Whats up with Thinness

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by Squirreladd, Feb 29, 2016.

  1. Squirreladd macrumors member

    Squirreladd

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    #1
    I notice a lot of post talking about apple getting rid of the 3.5nm jack to make the phone thinner. I ask this because i have held every iphone to date. From the iPhone 4 until now they have not been to thick. I see why getting a phone to be thin as a waste of engineers. Why not devote the time and energy making the phone thin to putting a larger battery in the phone. Are their people who value how thin a phone and why. Would you rather more battery or more storage or something with that shaved space. What is the ideal thickness for a phone and when is it to thick or to thin.
     
  2. T'hain Esh Kelch macrumors 601

    T'hain Esh Kelch

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Location:
    Denmark
  3. MrAverigeUser macrumors 6502a

    MrAverigeUser

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Location:
    europe
    #3
    I did.
    Long before.
    And repeated it multiple times...
     
  4. T'hain Esh Kelch macrumors 601

    T'hain Esh Kelch

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Location:
    Denmark
  5. MrAverigeUser, Feb 29, 2016
    Last edited: Feb 29, 2016

    MrAverigeUser macrumors 6502a

    MrAverigeUser

    Joined:
    May 20, 2015
    Location:
    europe
    #5
    A typical apologizer-statement of a extreme brand- loyalist....
    If you'd take off your applerose-tainted spectacles you'd already found lots of similar demands in many Threads, for example about the 5SE and also others...

    It is very amusing to finally find someone who likes short battery lifes... You are very unique...
     
  6. T'hain Esh Kelch macrumors 601

    T'hain Esh Kelch

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Location:
    Denmark
    #6
    The ignorance is strong in this one. I think we will just let your post sit for fun and giggles.
     
  7. bpeeps macrumors 68020

    bpeeps

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    #7
    What is the confusion here?

    I need these "bigger phone, bigger battey" people to like... go buy a phone that does that for them. Plethora of options. Apple has consistently shown us they are not interested in trading off a thinner device for a higher battery capacity. If they can go thinner, they will. Their R&D is dedicated to designing efficient, low power chips that draw less from the battery and software that manages this effectively behind the scenes. This has been their MO for a long time. Understand it and move on, or take your money elsewhere. Your choice.

    As long as my battery gets me through the day, I don't necessarily care about the size that's in it. If it doesn't meet your needs, re-evaluate your next phone purchase.
     
  8. sunapple macrumors 65816

    sunapple

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2013
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #8
    You know they actually made a bigger iPhone with more battery life? My iPhone 6 Plus has two day battery life. It's also half a centimeter thinner than a 5S.

    But seriously, going thinner pushes for new methods of building certain components in a smaller way which is great, but also pushes the processor and software to be extra efficient to get the most battery life out of less battery.

    Compare to the first iPhone how much better everything has gotten and you'll see how useful it was to gradually decrease thickness throughout the years. I believe keeping the iPhone a tad thicker could've made them lazy.
     
  9. lagwagon Suspended

    lagwagon

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #9
    Removing the 3.5mm jack isn't just for thinness.

    It moves things over to digital output for audio, which in the end will result in higher quality audio.

    It allows them to water proof easier (which is rumoured.) Yes others have been able "water resist" with a 3.5mm jack still there but it's easier without one and could potentially go beyond just water resistant that the new Samsung s7 has.

    It allows for a second speaker which is rumoured to take the spot of the 3.5mm. (speakers are also easier to water proof than a 3.5mm jack)

    Those are just some of the immediate possible "perks". For all anyone knows this could also be a Chess type move (making 1-2 moves to set up for something further down the road.) and removing the jack now gets people used to it early and then sets up for some new tech or feature they've been working on that required the jack gone.

    Everyone is always so quick to jump into negatives without considering anything else.
     
  10. trifid, Mar 1, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016

    trifid macrumors 65816

    trifid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #10
    Not necessarily, probably the opposite. iPhone already has a very high quality DAC, and for most users it's more than fine. For the very niche audio enthusiasts, they can bypass the internal DAC and get lightning headphones with 3rd party DACs currently. So the idea that one must remove 3.5mm headphone jack in order to bypass internal DAC is incorrect. You can have both 3.5mm jack (analog), and lightning port (digital passthrough).

    Now, if Apple removes the internal DAC and leaves it up to headphones manufacturers, there is more risk of cheap DACs put into headphones AND/OR same quality DAC as it's currently on iPhone which means there is no guarantee at all that in the end it'll result in higher quality audio.

    The other thing to consider is, users will face higher headphone costs due to lightning port licensing costs, and DAC costs.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 1, 2016 ---
    There is a lot more negative than positive though. Those perks you mention seem very minor compared to the negative impact it would have worldwide. We know Apple is in a position of power, so whatever move they put has repercussions. This means, instead of leading the tech world with a USB C standard for example (like Apple led in the world with USB on the original iMac), it'll force the world to segregate into lightning headphones, 3.5mm headphones and USB C headphones.

    Universality will be gone, we'll have more inconvenience (oops I forgot my lightning headphone, and my friend's 3.5mm headphone won't work), we'll have to carry adapters and try not to forget them, and spend more money unnecessarily.
     
  11. lagwagon Suspended

    lagwagon

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #11
    No where in what you quoted did I say anything about removing the jack is a must to bypass the internal DAC. So not incorrect. Also, no jack = no internal DAC to bypass because it will be removed along side it because it wouldn't need to be inside the phone anymore.

    The current DAC I wouldn't say it's very high quality either. It's decent, but not very high quality.

    I said it moves everything to a digital output for audio and in the end will result in higher audio quality for everyone, not just audiophiles. HD Audio and beyond can be achieved through Lightning, which again, in the end will be better. It's been known for close to two years now that Apple has been working on new HD Audio file formats. This is all prep work so that their most used device will be ready and equipped to bring that to all. Making moves now for the end game. Doing it now gets people used to the idea of no more jack and listening to whatever the new audio format is when it's ready to release instead of just the audiophiles.

    Eventually, over time, the majority will have moved off even owning 3.5mm headphones and will either have Lightning or wireless. Some high end headphones already offer swappable cables for 3.5mm and Lightning as well.

    If you try to understand, the intentions are likely to bring higher quality audio as standard (IE for everyone) on the device. It's a good thing, not everything is evil.

    It's a bold move for innovation. Lots will moan very hard in the beginning. But just like everything else Apple has removed in the past, they will get over it eventually and start enjoying the gains.
    --- Post Merged, Mar 1, 2016 ---
    Just because a couple potential things that can happen I mentioned seem minor to you doesn't make those potential things minor to everyone else.

    Every year people have complained "only one speaker still?!! Blah, blah, blah Android phone X and Y have two speakers" Or "I want water proof". So they are somewhat often demanded features for quite some time already.
     
  12. Elisha macrumors 6502a

    Elisha

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    #12
    Thin phones also mean less materials. Cost saving involved as well.
     
  13. Abazigal macrumors 604

    Abazigal

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2011
    Location:
    Singapore
    #13
    It's one of those things you don't notice until you have held a thinner iPhone, then the previous gen-iphone you thought was thin enough suddenly feels intolerably thicker and heavier by comparison.

    My take is that Apple feels that a thinner iPhone is also a lighter iPhone, which in turn makes it better to carry around and handle.

    As for battery life, that's also something which ultimately depends on the end user. There is a "good enough" threshold beyond which I am fairly indifferent to more battery life. My iPhone 6S+ typically ends the day with over 30% battery life, so I am not going to get more use out of my phone even if you give me way longer battery life. I plug in my phone to charge overnight so more battery life is just wasted here as well.

    I am tempted to say that the iPhone 6S is thin enough, but knowing the sucker that I am, Apple just needs to show me an even thinner iPhone and I will probably forgive Apple for whatever compromises and sacrifices they had to make to achieve that thinness.
     
  14. DeftwillP macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    #14

    Perhaps you're just having a hard time seeing the sarcasm as the complaints toward thinness, particularly at the expense of battery, are quite well documented here on MR.
     
  15. Jsameds Suspended

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    #15
    Ultimately efficiency trumps all. If Apple had gone the "just slap a bigger battery on" route since 2007 we would never have had such lightweight iPads and the Apple Watch would have been a lot bulkier too - and obviously iPhones would be a lot bigger, heavier and would operate a lot hotter and also wouldn't have sold so well.

    That said, I do think Apple will eventually produce an iPhone with 2x or more of the battery life of the previous iteration now that, almost a decade on, a lot of the hard work on driving efficiency is behind them, and I believe we'll see this battery boost sooner rather than later. I believe it is the injection Apple will use in order to curb the slowing sales of iPhone.
     
  16. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #16
    I don't have a problem with thinness as long as it doesn't create ugly trade offs like the bulging camera. I also knew that at one point the headphone jack would have to go to achieve the thinness Apple wants. And we are having that discussion now.

    I do think however there is a point. If we get to the stage where these things are as thin or thinner than a credit card (and as light as one) the problem may start to become "I dropped my phone and now I can't find it".
     
  17. Jsameds Suspended

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2008
    #17
    I still don't think it's the thin factor that's pushing the headphone jack out.

    iPhone 6 (the thinnest iPhone to date) is 6.9mm but iPod Touch 6G is 6.1mm and iPod Nano 7 is 5.4mm and both still have headphone jacks.

    I believe it's to do with saving space on the whole, but people are blaming it on thinness because it's another thing they can add to the blame pile, despite it being a false claim - that's if the iPhone 7 is thicker than 5.4mm.
     
  18. trifid macrumors 65816

    trifid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #18
    Source for this? Most information I've seen about it makes it one of the best in its category, certainly nothing close to just "decent".

    "Moves everything to digital" This sounds cool but it doesn't mean it'll guarantee higher quality music at all. DAC means "digital to analog" converter, even if you remove DAC from iPhone, you'll still need DAC on a headphone, meaning you will always need to convert digital to analog.

    Currently Apple ensures high quality DAC on EVERY IPHONE. This is the way to bring high quality to the masses. If you remove the built-in DAC, you are leaving the responsibility and burden to headphone manufacturers, which does not guarantee high quality for everyone.

    It's likely the low-end of headphones might suffer in DAC quality and give mainstream users worst audio quality. So it's actually the opposite of what you are saying, mainstream users will get affected negatively because mainstream users get headphones < $150 which will likely have cheap DACs.

    I've browsed audiophile forums, and users often recommend staying with the iPhone's built-in DAC because getting an external DAC doesn't add any improvements. Not to mention to get a better DAC than the iPhone's they usually are enormous in size, even the portable ones.

    You haven't addressed the core of my argument which is universality.
     
  19. Ivanovitchk, Mar 1, 2016
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016

    Ivanovitchk macrumors member

    Ivanovitchk

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Location:
    Paris, FR
    #19
    What's sure is that the DAC will remain as long as the iPhone comes with speakers :D

    Also, I'm not certain but can't Lightning output analogue audio ? If so, even without the 3.5 jack we could have passive lightning earphones...
     
  20. adamhenry macrumors 65816

    adamhenry

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Location:
    On the Beach
    #20
    How could they remove the internal DAC from the iPhone? It would be required for the speakers in the iPhone whether for music or phone conversations.
     
  21. trifid macrumors 65816

    trifid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #21
    That's a good point actually...
     
  22. lordofthereef macrumors G5

    lordofthereef

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #22
    I got damn near crucified in another thread (though it was a news thread where people are particularly ornery lol) for stating I would need to be wowed to upgrade this year if the 3.5mm was canned (admittedly I misread and thought the lightning port was also being reworked, my bad). For now, most of the rumors have focused on effectively what we lose, but not what we gain.

    Here are a few things that can be viewed as gains:

    Stereo sound (speakers) - I am not going to argue this is a bad addition, but it's also something I would hardly if ever utilize, so for my usage, it certainly isn't a gained feature. I guess ringtones would sound nicer when my phone isn;t on silent.

    Waterproofing - this one hasn't really been discussed as an "official rumor" (didn't know how else to word it, we have discussed it on forums but it hasn't really been a headline rumor that was leaked by people with decent background on the subject). I would actually welcome this by simple fact that, despite not having any water incidents for years, making the phone harder to ruin is always a plus for me. I do also use my devices in the gym, so sweat resistance/repulsion is a bonus.

    Thinner - this is always subjective, but I am happy with how thin my phone is now, and so a thinner phone is a neutral change for me. I realize the lightning cable allowed things other than just thinness in the last four generations of iPhone, but I take advantage of none of those, because I don't really have any need/reason to. I use my phone in my car, something I could do with the 30 pin, I charge my phone, also something I could do with my 30-pin, and I VERY RARELY sync my phone to my computer, again, perfectly possible with a 30-pin. It's slightly more convenient to plug the cable in at any orientation, so that's a plus. What I am saying here is, even though the lightning cable means much more than thinness overall, for my use, it really didn't change anything aside from allow the phone to be thinner.

    Flush Camera - I use a case on all of my phones for a handful of reasons and none of them include protecting the camera lens. I can recognize this being a welcome change for many, but for my use, it doesn't really matter. Flat or slight bulge, do whatever you need to Apple. In a case its always flush to me.

    High Quality External DAC - I can understand why people might want this. Higher quality sound if they choose to invest. great. Again, doesn't mean much to me because I use earbuds at the gym, and my demands really aren't really high enough that I need to feel like I am at a concert when I am on a run or lifting weights; it's possible I am in the minority here.

    This all leads me back to the feeling that I am losing more than I am gaining, with what we "know" now. If I have missed something, you are all welcome to chime in. For my usage preferences though, I will need something amazing given to me to make the sacrifices worth it.
     
  23. trifid macrumors 65816

    trifid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #23
    Just a clarification... to be clear, people can get high quality external DAC now, there was misinformation before saying or implying the iPhone 7 would allow this, that's wrong, it's possible to get it now via lightning headphones which are already in the market.
     
  24. lordofthereef macrumors G5

    lordofthereef

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #24
    I did not know this. Based on what I have been reading though, I think (right now and on these forums) the greater demand is for a 3.5mm adapter external DAC. I could be wrong here. I would benefit very little, if at all, from any of these things so I only passively follow Apple audio news/tech.
     
  25. trifid macrumors 65816

    trifid

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    #25

Share This Page