Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Supply Chain Rumors Reaffirm iPhone 7 Will Not Have Headphone Jack
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
just sounded like you were pulling that outta your ass...but, i'd imagine most people use their lightning cables a lot more than any set of headphones anyway so, yeah, naturally they're gonna get a little more wear and tear...for my own personal experience, i've never had an issue with any of my iPhone chargers...they've all worked for me since my first iPhone in 2008
Nope...you've proven nothing. Good effort though.
The argument was not about Lightning connectors vs 3.5 jacks.
Earlier in the thread, libmanj wrote, "Not to mention the fact that lightning cables break a lot more than 3.5mm jacks.". The argument was about Lightning CABLES vs 3.5 jacks. Please read and think before you post.
Quite the contrary, the industry standard is WINTEL. Apple became the most valuable tech-company in history by differing from this standard. Hence the iconic THINK DIFFERENT campaign. The Macintosh never cared about being IBM-compatible and every other PC manufacturer is struggling now, because iOS broke more computing standards than anything since the GUI. You can either be innovative or standard conform, but not both. Everyone on MacRumors is here for innovation. Nobody is waiting for rumors about backward-compatibility.
Problem solved:
Sure there is. There's no market for them. And there won't be until Apple eliminates the cheaper alternative of the 3.5mm jack. Any manufacturer who took this on now, including Apple would be facing a losing situation.
Besides, this is not about Lightning. It's about wireless, which is the ultimate future of audio.
Here's something to consider for the customer that plugs into all kinds of legacy equipment -- use a bluetooth dongle that is paired with your bluetooth headphones, even tether it to your BT headphones if you like. It doesn't add any significant steps to what someone is already doing with a pair of native 3.5mm headphones. If a wired connection is necessary, then a pair of new Lightning headphones, with an unobtrusive Lightning to 3.5mm dongle is simplest, that way it only has to be removed for Apple gear, which sounds like the least of your problems. And, it can be tethered to the cable so it is unlikely to be lost. If the reverse is needed, even better, use any headphones you like with an adapter that is only removed when infrequently connecting to non-Apple gear. I'm really not seeing the issue here even in a situation where multiple equipment connection is required.
Or, you know, they could just keep the headphone jack.
Eliminating the need for the majority of their user base to have to read multiple paragraphs explaining detailed workarounds, purchase additional equipment, etc... Just to have one of the core functions of the device become usable.
Eliminating the need for the majority of their user base to have to read multiple paragraphs explaining detailed workarounds, purchase additional equipment, etc... Just to have one of the core functions of the device become usable.
Soooooooooo......
Are you under the impression that sitting out the 7 will make ANY difference whatsoever?
Like, do you think that the 7S will add the headphone jack back on there or something?
Please post a link to the data that proves the "majority of [Apple's] user base" are exclusively using the 3.5mm jack. I'd love to see the research.
And assuming this is true, in leaving the connector in place, they could also eliminate any new features the reclaimed space would have provided, not improve battery capacity, or greatly increase the size of the iPhone instead, and lose standing in the marketplace against their competition. And then of course there's the lack of adoption of a wireless audio standard because it's more expensive than a 3.5mm jack, and then a dearth of innovation from wireless audio developers where there is no financial incentive, so the technology never improves, or becomes less expensive giving consumers greater freedom and choice and moving them toward the future of audio.
The headphone jack "greatly increases" the size of the phone? That's just laughable. Apple had no problem fitting it into phones that were much smaller than the current generation of iPhones.
If people don't want it, perhaps you should listen to them instead of trying to force it down their throat by taking away the established alternatives? Besides, there are many reasons why Bluetooth headsets are not popular in addition to the price, such as the need to constantly recharge them every few hours and the sucky audio quality of the SBC compression that many models are using.
I don't think the comparison with eliminating the 30-pin connector is valid. Apple sold an adapter to plug an old Apple cable into a new Apple phone. That affected only Apple devices, this is severely limiting the universe of things that can be plugged into an iPhone. For my part, if my Shure headphones don't work, then I'm skipping this one, and I'm not buying another adapter from Apple.
Guess what else? those smaller phones were also thicker, and contained much less hardware and battery capacity than the current phones. Because you see, as you add features, you need more room in which to put them, and miniaturization can only go so far. And you get more room by eliminating things that are redundant. Besides, I wasn't just talking about the headphone jack, I was talking about removing unnecessary things in general, to make room for new features. So yes, Apple can either find something they can get rid of to make room for new features and/or batteries to power them in their existing case dimensions, or they can greatly increase the size depending on the need over time.
If people do want it, perhaps others should listen to us rather than try to force the 3.5mm jack down our throats. And you clearly didn't care to read or understand what I said about Bluetooth headphones. Without a thriving market for them demanding better technology, and longer battery life, then where's the incentive to get better? Only removing the lowest-common denominator will push the market forward to improve all facets of wireless tech. Necessity is the mother of all invention. Where's the necessity if the 3.5mm jack remains? The future is wireless. No time like the present.
Seriously where would Apple be if they listened to every group who didn't want to lose some legacy port ... oh right, they'd be Microsoft.
All of you keep saying that you will switch to another phone because you want to keep using your good headphones that you have. I have to ask though, how much did you spend on those headphones? If you spent a bunch of money on those headphones so that you get really great sound from them wouldn't it make more sense for you to buy a small $20-30 lightning to 3.5mm adaptor to use with your current headphones. Instead of spending $200+ on a new phone, throwing away all your purchased apps/movies/music and starting over with the Google store?
A few years down the road when you want to replace your headphones you could look for a set that uses lightning directly if you want. My guess is by then there will be headphones that have removable cords so they can hook up to iphones with lightning and other phones with micro-USB so they can be used with any phones.
For the people comparing broken lightning cables to broken 3.5mm jacks, that is just ridiculous. How about comparing broken 3.5mm jacks to lightning jacks, and broken 3.5mm cables to broken lightning cables. I'm guessing those numbers will end up being pretty even. I know I have thrown away my fair share of headphones/earphones because the wires developed shorts right next to the 3.5mm plug, just like some people have issues with lightning cables shorting/fraying by the lightning connector (which I still haven't experienced yet).
I say get rid of the 3.5mm jack and add another speaker in it's place. Maybe even add 2 speakers to the top also and have them work like the iPad Pro (that would mean moving around cameras though).
A few years down the road when you want to replace your headphones you could look for a set that uses lightning directly if you want. My guess is by then there will be headphones that have removable cords so they can hook up to iphones with lightning and other phones with micro-USB so they can be used with any phones.
For the people comparing broken lightning cables to broken 3.5mm jacks, that is just ridiculous. How about comparing broken 3.5mm jacks to lightning jacks, and broken 3.5mm cables to broken lightning cables. I'm guessing those numbers will end up being pretty even. I know I have thrown away my fair share of headphones/earphones because the wires developed shorts right next to the 3.5mm plug, just like some people have issues with lightning cables shorting/fraying by the lightning connector (which I still haven't experienced yet).
I say get rid of the 3.5mm jack and add another speaker in it's place. Maybe even add 2 speakers to the top also and have them work like the iPad Pro (that would mean moving around cameras though).
I have no links to any research articles, but it's just common sense. Jump on public transport in peak hour. You can easily see 14 out of every 15 people using wired headphones, and it would be a safe assumption to say that all 15 of those people would never need to submerge their iPhone in water. Hell, walk out on the street - you'll see heaps of people with wired headphones, maybe 1 with wireless headphones, and none carrying around their phone in a bucket of water!
It's all about use cases.
Personally, having a 3.5mm headphone jack that I would use essentially for an hour every day is far more important to me than having a second loudspeaker that I would use maybe 15 times in 2 years and would have no noticeable impact to me over having one loudspeaker.
It would be interesting to see the data around usage of different features. If we're talking about stripping existing stuff out of the phone to make room for different things, or "new tech", I can think of a bunch of things to remove that would be less of an impact than removing the headphone jack. Let's see, NFC, essentially still unusable in Australia and most countries, 3D Touch, a glorified right click menu that is currently barely utilised, front facing camera, etc...
All of these features are great, but again, I'm assuming their usage is only a tiny fraction compared to people using the 3.5mm headphone jack.
It's all about use cases.
Personally, having a 3.5mm headphone jack that I would use essentially for an hour every day is far more important to me than having a second loudspeaker that I would use maybe 15 times in 2 years and would have no noticeable impact to me over having one loudspeaker.
It would be interesting to see the data around usage of different features. If we're talking about stripping existing stuff out of the phone to make room for different things, or "new tech", I can think of a bunch of things to remove that would be less of an impact than removing the headphone jack. Let's see, NFC, essentially still unusable in Australia and most countries, 3D Touch, a glorified right click menu that is currently barely utilised, front facing camera, etc...
All of these features are great, but again, I'm assuming their usage is only a tiny fraction compared to people using the 3.5mm headphone jack.
Looking at feature sets of other higher end phones, even smaller, I feel as long as Apple has to fit in a Home Button under the screen and make bezels symmetrical, there will be plenty of space to fit in a headphone jack, especially when miniaturisation and efficiency of other components continues.
But talking about redundancy and headphone jacks: using a weired headphone with the headphone jack is technically as elegant as it gets when you want the advantages of a weired connection. For its size it's sturdy because with being cylindrical this form factor offers high strength, a huge contact area and allowing the connector to be rotated.
You know what is redundancy? Plugging in a headset, which requires an external DAC trough your lightning port. Because it makes your internal DAC redundant. And your internal DAC will ALWAYS have to be there for your speakers as well. So making use of it via a dedicated port, which is universally used and not limiting sound quality (Ding Ding Ding) as a connector (here is where most of the comparisons to the elimination of the Floppy Disk or CD-Drives fall apart) and eliminating another DAC or adapter makes perfect sense.
Well, at least for me. For an Apple Share holder, maybe not so much.
Last edited:
I use Apple Pay and FaceTime more than wired headphones. Bluetooth headsets are used frequently.
Actually, in terms of volume, they contained "more" hardware, because miniaturization was less advanced, they used larger SIMs, and batteries had less energy density etc. But don't let that keep you from inventing more strawman arguments.
You're a funny guy. Nobody forces you to use the 3.5mm jack. You can use your Bluetooth or Lightning headphones today. The only one who wants to take away choice and force people to use what you think is best is ... you.
I ignored it because it's nonsense. If a technology brings real benefits, it can compete on its own and doesn't need to be forced on people.
[doublepost=1452125916][/doublepost]
For me, that's actually not the reason. If Apple were to use another industry standard instead of the 3.5mm jack, I'd have no problem with that. What I don't want is that they use a proprietary connector that nobody else uses and that isn't compatible with anything. I don't want to carry around a bagful of adapters just to be able to use something as basic as headphones with multiple different devices (and even Apple's own computers).
Last edited:
Right, so it's your anecdotal evidence which is completely contrary to mine, and it's your needs over mine, and everybody else. I seriously doubt Apple does things without understanding the market they serve. What happens to be your reality does not necessarily reflect their market research. I'll take Apple's over yours any day.
Of course teardowns show otherwise, but whatever.
Again, you're missing the forest for the trees. WIRELESS is the future of Audio. NOT Lightning. Lightning is an intermediary step that offers its own benefits, over the 3.5mm jack if not all, which is debatable. So unless you honestly think the future of personal audio is being tethered to a device by a wire, then you need to rethink your position. Wires are the most inconvenient thing we have to deal with in a technological society, and removing the 3.5mm jack is a step in eliminating them.
And the comparison to CD-R and Floppy disk doesn't fall apart in this respect. But a more clear relationship is this: the 3.5mm jack is to bluetooth audio as Ethernet is to Wifi networking. Simple as that. Or do you think we would be better off if we had to plug all of our mobile devices into an Ethernet port in order to access the internet?
As for redundancy, well, having a tiny chip inside the iPhone to provide key services required by the PHONE (because who really enjoys listening to music over their low-quality mono iPhone speaker?), and Siri, pales in comparison to the over 184 cubic mm of space the single function 3.5mm jack takes up in order to access it. This way, Apple can offer a less expensive, lower quality DAC that is suited to the low quality audio it serves. And in so doing allows the manufacturer of the headphones and speakers (wired or wireless) to match the best sounding DAC to their headphones and speakers, leaving Apple to stream the raw data and nothing else to color the sound.
And who knows, eventually Apple may move the DAC out of the iPhone altogether, relying on wearables like the Watch to be the audio interface. But one thing is certain, wireless is the future.
[doublepost=1452126339][/doublepost]
I ignored all your other comments because it's nonsense. ;-)
And Apple is rumored to use another industry standard: it's called Bluetooth. Maybe you've heard of it, "funny guy". So now you have no problems with this.
Because you know, nobody is forcing you to use a wired headphone of any kind, much less a bunch of adapters to use it.
Glad I could help.
Problem solved:
Sure there is. There's no market for them. And there won't be until Apple eliminates the cheaper alternative of the 3.5mm jack. Any manufacturer who took this on now, including Apple would be facing a losing situation.
Besides, this is not about Lightning. It's about wireless, which is the ultimate future of audio.
Here's something to consider for the customer that plugs into all kinds of legacy equipment -- use a bluetooth dongle that is paired with your bluetooth headphones, even tether it to your BT headphones if you like. It doesn't add any significant steps to what someone is already doing with a pair of native 3.5mm headphones. If a wired connection is necessary, then a pair of new Lightning headphones, with an unobtrusive Lightning to 3.5mm dongle is simplest, that way it only has to be removed for Apple gear, which sounds like the least of your problems. And, it can be tethered to the cable so it is unlikely to be lost. If the reverse is needed, even better, use any headphones you like with an adapter that is only removed when infrequently connecting to non-Apple gear. I'm really not seeing the issue here even in a situation where multiple equipment connection is required.
My job involves going from classroom to classroom and plugging either my computer or phone into a variety of 3.5 mm jacks. Let's say I want to use my iPhone 7 for this task. If I ever forget my dongle, I'm screwed.
Maybe someday every teaching station at every school will be bluetooth, but we aren't even close to being there yet.
I may be keeping my 6s for a while.
And long term, there won't ever be a time when the lightning cable becomes the industry standard for wired audio connection, because it's a proprietary connector.
It would be one thing if the headphone jack were some oversized, giant connector which was limiting phones from being unbelievably slim, but it's not.
I'm already longing for the iPhone Pro, the iPhone with all the jacks. That's what i would prefer, as opposed to this new 2015 Macbook-like iPhone 7.
But isn't that true for any tool you need for your job? What if you forget your iPhone at home? Apple has placed me in the exact same situation -- my job requires me to go from office to office across a sprawling corporate campus and plugging my MacBook Pro into a hard wired Ethernet in order to access the secure network. If I forget my Apple dongle, I'm screwed. So since my job depends on this tiny piece of tech, I make sure I know where it is at all times. And by the way, I've left my phone at home and in offices before as well. So stuff happens. So I'm not without empathy, but we all make choices. I'd rather keep up with that stupid Thunderbolt to Ethernet dongle than switch to a PC that still has the ports built in.
I actually feel worse for your situation because it represents the kids who are our future. And what the well-heeled consumer can afford and what a school district can afford are two very different things. But the reality is Apple is not selling products to school districts, and they're not selling products to customers who have to ride the bus. The only silver-lining I can offer is that if this comes to pass it's in part because Apple wants to push wireless audio as the new standard, just like Wifi replaced Ethernet. And the net result is that the cost of bluetooth accessories will drop, as the quality improves with the increased demand, just like every other technology Apple has abandoned over the years. It does sound like your school is moving toward some bluetooth connectivity so that's encouraging. I bought my first usb bluetooth dongle for my PowerBook G3, and at the end of the day, that may be the inexpensive tech legacy equipment will invest into as bluetooth becomes the dominant audio format.
As for keeping your old phone, I'm pretty sure Apple anticipates a certain amount of that. I'm holding onto my 5S until Apple releases a new 4"-sized iPhone. It looks like my wait may be over, but it's likely no surprise to Apple, and they've long since accounted for people like me.
Of course not. I feel like you're making a general statement, but I've never suggested that. Wireless is the new standard, Lightning is just an intermediary step until bluetooth improves more.
Well that's a matter of opinion. What is "oversized" and "giant" when you're discussing a device that measures it's internal space in millimeters, and battery life is already severely limited?
And that will apparently never happen. The iPad Pro would have likely given us some indication of that if it were going to happen. I fully expect all of Apple's products to lose the 3.5mm jack if they truly decide to go this route, over the next year of refreshes.
Of course, which is what I'm saying. It's all about use cases, and it would be interesting to see the data around all the different features on the phones. And in different markets.
For example, say there was X new feature that could only be introduced if either the 3.5mm jack, the NFC chip or the 3D Touch components were removed.
Currently, in the Australian market, it would make sense to remove the NFC chip first, as it isn't used here, and there doesn't seem to be any urgency by our major banks in getting it enabled here any time soon. The impact in removing it here would be insignificant.
Removing 3D Touch would only affect current 6S users - which would only make up X percent of total iPhone users, which means it's another non-essential feature.
Then you have the 3.5 jack, which out of the features mentioned, would clearly be the most commonly used of the three for the reasons specified above.
So speaking purely hypothetically, why would you remove the 3.5mm input to make room for a new piece of future tech, when removing it has the biggest impact?
And as others have mentioned, even with the 3.5mm port being available, the user still has the choice of using the most advanced fancy BlueTooth headphones if they desire.
I'm all in for wireless audio - where it makes sense. I have been using Airplay at home since 2004. Every one of my cars has bluetooth and there it's a convenient feature although when I am in the car for a longer trip I always plug in because the sound quality is noticeably better. Bluetooth is fine as an option for headphone use, but as I've said numerous times, I don't find that the tradeoffs are worth it. And it's not at all the same thing as the transition from Ethernet to wifi because your mobile phone is already untethered from the network - but you still have to carry your phone with you on your person even with bluetooth headphones. The downside is that you must now charge those headphones perhaps as often as every day or so - typically requiring yet another cable. To me, that inconvenience paired with the degradation in sound quality just isn't worth the minor convenience gained by losing a couple feet of cable between my ears and the phone in my pocket.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that if Apple goes this route it's going to be to offer something big - not to merely make the phone thinner. I think that this will happen along-side a massive reduction in bezel size - possibly losing the home button as we know it entirely. This will be a good thing as far as maximizing the size of the screen while minimizing the size of the device, but I'm not sure the tradeoff of losing a flawlessly executed touchid home button that can be located blind 100% of the time and the convenience and ubiquity of the 3.5mm jack. A few years ago I would have trusted Apple to execute this well while keeping the best interests of the user at the forefront of their design. Today I'm not so sure that this isn't just a money grab and a way to drive additional sales. You may think that's in your best interest as a shareholder, but that's the short-term view. If Apple continues down this path of acting like a traditional large business more and more frequently it will eventually bite them. They became the most profitable business in the world by expressly rejecting those traits. And at this point jettisoning the headphone jack doesn't seem to be in the best interest of the user at all. My wife is consistently a reliable litmus test as to what will fly in the mainstream, and she has roundly rejected bluetooth headphones after trying several pairs because of the overhead of constant charging an pairing was not worth the benefit when the 3.5mm ones sitting right next to them 'just work.'
Because, as I have repeatedly pointed out -- the future of audio is wireless, in exactly the same way as the future of networking is WiFi. Apple removed the Ethernet jack, because they need the space, and wanted to push customers toward the wireless future. For exactly the same reasons, as long as Apple offers customers a choice of using the lowest common denominator, they are always going to opt for the least expensive route that has been around for over 130 years. And in doing so, they remove the incentive for developers to improve and make more affordable wireless audio products.
So even if Apple didn't want to free up more space in the iPhone, there's that underlying incentive toward pushing its customers toward the future. But the reality is they do have to deal with reducing components inside the iPhone, or make it larger, and your hypothetical situation aside; there's no way in the world Apple is going to eliminate NFC, or 3D Touch, just because some Australians don't currently use it -- maybe Apple should just scrap Pay too? And in the iPhone 7, who knows what else they plan to add to the phone? My original point stands. Apple has the market data, they have the roadmap. If they are going to drop the 3.5mm port, they've already looked at it from all the angles, what it will do for them, and what it will do for the customers.