iPhone 7's Secondary Speaker Holes May Be Purely Cosmetic

[Mac 128]

That is just a guess. The Lightning spec is proprietary and reassigns pins at connection time - there is nothing stopping Apple from amending the spec (since it's theirs) to run analog audio signals over one or more of the pins when connected to new Lightning-specific headphones or a Lightning-to-3.5mm adapter (with the accessory simply needing to request this behavior from the phone). Will they? Don't know, we'll find out in a few weeks. But you can't declare with certainty that a second, external, DAC is required.

This is another guess. A bitterly cynical one at that.

I think that's the least likely option, because it doesn't benefit the customer at all, and once they go down that path it will be hard to justify going back. Also, they likely would have already done it with the 30-pin to Lightning adapter and Lightning docks if they were going to do it.

I also don't understand why anyone thinks two dacs is a problem. Every BT headphone has a DAC now and leaves the iPhone DAC unused when sound is transmitted that way. Also, it might actually be a good thing having the iPhone send alerts via the internal DAC, when streaming music to a BT external DAC where you wouldn't want a lot of super amplified ringtones and alert sounds. Plugging the iPhone into a TV uses an external DAC, leaving the iPhone's idle. Etc.

Don't get sucked into the argument that two dacs is somehow stupid. That's not the point, and never has been, but it makes a good strawman for people arguing against the removal of the headphone jack.

Now one place they might implement analogue with a revised MFi spec when the jack is dropped is in the area of using Lightning to pass through analogue audio from an analogue source, like a home stereo, to a Lightning equipped headphone. There really isn't any use of Lightning in that way until possibly now. It really doesn't make much sense for a digital source converted to analogue and output via a 3.5mm to then be re-encoded to digital, just to get it back into a Lightning equipped headphones, where it will be reconverted to analogue for the transducers. It makes far more sense for Lightning as a smart connector to sense an incoming analogue signal via an inexpensive 3.5mm to lightning adapter, and bypass the headphones' internal DAC, sending the analogue signal on to the headphones. It also encourages the upgrade to Lightning headphones, because the adapters will be much simpler and less expensive, making having a drawer full of them affordable.

It would also be useful for using on an older Mac until someone upgrades to a new Mac with a Lightning port. And Apple might include that adapter in the box, so the new Lightning earbuds included in the box can be used with Legacy equipment like an older Mac or iPod.

 

[thekeyring]

Apples and oranges. How does rearranging things internally at the top of the logic board for a new camera excuse the removal of a feature at the bottom that was still widely used when they aren't using the space for anything new?

I was suggesting that they might be using the space for a bigger camera module. Move stuff that was previously at the top of the phone to the bottom, where there is now space free.

 

[citysnaps]

.
[doublepost=1471132877][/doublepost]

If we find out that second set of holes was just cosmetic and Apple could have included a 3.5 mm headphone jack, there will be a LOT of complaints from iPhone fans and Apple could lose a lot of sales of the iPhone 7. After all, Samsung showed you can still keep the 3.5 mm headphone jack and still make the phone meet IP68 dust/moistture protection certification with the Galaxy S7 series and the new Galaxy Note 7.

No, that won't happen at all.

Most of Apple customers are adults who won't give two trucks on mice-nuts cosmetics. In other words, they have full lives and could not care less.

There may be a dozen or two trolls here who will get frothed up and continue to predict Apple's demise, as has been the case from when the first iPhone was released (as in, jeeeez, it doesn't have a real keyboard, what a joke, Apple is doomed...). From Apple's and others' perspective, they are safely ignorable.

 

[Count Blah]

"Diminished functionality" -- Rather than ascribing this to the next iPhone, which hasn't even arrived, it seems more accurately applied to the hundred or so MR posters who have let which features or specs Apple does or does not include in a product determine their level of happiness with their life. Ascribing sinister motives to every minor decision, using emotionally laden terms like "irate", "outraged" etc., reveals a level of emotional attachment and disproportionality that's very unhealthy and leads diminished functionality in one's life.

Customers don't like a decision made by a company.
Customers speak out, and let their displeasure know.
Fanbois gloat in the decision, describig how THEY are more technically savvy, and are thus eagerly accepting of the decision.
Fanbois set about to belittle and mock those expressing their displeasure.

Wash
Rinse
Repeat

 

[wikiverse]

"Most people don't really want headphone jacks anyway." - Tim Cook

"You're jacking it wrong" - Steve Jobs.

 

[CarlJ]

It's not a guess. It's now....read the MFI specification, an external DAC is necessary.

you are the one guessing...making up an excuse to be honest . I'll make a bet right here with you that the MFI spec will not change cause it does not need to, companies have already developed kits for the iPhone 7 and some already produce lighting headphones

I say they could amend the spec if they decided to, for a device not yet announced or released, and you counter that the spec doesn't currently include analog capability? Are you missing the point on purpose? Companies that already produce Lightning headphones have to go by the current spec. That has no bearing on new devices which could use an amended spec. Apple designed the Lightning connector and its attendant protocols to deal with change. I don't care to bet one way or the other on whether or when they'll actually change the spec. I'm just tired or people presenting their guesses as facts when they are merely guesses. If your guess turns out to be true, it was still a guess.

In regards to profit ...... Since wired headphones will need to use the lighting connector, each one equals $$ to Apple, go on Explain how that is not increased profit?

Again, you're missing the point, and I can't figure out if you're missing it on purpose. You said "its just about pulling in more money". I said that was cynical. Because it's entirely possible they're doing this in an attempt to, you know, make a better device. Now you're arguing that if they make any money off this change, then that proves your point. No, it doesn't. In order to prove your point, you need to demonstrate that the only benefit derived from this change is more money for Apple. That's the position you've carved out for yourself. Logic really isn't that hard, but there are rules.

Also, they likely would have already done it with the 30-pin to Lightning adapter and Lightning docks if they were going to do it.

And if Wilbur and Orville were going to make an airplane, they would have put jet engines on it because those are better that propeller-based engines. Just because someone didn't do something in the past, under different circumstances and conditions, doesn't mean they won't do that thing in the future, for potentially different reasons, or because the tech is now easier to implement.

Don't get sucked into the argument that two dacs is somehow stupid. That's not the point, and never has been, but it makes a good strawman for people arguing against the removal of the headphone jack.

I don't think two DACs is stupid - not optimal, but not grossly wasteful, and there are many situations where the DAC would likely be incorporated into circuitry specifically optimized for the needs of the item in question. I'm just a little tired of people in this thread constantly stating things as facts that are not known to be facts, and offering flawed evidence to support said "facts".

I'm really looking forward to the September announcement (followed by shipping and then by teardowns), just to get some of these bits answered finally.

 

[truthertech]

Customers don't like a decision made by a company.
Customers speak out, and let their displeasure know.
Fanbois gloat in the decision, describig how THEY are more technically savvy, and are thus eagerly accepting of the decision.
Fanbois set about to belittle and mock those expressing their displeasure.

Wash
Rinse
Repeat

It's not mocking you. And Apple fans are some of its biggest critics. It's simply pointing out that there is an unhealthy aspect in your life when you get wrapped around the axle over a rumor of something that is or isn't going to be added to a product. Most people are able to share their opinion, disagreement, etc., without anger and vitriol. Or name calling. When you can't, when you find yourself personalizing every decision a company makes, those are warning signs. MacRumors has, like Twitter, all too often been a gathering place for some pretty angry, disaffected people. I guess it explains why a few people, who have some obvious disdain of Apple would spend so much time on a site for Apple enthusiasts.

 

[nope7308]

500 comments and counting. Wow.

If only Tim Cook were listening...

 

[Burger Thing]

So people can use their old headphones with all the benefits of wireless, with the same quality as the headphone jack, if not better.

Now THAT is a good one.

You have been really working overtime here in these threads and wrote so much ... ah stuff:

Admit it, you are Eddy Cue!

 

[Shirasaki]

Removing headphone jack NOT for dual speaker.
This year I feel really happy to not buy a new iPhone. No, from now on, good bye iPhone.
Next Apple device would be iPad Pro. I will carry it around to listen to music WITH headphone jack. Of course, iPad Pro should have it. If not then....
Apple is going strange nowadays, and it seems that Apple has gone too far.

 

[truthertech]

500 comments and counting. Wow.

If only Tim Cook were listening...

What would he listen to? A bunch of disparate opinions responding to a rumor that may or may not be true? Also, since the next phone is already in production is he going to base his decision based on an infinitely tiny number of people on MR, or the close to 70 million who will decide to actually buy it in the next quarter or the around 200 million people worldwide who will buy it in the next year? Remember, MR posters like you and I don't represent the masses of people who love Apple products and its ecosystem. There's a reason they've sold over a billion of them, and assuming these rumors are true, the reason a couple hundred million will buy it, let that sink in, will be because they will find the new iPhone with double the base memory storage, double the available high end storage, increased battery life, more powerful processor, waterproofing, great new camera, etc., plus whatever features we don't even know about, to be a nice improvement to a product line they are very satisfied with.

 

[Shirasaki]

500 comments and counting. Wow.

If only Tim Cook were listening...

But he does not listen to this at all.

 

[csglinux]

MacRumors has, like Twitter, all too often been a gathering place for some pretty angry, disaffected people. I guess it explains why a few people, who have some obvious disdain of Apple would spend so much time on a site for Apple enthusiasts.

I completely understand the dissappointment of Apple fans (amongst whom I once numbered) whose future phone purchases are now limited because of Apple's decision to drop the headphone jack. I would not purchase this phone. If the amazing 10th-year anniversary OLED-screen iPhone has no headphone jack, I wouldn't purchase that one either. MacRumors has all too often become a hotspot for Apple shills, which would explain why a small number of people who couldn't care less about the 3.5 mm audio jack (and have less than zero empathy for those that do) would spend so much time on subject posts primarily of interest to audio enthusiasts.

 

[Jimmy Bubbles]

This would not be new for Apple. Didn't iPhone 4 appear to have dual speakers cosmetically but only one actual speaker? Seems like I recall something else too that had the same appearance of dual speakers but only had one? Maybe one of the iPad models?

The other "speaker grille" was actually the microphone in the 4/4s.

 

[Casiotone]

Stereo wouldn't work at that scale. So why have two speakers? To increase the volume?

If increasing volume is the goal, then it makes much more sense to use a single speaker that is 2x louder, instead of adding redundancy with two speaker mounts and connectors.

A single 2x louder speaker most certainly takes less space than two separate speakers.

 

[argopelter]

I don't really care about fake grills, but I do care about the headphone jack, and if they're literally dropping it just to drop it, or even to make the device thinner in some imperceptible way, that will indeed stop me from buying the iPhone 7. This comes after buying the 4, 5, and 6 (even though with the 6 I had some reservations about the larger form factor.)

Some people are bringing up the move away from optical drives with the Macbook Air or getting rid of floppys and focusing only on USB on the original iMac. Here's something that this analysis leaves out. Those devices were sexy, but they were not Apple's top of the line. The high end Macbooks back then all had optical drives. In fact, if you want a Macbook Pro with an optical drive, you can still buy a new one; it has the same processor as the entry level Retina MBP. Back when the G3 iMac came out, the higher end PowerMac had serial/parallel ports on the back and an empty drive bay that users could use for a floppy drive.

It looks the iPhone 7 might have an empty drive bay of sorts, too. If I can pay a little extra to put a headphone jack in there instead of fake speaker grills, I'm OK with that.

The reality is that if Apple released two phones that were identical except one had a headphone jack, the jackless wonder would sell approximately zero units. And unfortunately, I think it's extremely likely that the iPhone 7 will remove the jack basically for no reason other than to remove the jack. I do think that some people, but not an overwhelming number, will vote with their wallets and sit out this generation of phone.

 

[TitanicManDC]

How can this phone get any better?

Seriously, I love my Apple products, but this is just disappointing. What's next?

 

[Hank Carter]

It's starting to look more and more like my next phone will be a 6s...

I pity the person who buys an iPhone 7 and a MacBook. They are going to need a separate bag to carry all the adapters and docks needed to jerry-rig both of those devices into something useful.

It's going to be a barrel of laughs the first time someone attempts to plug their shiny new Lighting headphones into their MacBook and realize that they need to buy a Lighting to 3.5mm or USB-C adapter.

Great move, Cupertino.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

It's starting to look more and more like my next phone will be a 6s...

Great move, Cupertino.

Same here. I'm looking into getting a 64 GB 6s or SE ( very last resort ) to save money and go for the iPhone 8 next year. I have a 6 Plus but it's getting a bit long in the tooth somewhat although it works fine under 16 GB without my music collection.

Edit: android is another possibility as well

 

[Tom-Helge]

LOL, it doesn't suprise me at all if this is the case. Because you know, Apple loves mono sound and design over functions. Why else do you think Apple loves to use a single mono microphone in the latest iPhone (infact, all iPhones have only been using a mono microphone) that only gives mono sound in the recorded videos?

What's the point in having a video camera that takes good 4k videos, if the sound sounds like crap is going to destroy the overall video experience?

I mean, mono sound is best on videos in 2016, right?

I could even bet that the next iPhone wouldn't even get stereo sound in the recorded videos or a stereo microphone.

 

[weup togo]

I was suggesting that they might be using the space for a bigger camera module. Move stuff that was previously at the top of the phone to the bottom, where there is now space free.

The limiting factor for the camera is z-depth, hence the hideous wart that the iPhone 7 has managed to armor up and emphasize even further.

Tim's Apple has utterly failed his promise "to double down on security [leaks]" but it's managing to double down on making the wrong trade-offs.

 

[dyt1983]

LOL, it doesn't suprise me at all if this is the case. Because you know, Apple loves mono sound and design over functions. Why else do you think Apple loves to use a single mono microphone in the latest iPhone (infact, all iPhones have only been using a mono microphone) that only gives mono sound in the recorded videos?

What's the point in having a video camera that takes good 4k videos, if the sound sounds like crap is going to destroy the overall video experience?

I mean, mono sound is best on videos in 2016, right?

I could even bet that the next iPhone wouldn't even get stereo sound in the recorded videos or a stereo microphone.

Apple may actually know something that we don't. Like maybe most people play back their videos on the iPhone, which has a mono speaker. Recording in stereo with an A-B microphone, which I'm presuming is what you're suggesting by "stereo" microphone, can cause phase cancelation when converted back to monaural. A solution is to use a mid/side microphone, which produces stereo AND monaural compatible output, but a mid/side microphone needs to have the two mics placed relatively close, so a packaging issue comes up in the iPhone. Not to mention then needing different orientations for landscape or portrait orientation. Most single "stereo" microphones you see for sale incorporate mid/side placement, and this technique is used widely in the media so that stereo played back on mono equipment doesn't have issues.

 

[Zirel]

500 comments and counting. Wow.

If only Tim Cook were listening...

My guess of him right now on this page:

 

[MH01]

I say they could amend the spec if they decided to, for a device not yet announced or released, and you counter that the spec doesn't currently include analog capability? Are you missing the point on purpose? Companies that already produce Lightning headphones have to go by the current spec. That has no bearing on new devices which could use an amended spec. Apple designed the Lightning connector and its attendant protocols to deal with change. I don't care to bet one way or the other on whether or when they'll actually change the spec. I'm just tired or people presenting their guesses as facts when they are merely guesses. If your guess turns out to be true, it was still a guess.

Again, you're missing the point, and I can't figure out if you're missing it on purpose. You said "its just about pulling in more money". I said that was cynical. Because it's entirely possible they're doing this in an attempt to, you know, make a better device. Now you're arguing that if they make any money off this change, then that proves your point. No, it doesn't. In order to prove your point, you need to demonstrate that the only benefit derived from this change is more money for Apple. That's the position you've carved out for yourself. Logic really isn't that hard, but there are rules.

Im just going with what currently exits, and I already use the lighting port to power analogue headphones, why would apple add analogue capabilities to the lighting port?

Wait..... lets turn this around, how is removing the 3.5mm better for the consumer? If you can demonstrate that the removal results in a better Sound quality at the same price point, you may have a point. If Headphones are going to cost more, and have no better SQ, how do i benefit?

AS a CONSUMER.....I can demonstrate that I will need to spend extra money to use the iPhone 7, it will be inconvenient, and apple will get $$ out of me, as I will at least need adapter, And I put money on the DAC in the adapter being inferior to the one in the 6S, therefore, inferior SQ.

how does it cost less when you have to either buy and adapter or lighting headphones? therefore....either way apple makes more money..... its also impossible to loose the 3.5mm jack in my iPhone, but easy to loose an adapter, or buy a few, one for work and home etc.

Please demonstrate a scenario where apple does not make money out of this move.......People who already have BT.... well they do not care.....iphone 7 adds nothing to them, tech in their headphones is the limiting factor.

 

[davidgolfer]

Only way this would make sense for me is if you are getting rid of all plugs and going completely wireless. Get rid of lightning and headphone jack. Wireless charging and wireless connections. Don't think this will happen therefore this decision doesn't make sense, at least to me.