Will.i.am's 'i.am+ EPs' Wireless Earphones Debut Exclusively at Apple Stores

[Glassed Silver]

Because Apple no longer supports iPhone 4. As you can see, all devices listed there have iOS 9 support.

Apple may not, but Will.i.am might?
I'd like to think that Apple prints manufacturer specs instead of coming up with their own.

Then again the Apple compatibility part may be something that Apple derives from whatever the manufacturer tells them and is indeed "Apple's take" on the matter.

Hmm... the devil is in the detail it seems.

After all, it doesn't take iOS 9 to use BT earphones, doubt these will be any different.


Glassed Silver:mac

 

[Howyalikdemapls]

These pictures don't make them look very good. I can't imagine they sound good enough to justify that price tag either.

 

[Carlanga]

According to Apple's page for this product, they are compatible with Bluetooth 2.0. They very likely may been 4.0-compliant, as well, but that's not the minimum required.

It's bt 2.0. Lasts 8 hrs.
Any bt4 device is compatible w older bt devices. You just won't get the extra benefits. So no need to phrase things w complaint info on bt. This is a bt 2.0 device plain and simple. It works w your iPhone w higher bt but you won't get the benefits of anything more than what 2.0 brings.

 

[Mums]

Will.i.am is L.O.L

 

[iansilv]

 

[Peace]

Is it just me or does anybody else not want to stick magnets and a bluetooth receiver in my ear ?

 

[Rocketman]

2.0 = planned obsolesce
= downward compatible with 2.0+

I was expecting to see you (optionally) charged it with your Watch charger on the platters, and at least double the battery capacity considering how low power it is. Holding for V 2.0. Ignoring the price, the functionality seems nice.

 

[windowpain]

That will.i.am, that will.i.am. I do not like that will.i.am.
Do you want green plugs in head?
Do you want to listen in bed?
I do not want them, will.i.am.

Two hundred and thirty bucks so you say.
Try them, try them and you may I say.
Do you want them with a box?
Do you want them with a fox?
I have no use for such a thing.
I will throw them in the bin.

They have magnets, they look cool.
You can not use them in a pool.
I do not want them will.i.am.
Bluetooth? Bluetooth? only two point oh?
As for me, it's a no.

I do not want them will.i.am.
You can wear them to leave the house?
I will not wear them out the house.
I will not wear them with a mouse.

I will not wear them on a date.
I will not wear them with my mate.
I will not wear them on a train.
They will not rest near my brain.

I do not want them will.i.am
I will not wear them anywhere.
Try them and you will see.
Will.i.am please let me be.

 

[RowellE]

This is called i.am+?

It should be more like i.am$$$

 

[5105973]

What the what was all that gibberish? Oh well maybe he's onto something. He's rich and famous and I'm not.
[doublepost=1464059612][/doublepost]

That will.i.am, that will.i.am. I do not like that will.i.am.
Do you want green plugs in head?
Do you want to listen in bed?
I do not want them, will.i.am.

Two hundred and thirty bucks so you say.
Try them, they them and you may I say.
Do you want them with a box?
Do you want them with a fox?
I have no use for such a thing.
I will throw them in the bin.

They have magnets, they look cool.
You can not use them in a pool.
I do not want them will.i.am.
Bluetooth? Bluetooth? only two point oh?
As for me, it's a no.

I do not want them will.i.am.
You can wear them to leave the house?
I will not wear them out the house.
I will not wear them with a mouse.

I will not wear them on a date.
I will not wear them with my mate.
I will not wear them on a train.
They will not rest near my brain.

I do not want them will.i.am
I will not wear them anywhere.
Try them and you will see?
Will.i.am please let me be.

My only regret is that I can give that post only one thumbs up.

 

[Norbs12]

Despise this guy so much. He thinks tech is easy money and simple. His over-simplification of it really shows with every idiotic idea he comes up with. Stick to stupid kiddie music...

 

[_mdavenport]

Why would BT headphones support lightning?

Charging. I thought with Apple exclusivity it might come with a lightning port instead of micro USB

 

[Wondercow]

Is it just me or does anybody else not want to stick magnets and a bluetooth receiver in my ear ?

I definitely don't want to stick anything in your ear!

 

[bladerunner2000]

...almost as innovative as nylon watch bands.

But but but... 'Apple doesn't sell junk.' LOL.

 

[cargoplex]

I can't take this mimbo seriously.

 

[SchneiderMan]

I'd rather get these.

 

[delegagtor]

targeted at those interested in fashion

...and with more money than sense...

I have to laugh that it uses a micro USB connector to charge. What, is the lightning connector maybe too overpriced even for an Apple Store exclusive?

 

[Kajje]

When not being used for listening to music, they can be worn around the neck for quick access.

This has been a feature of literally every single headphones since the Sony Walkman came out in 1979.

Well.I.am Gotting The Feeling you ain't going to Get Your Money.

 

[isomorphic]

Edit: Wait, it has apt-x but the iPhone doesn't even support apt-x?

The iPhone supports AAC directly over Bluetooth. Depending upon which apt-X you're talking about, apt-X may be (perhaps vastly) inferior by itself. Either way, though, if the music you're listening to is already in AAC format, converting to apt-X before transmission would entail some loss. (There is a lossless apt-X codec but I don't know if anyone--much less a headphone maker--supports it.)

There are Bluetooth headphones that support AAC.

All that aside, if you're looking for high-quality, you should be using ALAC or FLAC with wired cans, connected to your own DAC / headphone amp. It may be some time before Bluetooth can deliver lossless audio with more than five minutes of battery time.

 

[emm386]

Absolutely ridiculous. In every aspect I can think off. I bet he laughs his butt off every single time he makes a sale, because the price is just completely blown out of proportion and his design not really as aesthetically pleasing as he states.

That said, I DO own a somewhat expensive pair of headphones and believe they are worth every penny. This one isn't. Never. To Nobody. This is not about taste anymore, it's about common sense.

 

[dezeeb]

Is it just me or does anybody else not want to stick magnets and a bluetooth receiver in my ear ?

Don't ALL earphones have magnets in?

 

[hybroid]

First he took the camera, no he's taking the earbuds. What a fugly POS.

Have you seen his laughable watch called dial? Hilariously poor for the price. Typical.

 

[AgentAnonymous]

I love Will.I.am.
[doublepost=1464081733][/doublepost]

First he took the camera, no he's taking the earbuds. What a fugly POS.

Gold and black looks great.

 

[peterh988]

First he took the camera, no he's taking the earbuds. What a fugly POS.

Don't forget his D.I.A.L. watch, too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...g-s-dial-watch-phone-wear-wrist-22-month.html

 

[iMacDragon]

Either way, though, if the music you're listening to is already in AAC format, converting to apt-X before transmission would entail some loss. (There is a lossless apt-X codec but I don't know if anyone--much less a headphone maker--supports it.)

As far as I'm aware, whether the music source is AAC or not, it gets re-encoded to AAC again for BT transmission rather than original raw bitstream, as it has to add in any system sounds etc, and account for all the other formats it may be in, having a seperate path for AAC which would get switched out when system sounds come up, without causing any additional jitter or jump in sound, would seem like overly complicated.