3 ms·
I don't understand why they didn't simply say that it's about better sound quality than analog can provide. They could have chosen a better word to focus on: F
by downandout 10y ago
I don't understand why they didn't simply say that it's about better sound quality than analog can provide. They could have chosen a better word to focus on: Fidelity. "Apple customers deserve better than the same analog headphones they've been listening to since the beginning of music".
They could have at least swayed the Apple loyal with that position - the thought would have been that they're getting something better than everyone else has. At the very least there wouldn't be justifiable headlines mocking what they said.
- mobiuscog 10y agoBecause it's not ?
- degenerate 10y agoPretending that $170 gets you better sound would put them in an even worse position. The world hasn't heard what they sound like yet, and I'm sure they sound great. But they won't sound $170 better than the regular wired ones. Apple would get slammed even harder by using that selling point. Besides, high fidelity is the selling point of their overpriced Beats brand, which they will position as a better version of the Apple ones after everyone's spent their money on it.
- downandout 10y agoI was talking about the lightning ear buds that come with it, not the wireless ones.
- TillE 10y agoIt's all analog in the end. That's how you move the drivers. As the article says, it really makes very little difference whether the analog signal is coming from a few centimeters away (built-in DAC) or a few feet away (as normal).