3 ms·

Can you provide a link to your headphones so I can see if they are something I'd be at all interested in?

• bhauer 10y ago
  Motorola S305: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002BH3I9U https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002BH3I9U They're from ~2009 or thereabouts. Traditional headphone form factor. Works great for my use case (pedestrian commutes to and from the office).
  • j2bax 10y ago
    I had a pair of wired Sony's wayyyyy back in the day in this wrap around ear/neck band form factor that I really loved when I was a kid. Lately though, I find anything that covers my ear too warm and uncomfortable. This is why I'm excited about the AirPods. I wouldn't really classify these Motorola's as truly wireless because of the connecting band.
    • bhauer 10y ago
      That's cool with me. A sense I have picked up from your reply and another message in this thread is that Apple is attempting to evolve the definition of "wireless headphone" to require no bridge between the two ears. I think that is a vocabulary change that is causing a lot of us to scratch our heads in confusion. Conventionally, "wireless headphone" has meant no wire to the device—no headphone cable and no 3.5mm connector. And by that definition, wireless headphones are old and boring. That said, I'm not a fan of earbuds, wired or otherwise. So whether removing the bridge wire is a revolution is lost on me since I'm not interested either way.
      • j2bax 10y ago
        Yeah... My bad, agree on the terminology. I think a more appropriate way to refer to them would be 'wireless earbuds'. In that case, I would say anything connecting them would be cheating and taking away from the truly amazing feeling of having audio delivered to your ears with no connecting wires to get caught on things, pull, vibrate when turning your head etc etc.