Why did Apple remove the 3.5mm headphone jack?

[Peepo]

It's absolutely false that usb-c is virtually nonexistent in the wild, to name a few, there are several android smartphones with usb-c (including the new Google Pixel phone which by the way also removed the headphone jack but did it the right way by replacing it with a universal connector), Apple's own Macbook has usb-c, and Apple plans on making new macs with usb-c too. I bet some people will use usb-c headphones on their Macbooks which will be automatically incompatible with iPhones ironically.

Even if by some wild imagination we consider your argument genuine, so what? Apple introduced USB in 1998 and it was virtually nonexistent back then. It went mainstream. Apple introduced lightning, it was obviously nonexistent as well and people followed suit. We'll continue to disagree on several things, but the popularity of usb-c isn't a factor that would have deterred Apple in adopting it. Had Apple adopted usb-c on iPhones, it would have simply fueled its existing popularity.

Google Pixel has a 3.5mm audio jack so not sure where you heard that they removed it. They even made a point of saying it has a 'satisfyingly not new' headphone jack.

 

[trifid]

Google Pixel has a 3.5mm audio jack so not sure where you heard that they removed it. They even made a point of saying it has a 'satisfyingly not new' headphone jack.

You are right, my bad. There is the new Moto Z with usb-c and no headphone jack actually.

 

[Mac 128]

You aren't making any sense, Apple imposed USB back in 1998 when it was 10000x riskier move due to Apple being nearly bankrupt, and having lost credibility in the eyes of the world, having no printers, no peripherals with usb in the world, and yet they pulled off using a universal port and brought the entire world to use it.

Then, Apple used firewire on ipods only for 2-3 years, and then ditched and imposed 30-pin connector and people followed suit. Then Apple ditched 30-pin connector for lightning and people followed suit. Maybe 4 years is too soon to ditch lightning, but the point is that it has nothing to do with usb-c being 'virtually nonexistent', Apple could impose usb-c on all its macs, iphones etc, and it'd make it instantly 'existent' in the world easily.

Apple pulled it off because most of the people who bought the iMac were new customers, many of whom had never used a Mac before, or even owned a PC. So they didn't drag all the legacy baggage with them, and created a whole new market for USB-C products, many of whom were buying peripherals for the first time.

I'm not arguing that Apple doesn't have the breadth and power to bring USB-C because there is a dearth of availability. I'm arguing that the dearth of availability is a major reason why Apple doesn't want to bring it, especially during the same year they drop the headphone jack when their focus is on having customers invest in new and expensive wireless headphones.

Apple isn't pushing Lightning headphones, they're pushing BT. There isn't even a way to use Lightning headphones with legacy equipment, much less USB-C. Apple doesn't want customers to buy Lightning or USB-C headphones. They want customers to buy BT.

Add to that Apple caused over half-a-billion customers to replace or adapt years of acquired 30-pin dock products only four years ago, a decision that has significantly affected their MFi licensing and proliferation of third party products -- Apple used to have a presence in every hotel room by virtue of the ubiquitous 30-pin dock. Now, not so much. They have been struggling back with Lightning as they have only just reached market saturation with the introduction of the 5th generation of products. Asking such a group that is growing by millions every week to throw all of that out again for a cable connector that doesn't offer the iPhone any significant advantages over Lightning, and is expensive, and hard to find is a recipe for disaster. This isn't 1998 when few people owned personal computers, and fewer still owned a Mac. There is nothing to be gained by switching to USB-C, except some imagined future compatibility with audio products that may eventually come to dominate the digital audio market. Not to mention the years of new adapters that will be required to make all that new technology compatible with current PCs and audio equipment, that won't be replaced overnight.

Could Apple do it? Yes they could. Could they potentially establish a USB-C as the new mobile audio standard? Yes they could. Could they eventually be left behind as USB-C potentially becomes the next mobile connector standard? Yes. But none of that matters if Apple intends to be 100% wireless before that moment in time arrives. In another 4 years the question won't be USB-C or Lightning -- it will be wired or wireless? In the meantime, Apples customers enjoy a world where a cheap replacement Lightning cable can be purchased at a local 7-11 at 3AM.

 

[trifid]

Yes. But none of that matters if Apple intends to be 100% wireless before that moment in time arrives.

Sorry, that's not true, that's pure conjecture and there are several factors why that's unrealistic, but I'm afraid we'll continue arguing in circles.

 

[Mac 128]

Sorry, that's not true, that's pure conjecture and there are several factors why that's unrealistic, but I'm afraid we'll continue arguing in circles.

Yes it is conjecture based on many articles I've read, including Apples own patents. Hence the word "if".

However, if you include links to reasonable sources that confirm a portless iPhone will be impossible in 3-4 years, then perhaps we won't continue to disagree, and I will see it your way. Until then, it's all just conjecture, including your insistence that USB-C is the undisputed future.

 

[trifid]

Yes it is conjecture based on many articles I've read, including Apples own patents. Hence the word "if".

However, if you include links to reasonable sources that confirm a portless iPhone will be impossible in 3-4 years, then perhaps we won't continue to disagree, and I will see it your way. Until then, it's all just conjecture, including your insistence that USB-C is the undisputed future.

USB-C is is being adopted by everyone including google's recent pixel phone, and Apple is already using it on the macbook and will use it on future macs, it's undisputed that the future of wired tech is usb-c, there is no question about it. About finding an article like you suggest, it's like asking if a unicorn iPhone is impossible in the next 3-4 years, sorry it doesn't exist but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.

But I'll tell you this, in 3-4 years, do you expect Apple to burden the world by requiring them to buy wireless receivers to charge their phones? Because Apple is known to charge premium for convenience, lets take Apple's own iPhone dock, it was usually, $40-50, doesn't seem too popular. And the Apple watch dock which doesn't seem that sophisticated is $80. And prices aren't going down ever.

Imagine a new Apple wireless receiver for iPhone, how much will it cost? $80+ right? And you'll need one for car, one for home, one for work? And you find it viable to impose this in 3-4 years to 1 billion people? People currently complain $20 lightning cables are expensive. Please tell me how it's realistic Apple will do this?

Here's what I see realistic: wired and wireless continue to co-exist for at least a decade or more, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, and people will have a choice.

 

[Mac 128]

USB-C is is being adopted by everyone including google's recent pixel phone, and Apple is already using it on the macbook and will use it on future macs, it's undisputed that the future of wired tech is usb-c, there is no question about it. About finding an article like you suggest, it's like asking if a unicorn iPhone is impossible in the next 3-4 years, sorry it doesn't exist but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.

But I'll tell you this, in 3-4 years, do you expect Apple to burden the world by requiring them to buy wireless receivers to charge their phones? Because Apple is known to charge premium for convenience, lets take Apple's own iPhone dock, it was usually, $40-50, doesn't seem too popular. And the Apple watch dock which doesn't seem that sophisticated is $80. And prices aren't going down ever.

Imagine a new Apple wireless receiver for iPhone, how much will it cost? $80+ right? And you'll need one for car, one for home, one for work? And you find it viable to impose this in 3-4 years to 1 billion people? People currently complain $20 lightning cables are expensive. Please tell me how it's realistic Apple will do this?

Here's what I see realistic: wired and wireless continue to co-exist for at least a decade or more, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, and people will have a choice.

Wow talk about baseless conjecture.

You're right. We're done. Have a good day.

 

[trifid]

Wow talk about baseless conjecture.

You're right. We're done. Have a good day.

I'd like to know how you expect 1 billion users to buy $80+ wireless charging receivers for their car, home, work etc in 3-4 years, if Apple removes wires as you suggest. It's not conjecture, just common sense.

 

[wwohl]

I'm not interested in the iPhone 7 either, but it's not because of the headphone jack. It just doesn't offer me any compelling features over what's already in the 6s -- at least not enough to justify the money again a year later. If the 7 had the same area the Plus had, I'd buy it in an instant.

That said, Apple totally lost some customers over the headphone jack. No question. Then again, they almost certainly gained some customers who frankly just don't care about it, especially thanks to the exploding Samsung miracle.

But, I don't think you can use older Ford and Honda vehicles as any kind of benchmark as to what we can expect in the near future. And, as much as I'm suggesting contactless wireless tech is likely coming to a portliness iPhone, that won't be the only way to charge it. For me, this is all about what's happening with the Lighting connector. Many keep suggesting that Apple should have switched to USB-C, despite the 500+ million installed Lightning customers, at a time when USB-C is virtually nonexistent in the wild. By the time Apple is ready to remove Lightning to go wireless, and USB-C has achieved some kind of market saturation, Apple will switch to a back-up magnetic inductive charging via the SmartPort. So everyone will exchange their Lightning cables for charging pucks, when wireless charging doesn't meet their needs. But most people will never need to plug their phones in.

So, in the event you're still driving an older car with a horrible BT radio, you'll just snap the SmartPort to 3.5mm connector onto the phone and have that wired connection you need. But it will theoretically save us the transition to USB-C, and be far more useful for a mobile device.

Apple just got approval on an optical connection patent that could replace the lightning connector and essentially make the phone "portless", sort of. It would just have a magnetic attachment where that port is.
Introducing that next year could be possible, but it would really cramp this whole lightning audio fiasco.

I agree, I didn't buy the iphone 7. The headphone jack was definitely a big deal to me, but the phone just didn't offer enough to upgrade from the 6. Id be even less likely to if I had a 6S
[doublepost=1476402690][/doublepost]

Apple pulled it off because most of the people who bought the iMac were new customers, many of whom had never used a Mac before, or even owned a PC. So they didn't drag all the legacy baggage with them, and created a whole new market for USB-C products, many of whom were buying peripherals for the first time.

I'm not arguing that Apple doesn't have the breadth and power to bring USB-C because there is a dearth of availability. I'm arguing that the dearth of availability is a major reason why Apple doesn't want to bring it, especially during the same year they drop the headphone jack when their focus is on having customers invest in new and expensive wireless headphones.

Apple isn't pushing Lightning headphones, they're pushing BT. There isn't even a way to use Lightning headphones with legacy equipment, much less USB-C. Apple doesn't want customers to buy Lightning or USB-C headphones. They want customers to buy BT.

Add to that Apple caused over half-a-billion customers to replace or adapt years of acquired 30-pin dock products only four years ago, a decision that has significantly affected their MFi licensing and proliferation of third party products -- Apple used to have a presence in every hotel room by virtue of the ubiquitous 30-pin dock. Now, not so much. They have been struggling back with Lightning as they have only just reached market saturation with the introduction of the 5th generation of products. Asking such a group that is growing by millions every week to throw all of that out again for a cable connector that doesn't offer the iPhone any significant advantages over Lightning, and is expensive, and hard to find is a recipe for disaster. This isn't 1998 when few people owned personal computers, and fewer still owned a Mac. There is nothing to be gained by switching to USB-C, except some imagined future compatibility with audio products that may eventually come to dominate the digital audio market. Not to mention the years of new adapters that will be required to make all that new technology compatible with current PCs and audio equipment, that won't be replaced overnight.

Could Apple do it? Yes they could. Could they potentially establish a USB-C as the new mobile audio standard? Yes they could. Could they eventually be left behind as USB-C potentially becomes the next mobile connector standard? Yes. But none of that matters if Apple intends to be 100% wireless before that moment in time arrives. In another 4 years the question won't be USB-C or Lightning -- it will be wired or wireless? In the meantime, Apples customers enjoy a world where a cheap replacement Lightning cable can be purchased at a local 7-11 at 3AM.

They're already going to push the USB C market.. They will want the port on all of their macs, especially with TB 3. Just wasn't the direction to go with the iphone because they'd have to ditch the royalties from the lightning.
Hopefully the next revision of BT is better than the previous standards, we could use a big improvement in reliability and functionality.

BT is a mess though unfortunately. Unlike the lightning cable, its something apple has little control over. So BT functionality, consistency and reliability will always be worse than a wired connection because the consumer is obviously going to have third party products for BT use. Cars, speakers, computers, headsets, headphones etc... everyone of them has different BT functions and everyone of them has different reliability and functionality than the other

 

[Mac 128]

Apple just got approval on an optical connection patent that could replace the lightning connector and essentially make the phone "portless", sort of. It would just have a magnetic attachment where that port is.
Introducing that next year could be possible, but it would really cramp this whole lightning audio fiasco.

I agree, I didn't buy the iphone 7. The headphone jack was definitely a big deal to me, but the phone just didn't offer enough to upgrade from the 6. Id be even less likely to if I had a 6S
[doublepost=1476402690][/doublepost]

They're already going to push the USB C market.. They will want the port on all of their macs, especially with TB 3. Just wasn't the direction to go with the iphone because they'd have to ditch the royalties from the lightning.
Hopefully the next revision of BT is better than the previous standards, we could use a big improvement in reliability and functionality.

BT is a mess though unfortunately. Unlike the lightning cable, its something apple has little control over. So BT functionality, consistency and reliability will always be worse than a wired connection because the consumer is obviously going to have third party products for BT use. Cars, speakers, computers, headsets, headphones etc... everyone of them has different BT functions and everyone of them has different reliability and functionality than the other

I don't think Apple is going to push Lightning audio from their end. Otherwise, we'd have seen at a minimum a Lightning headphone to USB-C adapter in the Apple Store, and probably a Beats headphone with a Lightning cable. These things could still come, but there's no rush, which suggests to me they aren't interested. Or, that may all change in a couple of weeks, if/when Apple adds a Lightning port to the Macs.

Apple does have some influence over BT, since they are on the BT SIG board. I wouldn't be surprised if the W1 chip is the direct result of their involvement in the development of BT 5. The current state of BT devices is poor, no doubt, and any equipment that has to fall back to previous standards is going to suffer. But at some point that's going to universally improve as old equipment gets updated.

 

[Abazigal]

USB-C is is being adopted by everyone including google's recent pixel phone, and Apple is already using it on the macbook and will use it on future macs, it's undisputed that the future of wired tech is usb-c, there is no question about it. About finding an article like you suggest, it's like asking if a unicorn iPhone is impossible in the next 3-4 years, sorry it doesn't exist but that doesn't mean it makes any sense.

But I'll tell you this, in 3-4 years, do you expect Apple to burden the world by requiring them to buy wireless receivers to charge their phones? Because Apple is known to charge premium for convenience, lets take Apple's own iPhone dock, it was usually, $40-50, doesn't seem too popular. And the Apple watch dock which doesn't seem that sophisticated is $80. And prices aren't going down ever.

Imagine a new Apple wireless receiver for iPhone, how much will it cost? $80+ right? And you'll need one for car, one for home, one for work? And you find it viable to impose this in 3-4 years to 1 billion people? People currently complain $20 lightning cables are expensive. Please tell me how it's realistic Apple will do this?

Here's what I see realistic: wired and wireless continue to co-exist for at least a decade or more, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, and people will have a choice.

You speak as though I can only use official Apple-branded devices with my devices. 3rd party charging stands are available at half the price. I bought a bunch of Anker-branded lightning cables from Amazon at $4-5 each. If Apple does go wireless / portless, that iphone will definitely at least come with one charger, and you can expect 3rd party OEMs to fill the gap with their own accessories, which will among other things, push the price down.

So my guess is that we will see wireless charging with the next iphone. Once wireless charging becomes more mainstream and prevalent and you know the majority of iphone owners have at least 1-2 such chargers lying around, Apple may then be comfortable removing the charging port altogether.

You can change the inevitable destiny of the iphone, but you can determine your own reaction and course of action moving forward.

 

[trifid]

You speak as though I can only use official Apple-branded devices with my devices. 3rd party charging stands are available at half the price. I bought a bunch of Anker-branded lightning cables from Amazon at $4-5 each. If Apple does go wireless / portless, that iphone will definitely at least come with one charger, and you can expect 3rd party OEMs to fill the gap with their own accessories, which will among other things, push the price down.

So my guess is that we will see wireless charging with the next iphone. Once wireless charging becomes more mainstream and prevalent and you know the majority of iphone owners have at least 1-2 such chargers lying around, Apple may then be comfortable removing the charging port altogether.

You can change the inevitable destiny of the iphone, but you can determine your own reaction and course of action moving forward.

It's taking something seemingly simple like bluetooth 10+ years to mature and it's still unreliable from manufacturer to manufacturer, and it's still expensive for a good product, I'm not sure why anyone can expect wireless charging to become mainstream in just a couple of years AND guarantee wires to be eliminated immediately. It'll likely take a decade at least if there ever is a viable truly wireless technology. In the meantime Apple will keep profiting from lightning royalties, while the rest of the world adopts usb-c.

About OEMs, you forget prices eventually came down after Apple lowered royalties, but I distinctly remember certified cables never dropped below $15 for at least the first 2 years. And we are talking about cables. Imagine a next-gen wireless receiver if that is ever possible, it'll be likely proprietary. It's unlikely that Apple will allow OEM for the first few years, as Apple matures the technology, and ensures there are no health risks, they'll want to sell their own adapters.

Please don't get me wrong, I think anything could happen, something innovative could come along and get implemented fast. But realistically? I have 0 faith in an Apple that solders ram for no reason on Mac Minis, milked 16gb to death and to this day will not license magsafe.

Bottom line, even if a truly wireless tech is possible, it'll take a long transition if and when it becomes mainstream enough to completely kill cables, and Apple is still screwing everyone with lightning by not adopting usb-c because we'll likely have a decade or so of transition.

 

[Abazigal]

It's taking something seemingly simple like bluetooth 10+ years to mature and it's still unreliable from manufacturer to manufacturer, I'm not sure why anyone can expect wireless charging to become mainstream in just a couple of years AND warrant wires to be eliminated. It'll likely take a decade at least if there ever is a viable truly wireless technology. In the meantime Apple will keep profiting from lightning royalties, while the rest of the world adopts usb-c.

I think this is where Apple stands to benefit from forking standards and coming up with its own proprietary technology. This allows Apple to essentially do whatever they wish without being held hostage by existing standards dictating what they can and cannot do with said technology. And Apple can do it because they have a sufficiently large user base to support their own ecosystem of proprietary accessories and standards.

Apple will use bluetooth when it is better, and when it no longer suffices for their needs, that's where you see the W1 chip coming in, as an answer to the common battery life and pairing issues that tend to plague bluetooth devices. That's why they bought Beats, so they get to control the entire manufacturing process and ensure that the technology gets implemented the way they want, so as to ensure the end user experience isn't compromised in any way.

The drawback is that the W1 chip will likely remain proprietary to Apple's platform (unless they license or collaborate with 3rd parties), and to really get the full benefits from it, you will want to use all Apple devices. Great for someone like me using only Apple hardware, not so much for other users who mix and match.

I think we will eventually see a proprietary version of Apple's own wireless charging standard be released as well, and Apple will no doubt engage in an aggressive marketing campaign to trumpet the benefits and advantages of wireless charging (or at least their own variation thereof).

That's why Apple is sticking with lightning. Not so much for the licensing fees (which is probably peanuts compared to what Apple rakes in from hardware sales), but because its their own in-house standard which Apple has full control over. This way, Apple gets to do whatever they want with the lightning standard based on what their future roadmap entails and nobody can tell them that they are wrong.