Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Isn't "better sound" tied to the quality of the Digital Analog Converter (DAC) regardless of digital (Lightning) or analog (3.5 mm) jack? At the end of the day the signal needs to be converted back to analog because humans can't otherwise hear the 1s and 0s .
Going Lightning-only puts the listener at the mercy of whatever DAC is in the wireless or wired headphones and introduces two variables into the "quality sound equation" - the headphones and the DAC. Currently the only variable is the headphones because the DAC is in the iPhone.
To my knowledge Lightning-only is no guarantee of better sound. I'd even argue that, in trying to reach a price point, headphone manufacturers will have to find sacrifices; the DAC will be in their cross-hairs.

Yes that's right, Lightning or 3.5mm are not a factor in delivering a digital signal. However, the iPone is limited by the quality of the chip, amp, and other factors. Moreover, Apple has to offer a flat output to accommodate whatever device is plugged into it. A Lightning device will have its DAC and amp customized to the equipment it's driving. So that will be the first improvement. The next will be the quality of the DAC & Amp. Some will introduce outboard power supplies to better drive the headphones over what the iPhone can provide. All of that will benefit the playback of lossless sound files.

And you're right. Lightning is no guarantee of better sound. While I've no doubt some manufacturers will try to screw their consumers, I really don't see this any different than the current headphone market -- the customer chooses which pair sounds best. The iPhone quality is actually out of the equation now, as it send only a digital signal. So for the first time a customer is going to hear their music the way the headphones reproduce it. And now the burden of producing good sound is entirely on the headphone maker. If they cut corners, then they will lose in the marketplace, just like it is today. The customer will finally hear the difference between cheap headphones and high priced headphones, and they will get what they pay for, for better or worse.

But my guess is Apple is going to make the most of that marketing.

But what benefit will "HQ Audio" have when it's still only 256kbps? Wouldn't they have to address that? And increasing that bit rate significantly would affect Apple Music streamers on limited data plans (so mostly everyone). Furthermore, wouldn't they need some really high end drivers to notice a difference in this "HQ Audio"? And yes it would affect hundreds of millions, as once they do this and go too thin there isn't any turning back. All future iPhones will have to deal with this.

As I've said in other threads on this, I applaud Apple at pushing the industry forward with an old connector, but like I said, they need to make sure they come up with satisfactory solutions or it could dip sales. And it won't take much to dip sales and tank their stock right now as they're treading a fine line. So I get what you're saying about wanting to move them towards Lightning, but at the same time it seems rather expensive to build a decent pair of Lightning EarPods that showcases the benefit of "HQ Audio" to users who would actually care about that—probably less than 10% of the population? It will be really interesting to see how this shakes out. The only thing I know is that people will be pissed either way, lol.

Rumor has it that Apple is addressing the sound file quality in iTunes and Apple Music. And I would expect that they would as part of introducing and selling a headphone jack-less iPhone. At a minimum a new AAC codec. As I mentioned above, I think there are a lot of ways to use custom DAC/amp combos to improve the sound of even basic headphones. But in general, the appeal in marketing is the prospect of affordable HQ audio, or at least opting for more expensive equipment if someone demands it. The reality is, putting the analogue conversion in the outboard device, or adapter, opens up all kinds of other digital control that wasn't possible before, not just sound enhancement. So it's all of that which Apple offers over the original iPhone "dumb" adapter. Streaming lossless audio is going to be a bandwidth problem, but again, if Apple's going down this path, then there must be some kind of plan for this, perhaps along the lines of FaceTime calls not counting toward bandwidth.

Im not arguing that Apple won't get blowback over this no matter what. If Apple acted too soon here, it wouldn't be the first time they backtracked and put the 3.5mm jack back into the 7s, or 8. I've been giving them the benefit of the doubt for a while now, that they needed the space, something Droid makers would also then be facing. However, the rumor of the 2nd speaker would make a mockery of that rationale, and I'm not sure how Apple could survive if the Galaxy 8 can compete head to head on everything the 7 does, but retains the 3.5mm jack.


I see you've upped your estimate from 400 million to 475 million... but it's still too low.

Apple sold 230 million iPhones last year alone. And 675 million over the last 4 years.

iPhones last a looong time. They stay in service much longer than other phones.

I've actually heard estimates around 700 million active iPhones.

Tim Cook said in January that there are a BILLION active Apple devices... and we know iPhones make up the VAST majority of them. (there are less than 100 million Macs and maybe 200 million iPads, yet not very many iPods anymore)

So... how are you figuring 400-475 million active iPhones worldwide?

By saying that... you're saying half of all the iPhones on Earth were sold just last year. Or that almost all of the iPhones on Earth were sold over the last two years. That's ridiculous ;)

No, Tim Cook said Apple had sold 1 billion active devices, not iPhones. That includes, Mac, iPads, Watch, TV, iPod Touch. Now considering the average life span of all those other devices, your argument suggests there's less than 300 million of everything else Apple sells in active use. That's hard to imagine when I'm still using my 2011 MacBook Pro. And my Mom is still using her 2009 MacBook.

My original figures came from the reports of around 2.6 billion smartphones worldwide, of which Apple has about a 15% share. So around 400 million -- and that's rounding up all the way around.

This is where I got my latest figures:

http://bgr.com/2015/06/01/iphone-6s-vs-iphone-6-sales/

Now, they are arguably almost 9 months out of date, and don't take into account the 6s launch, but I would also suggest that some portion of every 6s upgrade, completely replaced the earlier device. I know mine does. I have all of my previous iPhones, mainly because they became functionally unreliable, or to use as backups. I would suggest that every new purchase is not a new and unique activation, but a wholesale replacement of a lost or damaged phone. I even recall reading a study that gave a particularly high estimate of the number of old iPhones that went into a customers drawer, never to be used again when they upgraded. So taken as a whole, 475-500 currently active iPhones sounds about right.
 
Last edited:



We've already seen several alleged part leaks for the next-generation iPhone 7, and now Chinese site Digi.tech.qq.com [Google Translate] (via HDBlog.it) has shared images of what is believed to be the battery that will be included in the device.

The battery lists a capacity of 7.04 watt-hours, slightly larger in capacity than the equivalent battery capacity listed for the iPhone 6s (6.61 watt-hours) and almost identical to the iPhone 6 (7.01 watt-hours). Voltage is not visible on the alleged iPhone 7 battery, so the exact charge capacity is not yet available, but should be similar to the iPhone 6 battery.

battery1.jpg

Rumors suggest the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus will be thinner than existing iPhones, with Apple perhaps making room for the similarly-sized battery by eliminating the headphone jack and cutting down on the extra space around the Lightning port.

battery2.jpg

While we still have several months to go before the iPhone 7 debuts, we've already heard a long list of rumors about the device and we've seen multiple part leaks. The iPhone 7 is said to include a faster A10 chip, a Smart Connector, up to 256GB storage space, stereo speakers, no headphone jack, a thinner design with no rear antenna bands, a faster LTE modem, and dual cameras in the iPhone 7 Plus model.

Article Link: New Images Depict Alleged 7.04 Watt-Hour Battery Designed for iPhone 7
[doublepost=1458347995][/doublepost]7.04WH is the charge capacity, I don't know why you think you need to know voltage to figure that out.
At 7.04W of power draw this battery will discharge in 1 hour, alter you expectations of power draw and re-calculate to estimate battery life. 0.5w = 14 hours

Battery capacity is only one factor in battery performance, power consumption has just as much effect.
 
There's obviously a really good reason for them not putting a larger battery in the iPhone and having it a little thicker. I'd love to hear the Apple leaderships reasoning.

I think saying "all they think about is thin, thin, thin!" is underestimating them a tad.
 
Can we PLEASE get Wireless and Fast Charging. At least Fast Charging. I'm using a Note 5 just to try it out and hate the operating system, but I love how fast it charges lol

Its frustrating how it looks like Fast Charging isn't even on the rumor table according to this article

"fast charging" as far as I can research is just a 2a power adapter. iPhone 6, 6+, 6s & 6s+ all support Apple's larger 10w/12w charger that ships with iPad to charge the iPhone about twice as fast as the standard 1a cube charger included with the phone purchase.
 
No, Tim Cook said Apple had sold 1 billion active devices, not iPhones. That includes, Mac, iPads, Watch, TV, iPod Touch. Now considering the average life span of all those other devices, your argument suggests there's less than 300 million of everything else Apple sells in active use. That's hard to imagine when I'm still using my 2011 MacBook Pro. And my Mom is still using her 2009 MacBook.

This is where I got my latest figures:

http://bgr.com/2015/06/01/iphone-6s-vs-iphone-6-sales/

Now, they are arguably almost 9 months out of date, and don't take into account the 6s launch, but I would also suggest that some portion of every 6s upgrade, completely replaced the earlier device. I know mine does. I have all of my previous iPhones, mainly because they became functionally unreliable, or to use as backups. I would suggest that every new purchase is not a new and unique activation, but a wholesale replacement of a lost or damaged phone. I even recall reading a study that gave a particularly high estimate of the number of old iPhones that went into a customers drawer, never to be used again when they upgraded. So taken as a whole, 475-500 currently active iPhones sounds about right.

Read my comment again. I said 1 billion active devices... not iPhones and not cumulative ever sold.

Here's Tim's quote from two months ago:

“Our team delivered Apple’s biggest quarter ever, thanks to the world’s most innovative products and all-time record sales of iPhone, Apple Watch and Apple TV,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “The growth of our Services business accelerated during the quarter to produce record results, and our installed base recently crossed a major milestone of one billion active devices.

"Active" devices means they have connected to Apple's servers in the last month. In other words... they're not stuck in a drawer somewhere.

So one billion active Apple devices... yet you're saying less than half are iPhones: the most widely used Apple product in history. And more than half are Macs, iPads, iPods, Apple TV and Apple Watch. I find that a little hard to believe. There are less than 100 million Macs in the world today... possibly 200 million iPads... not very many iPods in-use anymore... and Apple TV and Apple Watch are tiny compared to other active Apple devices in the hundreds of millions.

Here's where I got my iPhone numbers. Apple publishes their sales numbers.

2015: 230 million
2014: 170 million
2013: 150 million
2012: 125 million

= 675 million new iPhones sold over the last 4 years.

And I would imagine almost all of the iPhones sold during those years are still in active use. Why wouldn't they be? The majority of the iPhones sold during those years were iPhone 5 and above. Even the iPhone 5 is still a capable phone today. They shouldn't be inactive in a drawer.

I sold my iPhone 5S to my carrier when I got the iPhone 6S Plus... but that iPhone 5S is still being used somewhere, right? It didn't get thrown away in a landfill. My point is... Apple obviously sells a lot of new iPhones... but tons of older iPhones are still active.

The iPhones sold in the last two years alone are 400 million. We know those devices are active and still in use. Plus we know there are even older iPhones still in service... thus adding to the active installed base.

So it's a little hard to believe that the majority of active iPhones in the world were sold just in the last two years.

BTW... you've gone from 400 million, to 475 million, to 500 million active iPhones in subsequent comments. I'm having a tough time following your claims ;)

But it's a great discussion :D
 
Apple is so uncompromising with their obsession on thinness...

We REALLY wouldn't mind if the device were as thick as the previous generation model, with a bigger battery inside.

Amen! I will take extra battery life over a 1.2 mm reduction in thickness every time. I always put an Otter Box case on my phone so I never even notice the reduction in thickness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandstorm
Read my comment again. I said 1 billion active devices... not iPhones and not cumulative ever sold.

Here's Tim's quote from two months ago:

“Our team delivered Apple’s biggest quarter ever, thanks to the world’s most innovative products and all-time record sales of iPhone, Apple Watch and Apple TV,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “The growth of our Services business accelerated during the quarter to produce record results, and our installed base recently crossed a major milestone of one billion active devices.

"Active" devices means they have connected to Apple's servers in the last month. In other words... they're not stuck in a drawer somewhere.

So one billion active Apple devices... yet you're saying less than half are iPhones: the most widely used Apple product in history. And more than half are Macs, iPads, iPods, Apple TV and Apple Watch. I find that a little hard to believe. There are less than 100 million Macs in the world today... possibly 200 million iPads... not very many iPods in-use anymore... and Apple TV and Apple Watch are tiny compared to other active Apple devices in the hundreds of millions.

Here's where I got my iPhone numbers. Apple publishes their sales numbers.

2015: 230 million
2014: 170 million
2013: 150 million
2012: 125 million

= 675 million new iPhones sold over the last 4 years.

And I would imagine almost all of the iPhones sold during those years are still in active use. Why wouldn't they be? The majority of the iPhones sold during those years were iPhone 5 and above. Even the iPhone 5 is still a capable phone today. They shouldn't be inactive in a drawer.

I sold my iPhone 5S to my carrier when I got the iPhone 6S Plus... but that iPhone 5S is still being used somewhere, right? It didn't get thrown away in a landfill. My point is... Apple obviously sells a lot of new iPhones... but tons of older iPhones are still active.

The iPhones sold in the last two years alone are 400 million. We know those devices are active and still in use. Plus we know there are even older iPhones still in service... thus adding to the active installed base.

So it's a little hard to believe that the majority of active iPhones in the world were sold just in the last two years.

BTW... you've gone from 400 million, to 475 million, to 500 million active iPhones in subsequent comments. I'm having a tough time following your claims ;)

But it's a great discussion :D

Try reading my post again ... I gave you the answers for everything you're still questioning, with explanations as to where my numbers came from. It's not like this information is easy to come by. So yes, I'm generalizing my estimates based on actual statistical reports. You're still going on your gut. Provide links that back up your assertions and I'll happily acquiesce. If you can find reports that suggest more than 500 million iPhones are currently active, then I'll amend my thinking accordingly. But you're basically saying that of 675 million iPhones sold none were lost, none were stolen, none were put into storage or sitting in unused inventory, none were broken or damaged beyond repair, none suffered any warranty defects -- that they are all still in active use somewhere. And I find that hard to believe.

And by the way, your carrier likely did not resell your phone. It was likely ground up and recycled. It may have been refurbished and resold, but if it was, it likely counts in the total iPhones sold each quarter, since carriers and re-sellers are partners with Apple and have to abide by guidelines. If you'd sold it on eBay, or private phone repair shop, it might be a different story.
 
Last edited:
Can we PLEASE get Wireless and Fast Charging. At least Fast Charging. I'm using a Note 5 just to try it out and hate the operating system, but I love how fast it charges lol

Its frustrating how it looks like Fast Charging isn't even on the rumor table according to this article

That's because it's unlikely for this year's iPhone. Apple has to save wireless charging for next year's model, maybe fast charging as well. Anyway, it looks like battery life will be a little better, but wireless charging should be a very welcome feature on the 7s (8 if Apple decides to skip the 's' model next year).
[doublepost=1458352086][/doublepost]
ARG! All this battery talk is driving me crazy! Here's a few things to think about:
  • The battery capacity appears to be remaining the same(-ish)
  • But whereas the A9 (and A9X) are made with a 14-or-16nm photolithographic process, the A10 is expected to be a 10nm photolithographic process.
  • Lots of folks are aware of Moore's Law but lesser known is Koomey's Law. The computational power of devices goes up with Moore's Law but the power consumption of the same devices goes down because of Koomey's Law.
  • When Apple claims "same battery life because the A-Processor is more efficient" they are not making it up. It is a function of needing to push around fewer electrons through the increasingly microscopically small "wires" on a chip.
  • Apple knows all of this. The price-point/performance-level/style equation they must have to calculate (even if only metaphorically) takes all of this into account.
  • One size does not fit all. I charge my "6" every other day (maybe a bit more than that) and never have low-power-anxiety problems. I do NOT want to have to pay extra for more battery life that I do not need even if other power-users do. And I suspect Apple has all kinds of market research supporting their thinking that "the choices we have made will please the biggest audience." For those that it doesn't, the add-on battery pack fixes that ... maybe no so stylishly but...
  • Moore's Law has a little more life in it - and the limits Koomey's Law are still unfolding.

I thought the A10 would be an "enhanced" A9 at 16nm and the A11 next year will be 10nm (thanks to a delay).
 
Try reading my post again ... I gave you the answers for everything you're still questioning, with explanations as to where my numbers came from.
Yeah I'm still confused.

There were 675 million new iPhones sold in recent years. And these are phones with 3-4 year lifespans.

So I'm not seeing how there are only 400-500 million active iPhones today.

iPhones simply don't expire that fast. iPhone 5 still works today... and the iPhone 5S, 6, and 6S are still being sold new.

And those are the models that make up that 675 million and are all very worthy of being active today.

I can see the iPhone 4S and earlier being tucked in a drawer... but not the iPhone 5 and above.

And it's the iPhone 5 and above that sold in huge numbers... which means there are a lot of them out in the world... so there should be a lot of them in active use.

Holy ninja edit, Batman! I'll have to return to this discussion later :)
 
Yes that's right, Lightning or 3.5mm are not a factor in delivering a digital signal. However, the iPone is limited by the quality of the chip, amp, and other factors. Moreover, Apple has to offer a flat output to accommodate whatever device is plugged into it. A Lightning device will have its DAC and amp customized to the equipment it's driving. So that will be the first improvement. The next will be the quality of the DAC & Amp. Some will introduce outboard power supplies to better drive the headphones over what the iPhone can provide. All of that will benefit the playback of lossless sound files.

And you're right. Lightning is no guarantee of better sound. While I've no doubt some manufacturers will try to screw their consumers, I really don't see this any different than the current headphone market -- the customer chooses which pair sounds best. The iPhone quality is actually out of the equation now, as it send only a digital signal. So for the first time a customer is going to hear their music the way the headphones reproduce it. And now the burden of producing good sound is entirely on the headphone maker. If they cut corners, then they will lose in the marketplace, just like it is today. The customer will finally hear the difference between cheap headphones and high priced headphones, and they will get what they pay for, for better or worse.

But my guess is Apple is going to make the most of that marketing.



Rumor has it that Apple is addressing the sound file quality in iTunes and Apple Music. And I would expect that they would as part of introducing and selling a headphone jack-less iPhone. At a minimum a new AAC codec. As I mentioned above, I think there are a lot of ways to use custom DAC/amp combos to improve the sound of even basic headphones. But in general, the appeal in marketing is the prospect of affordable HQ audio, or at least opting for more expensive equipment if someone demands it. The reality is, putting the analogue conversion in the outboard device, or adapter, opens up all kinds of other digital control that wasn't possible before, not just sound enhancement. So it's all of that which Apple offers over the original iPhone "dumb" adapter. Streaming lossless audio is going to be a bandwidth problem, but again, if Apple's going down this path, then there must be some kind of plan for this, perhaps along the lines of FaceTime calls not counting toward bandwidth.

Im not arguing that Apple won't get blowback over this no matter what. If Apple acted too soon here, it wouldn't be the first time they backtracked and put the 3.5mm jack back into the 7s, or 8. I've been giving them the benefit of the doubt for a while now, that they needed the space, something Droid makers would also then be facing. However, the rumor of the 2nd speaker would make a mockery of that rationale, and I'm not sure how Apple could survive if the Galaxy 8 can compete head to head on everything the 7 does, but retains the 3.5mm jack.




No, Tim Cook said Apple had sold 1 billion active devices, not iPhones. That includes, Mac, iPads, Watch, TV, iPod Touch. Now considering the average life span of all those other devices, your argument suggests there's less than 300 million of everything else Apple sells in active use. That's hard to imagine when I'm still using my 2011 MacBook Pro. And my Mom is still using her 2009 MacBook.

My original figures came from the reports of around 2.6 billion smartphones worldwide, of which Apple has about a 15% share. So around 400 million -- and that's rounding up all the way around.

This is where I got my latest figures:

http://bgr.com/2015/06/01/iphone-6s-vs-iphone-6-sales/

Now, they are arguably almost 9 months out of date, and don't take into account the 6s launch, but I would also suggest that some portion of every 6s upgrade, completely replaced the earlier device. I know mine does. I have all of my previous iPhones, mainly because they became functionally unreliable, or to use as backups. I would suggest that every new purchase is not a new and unique activation, but a wholesale replacement of a lost or damaged phone. I even recall reading a study that gave a particularly high estimate of the number of old iPhones that went into a customers drawer, never to be used again when they upgraded. So taken as a whole, 475-500 currently active iPhones sounds about right.

Thanks for the well written reply.
Considering the mass adoption of mp3s; a format of lesser quality/fidelity than its predecessor and possibly the first time a subsequent format was the lesser of its predecessor, I don't believe the bulk of the population can identify good sound vs bad sound vs the sound the artist intended.
Societally, high fidelity became the casualty of convenience. Apple, like most corporations will remove ports and make decisions to drive shareholder value. That's the bottom line, literally and figuratively.
 
I wish that were the case. While using an iPad A/C adaptor is definitely faster than the one provided, if you used a Quick Charge on like a Note 5 or Galaxy S7, it will charge from 0-100% in about 90 minutes and charge from 0-50% in about 30 minutes. It's insane
[doublepost=1458355786][/doublepost]
Whenever I want fast charging I use an iPad charger to charge my iPhone.

That's not the same. That's faster than the included A/C adapter but is much slower than Quick Charge that the latest Android devices feature.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jimrod
It definitely charges faster with the 12 watt iPad charger, though....

As I mentioned in the previous comment, the video shows an iPhone 5. The new 6 line can charge much faster with the 12W iPad charger. I charge with it everyday and it never takes much longer than an hour for a full charge
 
Why does Apple have to keep making it thinner...? It's as if they think the only way to innovate is to shave off another millimeter. This obsession with thinness used to be great, but these days it's really getting ridiculous and isn't providing any real benefit anymore.

Would u prefer a thick iPhone, like the iPhone 5s ? Thy have to do something to keep users happy. These days its probably not much improvements... A millimeter here... a shave there, noting to big..... its more about features than anything. like improved GPU/ new A-series chip and/or dual camera system....

We've come a long way from where we just amazed ourselves with "oh look. It's a thinner phone" augment. Something u could actually "see" Now days all thin phones look a-like.. unless u have a slide-rule you can't really tell that much. It's a sure sign Apple's running out of idea's as to what phone might look like. Some may even say, we've passed that point already..
 
Would u prefer a thick iPhone, like the iPhone 5s ? Thy have to do something to keep users happy. These days its probably not much improvements... A millimeter here... a shave there, noting to big..... its more about features than anything. like improved GPU/ new A-series chip and/or dual camera system....

We've come a long way from where we just amazed ourselves with "oh look. It's a thinner phone" augment. Something u could actually "see" Now days all thin phones look a-like.. unless u have a slide-rule you can't really tell that much
The best thing would have been to keep the thin-ness of the iPhone 6 and then added a larger capacity battery.

Frankly what's more important is for Apple to finally leave the year 2011 and move beyond a ridiculous 16GB base model.
 
no headphone jack is a deal-killer for me. Looks like they got rid of it to make space for another speaker (dumb)

I already use bluetooth headphones but I still use aux for the car, and I refuse to pay for another adaptor.

Time to look at S7 edge
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I have an appreciation for thin and light devices.

Happy to see Apple ignores the complainers and continues making the iPhone thinner and lighter every 2 years.

Thanks!

If you have to ask why, then it's something you'll probably never understand or agree with. Sort of like when people ask why I choose to own a 1000cc sport bike when there's a speed limit. Some things just defy practical thought and are simply appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.