6 ms·

I understand why manufacturers are keen to get rid of the 3.5mm jack. Phones are constantly getting thinner, and the jack isn't. It's also another part on the B

I understand why manufacturers are keen to get rid of the 3.5mm jack. Phones are constantly getting thinner, and the jack isn't. It's also another part on the BOM that manufacturers have to allocate PCB space for and pay money for the jack. But here's the thing. 3.5mm jacks are analogue, and they're everywhere. They're out dated by modern standards, but overall they just work. If the industry actually cares about thickness, they'll put a 2.5mm jack on the phone, or cut the 3.5mm jack in half (this was talked about a few years ago, but I haven't seen any production phones implementing this). As the article points out, the phone still needs a DAC and an amplifier to, you know, be a phone. Phones will typically have an earpiece speaker and a loud speaker, so you still need a DAC and amp to power those. So, apart from reducing the port count (cheaper BOM, yay!) and making phones thinner, what is this really about? It's about DRM. As soon as headphones are digital, manufacturers can start locking down headphones. Oh, you want HiFi audio? Well, the iPhone 9AB is only HiFi certified with Beatz(TM) headphones, so those fancy Bose headphones you bought for $500 last year, yeah, those are gonna give you ear-bud quality music.

jacquesm 10y ago
Connectors are the #1 failure point in any electronics design. Substituting one connector for another isn't going to be an improvement in this respect but I can see why getting rid of a connector by itself could be a good thing (and then they'd need a wireless replacement, none of the bluetooth headsets I've used were good enough for day-to-day or prolonged use).
- snovv_crash 10y ago
  I've never had a 3.5mm jack fail me. The wires die, the PCB dies, but the connectors live forever.
  - plorg 10y ago
    I've given up using the 3.5mm jack in situations where there might be stress on the plug (e.g. when you have your phone in your pocket). I've destroyed so many sets of headphones (or, in my case, replaced the cord on so many headphones) that it's just not worth it. But there are situations in which I do use the 3.5mm jack, e.g. in my car. In any case, it seems to me that co-locating the audio port with the USB port has another potential downside. If you destroy the 3.5mm headphone port you can still use and charge the phone (and use bluetooth headphones, for example). But if you destroy the USB port because your headphone cable torques in badly you have maybe 15 hours of life left in your phone before it's completely useless.
  - hashkb 10y ago
    And they are easy and inexpensive to fix and replace.
  - rhinoceraptor 10y ago
    They do wear out if you're plugging and unplugging it several times a day for several years.
  - goda90 10y ago
    Counter-example: I did have issues with my old Samsung Galaxy S3's 3.5mm jack. Luckily the sound board was a relatively cheap and replaceable part and I only had to shave a little bit of plastic off to make it fit in my specific model :)
  - elcapitan 10y ago
    Actually I just gave up my 8 year old iPod Classic because of that. Everything else worked fine, probably the most reliable piece of hardware I ever bought.
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    Anecdotal evidence. You got lucky. Due to the sheer length of a 3.5 plug, and the sturdy design of most of these plugs, a small amount of lateral force can easily wreck the socket in a split-second; and small amounts of damage over time can easily accumulate. I don't know if the lightning connectors are any better, but just by the fact that they're shorter, i'd hope they'd get removed from the socket, or just have the plug break, instead of the socket.
    - riprowan 10y ago
      Are you actually arguing that a USB-C / Lightning connector will be more reliable than a 3.5mm analog connector? You'll have to produce data to back that up.
      - Mithaldu 10y ago
        I was using the wrong word, s/jack/socket/, now it should make more sense. As to your data: Basic physics. Any plug in a socket is a lever. Its length determines to how much force any force impacting the part outside the device is translated to, at the end of the lever; inside the device. USB-C plugs are shorter than 3.5mm plugs. Thus, they're less likely to wreck your phone, and more likely to wreck themselves.
        pritambaral 10y ago
        > Its length determines to how much force any force impacting the part outside the device is translated to, at the end of the lever; inside the device. > Thus, they're less likely to wreck your phone, and more likely to wreck themselves It's not about the force, since that goes both ways (because Newton's third law). It's about how deep damage may happen or how sooner will a jack give in before the socket does. 3.5mm plugs usually have more strength than lightning plugs (but not more than the USB-C plugs I've seen), so it is understandable if lightning plugs destroy themselves before dealing much damage to the socket. But a shorter lever (of considerable strength to not break first) will apply the same amount of force over a smaller area than a longer lever. Less area => more pressure => more damage to socket. This is exactly why I can (and have done so for the last three years, same phone) pick my phone up with the earphones, but not with the end of its microUSB cable: the shorter socket cannot handle the weight of the phone.
  - fhood 10y ago
    Sorry I'm with snovv_crash here. I can only speak for iphones, but I have never had a 3.5mm jack fail on me, and I used to go through a pair of headphones every 6 months or so.
    - coddingtonbear 10y ago
      I have broken one iphone's 3.5mm jack by biking in probably-too-tight pants while listening to something on my headphones, so if you're looking for anecdata, it does happen.
      - fhood 10y ago
        I believe that it happens, I am just saying that I believe the 3.5mm to be the toughest port on the phone in my experience.
  - barrkel 10y ago
    I've had three die in the past 3 years: one on a desktop PC, two in phones. I switched to bluetooth and lived with a muddier sound.
- legulere 10y ago
  The 3.5 mm connector actually is pretty flaky.
- intoverflow2 10y ago
  and if it's lightning now I'm using that port significantly more than it was used initially, going from plugging into it once a day to 8+ times
speeder 10y ago
Yesterday I spent hours trying to find a dedicated sound card. What I found instead is that my pci Audigy SE (one of the weakest soundblaster models) costs here new 120 usd and used 90 usd. All this pain due to DRM. DVD and HDMI companies (mostly Hollywood, but also directtv and some other subscription tv companies) pressured MS to get rid of all loopholes in Windows that let people ignore DRM. Microsoft complied, removed HAL for audio, killing 3D sound as side effect, and created WDDM with draconian rules to get certified, among them that drivers weren't allowed to setup custom resolutions that weren't in EDID, requiring hacks (like CRU) to be able to use monitors to full capacity, effectively being the final strike against analog video, as most people could not figure how to use their 2560x1600 @80hz screens (on ms forums complaints are usually that they can't go beyond 1280x1024 @75hz even when they were sure it was 85hz in windows xp)
- dragontamer 10y ago
  PCI Sound card? That sounds like an obsolete and out-of-date model. Why not a PCIe sound card for cheaper? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829102062 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829102... $35 new. But my understanding is that the ASUS Xonar is getting better reviws recently anyway. And that's $5 cheaper. Neither of these are "Audiophile grade" (which gets into $100+), but that's because Audiophiles demand higher-quality components. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829132020 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829132...
  - speeder 10y ago
    I am from Brazil. Using a search engine that search all online stores, for "sound blaster" 3 models are available: Audigy SE PCI (not PCI-e) for 100 USD Zx for 350 USD. ZxR 550 USD. Xonar in that search engine, or any other, return 0 results. Looking into "sound card" categories, there are lots of PCI sound cards, a incredible amount of USB "sound cards", and a couple different PCI-e 25 USD generic sound cards (with VIA, Realtek, etc... chips). Also from what I've heard Xonar doesn't do OpenAL correctly anymore, because it relied on some Sensaura code in their drivers, and Creative in their typical jerk behaviour bought Sensaura and refused to renew the license.
gman99 10y ago
> 3.5mm jacks are analogue, and they're everywhere >As soon as headphones are digital, manufacturers can start locking down headphones. The article is unclear, but the USB3.1 spec does specifically support analog audio over USB-C explicitly for compatibility with 3.5mm audio headsets. So if Motorola don't support this mode then you may have a point. But right now it's unclear exactly what this phone supports > they'll put a 2.5mm jack on the phone, or cut the 3.5mm jack in half If I need a passive adapter for my existing headsets, I'd rather get a USB-C port which supports analog audio. Atleast then my adapters would be standardized.

jacquesm 10y ago

Connectors are the #1 failure point in any electronics design. Substituting one connector for another isn't going to be an improvement in this respect but I can see why getting rid of a connector by itself could be a good thing (and then they'd need a wireless replacement, none of the bluetooth headsets I've used were good enough for day-to-day or prolonged use).

snovv_crash 10y ago
I've never had a 3.5mm jack fail me. The wires die, the PCB dies, but the connectors live forever.
- plorg 10y ago
  I've given up using the 3.5mm jack in situations where there might be stress on the plug (e.g. when you have your phone in your pocket). I've destroyed so many sets of headphones (or, in my case, replaced the cord on so many headphones) that it's just not worth it. But there are situations in which I do use the 3.5mm jack, e.g. in my car. In any case, it seems to me that co-locating the audio port with the USB port has another potential downside. If you destroy the 3.5mm headphone port you can still use and charge the phone (and use bluetooth headphones, for example). But if you destroy the USB port because your headphone cable torques in badly you have maybe 15 hours of life left in your phone before it's completely useless.
- hashkb 10y ago
  And they are easy and inexpensive to fix and replace.
- rhinoceraptor 10y ago
  They do wear out if you're plugging and unplugging it several times a day for several years.
- goda90 10y ago
  Counter-example: I did have issues with my old Samsung Galaxy S3's 3.5mm jack. Luckily the sound board was a relatively cheap and replaceable part and I only had to shave a little bit of plastic off to make it fit in my specific model :)
- elcapitan 10y ago
  Actually I just gave up my 8 year old iPod Classic because of that. Everything else worked fine, probably the most reliable piece of hardware I ever bought.
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  Anecdotal evidence. You got lucky. Due to the sheer length of a 3.5 plug, and the sturdy design of most of these plugs, a small amount of lateral force can easily wreck the socket in a split-second; and small amounts of damage over time can easily accumulate. I don't know if the lightning connectors are any better, but just by the fact that they're shorter, i'd hope they'd get removed from the socket, or just have the plug break, instead of the socket.
  - riprowan 10y ago
    Are you actually arguing that a USB-C / Lightning connector will be more reliable than a 3.5mm analog connector? You'll have to produce data to back that up.
    - Mithaldu 10y ago
      I was using the wrong word, s/jack/socket/, now it should make more sense. As to your data: Basic physics. Any plug in a socket is a lever. Its length determines to how much force any force impacting the part outside the device is translated to, at the end of the lever; inside the device. USB-C plugs are shorter than 3.5mm plugs. Thus, they're less likely to wreck your phone, and more likely to wreck themselves.
      - pritambaral 10y ago
        > Its length determines to how much force any force impacting the part outside the device is translated to, at the end of the lever; inside the device. > Thus, they're less likely to wreck your phone, and more likely to wreck themselves It's not about the force, since that goes both ways (because Newton's third law). It's about how deep damage may happen or how sooner will a jack give in before the socket does. 3.5mm plugs usually have more strength than lightning plugs (but not more than the USB-C plugs I've seen), so it is understandable if lightning plugs destroy themselves before dealing much damage to the socket. But a shorter lever (of considerable strength to not break first) will apply the same amount of force over a smaller area than a longer lever. Less area => more pressure => more damage to socket. This is exactly why I can (and have done so for the last three years, same phone) pick my phone up with the earphones, but not with the end of its microUSB cable: the shorter socket cannot handle the weight of the phone.
- fhood 10y ago
  Sorry I'm with snovv_crash here. I can only speak for iphones, but I have never had a 3.5mm jack fail on me, and I used to go through a pair of headphones every 6 months or so.
  - coddingtonbear 10y ago
    I have broken one iphone's 3.5mm jack by biking in probably-too-tight pants while listening to something on my headphones, so if you're looking for anecdata, it does happen.
    - fhood 10y ago
      I believe that it happens, I am just saying that I believe the 3.5mm to be the toughest port on the phone in my experience.
- barrkel 10y ago
  I've had three die in the past 3 years: one on a desktop PC, two in phones. I switched to bluetooth and lived with a muddier sound.
legulere 10y ago
The 3.5 mm connector actually is pretty flaky.
intoverflow2 10y ago
and if it's lightning now I'm using that port significantly more than it was used initially, going from plugging into it once a day to 8+ times

speeder 10y ago

Yesterday I spent hours trying to find a dedicated sound card. What I found instead is that my pci Audigy SE (one of the weakest soundblaster models) costs here new 120 usd and used 90 usd. All this pain due to DRM. DVD and HDMI companies (mostly Hollywood, but also directtv and some other subscription tv companies) pressured MS to get rid of all loopholes in Windows that let people ignore DRM. Microsoft complied, removed HAL for audio, killing 3D sound as side effect, and created WDDM with draconian rules to get certified, among them that drivers weren't allowed to setup custom resolutions that weren't in EDID, requiring hacks (like CRU) to be able to use monitors to full capacity, effectively being the final strike against analog video, as most people could not figure how to use their 2560x1600 @80hz screens (on ms forums complaints are usually that they can't go beyond 1280x1024 @75hz even when they were sure it was 85hz in windows xp)

dragontamer 10y ago
PCI Sound card? That sounds like an obsolete and out-of-date model. Why not a PCIe sound card for cheaper? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829102062 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829102... $35 new. But my understanding is that the ASUS Xonar is getting better reviws recently anyway. And that's $5 cheaper. Neither of these are "Audiophile grade" (which gets into $100+), but that's because Audiophiles demand higher-quality components. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829132020 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829132...
- speeder 10y ago
  I am from Brazil. Using a search engine that search all online stores, for "sound blaster" 3 models are available: Audigy SE PCI (not PCI-e) for 100 USD Zx for 350 USD. ZxR 550 USD. Xonar in that search engine, or any other, return 0 results. Looking into "sound card" categories, there are lots of PCI sound cards, a incredible amount of USB "sound cards", and a couple different PCI-e 25 USD generic sound cards (with VIA, Realtek, etc... chips). Also from what I've heard Xonar doesn't do OpenAL correctly anymore, because it relied on some Sensaura code in their drivers, and Creative in their typical jerk behaviour bought Sensaura and refused to renew the license.

gman99 10y ago

> 3.5mm jacks are analogue, and they're everywhere >As soon as headphones are digital, manufacturers can start locking down headphones. The article is unclear, but the USB3.1 spec does specifically support analog audio over USB-C explicitly for compatibility with 3.5mm audio headsets. So if Motorola don't support this mode then you may have a point. But right now it's unclear exactly what this phone supports > they'll put a 2.5mm jack on the phone, or cut the 3.5mm jack in half If I need a passive adapter for my existing headsets, I'd rather get a USB-C port which supports analog audio. Atleast then my adapters would be standardized.