other improvements, and isn't waterproof I'm sure he'll find some new excuse why it was necessary.

 

[Mac 128]

Why? USB-C was specifically developed with small mobile devices in mind.

The way I read that is that it applies mostly to Laptops. Yes it can be used with smaller mobile devices like phones, but the strength of such a robust data connector is in desktop/laptop applications. Phones simply don't have the current need for such a robust connector. That doesn't mean they won't in the future, and I think Apple is finally acknowledging this as they have enabled 4K video creation and emphasize the iPhone as a 12mp camera. Wifi just doesn't cut it for someone who is creating dozens of GB of content on their phones. So there will likely be wide adoption of USB-C going forward until the next "standard" is decided on.

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.

They do sell a camera kit that provides some USB connectivity, something which until quite recently was incompatible with the iPhone, and moreover I'd bet most iPhone customers don't even know exists. Even so, I'd suggest that an adapter is not the same as a USB port built into the phone. At a minimum, the adapter can control and regulate what's plugged into it, before any damage may occur. I'm not sure the same safeguards can be built into a built-in port. An adapter is a lot easier to replace than repair a built-in port. As for the TV, most customers probably don't even know it's there, and aren't likely to plug anything into it as it sits on a shelf. As for other manufacturers using USB-C ports on their phones, I don't know how widespread that is, but I would argue that there's a dearth of USB-C products in general, much less any people want to plug into an Android phone. That said, I'd also want to consider a USB-C product designed for a mobile phone that is plugged into a desktop/laptop USB-C which may be incompatible, and/or cause damage. In the end, whether that's a concern or not, the confusion comes from buying a USB-C device that isn't compatible with one or the other without knowing that. Sadly as you point out Apple hasn't been especially helpful with their own camera kit, causing a lot of frustration and confusion as to what will work with it, so I magine if everyone with an iPhone had a universal connector and no idea what it supports.

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.

We're talking semantics here. Of course USB-C is a standard. Just like FireWire is a standard. But like FireWire, USB-C does not have wide adoption or implementation in products at this time. The USB 3.0 connector never appeared on a wide array of products either, despite also being a standard and successor to USB-A, which is a widely implemented and adopted standard.

That said, I don't think the point of Lightning audio is to replace the 3.5mm connector. It seems to me Apple is pushing wireless as a replacement, which of course is currently a BT standard. Lightning merely provides an option for wireless connection for those who need it. Frankly, I don't care to see Lightning, or USB-C connectors popping up on stereo equipment. Between the two I much prefer Lightning, so I'd be happy seeing Apple stick with it. Apple customers use Lightning, and have a fair amount of money invested in Lightning gear, whether or not anyone else does. Regardless, when the next USB standard is arrived upon, while it will surely be electrically backward compatible, it will likely be no more physically compatible than USB-C is to 3.0, is to 2.0, is to micro A or B, etc. So that means my brand new set of native USB-C headphones will need an adapter to connect to the new "USB-D" equipped products. Whereas Apple could support Lightning much longer. I wouldn't bet on either being the case, but I would bet that no matter what, the "standards" will continue to change as technology improves, and therefore the need for a universal wired digital audio standard is rendered moot since customers will likely always need an adapter to interface with all possible audio equipment.

At some point the manufacturers have to limit the experience to the customers immediate needs, and for most I'd bet that's the phone they use. For everyone else, there's an adapter should they need it.

As for Apple customers, they've already weathered the transition from 30-pin to lightning. Android users wil have to go from the universal micro-USB standard to USB-C, and forget audio, they'll have to buy brand new adapters, Chargers, and docks. Since there's a larger market share that's going to be a much more dramatic shift. Add audio to that, and who knows, maybe they'll actually take a look at Apple instead since they basically have to start over from scratch. Seriously, how is the average customer supposed to know USB-C is going to eventually be the new adopted implementation across the board and Apple will be a dying, proprietary option? Is the guy at the Verizon store going to educate them?
[doublepost=1455556741][/doublepost]

3. If Apple choice to use lightning headphone, then customer will have to buy lightning to 3.5mm adaptor and that is not gonna work with USB Type C and will not work with MacBook.

4. Base on past history, future USB standard will likely backward compatible with USB Type C. So current USB Type C adaptor will likely work with future USB standard.

5. it is smart for Apple to go USB Type C instead of Lightning, because it any USB Type C headphone will work on iPhone and MacBook. Lightning headphone will only work with iOS devices.

3. Here's the thing about Apple' ONLY USB-C Mac/iOS Product: currently very few things can be attached to it without an adapter. Since it also has a 3.5mm headphone jack, using legacy headphones won't be an issue. If a customer wants to use a native Lightning set of headphones, they'll need a lightning to USB-C, or Lightning to 3.5mm adapter. The latter is more likely since they will likely need to use their lightning headphones with more 3.5mm products than USB-C as the adoption and implementation of that is far less. But consider this, even if USB-C were the new standard for audio, the Retina MacBook is the ONLY Apple product they could use them with at the moment without an adapter.

4. Yes, I agree, "USB-D" will be electrically compatible with USB-C, B, & A. But it will not likely be physically compatible without an adapter, just as none of the others presently are. While USB-C is the best thing to happen to USB since it was implemented, I don't believe that this physical connector will not change, nor cannot be improved upon -- and I'd bet that will happen within 5 years time. I'd rather not risk investing a lot of money into a set of headphones and audio products with a USB-C connector which may need an adapter in 5 years to work with new equipment.

5. If Apple does this, I fully expect Apple to start putting Lightning connectors on all of their products. It will essentially be an extra proprietary USB 3.0 port, which in the case of the Retina MB will be an amazing addition. Could they adopt USB-C instead? Sure. But I'm not convinced that will be any better than staying with Lightning at present. In 5 years if USB-C is everywhere, and no new products have a 3.5mm jack, then I'll happily admit I was wrong. But right now, based on the history of USB connectors in general, I'm not convinced I'm not right.
[doublepost=1455557208][/doublepost]

I don't know why he's so hung ho on dropping the 3.5 port but it's obvious he's going to defend it to the death regardless of what anyone else says. Even if the new phone ships without 3.5 and is no smaller, has no additional battery or other improvements, and isn't waterproof I'm sure he'll find some new excuse why it was necessary.

When you could ask me directly, you instead passive/aggressively attack me in third person, like I'm not here.

If Apple eliminates the 3.5mm Jack without any improvements to justify it, I will be the first to call foul. There's a rumor that the 3.5mm Jack is being replaced by a 2nd speaker, which considering the quality and spatial separation would be the dumbest thing they could possibly do, and I'll condem them to the end.

But right now, I am giving this rumor of eliminating the 3.5mm Jack the benefit of the doubt, and understand why it might be necessary. But I'm not blind.

But if you want to start debating how I will react under a different set of circumstances, as if I'm not here, you go right ahead. That's your argument to have with your new buddy @blairh, you deserve each other.

 

[Rigby]

Phones simply don't have the current need for such a robust connector.

Say what?

That doesn't mean they won't in the future, and I think Apple is finally acknowledging this as they have enabled 4K video creation and emphasize the iPhone as a 12mp camera. Wifi just doesn't cut it for someone who is creating dozens of GB of content on their phones. So there will likely be wide adoption of USB-C going forward until the next "standard" is decided on.

USB-C on small mobile devices is not primarily about speed.

We're talking semantics here. Of course USB-C is a standard. Just like FireWire is a standard. But like FireWire, USB-C does not have wide adoption or implementation in products at this time. The USB 3.0 connector never appeared on a wide array of products either, despite also being a standard and successor to USB-A, which is a widely implemented and adopted standard.

What are you talking about? USB 3 works with the standard type A connector on the host side. The USB 3 specific type B plugs on the peripheral side are used today in all USB 3 devices.

Frankly, I don't care to see Lightning, or USB-C connectors popping up on stereo equipment. Between the two I much prefer Lightning, so I'd be happy seeing Apple stick with it. Apple customers use Lightning, and have a fair amount of money invested in Lightning gear

Apple customers also use the 3.5mm plug and have a fair amount of money invested in headphones and earbuds.

As for Apple customers, they've already weathered the transition from 30-pin to lightning. Android users wil have to go from the universal micro-USB standard to USB-C, and forget audio, they'll have to buy brand new adapters, Chargers, and docks.

At least their new accessories will work across a wide range of devices and not just a single manufacturer's phone.

 

[LovingTeddy]

3. Here's the thing about Apple' ONLY USB-C Mac/iOS Product: currently very few things can be attached to it without an adapter. Since it also has a 3.5mm headphone jack, using legacy headphones won't be an issue. If a customer wants to use a native Lightning set of headphones, they'll need a lightning to USB-C, or Lightning to 3.5mm adapter. The latter is more likely since they will likely need to use their lightning headphones with more 3.5mm products than USB-C as the adoption and implementation of that is far less. But consider this, even if USB-C were the new standard for audio, the Retina MacBook is the ONLY Apple product they could use them with at the moment without an adapter.

Yes, currently there are few devices with USB Type C. But I am more than willing to bet that Android/WP phones will most likely come with USB Type C this year. USB Type C will eventually become industry standard that everyone will use, including Apple.

However, how many devices using lightnging? Only Apple devices. Lightnging will never become industry standard, but USB type C will. Forward looking, it is wise just to use USB Type C for future iPhones and iPads.

I am willing to bet that Apple will include USB Type C on upcoming Macs and eventually iPhone and iPad will use USB Type C. If Apple going to remove 3.5mm on their Macs, Apple user gonna need either two set of adapters or two set of headphone.

4. Yes, I agree, "USB-D" will be electrically compatible with USB-C, B, & A. But it will not likely be physically compatible without an adapter, just as none of the others presently are. While USB-C is the best thing to happen to USB since it was implemented, I don't believe that this physical connector will not change, nor cannot be improved upon -- and I'd bet that will happen within 5 years time. I'd rather not risk investing a lot of money into a set of headphones and audio products with a USB-C connector which may need an adapter in 5 years to work with new equipment.

Judging from history of USB port, future USB port will most likely electrically and physically backward compatible with USB Type C. There is no doubt some point in future, there will be other revision of USB standard that will not be physically compatible, but i doubt will be anytime soon.

And your argument really does not hold anyway.

1. If you need 3.5mm headphone right now, you probably will need adapter some point in the future.
2. If you buy lightning headphone, you will need adapter if you want connect to non-iOS devices.
3. If you buy USB Type C headphone, you will need adapter for non-USB Type C port. However, if removing 3.5mm become the trend, then USB Type C will probably become next industry standard. You are likely not need adapter.

So what we get, you will need adapter if you buy lightning headphone. If you buy USB Type C headphone, you will likely not need adapter. MicroUSB was standard for very long time and it is still dominate almost all portable devices. USB Type C will likely stay for pretty long time.

5. If Apple does this, I fully expect Apple to start putting Lightning connectors on all of their products. It will essentially be an extra proprietary USB 3.0 port, which in the case of the Retina MB will be an amazing addition. Could they adopt USB-C instead? Sure. But I'm not convinced that will be any better than staying with Lightning at present. In 5 years if USB-C is everywhere, and no new products have a 3.5mm jack, then I'll happily admit I was wrong. But right now, based on the history of USB connectors in general, I'm not convinced I'm not right.

One thing i can guarantee you that is, it will take fewer than 5 years for USB Type C to take off. We already start to see the trend. The Chromebook Pixel, Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P, MacBook Retina, Lumia 960. I am sure, most flagship phone this year will use USB-C.

 

[Mac 128]

Say what?
USB-C on small mobile devices is not primarily about speed.
What are you talking about? USB 3 works with the standard type A connector on the host side. The USB 3 specific type B plugs on the peripheral side are used today in all USB 3 devices.
Apple customers also use the 3.5mm plug and have a fair amount of money invested in headphones and earbuds.
At least their new accessories will work across a wide range of devices and not just a single manufacturer's phone.

What am I talking about? What are you talking about? Last I checked I can't plug a USB-A connector directly into a USB 3 connector without an adaptor, much less a USB-B.

And for any Apple customer with a substantial investment, there's an adapter, whether USB-C or Lightning. And That's only for the percentage of customers who have this substantial investment. I mostly see white earbuds. For everyone else, particularly those who are happy with the free earbuds, almost 100% of Apple customers have a substantial investment in Lightning products, be it charging cables and docks, or HDMI adapters and camera kits. All of that would have to be replaced just 3 years after the switch from 30-pin dock connector.

Again, if Apple adopts USB-C, and a customer buys a native USB-C headphone, it's going to take years before those headphones are natively compatible with the majority of devices they may need to plug into without an adaptor. And by that time, I'm saying based on the actual history of USB connector standards, that the USB-C physical connector, assuming it ever attains critical mass, will likely be replaced by someone physically incompatible. And this means those expensive 5-year old headphones that have needed an adapter, will likely need a new adapter to connect to new equipment.
[doublepost=1455560634][/doublepost]

I am willing to bet that Apple will include USB Type C on upcoming Macs and eventually iPhone and iPad will use USB Type C. If Apple going to remove 3.5mm on their Macs, Apple user gonna need either two set of adapters or two set of headphone.

And your argument really does not hold anyway.

1. If you need 3.5mm headphone right now, you probably will need adapter some point in the future.
2. If you buy lightning headphone, you will need adapter if you want connect to non-iOS devices.
3. If you buy USB Type C headphone, you will need adapter for non-USB Type C port. However, if removing 3.5mm become the trend, then USB Type C will probably become next industry standard. You are likely not need adapter.

So what we get, you will need adapter if you buy lightning headphone. If you buy USB Type C headphone, you will likely not need adapter. MicroUSB was standard for very long time and it is still dominate almost all portable devices. USB Type C will likely stay for pretty long time.

One thing i can guarantee you that is, it will take fewer than 5 years for USB Type C to take off. We already start to see the trend. The Chromebook Pixel, Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P, MacBook Retina, Lumia 960. I am sure, most flagship phone this year will use USB-C.

Ok, how can I refute your "gut". I'm only expressing my opinion here. We shall see what happens. If you are right, then I should sell my stock in Apple right now because they are sealing their tomb with this move.

Whether USB-C becomes the next most widely adopted USB standard quickly or not, the question remains whether it will be used for audio. My guess is the rest of the industry is not necessarily going to race to compete with Apple by removing the 3.5mm Jack. In fact some will likely retain it as a competitive selling point.

As for adapters, I have been saying since before these rumors started if Apple does this, they will add Lightning ports to all of their products. So Apple customers aren't going to need adapters for new Apple products.

The only way you say my argument doesn't hold up is based on your "gut" that USB-C will become the standard that will be physically compatible with all new improvements for years to come. And you also have to make the assumption that everyone will throw out all of their 3.5mm devices for compatible ones, when they buy their USB-C equipped phones, otherwise, they'll need adapters for every device that doesn't have a USB-C port -- headphones or otherwise. How one is necessarily better than the other depending on a customers needs escapes me.

I get the world where USB-C becomes the standard and Apple missed the boat and everybody who followed them down the rabbit hole loses. I also get the world where I have dozens of USB adapters to connect all the USB-C devices with A, B, micro A, B, 3.0, micro 3.0 A&B, micro 3.0, etc. The utopia where all of these legacy devices get tossed out and replaced by the new-standard for every digital connection devised is a fantasy, and based on that history I simply can't buy into it. I'm sorry I just don't see native USB-c headphones being better for anybody under those circumstances.

But I'm happy to be surprised. And I also intend to buy an adapter to use my wired headphones with Lightning, or buy new headphones that can use interchangeable cables. If Apple makes the wrong call, I won't be too deep into it. But I'm betting if they do this, they have enough research to suggest they're making the right move.

Besides,the point I've been making all along is that I'm looking toward a very near future where BlueTooth or AirPlay has improved to satisfy most customers, and I can eliminate wires of any kind from my life (including eventually power). The future of audio is wireless, not a new wired standard of any kind. Wires will always be necessary in some situations, but for the majority of people listening to music they won't be. And that's what I'm gambling Apple knows -- again, assuming this happens at all. If it doesn't then I stand corrected.

 

[OllyW]

The future of audio is wireless, not a new wired standard of any kind. Wires will always be necessary in some situations, but for the majority of people listening to music they won't be. And that's what I'm gambling Apple knows...

If that's the case why are the rumours all suggesting Apple will still be including wired headphones with the next iPhone?

 

[Rigby]

What am I talking about? What are you talking about? Last I checked I can't plug a USB-A connector directly into a USB 3 connector without an adaptor, much less a USB-B.

You don't seem to understand how USB works. Before type C, USB always used asymmetric cables (that's why there are no USB cables with type A plugs on both ends). The cables you use to connect USB 3 devices aren't "adapters" but the regular cables (type A on the host side and type B on the peripheral side). Type A *is* the "USB 3 connector" on the host side.

And for any Apple customer with a substantial investment, there's an adapter, whether USB-C or Lightning.

You don't seem to be able to understand that adapters are a nuisance for something this common. But this has been discussed ad nauseam already.

Again, if Apple adopts USB-C, and a customer buys a native USB-C headphone, it's going to take years before those headphones are natively compatible with the majority of devices they may need to plug into without an adaptor.

I think this will go much faster on mobile devices than you expect (mostly because micro-USB is a terrible connector in terms of usability). And, by contrast, we know that Lightning headphones will never be compatible with anything but the iPhone.

Whether USB-C becomes the next most widely adopted USB standard quickly or not, the question remains whether it will be used for audio. My guess is the rest of the industry is not necessarily going to race to compete with Apple by removing the 3.5mm Jack.

I really hope so, because it's just a stupid move. But again, dead horse.

 

[Mac 128]

If that's the case why are the rumours all suggesting Apple will still be including wired headphones with the next iPhone?

For starters, all of this is rumor.

Second, the new iPhone has multiple conflicting rumors about processor features and price.

I personally believe this disparity is explained by two phones, an entry level phone and a higher end phone. The budget "5se" phone will likely have a headphone jack, because the customer who buys that is less likely to spend money on wireless headphones at their current price points. Whereas the higher end "6c" might not.

Third, I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple hold back any hint of this move until they are ready to release the 7. Pay is clearly going to be a major standard, yet despite introducing it two years ago, they are still selling the 5S without NFC, and they are only now rumored to be changing that. Apple may take the same approach with the 3.5mm Jack, and only removing it on the 7, but take two years before they remove it from all iPhones.

And finally, the future of audio is wireless for most consumers, whether Apple is ready to commit to it 100% with the next phone or not. There's no argument from me that Bluetooth doesn't satisfy everyone's needs currently from audio quality, to battery life, to price. But like everything else, all of that has been improving year after year and will continue to do so. I personally believe the more incentive developers are given in the form of demand, the faster these improvements will come, as we have seen time and time again when new technologies are introduced.
[doublepost=1455564586][/doublepost]

You don't seem to understand how USB works. Before type C, USB always used asymmetric cables (that's why there are no USB cables with type A plugs on both ends). The cables you use to connect USB 3 devices aren't "adapters" but the regular cables (type A on the host side and type B on the peripheral side). Type A *is* the "USB 3 connector" on the host side.

I understand this just fine. It's semantics. Call it what you like, you need a different cable to attach a USB-A port to each different USB standard. Just looking at my desk right now, I count 6 different USB connectors, each needing their own cable. And now with USB-C, I now need a USB-C to USB-A adapter to continue using any of those devices with their respective cables, not to mention standard USB flash drives, of which I have a drawer full

You don't seem to be able to understand that adapters are a nuisance for something this common. But this has been discussed ad nauseam already.

Of course I do. I lived through the change from 1/4" Jack to 1/8" Jack in the 80s & 90s, then the 3.5mm to 2.5mm and back again to 3.5mm phone jack during the 90s and 2000s. And not counting audio, I've lived through 3 decades of mobile power adapters and dongles. Just because everyone agrees on using USB-C tomorrow, doesn't mean adapters are going away. Ever. So it's silly to continue making this the primary point.

I think this will go much faster on mobile devices than you expect (mostly because micro-USB is a terrible connector in terms of usability). And, by contrast, we know that Lightning headphones will never be compatible with anything but the iPhone.
I really hope so, because it's just a stupid move. But again, dead horse.

I'm OK if it does. Not sure it's going to be a problem if Apple doesn't follow suit, especially in the short term as it only affects adoption by new equipment going forward and does not address legacy equipment at all.

In the end you seem to be of the opinion that USB-C is 'the greatest thing since sliced bread' (my hyperbole). And that's fine. It may very well be. I don't currently share that opinion. So we'll all see together. Maybe I will be eating crow in 5 years, but all I know is should this happen, I will not have to replace all of my Lightning gear for a few more years, and I may have to buy an adapter, which I would have had to buy with USB-C anyway, but especially to have compatibility with any device without it, which for the foreseeable future will be the majority of devices in the world, no matter how fast USB-C is adopted on new devices going forward.

 

[Rigby]

I understand this just fine. It's semantics.

I don't think you do. You claimed there was some kind of USB 3.0 connector to succeed type A that never gained acceptance. There wasn't.

Call it what you like, you need a different cable to attach a USB-A port to each different USB-C standard.

There are no different USB-C standards.

In the end you seem to be of the opinion that USB-C is 'the greatest thing since sliced bread' (my hyperbole).

As someone already wrote, you keep putting things into other people's mouths that they never said to support your twisted rethoric. Useless to discuss.

 

[milo]

Some posters are like small children, when they act up best to ignore them.

 

[Mac 128]

I don't think you do. You claimed there was some kind of USB 3.0 connector to succeed type A that never gained acceptance. There wasn't.
There are no different USB-C standards.
As someone already wrote, you keep putting things into other people's mouths that they never said to support your twisted rethoric. Useless to discuss.

Whether I confused terms, or had typos, or exaggerated, or not doesn't change anything. That's the "straw-man" here. I have 6 different USB connectors on my desktop all requiring their own unique cables or adapters. And that's not going to change with USB-C, unless I throw all those peripherals out -- I'm going to need new cables and/or adapters for each of them. In fact it's likely only going to get worse with each new standard that follows USB-C.

And how can I put something into your mouth when I acknowledge I inferred your meaning and am paraphrasing? If I have overstated your feelings about USB, I apologize, but you do seem very high on it and its prospects for adoption and longevity, while simultaneously stating things like "we know that Lightning headphones will never be compatible with anything but the iPhone". I mean that's a pretty huge forecast considering the proprietary 30-pin connector was so widely available in audio products throughout the industry. At a minimum, I'd expect the Lightning connector on all Apple products, and a significant number of third party products, just like the 30-pin connector was, whether USB-C becomes the defacto wired audio connector or not, or whether the entire audio industry adopts it and maintains it as a standard for the next 20 years, regardless what else comes along. I'm just not as sure of that path as you are, nor as sure that Apple is making a mistake.

 

[x3n0n1c]

Way too many people throwing this "digital headphones" term around. The only thing potentially changing due to this rumored change is where the DAC/AMP are in the audio chain.

With the 3.5mm jack, assuming you're using the one built into the phone, the DAC/AMP are located in the phone itself. In terms of DAC/AMPS in phones, the iPhones generally have pretty good ones but moving to an off phone solution would allow for higher quality components to be used with external DAC/AMP adapters or the ones built into compatible headphones.

You can already emulate this solution with a portable DAC/AMP combo from the likes of OPPO or Fiio, and the Lightning to Camera (USB) adapter. I personally own the Fiio Q1 and using its built in DAC/AMP provides a noticeable boost in audio quality.

At the end of the day, you still have regular analog headphones/speakers on the other end. All sound producing devices are analog, there is no such thing as a digital speaker or headphone driver. Air isn't electronic, speakers/headphone drivers are just air pumps. There is also nothing stopping anyone from including a 3.5mm input on the headphones themselves should you decided to purchase a lightning compatible pair.

It should also be mentioned that there is nothing stopping apple from using a sealed 3.5mm jack in their phones to protect again water ingress. They don't HAVE to remove the port to increase the phones water resistance.

 

[machpost]

Nope. I doubt it'll cost more than $20 from Apple, and a LOT less from other manufacturers. What's your basis for that claim?

A slight exaggeration, yes, but the Lightning to 30-pin adapter I had to buy a few years ago in order to use my iPhone 5 in my car was a not-so-cheap $30. When a Lightning to 3.5mm adapter might also need to contain some fancy electronics, I doubt it'll be cheap.

 

[Mac 128]

A slight exaggeration, yes, but the Lightning to 30-pin adapter I had to buy a few years ago in order to use my iPhone 5 in my car was a not-so-cheap $30. When a Lightning to 3.5mm adapter might also need to contain some fancy electronics, I doubt it'll be cheap.

Well I think we all know Apple will charge a premium over any third parties. But this adapter is going to be much simpler. Instead of a 30-pin connector it will be a simple 4 pole audio jack. And it won't have to support USB data or power (although I expect them to offer a $30 adapter that includes a 2nd Lightning port for pass-through charging and data).

I base my price of $20 for the basic audio adapter on the fact that Apple originally sold the 5s & 5c docks for $29 two years ago, both of which included two Lightning connections, and a 3.5mm jack as well as the dock itself. As this will be a much smaller, and simpler adapter, and considering that Apple is going to have an uphill battle if they go this route, they're going to have to price the dock in such a way that it isn't a big deal for those who need it, but not so low that it encourages sticking with cheaper legacy technology. That's why there won't be an adapter included with the iPhone 7. But third parties will jump on this offering simple adapters with decent specs for under $10.

I imagine Apple may also offer a Lightning to 3.5mm adapter as well, and I do wonder if they will include that in the box with the separately sold Lightning headphones for use with Legacy equipment (the way they used to give a 1/4" adapter with 1/8" jack headhones). For the pair of Lightning headphones they will include with the iPhone 7, you'll have to buy the Legacy adapter separately.

But I do expect the DAC in the adapter to be top of the line, so Apple can launch a marketing campaign about how amazing the audio sounds on the new iPhone through Lightning. So maybe they will charge $30. The more I think about it, the March 15th event could focus on digital audio, announcing new HQ codecs introduced with this phone, along with Lightning audio, and likewise introduce them on a new iPad Air 3, also equipped with Lightning audio, as well as an updated retina MacBook which includes a Lightning port in place of the 3.5mm jack. Of course that might stunt 6S sales as people hold off for the new 7 which will incorporate the technology, if it's not just a simple software update to the existing phones (I was imagining it would require the 17-pin Lightning connector). Or they could save all of this for the 7s, where the "s" stands for "sound".

 

[kopitedavo]

I cant believe people are still going on about steve jobs.

 

[GlenK]

Pretty simple for me. No adapter no sale. Will just hang on to my 6s. I just got a new pair of Bose noise cancelling head phones late last year. Not interested in spending another $300+.