5 ms·

The notion of removing the headphone jack from flagship phones is infuriating and ludicrous to me.. When I first read about it I couldn't help but think 'haha,

by Daneel_ 10y ago

The notion of removing the headphone jack from flagship phones is infuriating and ludicrous to me.. When I first read about it I couldn't help but think 'haha, nice joke!' There are so many downsides to removing the jack, specifically around connections to other devices and systems - hifi systems, car audio, external microphones, and yes, even selfie sticks. I would consider myself an audio enthusiast (Westone W60 headphones for daily use), and I don't relish the thought of needing to have either a) a bulky and inconvenient adaptor with an external DAC, b) new headphone cable with a DAC built in, at probably considerable expense, or c) switching to a new handset manufacturer that hasn't lost their mind. The people who want external DACs can already make use of the USB or lightning connector while the rest of us quite happily make do with the convenience of the 3.5mm jack. Apologies for the somewhat-ranty nature of this post, it just frustrates me to see functionality taken away for no good reason. Phones are already too thin, and I constantly have issues gripping my iPhone 6 - the thicker iPhone 5 felt much more comfortable in my hand, and was far easier to grip into with the square bevelled edges. We're heading in the wrong direction with thickness at the moment - I'd rather extra battery life via a larger battery than an extra 0.6mm thinner.

jonknee 10y ago
> The people who want external DACs can already make use of the USB or lightning connector while the rest of us quite happily make do with the convenience of the 3.5mm jack. That's what gets me the most. Removing the jack simply takes away a choice and doesn't introduce anything new in its place. So frustrating.
mseebach 10y ago
A lot really hinges on what a USB-C to jack adaptor will look like. If it's not bulky and inconvenient (or expensive), none of your listed concerns apply. In the meantime, the 3.5mm jack actually takes up a not at all trivial volume in the handset.
- olympus 10y ago
  A usb-c to 3.5mm adapter will almost certainly be inconvenient. It has to plug into the usb-c port, which means that it will protrude from the phone, and the 3.5mm plug will stick out past that. Integrating it into the phone was much better since you didn't have the additional protrusion.
  - sjwright 10y ago
    If the adapter is in the form of a low profile short and stubby cable, the protrusion issue wouldn't be so bad.
  - Yhippa 10y ago
    The biggest drawback for me: one more think to keep track of with my phone.
- angersock 10y ago
  A non-trivial volume? Seriously? What a load of nonsense. What else of equivalent utility would be put there, a cure for cancer? This is just a DRM play in the guise of making the phones sexier.
  - wvenable 10y ago
    DRM play? What content is this protecting?
  - rwmj 10y ago
    It's non-trivial if you include the added depth that affects the whole phone.
    - angersock 10y ago
      Oh golly gee a whole four millimeters! Whatever shall we do? The "how thin can we make our phones" game is as stupid as the 3D TV game.
- mightykan 10y ago
  iPod touch is thinner than an iPhone and still has a 3.5mm jack. Thickness considerations isn’t a reason to remove it. The thickness of iPhone 6S/Plus actually increased compared to 6/Plus to accommodate the, to me, gimmicky 3D touch display assembly. The size of the battery shrank, too. So, if Apple really cared about thinness and battery life, they wouldn’t have included/will remove the 3D touch stuff in the next iPhone. I think controlling all aspects of the device (perhaps a DRM move?) is one reason but I have yet to hear a compelling reason to remove. I suspect that if they were to remove it, they’ll do it without trying to justify it at all. They’ll present it as the way it is. See the App Store search results Ad. announcement, which is borderline tone-deaf, for one recent example of doing something that wholly benefits Apple and no one else.
swiftisthebest 10y ago
Next you're going to be telling us to get off your lawn.
gp7 10y ago
Consider d) phones necessarily require DACs for their speakers so they'll always be able to dump analog signals onto the usb-c pins. All that's needed is an agreement of what to expect from the connector when analogue audio is playing and not fry equipment expecting something else, and best-case scenario all those pins can now be used even for balanced 5.1 audio (there are 6 positive-negative pairs free for alternate use according to wikipedia). So the dreaded adapter, while still unappealing, can be as simple as connecting pins to the correct 3.5mm pins (altho if usb requires some acknowledgment to get to that point it would only require a small finite state machine to achieve, I couldn't say what the impact of that would be on adapter size) e; it occurs to me i have no idea the different impedance for usb signals and line level, so this could all be hogwash
- falcolas 10y ago
  This is, while a standard, not required for USB Type C implementations.
  - gp7 10y ago
    The article raises the spectre of DAC-less phones to cut costs but I don't see that ever happening unless the microphone and speaker are removed too, so not implementing it, at least for the foreseeable future where everything still has 3.5mm sockets, seems.. foolhardy. Maybe we'll have worse DACs? I know that in my experience the difference between an acceptable dac and a great dac is not one I can notice with my ears
    - falcolas 10y ago
      Whether it's implemented or not will not depend on if the phone has a DAC, but if the USB chipset supports it. If the USB chipset does not support it, the phone could have the best DAC support in the world, and not provide analog audio over USB-C.
- olympus 10y ago
  You can choose whatever impedance you want since you're going to have to isolate the analog signal from the digital usb in your solution anyway. Or the usb-c to 3.5mm adapter can have a matching circuit in it made up of cheap passive components. Not really a big issue. More importantly, is this an actual solution being pursued? It sounds good, but I can see this getting out of hand with each manufacturer having a different standard. Or there could be an "analog audio over usb-c" standard that codifies which pins get which channel.
teaneedz 10y ago
I'm glad that there is sound reasoning around this topic. Removing the 3.5mm is just a plain stupid idea that is going to anger users unnecessarily. It's a really bad design decision and UX fail.
xellisx 10y ago
Remember when phones had IrDA ports and slide out keyboards?
rascul 10y ago
I can't remember the last time I used a headphone jack. I have Bluetooth headphones, speakers, and radios, which I find much easier than a cable. Removing it, even if no alternative cable connection is offered, wouldn't bother me at all.

by Daneel_ 10y ago

jonknee 10y ago

> The people who want external DACs can already make use of the USB or lightning connector while the rest of us quite happily make do with the convenience of the 3.5mm jack. That's what gets me the most. Removing the jack simply takes away a choice and doesn't introduce anything new in its place. So frustrating.

mseebach 10y ago

A lot really hinges on what a USB-C to jack adaptor will look like. If it's not bulky and inconvenient (or expensive), none of your listed concerns apply. In the meantime, the 3.5mm jack actually takes up a not at all trivial volume in the handset.

olympus 10y ago
A usb-c to 3.5mm adapter will almost certainly be inconvenient. It has to plug into the usb-c port, which means that it will protrude from the phone, and the 3.5mm plug will stick out past that. Integrating it into the phone was much better since you didn't have the additional protrusion.
- sjwright 10y ago
  If the adapter is in the form of a low profile short and stubby cable, the protrusion issue wouldn't be so bad.
- Yhippa 10y ago
  The biggest drawback for me: one more think to keep track of with my phone.
angersock 10y ago
A non-trivial volume? Seriously? What a load of nonsense. What else of equivalent utility would be put there, a cure for cancer? This is just a DRM play in the guise of making the phones sexier.
- wvenable 10y ago
  DRM play? What content is this protecting?
- rwmj 10y ago
  It's non-trivial if you include the added depth that affects the whole phone.
  - angersock 10y ago
    Oh golly gee a whole four millimeters! Whatever shall we do? The "how thin can we make our phones" game is as stupid as the 3D TV game.
mightykan 10y ago
iPod touch is thinner than an iPhone and still has a 3.5mm jack. Thickness considerations isn’t a reason to remove it. The thickness of iPhone 6S/Plus actually increased compared to 6/Plus to accommodate the, to me, gimmicky 3D touch display assembly. The size of the battery shrank, too. So, if Apple really cared about thinness and battery life, they wouldn’t have included/will remove the 3D touch stuff in the next iPhone. I think controlling all aspects of the device (perhaps a DRM move?) is one reason but I have yet to hear a compelling reason to remove. I suspect that if they were to remove it, they’ll do it without trying to justify it at all. They’ll present it as the way it is. See the App Store search results Ad. announcement, which is borderline tone-deaf, for one recent example of doing something that wholly benefits Apple and no one else.

swiftisthebest 10y ago

Next you're going to be telling us to get off your lawn.

gp7 10y ago

Consider d) phones necessarily require DACs for their speakers so they'll always be able to dump analog signals onto the usb-c pins. All that's needed is an agreement of what to expect from the connector when analogue audio is playing and not fry equipment expecting something else, and best-case scenario all those pins can now be used even for balanced 5.1 audio (there are 6 positive-negative pairs free for alternate use according to wikipedia). So the dreaded adapter, while still unappealing, can be as simple as connecting pins to the correct 3.5mm pins (altho if usb requires some acknowledgment to get to that point it would only require a small finite state machine to achieve, I couldn't say what the impact of that would be on adapter size) e; it occurs to me i have no idea the different impedance for usb signals and line level, so this could all be hogwash

falcolas 10y ago
This is, while a standard, not required for USB Type C implementations.
- gp7 10y ago
  The article raises the spectre of DAC-less phones to cut costs but I don't see that ever happening unless the microphone and speaker are removed too, so not implementing it, at least for the foreseeable future where everything still has 3.5mm sockets, seems.. foolhardy. Maybe we'll have worse DACs? I know that in my experience the difference between an acceptable dac and a great dac is not one I can notice with my ears
  - falcolas 10y ago
    Whether it's implemented or not will not depend on if the phone has a DAC, but if the USB chipset supports it. If the USB chipset does not support it, the phone could have the best DAC support in the world, and not provide analog audio over USB-C.
olympus 10y ago
You can choose whatever impedance you want since you're going to have to isolate the analog signal from the digital usb in your solution anyway. Or the usb-c to 3.5mm adapter can have a matching circuit in it made up of cheap passive components. Not really a big issue. More importantly, is this an actual solution being pursued? It sounds good, but I can see this getting out of hand with each manufacturer having a different standard. Or there could be an "analog audio over usb-c" standard that codifies which pins get which channel.

teaneedz 10y ago

I'm glad that there is sound reasoning around this topic. Removing the 3.5mm is just a plain stupid idea that is going to anger users unnecessarily. It's a really bad design decision and UX fail.

xellisx 10y ago

Remember when phones had IrDA ports and slide out keyboards?

rascul 10y ago

I can't remember the last time I used a headphone jack. I have Bluetooth headphones, speakers, and radios, which I find much easier than a cable. Removing it, even if no alternative cable connection is offered, wouldn't bother me at all.