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
Those are a little optimistic.
I also wouldn't want to use an adapter that plugs directly into my iPhone, but rather for strain relief, a plug with short length of wire to the actual adapter. Some designs will also use longer cords, and add iPhone controls that some headphones don't have.
This one's a little more realistic, given that it's an actual design. It's also an audiophile product, and far superior to what's inside the iPhone 6, so likely larger than a basic adaptor needs to be. The reality is the market for this kind of thing outside of the audiophile crowd is pretty small, and we're just on the edge of pushing the envelope as to how small and compact these can be. It just hasn't been done yet.
http://appleapple.top/headphone-amp...rface-and-requires-no-additional-power-video/
Here's an example of an adapter tech from 2013. Note how bulky the housing is with respect to the actual hardware inside. And then notice how much wasted room there is on the circuit board design and layout, not to mention the size of the components. There's nothing Apple-like about any of it, and demand will ultimately spawn innovation and improve these designs.
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
It may be a little optimistic, but consider how small the lighting to micro USB adaptor is.
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MD820AM/A/lightning-to-micro-usb-adapter
I guess we could get a better idea if someone tore down the iPhone doc to see what the electronics inside it really look like.
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MD820AM/A/lightning-to-micro-usb-adapter
I guess we could get a better idea if someone tore down the iPhone doc to see what the electronics inside it really look like.
Again, no DAC or amp in there. The closest thing we have is the 30-pin adapter, which has a DAC, but no amp.
I know that there is no DAC or amp in the micro-usb connector. I'm just saying look how small they were able to make it.
Like I said the lightning dock would be the best place to get an idea of what it would take. The way I understand it the lightning dock does have a DAC and amp inside it for the headphone output on the back. If someone was to do a teardown on it we could see how small Apple was able to make those components and get and idea of how large the adaptor would need to be. Chances are they weren't too worried about size in the lightning dock so whatever is in there could probably be made somewhat smaller, but I think it would be a good place to start.
I did a quick google search and surprisingly didn't find a teardown for the lightning dock. Just the old 30 pin dock, and the 30 pin to lightning adaptors.
Also, I'm wondering if Apple really would have to put a DAC and amp in the adaptor at all. Wasn't one of the big ideas about lightning the fact that they could change what pins do what? Couldn't they possibly use the internal DAC and amp that is used for the built in speakers to output analog audio to certain pins in the lightning port, if the lightning to 3.5mm adaptor was present and told the phone to do so?
Like I said the lightning dock would be the best place to get an idea of what it would take. The way I understand it the lightning dock does have a DAC and amp inside it for the headphone output on the back. If someone was to do a teardown on it we could see how small Apple was able to make those components and get and idea of how large the adaptor would need to be. Chances are they weren't too worried about size in the lightning dock so whatever is in there could probably be made somewhat smaller, but I think it would be a good place to start.
I did a quick google search and surprisingly didn't find a teardown for the lightning dock. Just the old 30 pin dock, and the 30 pin to lightning adaptors.
Also, I'm wondering if Apple really would have to put a DAC and amp in the adaptor at all. Wasn't one of the big ideas about lightning the fact that they could change what pins do what? Couldn't they possibly use the internal DAC and amp that is used for the built in speakers to output analog audio to certain pins in the lightning port, if the lightning to 3.5mm adaptor was present and told the phone to do so?
Well I gave you a picture of an already TINY DAC & amp circuit board, which is clearly not as optimized as it can be on any level -- and that was 3 years ago. So it's unlikely that Apple would have gone out of their way to make such an adapter any smaller than it needs to be inside a Lightning dock, and certainly to a certain degree there was no need to make the 30-pin adapter any smaller, especially since there's more circuitry involved to make all the necessary connections aside from the audio needs. But, based on my example alone, it's obvious there is substantial room for improvement in terms of reducing the size of such an adapter. Maybe not as small as a simple pin converter, but close. You don't need to try to prove that to anybody. They know it full well, but reject the idea on principle, so no matter what you propose, you'll never see the opponents concede the point -- it's still an adapter for "a problem that didn't exist" for them before.
As far as putting the DAC and amp in there, I'd say that's what Apple is trying to do -- push the responsibility for the quality of the sound to outboard gear. This is especially true if we assume a significant motivation for Apple in doing this is a push towards wireless, in which all of the headphones will have built-in amps and DACs, presumably chosen to match the transducers. So, I would think Apple would want to encourage hard-wired products to do this as well, leaving Apple merely to deliver the highest quality sound file, and codecs possible.
While Lightning is more than capable of routing ANY signal Apple wants to send it to ANY pin, there's a couple of potential problems. Unless Apple has always used only the same 5 Lightning pins, or less, leaving four free solely for use with analogue audio, they will have potential conflicts with legacy accessories and software. And even if those pins are available unused by anything else, Apple is moving from a 9-pin standard to a 17-pin standard, which means that Apple would have to restrict the use of 4 pins for audio, thus preventing current or future developments. Keep in mind USB 3.1 connectors have 24 pins, 4 of which are dedicated to USB 2.0, and there are 4 power, and 4 ground connectors. So a custom Lightning implementation could theoretically deliver Thunderbolt 3 performance -- but not if they have to hold in reserve 4 analogue pins.
And compatibility aside, if Apple wanted to deliver analogue over Lightning, they could have done that a long time ago instead of releasing Lightning docks with 3.5mm jacks which most customers probably don't even use -- all of which has led to some nasty backlash about the price of those docks. Yet instead of doing that, Apple has maintained the DAC and amps in the docks, and raised the price over $20 since the 5S & 5c docks first were offered. And consider this ... if Apple decides to offer analogue out at this point, they're essentially requiring some customers to buy an adapter that only changes the connector shape without actually offering any benefits. While such an adapter will be less expensive, it's unlikely to be substantially smaller than one with a DAC which they can at least market that it gives the customer choice for better sound, and improved digital features, like adding aptX, and digital controls not otherwise available through the 3.5mm jack. And if I'm right about an improved wireless standard being Apple's end goal, then offering an inexpensive path to analogue audio isn't in that goal's best interest, since it will encourage people using cheap 3.5mm headphones to keep using them for the cost of a $2 adapter from China, and not consider other more expensive options.
Last edited:
Not a big deal from a logistical/cost perspective, but absolutely a big deal from a usability perspective. Are you REALLY going to walk around with a 1.5" dongle hanging out the bottom of your phone? In your back pocket? All of this just so Apple can make an already insanely thin device even thinner, and where customers will just by cases to protect them.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
[doublepost=1454994937][/doublepost]
New technology is cool and all, but there's still some people like me who actually like buying hard copy CD's and downloading them to our Macbooks. I could just buy the songs online but why would I buy the songs online when I already have the CD I can download? There's just some things like buying hard copy CD's and downloading them that's nostalgic. Besides songs can get erased from a virus or something, and if they were bought online you'd have to buy them again. If they were downloaded from a CD, you could just download them again. Again, another reason to keep the disk drive.
New technology is cool and all, but there's still some people like me who actually like buying hard copy CD's and downloading them to our Macbooks. I could just buy the songs online but why would I buy the songs online when I already have the CD I can download? There's just some things like buying hard copy CD's and downloading them that's nostalgic. Besides songs can get erased from a virus or something, and if they were bought online you'd have to buy them again. If they were downloaded from a CD, you could just download them again. Again, another reason to keep the disk drive.
Exactly.I keep reminding myself how selfish this is. Thanks Tim. Thanks Ive.
No this isn't doing away with outdated tech like CD-Drives or phasing out Flash, because a 3.5mm jack is one of the few remaining universal standards that many people across the globe depend on in their daily lives and we haven't invented a superior alternative. Lightning/Bluetooth exclusivity is NOT an upgrade, it is a downgrade. So I can:
a. buy stupid pricey lightning headphones when I already have great headphones
b. buy a stupid clunky adapter to use my existing headphones
c. buy bluetooth headphones as my daily driver with worse audio quality I have to worry about recharging.
And no, Lightning is not an upgrade to a 3.5mm jack. Why?
1. A 3.5 mm jack is not inferior to lightning because it’s analog.
2. An equalizer can fine tune analog output. It doesn't need lightning.
Apple is basically telling us: hey you're a captive audience, let's force you to buy things you don't need and make other manufactures produce more products that conform to our unnecessarily low standards because that is why we bought Beats. I highly doubt Steve Jobs would have allowed this to happen.
Last edited:
Steve would have insisted on it. ;-)
[doublepost=1455294259][/doublepost]
Well for starters, I grew up in an era where the expensive headphones I already owned had 1/4" plugs, and required 1/8" adapters to plug them into any new mobile products, and the headphones that came with my Walkman needed a 1/4" adapter to plug into my stereo eauipment. And I can tell you it wasn't a big deal, and likely worse than this situation. It was at least 10 years before the 3.5mm connectors became standard everywhere, so an adapter didn't need to be carried around.
But the bigger problem is that you see a "dongle hanging out the bottom of your phone" whereas I see a 1-2 foot-long extension with possibly a useful digital control pad built into it; or an extension with just a slim bump in the headphone connector. And it will be part of the headphone cable that you already have to manage, always connected to it, requiring nothing else to keep track of. Plugging it into the iPhone will be no different than what you're doing now, and will look the same, and fit in your pocket the same. The only difference is you'll have a longer cable; and I don't know about you, but I find my cables are almost always too short for how I want to listen.
If this is really such a major problem for you, then there are extremely simple solutions -- when you buy a new set of digital headphones, they will have options for different cables allowing you to use them with any connectors without an adapter. They had these in the 80s too for people who detested adapters. And if you want to use your old headphones forever, then there will be other options besides "dongles", like phone cases with built-in adapters. Since you've said the phone is already so thin that you need to buy a case to protect it anyway, this won't be a problem for you. Of course Apple will likely ship the phone with a pair of Lightning earbuds so this is only a problem with old headphones.
[doublepost=1458396380][/doublepost]I know it may seem like UFO story material, but I have a concern about the proliferation of Bluetooth devices that go in the ear canal and on your head. I'm not trying to fear monger.
There's a building body of data that is starting to suggest a link between RF energy next to the brain and cancer. Bluetooth is RF, albeit not a powerful signal, it is still RF. My concern is we wake up one day to find a CTE type of story show up about Bluetooth too near the brain.
Sure, it will be a bit annoying to not be able to just plug in my high end headphones without having to use a dac. But that pales in comparison to a potential hazard no one has yet sufficiently researched.
Is another couple of millimeters of thinness that important to us?
This is not tinfoil hat territory!
If Apple includes a small converter or some other way to listen to audio other than having a radio in my ear
I will buy the iphone7 but if not then I'll keep my 6 as long as possible.
Thats why I love the current earbuds, analog and it allows me to keep the phone away from my head.
As much as I love apple and iPhones, quite often apple makes changes just for the sake of being bleeding edge and at tother times makes decisions that are quite perplexing, like the last mac mini..
we will have other phones we can use.
Can you cite your sources?
From NIH:
Please read this
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet
Until people come up with a way to implant a DAC into your brain (please, don't discuss it - I am being facetious), the human ears are analogue receivers. I think this (potential, unannounced) design decision has nothing to do with fidelity/audiophoolery and EVERYTHING to do with the integrity of the interface between iPhone and the wire, ergo reliability: you can't error correct a crackling analogue waveform caused by a dirty 3.5mm jack, but you CAN error correct a digital output which becomes analogue only at the very last few mm before the audio driver.
PS: Please, just because very few of you credit Apple with the PROVEN design & ergonomic sense to release a solution that doesn't involve some hideous dongle monstrosity, that doesn't mean they are going to have some lop-sided oblong block of polycarbonate dangling under their beautiful iPhone. MFI lightning cables fit MINISCULE digital silicon almost invisibly into a charging cable, so what makes you (falsely) assume that a simple DAC cannot be imperceptibly integrated into the new EarPods?
Never follow the thought patterns of "concept" render creators and analysts - they're way off FAR more than they're anywhere NEAR.
PS: Please, just because very few of you credit Apple with the PROVEN design & ergonomic sense to release a solution that doesn't involve some hideous dongle monstrosity, that doesn't mean they are going to have some lop-sided oblong block of polycarbonate dangling under their beautiful iPhone. MFI lightning cables fit MINISCULE digital silicon almost invisibly into a charging cable, so what makes you (falsely) assume that a simple DAC cannot be imperceptibly integrated into the new EarPods?
Never follow the thought patterns of "concept" render creators and analysts - they're way off FAR more than they're anywhere NEAR.
Last edited:
Very relevant caution.
You have a serious problem if you trust any government source for anything. Clean water, anyone? Ask the people in Flint, MI what their perspective is on trusting authorities.
Here is a scientific source for you on RF and EMF:
Compare the above to the NIH scientific process and choose the one you trust:
Last edited:
Honestly I don't think ANYONE really has an issue with dumping the headphone jack.
Before you say "YES I DO" allow me to explain.
I believe you only say this, due to technology at the moment as opposed to a genuine desire.
I don't believe ANYONE really wants a wire connecting the music playback device to speakers on/in your ears.
It's a compromise we have lived with for many many decades as it's what had been needed to work, as the speakers need a voltage to move them, and create the sound waves for our eardrums to pick up and send to our brain.
So, no, I don't think we WANT the socket, and WANT the wire. We simply are used to this being THE only practical way to enjoy the sound due to technical limitations.
Create tiny headphones/ear buds that lasted say a full weeks playback at superb quality/volume for a reasonable price and this being a standard so all brands produced them, and there would probably never be anyone that thought "I wish there was a wire" ever again.
Does any child today who see's a TV remote, think "If only there was a wire between the TV and this remote control I'm holding".....? No.
So hence why I say, I don't feel anyone WANTS the jack in reality, they are just saying, right now, I don't see any "as good alternatives"
Hopefully Time will fix this.
AND........... Perhaps more importantly, as "Necessity is the mother of invention" Apple doing this will FORCE companies to try seriously to create headphones that don't need a wire.
Thought of course I suspect the 1st thing that's going to happen is there will still be a wire and a DAC dongle, until tech can catch up to no wire.
Before you say "YES I DO" allow me to explain.
I believe you only say this, due to technology at the moment as opposed to a genuine desire.
I don't believe ANYONE really wants a wire connecting the music playback device to speakers on/in your ears.
It's a compromise we have lived with for many many decades as it's what had been needed to work, as the speakers need a voltage to move them, and create the sound waves for our eardrums to pick up and send to our brain.
So, no, I don't think we WANT the socket, and WANT the wire. We simply are used to this being THE only practical way to enjoy the sound due to technical limitations.
Create tiny headphones/ear buds that lasted say a full weeks playback at superb quality/volume for a reasonable price and this being a standard so all brands produced them, and there would probably never be anyone that thought "I wish there was a wire" ever again.
Does any child today who see's a TV remote, think "If only there was a wire between the TV and this remote control I'm holding".....? No.
So hence why I say, I don't feel anyone WANTS the jack in reality, they are just saying, right now, I don't see any "as good alternatives"
Hopefully Time will fix this.
AND........... Perhaps more importantly, as "Necessity is the mother of invention" Apple doing this will FORCE companies to try seriously to create headphones that don't need a wire.
Thought of course I suspect the 1st thing that's going to happen is there will still be a wire and a DAC dongle, until tech can catch up to no wire.
By the way, while the AQUA Lightning port headphone amp appears to be a GREAT idea, only one major question: will it allow current 3.5 mm jack headphones that have the iPod/iPhone in-line controller to keep its full functionality conforming to Apple's Made For iPhone (MFi) specifications when using this device?
I'm sorry but what a load of nonsense.
You are yet another person who simply doesn't understand the technology. At all.
Indeed. If and when those technical limitations are resolved, that will be the time to retire the 3.5mm jack. But doing it now would be a step backwards for the consumer. The only beneficiary would potentially be Apple since they could sell and license proprietary headphones and adapters that otherwise wouldn't be needed.
Do you really think if someone was able to build your wireless miracle earbuds with superior audio quality and week-long battery life, they wouldn't have done it already? Why would a phone with a 15% market share be required to "force" them? It's not like the engineers have been sleeping. Bluetooth, for example, has been continually refined and optimized for over 20 years and is drastically more efficient than it was earlier. Li-Ion batteries have seen incremental improvements over a similar time span. But it is still not possible to build tiny wireless earphones with the desired qualities for a reasonable price.
[doublepost=1458508835][/doublepost]
That is a good question. People keep forgetting that such an adapter wouldn't only need a DAC and amp, but an ADC as well to support the built in microphone ...
I feel you may have misunderstood what I was saying here.
In a nutshell I'm saying that the only reason anyone would not like the idea of losing the standard headphone jack is due to the current level of technology.
GIVEN the RIGHT technology then it would be silly to want a wire.
As with a TV Remote. As we are at a level of tech with TV Remotes work, and have done for years without need of a cable, and the very 1st ones DID need a wire, in case you did not know that.
No one NOW, would say, Jeee, this TV remote would be so much better if it did not have batteries, but there was a wire from my TV to the remote I'm holding.
Likewise, it's what I am saying with wireless headphones. We don't WANT a wire, we don't WANT a standard headphone jack.
We are just saying right now, with the tech now, there is nothing good enough to replace the wire.
That's a different argument to wanting a wire.
[doublepost=1458509592][/doublepost]
Honestly I don't disagree.
However there is one truth.... Whilst you keep one aspect of old tech, others will keep making devices that work with that aspect of old tech.
Remove it totally, but still have a need, then FORCES companies who were happy with how things were to try harder in the new direction.
If Cars ran on Gas, and the engine produced clean air, and we have unlimited amounts of gas, we'd not have ANY electric cars in development and we where we are today which is a hundred miles from where we were 20 years ago.
I agree 100% we should develop the tech and THEN dump the old one.
Unfortunately companies these days don't work that way.
You need a BIG company to give others a kick up the ass, like NFC and Android that's been hanging around for years before Apple, it's not till Apple gives a push that anyone sadly takes a great deal of notice.
I wish the world did not work this way
In the 80's things were different. Tech Geeks ran the show, and tried to out-do each other and push each time. Now it's run my corporations who will do as little as they can to generate cash for stockholders
What makes you think that companies, particularly those whose main business are headphones and related accessories, aren't already trying as hard as possible? If someone was able to make those wireless miracle earphones, they would obviously sell like hotcakes. That is a much stronger motivation than anything Apple can do.
Hardly comparable. Apple Pay hasn't accelerated technical development in any way, shape or form. It's all based on technology that has existed for years before Apple started using it.
I am sure that by the time the iPhone 7s comes out our tears about the headphone jack will have dried up, and we will remember the headphone jack as a ridiculous connector that our grandparents talked about.
I would love to write more, but I have to install El Capitan from floppy disks, that will take some time....
I would love to write more, but I have to install El Capitan from floppy disks, that will take some time....