6 ms·

> "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." -- Slashdot creator CmdrTaco/Rob Malda about the iPod in 2001. I'm not saying these will have the impact of an

> "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." -- Slashdot creator CmdrTaco/Rob Malda about the iPod in 2001. I'm not saying these will have the impact of an iPod, but I am entertained by the amount of naysaying here. For one thing, how often have you fiddled with the knots in your headphone cord? It's frustrating enough to prevent me from using them in situations where I otherwise would.

pikzen 10y ago
Less often than I have had my earphones fall out because I was running, or doing anything that requires my head to move a little. AirPods look to be perfectly fine (and extremely expensive for what they bring) if your usage of them is while sitting at your desk.
phailhaus 10y ago
Wires are definitely frustrating, but what's worse is losing them entirely. If you're running and they fall out, you're screwed.
- JadeNB 10y ago
  > If you're running and they fall out, you're screwed. On the other hand, this is a silent failure mode in a good sense: if you lose them, then you'll know instantly (because of no music), so at least have a chance of looking for them nearby.
  - CPLX 10y ago
    Where they will be discovered conveniently ensconced 15 yards below a subway grate. For those of us that live in cities and commute via public transit, having them fall out is probably 70% as problematic as vanishing entirely.
    - vacri 10y ago
      If only they came with some sort of lanyard...
      - Neliquat 10y ago
        What if the lanyard connected to the phone and kept them charged?
        Humdeee 10y ago
        Damn, we've come full circle
  - phailhaus 10y ago
    Yeah, except wired headphones also have the same "silent failure mode", and they won't roll away.
edgarvaldes 10y ago
I love the idea of wireless everything, when it really works. Let's see how these play out.
jimbokun 10y ago
Yes, but other wireless headphones already exist, no?
- BryantD 10y ago
  The reviews I've heard of these and the Beats Solo3 (which use the same chip) indicate that the wireless connection on these is absolutely rock solid. This includes a very picky friend of mine who got a set of Solo3 headphones; he's blown away. I'd like to see the AirPods in the wild for a month or so before I totally believe this, but early indications are good.
  - JadeNB 10y ago
    I have used cheapo sub-$20 SoundBot headphones for almost a year and a half now, and have literally never had an issue with wireless connectivity. EDIT: Ah, throwanem (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13170546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13170546) points out the crucial difference between headphones and earbuds. For me, earbuds are undesireable, so I didn't realise that the form factor was meant to be a selling point.
    - throwanem 10y ago
      Headphones or earbuds? The former have considerably more space in which to put an antenna that extends past the side of the wearer's head; earbuds have a pretty strict limitation in this regard, and indeed all the ones I've tried (ranging in price from about $10 to about $60) have at least occasionally dropped signal with the phone in my front trouser pocket on the same side as the earbud. For AirPods never to do so would be a significant differentiator in my experience.
  - jodrellblank 10y ago
    https://www.cnet.com/products/apple-airpods/preview/ https://www.cnet.com/products/apple-airpods/preview/ Until, of course, they start to produce some of the same little pops and interruptions I always get from Bluetooth earphones when I'm walking. I don't seem to get quite as many with the AirPods, but the skips and interruptions, when they happen, make me wish for something wired. Did they stay connected? Mostly, but I still heard audio pops from time to time. Not as many as I usually get with Bluetooth headphones, but they were still there.
skyyler 10y ago
I find it interesting that you use that quote as an example of naysaying. Within a few months of the iPod's introduction, they introduced higher storage options. Though the Classic line never got wireless, the HUGELY popular iPod touch had wireless. Both of his complaints were eventually rectified by Apple in the iPod line.
- Gorbzel 10y ago
  Yes, they introduced higher storage options, but not until component prices dropped low enough for Apple to maintain their margins at the same MSRP. The iPod had already became a gigantic hit in its own right during the 6 years between the introduction of the iPod 1st Gen and when the iPod Touch brought wireless to the iPod family. So other than some non-sequitur facts, what's so interesting? CmdrTaco's take is the classic example of tech spec-naysaying by pundits completely misreading demand in the market. Meanwhile, AceJohnny says that it may very well apply here, which remains to be seen.
- CardenB 10y ago
  But the iPod was already a huge success despite those shortcomings. Apple seems to be good at figuring out which drawbacks are deal breakers and which ones are not.
  - squeaky-clean 10y ago
    Was it an immediate success? If these graphs are true [0,1,2], it looks like it took several years for it to really take off. It didn't really become a huge success until the end of 2004, the same year they increased storage capacity (for the second time), moved iPods to the click-wheel, and added the iPod mini. Also the iTunes music store was released in 2003, and added Windows support in late 2002. "Apple’s total iPod sales climb past 10 million, with 8.2 million units sold in 2004 alone" [0] [0] http://www.macworld.com/article/1053499/home-tech/ipodtimeline.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1053499/home-tech/ipodtimeli... [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/ipod-sales_n_4680000.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/ipod-sales_n_468000... [2] http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/01/29/apple-stops-divulging-ipod-sales/ http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/01/29/apple-stops-divulgin...
untog 10y ago
This quote is so overused it's basically a tech trope. The point is that, at the time, the iPod was a niche product, with several huge flaws. Subsequent iterations of the iPod fixed those flaws, but that doesn't mean you should have bought a v1 iPod. It made much more sense to wait. Exactly the same logic applies to the Airpods. Suggesting that people can't criticise them because at some point in the future the product line will become successful is asinine.
- tormeh 10y ago
  No, the iPod took what was a technically good-enough product category and slapped on a UI that didn't suck. UI is often the most important part of a product, and basically only Apple really got it when it came to MP3-players.
  - izacus 10y ago
    And it got really successful only on second or third iteration, when it got rid of silly stuff like Mac-only compatibility.
  - untog 10y ago
    But the first device still had huge weaknesses. Firewire-only, Mac-only, and small storage compared to the competition. Not only that, the first iPod wasn't a success, it took a few iterations for Apple to get it right. My point is that this initial criticism of the iPod was not wrong. It was a flawed device. It was eventually improved into a successful device, but using that logic to shut down any criticism of future products is just silly.
  - rospaya 10y ago
    Except Apple nicked the UI from Creative Labs. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-with-creative-for-100-million-1/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-with-creative-for-10...
    - ascagnel_ 10y ago
      > The patent covers an interface that lets users navigate through a tree of expanding options, such as selecting an artist, then a particular album by that artist, then a specific song from that album, said Phil O'Shaughnessy, a Creative spokesman. The software UI (especially as described by that spokesman) is somewhat obvious. That said, the hardware UI of the iPod (click-wheel) was miles ahead of what Creative and others were offering (D-pads).
dragonwriter 10y ago
"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." -- Carl Sagan
asher_ 10y ago
Unrelated to the actual topic but... Knots occur in headphone cables because of how people wrap or store them. If you take each end of the cable and fold it in half a few times (I do it 3 times) then you're far less likely to get any tangles than if you wrap them around your fingers in a continuous loop.

pikzen 10y ago

Less often than I have had my earphones fall out because I was running, or doing anything that requires my head to move a little. AirPods look to be perfectly fine (and extremely expensive for what they bring) if your usage of them is while sitting at your desk.

phailhaus 10y ago

Wires are definitely frustrating, but what's worse is losing them entirely. If you're running and they fall out, you're screwed.

JadeNB 10y ago
> If you're running and they fall out, you're screwed. On the other hand, this is a silent failure mode in a good sense: if you lose them, then you'll know instantly (because of no music), so at least have a chance of looking for them nearby.
- CPLX 10y ago
  Where they will be discovered conveniently ensconced 15 yards below a subway grate. For those of us that live in cities and commute via public transit, having them fall out is probably 70% as problematic as vanishing entirely.
  - vacri 10y ago
    If only they came with some sort of lanyard...
    - Neliquat 10y ago
      What if the lanyard connected to the phone and kept them charged?
      - Humdeee 10y ago
        Damn, we've come full circle
- phailhaus 10y ago
  Yeah, except wired headphones also have the same "silent failure mode", and they won't roll away.

edgarvaldes 10y ago

I love the idea of wireless everything, when it really works. Let's see how these play out.

jimbokun 10y ago

Yes, but other wireless headphones already exist, no?

BryantD 10y ago
The reviews I've heard of these and the Beats Solo3 (which use the same chip) indicate that the wireless connection on these is absolutely rock solid. This includes a very picky friend of mine who got a set of Solo3 headphones; he's blown away. I'd like to see the AirPods in the wild for a month or so before I totally believe this, but early indications are good.
- JadeNB 10y ago
  I have used cheapo sub-$20 SoundBot headphones for almost a year and a half now, and have literally never had an issue with wireless connectivity. EDIT: Ah, throwanem (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13170546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13170546) points out the crucial difference between headphones and earbuds. For me, earbuds are undesireable, so I didn't realise that the form factor was meant to be a selling point.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    Headphones or earbuds? The former have considerably more space in which to put an antenna that extends past the side of the wearer's head; earbuds have a pretty strict limitation in this regard, and indeed all the ones I've tried (ranging in price from about $10 to about $60) have at least occasionally dropped signal with the phone in my front trouser pocket on the same side as the earbud. For AirPods never to do so would be a significant differentiator in my experience.
- jodrellblank 10y ago
  https://www.cnet.com/products/apple-airpods/preview/ https://www.cnet.com/products/apple-airpods/preview/ Until, of course, they start to produce some of the same little pops and interruptions I always get from Bluetooth earphones when I'm walking. I don't seem to get quite as many with the AirPods, but the skips and interruptions, when they happen, make me wish for something wired. Did they stay connected? Mostly, but I still heard audio pops from time to time. Not as many as I usually get with Bluetooth headphones, but they were still there.

skyyler 10y ago

I find it interesting that you use that quote as an example of naysaying. Within a few months of the iPod's introduction, they introduced higher storage options. Though the Classic line never got wireless, the HUGELY popular iPod touch had wireless. Both of his complaints were eventually rectified by Apple in the iPod line.

Gorbzel 10y ago
Yes, they introduced higher storage options, but not until component prices dropped low enough for Apple to maintain their margins at the same MSRP. The iPod had already became a gigantic hit in its own right during the 6 years between the introduction of the iPod 1st Gen and when the iPod Touch brought wireless to the iPod family. So other than some non-sequitur facts, what's so interesting? CmdrTaco's take is the classic example of tech spec-naysaying by pundits completely misreading demand in the market. Meanwhile, AceJohnny says that it may very well apply here, which remains to be seen.
CardenB 10y ago
But the iPod was already a huge success despite those shortcomings. Apple seems to be good at figuring out which drawbacks are deal breakers and which ones are not.
- squeaky-clean 10y ago
  Was it an immediate success? If these graphs are true [0,1,2], it looks like it took several years for it to really take off. It didn't really become a huge success until the end of 2004, the same year they increased storage capacity (for the second time), moved iPods to the click-wheel, and added the iPod mini. Also the iTunes music store was released in 2003, and added Windows support in late 2002. "Apple’s total iPod sales climb past 10 million, with 8.2 million units sold in 2004 alone" [0] [0] http://www.macworld.com/article/1053499/home-tech/ipodtimeline.html http://www.macworld.com/article/1053499/home-tech/ipodtimeli... [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/ipod-sales_n_4680000.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/28/ipod-sales_n_468000... [2] http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/01/29/apple-stops-divulging-ipod-sales/ http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/01/29/apple-stops-divulgin...

untog 10y ago

This quote is so overused it's basically a tech trope. The point is that, at the time, the iPod was a niche product, with several huge flaws. Subsequent iterations of the iPod fixed those flaws, but that doesn't mean you should have bought a v1 iPod. It made much more sense to wait. Exactly the same logic applies to the Airpods. Suggesting that people can't criticise them because at some point in the future the product line will become successful is asinine.

tormeh 10y ago
No, the iPod took what was a technically good-enough product category and slapped on a UI that didn't suck. UI is often the most important part of a product, and basically only Apple really got it when it came to MP3-players.
- izacus 10y ago
  And it got really successful only on second or third iteration, when it got rid of silly stuff like Mac-only compatibility.
- untog 10y ago
  But the first device still had huge weaknesses. Firewire-only, Mac-only, and small storage compared to the competition. Not only that, the first iPod wasn't a success, it took a few iterations for Apple to get it right. My point is that this initial criticism of the iPod was not wrong. It was a flawed device. It was eventually improved into a successful device, but using that logic to shut down any criticism of future products is just silly.
- rospaya 10y ago
  Except Apple nicked the UI from Creative Labs. https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-with-creative-for-100-million-1/ https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-settles-with-creative-for-10...
  - ascagnel_ 10y ago
    > The patent covers an interface that lets users navigate through a tree of expanding options, such as selecting an artist, then a particular album by that artist, then a specific song from that album, said Phil O'Shaughnessy, a Creative spokesman. The software UI (especially as described by that spokesman) is somewhat obvious. That said, the hardware UI of the iPod (click-wheel) was miles ahead of what Creative and others were offering (D-pads).

dragonwriter 10y ago

"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." -- Carl Sagan

asher_ 10y ago

Unrelated to the actual topic but... Knots occur in headphone cables because of how people wrap or store them. If you take each end of the cable and fold it in half a few times (I do it 3 times) then you're far less likely to get any tangles than if you wrap them around your fingers in a continuous loop.