Why did Apple remove the 3.5mm headphone jack?

[sunking101]

The 7 is clearly a beta model/stop gap model (to me) used to test the waters on how a headphone jack free phone would work. The dual camera set up on the Plus is an even more obvious Beta part... the "coolest" feature isn't even available until the end of the year (sans beta testers). The 7 is clearly the phone for them to work out the bugs for next year's newly designed and updated phone.

The headphone tech is old tech... really old tech. Bluetooth is not proprietary and has been around for YEARS... and it has barely improved. The biggest improvement came in Apt-X compression which in itself 1/2 a decade old now.
It might not be obvious to you that this painful move of removing the jack is to push the tech but look at it this year... Now we have the W1 chip that seemingly 2x-3x the battery life of previous bluetooth headphones (based on the 5/hr PB2 live to 12/hr PB3 or 12/hr Solo2 to 40/hr Solo3). So let's say in a years time when the new iPhone 10 yr Anniversary phone comes out they are able to perfect the W2 even further. Double THAT battery life and introduce a new lossless format that will impress us. But had they not introduced this model that shows us a glimpse of the future we wouldn't be as impressed with the model next year. This also leads other bluetooth headphone manufacturers to up their game and create better products and innovate.

I would like to think that Apple is still a forward thinking company and there are reasons they are doing what they are doing. The design of the 7 is clearly because they are on an odd year... if they redesigned this year then they would have to redesign again for next year's 10th anniversary phone. You don't make a flagship product an "S" model on a prestigious anniversary year.

Who cares a hoot about tech anniversaries? They shouldn't rest on their laurels this year and release a lacklustre £700 phone just because they're saving it all for next year. The iPhone 7 AKA 6SS is a stale design and a very poor update. Diehard Apple fans are even seeing the *removal* of a feature as being a cool new feature. Ha!

 

[trifid]

Its not really a great point. The fact is we have a choice to make every day of our lives. Protect the environment, or make out lives more convenient. The batteries may not be replaceable but I'd far prefer using them as they are than compromised to allow for the batteries to be replaced. As long as I recycle them appropriately, then the impact to the environment will be minimal. Apple has shown a strong commitment to this, so I give them a pass on designing things the way they want. It's only environmental waste, if the batteries are disposed of improperly/illegally. So it's not about curtailing Apple's designs, it's about educating the customer.

It's really a great point, Apple's vision of a wireless world will have significant consequences on the environment regardless of recycling programs or education, it will be an extra burden for which there is no guarantee the public will follow advise, in fact statistically it's a norm that recycling is done by a minority of the public (only 12.5% of e-waste is recycled according to EPA) . You say you will recycle, but that's only you, 1 person, the rest of the public is likely not to, and there isn't any additional campaigns or initiatives from Apple to address the environmental impact.

So the price to pay for convenience is not insignificant, and in fact I think it's questionable whether it's really needed for the mainstream public, I think a lot of people really don't mind cables in headphones, yet Apple pushing for wireless is going to make people that didn't mind it before, go wireless and put extra burden on the environment. So it's a great point of consideration and one that shouldn't be dismissed so easily like you are doing.

 

[bibigon]

Who cares a hoot about tech anniversaries? They shouldn't rest on their laurels this year and release a lacklustre £700 phone just because they're saving it all for next year. The iPhone 7 AKA 6SS is a stale design and a very poor update. Diehard Apple fans are even seeing the *removal* of a feature as being a cool new feature. Ha!

Headphone removal isn't a feature on the phone itself, but it may spur a lot of development for better bluetooth headphones given the popularity of the iPhone 7 so far.

For someone like me, who hasn't used wired headphones in ~4 years, the removal is only a good thing. I get more battery life on my phone, and give up nothing. Were I crotchety audiophile, I'd feel differently of course.
[doublepost=1475186917][/doublepost]

Why should Apple care if wireless earphones take off or not, other than that they sell wireless earphones? What is driving Apple to make wireless audio the new big thing in town? Currently wireless earphones offer zero improvements over the tethered type, and they're actually worse in many areas. Why should I care that this will force wireless manufacturers to up their game in years to come? As of right now Apple have introduced a problem, not a solution. That to me isn't in the least bit helpful.

They don't have wires connecting them to the phone.

 

[Mac 128]

It's really a great point, Apple's vision of a wireless world will have significant consequences on the environment regardless of recycling programs or education, it will be an extra burden for which there is no guarantee the public will follow advise, in fact statistically it's a norm that recycling is done by a minority of the public (only 12.5% of e-waste is recycled according to EPA) . You say you will recycle, but that's only you, 1 person, the rest of the public is likely not to, and there isn't any additional campaigns or initiatives from Apple to address the environmental impact.

So the price to pay for convenience is not insignificant, and in fact I think it's questionable whether it's really needed for the mainstream public, I think a lot of people really don't mind cables in headphones, yet Apple pushing for wireless is going to make people that didn't mind it before, go wireless and put extra burden on the environment. So it's a great point of consideration and one that shouldn't be dismissed so easily like you are doing.

But Apple has not forced anyone to go wireless. They gave people a free adapter in the box (something I don't agree with by the way), so they can keep using wires if they want. How does that harm the environment? More cheap earbuds picked up at a roadside convenience store on a trip to replace lost or forgotten earbuds is a much bigger concern to the overall impact of e-waste. Free earbuds on airlines are cumulatively much worse. So you can say this move by Apple is significant, but there are far worse offenders using a wired universal standard.

 

[PracticalMac]

While this is "user hostile" as Nilay at the Verge called it, it's really not that big of a deal to remove the headphone jack. This will "force" the adoption of wireless headphones which IMO has been moving REALLY slow. I bought my first mono bluetooth headset in 2001 and my first pair of Bluetooth headphones in 2007. It's been nearly a decade since my first BT headphones and they still work. Short of battery life there hasn't been much of an advancement besides the price going down slightly for some generic ones.

If this leads to 10 hour+ completely untethered Earpod type headphones in the next 2-3 years it will be totally worth it.

2016 seems like a Beta year for Apple to test out new ideas rather than put out full fledged great products. But it's all about the future and the next gen or 2 of these products will be the ones that will make good use of what they're doing.

Apple is a mover in the industry and many changes (no floppy drive) worked great, but there are a few that failed, and some that failed badly.

The major problem with no-jack is logistics. To support BT ear buds means another charging device, another plug, another object to keep track of, and this does not consider the cost.

With a headphone with mini-jack, just plug it in.

 

[JCCL]

That's a good choice of music there, sir.

Thanks, loved that song, been hearing it a lot since it was released on Monday. Really looking forward to the full album in November!

 

[Mac 128]

Apple is a mover in the industry and many changes (no floppy drive) worked great, but there are a few that failed, and some that failed badly.

The major problem with no-jack is logistics. To support BT ear buds means another charging device, another plug, another object to keep track of, and this does not consider the cost.

With a headphone with mini-jack, just plug it in.

Seriously, "another object to keep track of"? What exactly do you think a pair of wired "EarPods" are? They sell wired earbuds at gas stations for under $5 because people can't keep track of them. So this burden is not changed by simply switching to BT. Hopefully spending a little more on a pair of headphones will help people keep better track of them and teach them a little more personal responsibility in a disposable society.

As for charging them, I would take charging my 40 hour BT headphones once a day, over the endless cable management, getting caught on things, forever winding and untangling them, plugging and unplugging, etc.

Cost is the least of it, especially when you're discussing it in context of other tech transitions. Replacement tech is always more expensive initially, and always comes down over time. The first USB flash drives were $40 for 8 MB!

 

[MrXiro]

Apple is a mover in the industry and many changes (no floppy drive) worked great, but there are a few that failed, and some that failed badly.

The major problem with no-jack is logistics. To support BT ear buds means another charging device, another plug, another object to keep track of, and this does not consider the cost.

With a headphone with mini-jack, just plug it in.

Well as I said... I don't see this as a user friendly move. It's "User Hostile" but I can see why it was done.
[doublepost=1475247660][/doublepost]

Who cares a hoot about tech anniversaries? They shouldn't rest on their laurels this year and release a lacklustre £700 phone just because they're saving it all for next year. The iPhone 7 AKA 6SS is a stale design and a very poor update. Diehard Apple fans are even seeing the *removal* of a feature as being a cool new feature. Ha!

#firstworldproblems And see above.
I never said it was for fans or users. It's user hostile. But it's for the advancement of tech... and a 10th anniversary means a lot. You'd probably be complaining next year if they redesigned this year and didn't next year. If not you then a few other whiners would.
[doublepost=1475247702][/doublepost]

Seriously, "another object to keep track of"? What exactly do you think a pair of wired "EarPods" are? They sell wired earbuds at gas stations for under $5 because people can't keep track of them. So this burden is not changed by simply switching to BT. Hopefully spending a little more on a pair of headphones will help people keep better track of them and teach them a little more personal responsibility in a disposable society.

As for charging them, I would take charging my 40 hour BT headphones once a day, over the endless cable management, getting caught on things, forever winding and untangling them, plugging and unplugging, etc.

Cost is the least of it, especially when you're discussing it in context of other tech transitions. Replacement tech is always more expensive initially, and always comes down over time. The first USB flash drives were $40 for 8 MB!

This is the internet... sometimes we reach DEEP in our pockets to find things to bitch about. 😛

 

[PracticalMac]

Seriously, "another object to keep track of"?

Visual demonstration.

(PS, I was taking about the charger, you need to have a place for it, and remember to take with you if you go somewhere for extended period.
Expect car chargers for AirPods soon, yet 1 more single use device)


[doublepost=1475262285][/doublepost]

This is the internet... sometimes we reach DEEP in our pockets to find things to bitch about. 😛

I like to bitch ahead of getting a product I know I will bitch about.

 

[Mac 128]

Visual demonstration.

(PS, I was taking about the charger, you need to have a place for it, and remember to take with you if you go somewhere for extended period.
Expect car chargers for AirPods soon, yet 1 more single use device)


[doublepost=1475262285][/doublepost]

I like to bitch ahead of getting a product I know I will bitch about.

Well first of all, while I do find that parody ad amusing, nobody is making you buy the airpods. there are plenty of BT headphones that aren't so hard to keep track of, including two W1 chipped ones from Beats, which are no harder to keep track of than the wired ones.

As for the charger, you need to take one with you for the iPhone too. The AirPods case uses the same charger as your iPhone. So I don't really see the problem. I charger various things in my car using the same charger and Lightning cable. I carry a Lightning to micro USB adapter in the car for the things that that need that. One cable, one charger, one adapter. This is the same situation at home, and when I travel.

 

[wwohl]

It's definitely about money. And it's definitely not going to create better wireless headphones.
That's limited by battery technology which has been nearly stagnant for years. Pushing the industry towards wireless is not going to cause some massive power innovation
[doublepost=1475265669][/doublepost]

Apple doesn't believe in reducing the lifespan of batteries by rapidly charging them. USB C is a larger plug then a lightning plug and provides the same benefits as it. Wireless charging is coming next year. It's just not going to need to have the phone placed onto he pad for it to function.

USB C can do substantially more than lightning. Rapid charging has been done without the negative benefits. And let's be honest, iPhones current batteries are junk a year in as is.
Wireless charging (not on a pad) is no where close. Neither is the ability to push enough power to have any improvement.

 

[MrXiro]

It's definitely about money. And it's definitely not going to create better wireless headphones.
That's limited by battery technology which has been nearly stagnant for years. Pushing the industry towards wireless is not going to cause some massive power innovation.

W1 Chip seemingly triples the battery life of the Beats Solo3 from the Solo2 (40/hr vs 12/hr). Same battery, same build, same weight and pretty much the same exact headphone but one with a 100 ft range as opposed to 30 feet.

So please... tell me again if this isn't a push for a better Wireless Headphone...

 

[P0stalTek]

It's a profit driven decision that has nothing to do with vision. The floppydrive was not dropped untill something better and more convenient was on the market (USB-stick). There's no better and more convenient alternative for the jack. You yourself are stating that dropping the jack is user hostile. And you're correct. That is not what Apple used to be about. Add to that the mediocre technological progress that the 7/7+ is compared to it's predecessor (and the competition, 720p screen in 2016, come on!) and the stale third iteration of the same design with added fugly camerabump and the coolness factor starts to wane. Maybe not in the US, but globally. I can't remember when an iPhone launch was greeted this lukewarm. Well I can still hope that all the rumours about next year are true.

Apple has always been a company that makes unpopular decisions to reach their vision. Either you buy in or check out.

Either you are new to Apple, or just plain wrong. They have always tried to push vendors by making changes. The most obvious example I can think of is Adobe Flash. In a time when the world was up in arms about iOS not running flash videos, Apple said no way. They did this to push ahead HTML5 tech which was a better, more open standard.


http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

 

[trifid]

Apple has always been a company that makes unpopular decisions to reach their vision. Either you buy in or check out.

Either you are new to Apple, or just plain wrong. They have always tried to push vendors by making changes. The most obvious example I can think of is Adobe Flash. In a time when the world was up in arms about iOS not running flash videos, Apple said no way. They did this to push ahead HTML5 tech which was a better, more open standard.


http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/

Flash was replaced with universal standard, the headphone jack isn't, and no bluetooth isn't the replacement, both universal wireless and universal wired standards are needed. So you are wrong to equate Apple's past visions with this one.

Apple's lightning choice is for profits. Please answer to me how I can plug in Apple's lightning headphones into the Macbook 12" which has USB-C? And future macbooks and macs are all rumored to have more USB-C, a universal standard.

More adapters, more profits, more inconveniences, more e-waste. This isn't visionary like Flash or Floppy, it's Apple going back to the greed and propietary stuff from the 90s.

 

[MrXiro]

Flash was replaced with universal standard, the headphone jack isn't, and no bluetooth isn't the replacement, both universal wireless and universal wired standards are needed. So you are wrong to equate Apple's past visions with this one.

Apple's lightning choice is for profits. Please answer to me how I can plug in Apple's lightning headphones into the Macbook 12" which has USB-C? And future macbooks and macs are all rumored to have more USB-C, a universal standard.

More adapters, more profits, more inconveniences, more e-waste. This isn't visionary like Flash or Floppy, it's Apple going back to the greed and propietary stuff from the 90s.

Bluetooth IS the standard they want to push. They wouldn't have have created the W1 otherwise if they wanted you to use the lightning port as the sole audio port. The Lightning audio is essentially a band aid for those that don't want to give up wired audio just yet. But the future is wireless.

I expect things like much longer battery life and a new compression format for audio over bluetooth (like Apt-X) that uses less power in the future.

 

[Mac 128]

USB C can do substantially more than lightning.

Why does anyone need it to on an essentially wireless mobile device?

You think it's better to have over half-a-billion people toss out their existing Lightning cables and accessories acquired over the last four years (after tossing out all of their 30-pin cables accessories), only to replace them with unnecessary USB-C cables to accommodate a standard that doesn't presently exist, and may not for years?

 

[DevNull0]

As for charging them, I would take charging my 40 hour BT headphones once a day, over the endless cable management, getting caught on things, forever winding and untangling them, plugging and unplugging, etc.

I disagree with you. But the iPhone 6s means we both get what we want. The iPhone 7 means the iPhone is useless to me and a significant number of people. So how is removing the jack a good choice?

 

[MrXiro]

Removing the headphone isn't for the user's benefit... it's to push wireless headphone technology to innovate faster... been repeated many times over already in this thread. 5-10 years from now it will be the norm.

If you want a headphone jack get the 6s/Plus or wait for those cases that break out the headphone jack again.

 

[trifid]

Bluetooth IS the standard they want to push. They wouldn't have have created the W1 otherwise if they wanted you to use the lightning port as the sole audio port. The Lightning audio is essentially a band aid for those that don't want to give up wired audio just yet. But the future is wireless.

The future has been wireless since a decade ago and it continues to be crap. There is no guarantee that things will improve. Even now, $170 air pods for 5 hours battery is a joke and unusable and unaffordable for the mainstream. There needs to be both wireless and wired standards, and Apple has failed to provide the wired standard due to profits, plain and simply unnacceptable. It's time to admit a company isn't perfect and has chosen profits over doing the right thing.

 

[MrXiro]

The future has been wireless since a decade ago and it continues to be crap. There is no guarantee that things will improve. Even now, $170 air pods for 5 hours battery is a joke and unusable and unaffordable for the mainstream. There needs to be both wireless and wired standards, and Apple has failed to provide the wired standard due to profits, plain and simply unnacceptable. It's time to admit a company isn't perfect and has chosen profits over doing the right thing.

5 hour battery life with a 15 min charge to regain 3 from empty. That's a huge difference.

Wired headphones are a crutch... that's why wireless hasn't succeeded yet. BT has been around for over a decade. It's been nearly 20 years and it hasn't gotten better cause it didn't NEED to get better.

If you just said that you won't buy the iPhone and a whole bunch of people won't buy the iPhone how is it about profits? So they can sell LESS iPhones and more lightning headphones through the MFI program? That program is like chump change... they are a multi-BILLION dollar company.

If Apple was about profits they'd just give you what YOU want every year... you want thicker with more battery? Here ya go, and have some more RAM so we can jack up the price.

 

[trifid]

5 hour battery life with a 15 min charge to regain 3 from empty. That's a huge difference.

Wired headphones are a crutch... that's why wireless hasn't succeeded yet. BT has been around for over a decade. It's been nearly 20 years and it hasn't gotten better cause it didn't NEED to get better.

If you just said that you won't buy the iPhone and a whole bunch of people won't buy the iPhone how is it about profits? So they can sell LESS iPhones and more lightning headphones through the MFI program? That program is like chump change... they are a multi-BILLION dollar company.

If Apple was about profits they'd just give you what YOU want every year... you want thicker with more battery? Here ya go, and have some more RAM so we can jack up the price.

You are kidding right? We are talking about the same Apple that kept 16gb storage for a decade while everyone else has been offering 32gb for years? Apple started neglecting users and maximizing more profits. You still have 0 excuse for Apple going propietary with lightning, it's all about profits, adapters for iphone, adapters for macbooks, it's a shame.

 

[MrXiro]

You are kidding right? We are talking about the same Apple that kept 16gb storage for a decade while everyone else has been offering 32gb for years? Apple started neglecting users and maximizing more profits. You still have 0 excuse for Apple going propietary with lightning, it's all about profits, adapters for iphone, adapters for macbooks, it's a shame.

The 16gb thing was to maximize profits but also to keep the entry level low. That's just Capitalism. But they could have just started it at 64gb and charged $750 for the base. Welcome to American business practices. Now that they're done milking that Spec they have become pretty generous in the iPhone with the 128gb for $100 more. They are still Apple and the tax exists.

I didn't give you zero reasons. It's to push wireless to innovate and grow. Read above. I'm getting sick of repeating myself at this point.

But if you think lightning MFI is some lucrative business model you're delusional.

 

[trifid]

I didn't give you zero reasons. It's to push wireless to innovate and grow. Read above. I'm getting sick of repeating myself at this point

This makes no sense, how is pushing wireless any different if Apple shipped iPhones with USB-C instead of lightning? That's the point, provide both universal options, don't keep propietary connector which still affects the mainstream inmensely.

 

[MrXiro]

This makes no sense, how is pushing wireless any different if Apple shipped iPhones with USB-C instead of lightning? That's the point, provide both universal options, don't keep propietary connector which still affects the mainstream inmensely.

Lightning audio is a band aid. USB C would also be a bandaid. Had USB C existed before lightning they probably would have used it. At this point they are too invested in Lightning to dump it. I can already hear the complaining now if they did that.

This was done to push BT Audio. If they wanted to profit off lightning audio why even include it in the box?

They could easily just charge you $20 per adapter and not given you a free one. Instead they made it $10 and gave a freebie. That's pretty generous and un-apple-like.

 

[sunking101]

Lightning audio is a band aid. USB C would also be a bandaid. Had USB C existed before lightning they probably would have used it. At this point they are too invested in Lightning to dump it. I can already hear the complaining now if they did that.

This was done to push BT Audio. If they wanted to profit off lightning audio why even include it in the box?

They could easily just charge you $20 per adapter and not given you a free one. Instead they made it $10 and gave a freebie. That's pretty generous and un-apple-like.

Pushing BT audio, why is this Apple's job? All that will come to market is a slurry of BT earphones and headphones. Nobody needs to invent or push anything. Audio standards won't improve, only the choice of colours and styles of Bluetooth earphones/headphones/portable speakers.