12 ms·

Stop trying to kill the headphone jack

77 points by kasabali 9y ago

egwynn 9y ago
I'm pretty sure the motivating factor is waterproofing. The more places where the insides of the phone need to connect to the outside, the harder it is to protect from water damage.
- jakelarkin 9y ago
  that and encouraging people to spend $160 on bt earphones
  - scarface74 9y ago
    You mean by including both headphones with a lightning connector and an adapter?
- imglorp 9y ago
  If they add inductive charging and capacitative-only buttons, they could have a solid chunk of glass with no ports or seams. The first phone to that milestone would be an historic achievement. On that note, wtf is up with inductive charging? It's been around since the 90s at least, with the first phone maybe the Palm Pre around 2009. It's super convenient and you'd think Apple would have leaped on that feature, to drop a connector.
- gargravarr 9y ago
  Harder, yes, but not impossible. Samsung have managed with the Galaxy S5 and S7 without dropping the jack.
zimpenfish 9y ago
I use a Bluetooth dongle (Taotronics TT-BA08) with my normal Etymotic headphones for my iPhone 7. Works fine. The TT has ~20hr battery which is a week of usage for me. (Also doubles as a 3.5mm-to-Bluetooth transmitter but I've not used that yet. I think it also has a microphone for hands-free calling.)
- OtterCoder 9y ago
  My $3 headphones are guaranteed to last as long as the phone I'm using, can be toggled between my phone and laptop with one touch, have never had driver issues, are far greener and less power hungry, do not induce noticable EM interference, have perfectly fine range and fidelity, and can be used as a defensive garotte if I'm attacked. I'm sticking with jacks.
  - knowaveragejoe 9y ago
    It's also a widely adopted zero configuration standard. Go figure, a real problem that needs solving. Glad we're chasing this one down, smart phone manufacturers.
  - jackieON71 9y ago
    Sounds like you don’t know what the word guaranteed means.
  - arethuza 9y ago
    I finally gave Bluetooth headphones a go recently with a pair that cost about £30 and I've found that I really like them - I was always finding that cables got in the way and although audio quality isn't brilliant I mostly listen to audiobooks where I don't mind it. I'll probably stick with wireless headphones in future.
    - OtterCoder 9y ago
      But are they 10x better, for the price? I listen to music. You mentioned the quality was poor. I won't compromise quality for cables, and cordless is a bit of a non-benefit to me.
      - dyarosla 9y ago
        You seem to forget you can still have wired headphones connected through the USB c port. It's just the standard jack that's gone. It's not wireless or jack as the only options. Personally I've loathed wired for almost 8years now. I was happy when they removed the jack, and kept, in my mind, still an alternative if you really want to stay wired sometimes.
shmerl 9y ago
Others should keep it as a feature, and Apple should get lost with their DRMed audio idea.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  I'm getting a kick out of this comment since I remember when Apple introduced the volume + play/pause control on their earbuds and people breathlessly rushed to claim they were adding secret DRM to make only Apple-approved headphones work with Apple devices.
  - damnfine 9y ago
    Well, they did purposely make a different standard. But where does the (sometimes still required by studios) DRM go now? Its not a direct comparison it that sense.
- culturestate 9y ago
  > Apple should get lost with their DRMed audio idea Did I miss something? What DRM are they planning in relation to headphones?
  - shmerl 9y ago
    This introduces possibility of DRM, while regular audio jack has none. See https://boingboing.net/2016/08/12/how-a-digital-only-smartphone.html https://boingboing.net/2016/08/12/how-a-digital-only-smartph...
    - culturestate 9y ago
      If they wanted to add audio DRM, could they not have done so with a regular 3.5mm jack? Just because the physical interface is a "standard" doesn't mean they have to send standard data over it.
      - damnfine 9y ago
0xfeba 9y ago
I have a headphone jack on my pixel. But I just use BT headphones. I don't have a problem with it being removed.
- sapphire_tomb 9y ago
  I do - especially with all the BT problems that Oreo has introduced into the mix. Lots of people reporting that the connectivity between their handset and their headphones is now dropping out frequently. (Somewhere on google groups in the pixel support forum, where there's a massive thread on this - can't access google groups from work, or I'd find the link).
  - cannonedhamster 9y ago
    Oh Google BT issues have been going on for far longer than Oreo. BT support on Android is garbage. Put your phone in your back pocket, lose BT. Stuck paired with your car? Restart your phone. I've had nothing but bad luck with BT as far as reliability goes. It works fine for my runs but drops out so easily it just proves how not ready for primetime it is.
    - 0xfeba 9y ago
      I had a few issues with Nougat when I first got it. At some point an update fixed all issues. I just upgraded to Oreo and other than being blinded by the UI nothing much seems to have changed.
jackieON71 9y ago
Oh look! There’s an old man yelling at sky. Might as well whine about the lack of a real keyboard and replacable battery too!
markhagan 9y ago
I am happy that someone is writing about this. Essential broke my heart when they launched without the headphone jack (okay, not really, but you they did eliminate me as a customer for this version -- maybe I won't need the headphone jack for their next release). Survey from Nov last year: https://9to5mac.com/2016/11/01/life-without-the-headphone-jack/ https://9to5mac.com/2016/11/01/life-without-the-headphone-ja... It is a survey...so who knows how real it is, but 55.86% were negatively impacted Apple removing the headphone jack. While Apple customers don't have a choice, Android users do and we will vote with our wallets.
- stult 9y ago
  Apple customers have a choice. Which is why I'm typing this from my brand new Galaxy instead of an iPhone.
  - chrischen 9y ago
    I could suffer android, or like you know I could plug in the 3 cm converter onto my 20cm cord when my can’t find my airpods.
    - damnfine 9y ago
      Dongles are never the best answer. Either bulky and akward, or tiny and lost/broken. It would take a bit less than 3cm to just add the extra chip and jack.
      - chrischen 9y ago
        You have a massive wire attached to your headphones already...
    - wl 9y ago
      Assuming that you can find the adapter...
      - 9y ago
rm999 9y ago
>It isn’t a forward-thinking move like Apple’s decision to kill off the floppy disk, because no one’s playing along. In an article about how too many phone manufacturers are removing the headphone jack? A lot of people are playing along. The market for bluetooth headphones has blown up, covering a range of prices and form factors - it's absurd and perhaps wishful thinking to say this isn't a real trend. I also don't believe there are no benefits to the manufacturing process. I predict this article will feel very outdated in a couple years. I was very skeptical of the removal of the headphone jack, but six months ago I tried out a bluetooth headset, and I would never go back. It's easier and doesn't snag, and is easier to put away. This isn't to say everyone should get rid of the headphone jack, but I don't see why manufacturers shouldn't be able to.
- scriptkiddy 9y ago
  Here's my problem with bluetooth: Sound quality. Bluetooth is not able to offer the fidelity of a standard 3.5mm jack. Until it is capable of doing so, I will not even consider using bluetooth headphones. Plus, industry standard high-fidelity and studio quality headphones don't come with bluetooth due to the fidelity issue. I already have a several hundred dollar pair of awesome headphones. Why would I purchase a phone that I can't connect them to? Let's call the removal of the headphone jack what it is: a cash grab. The only reason manufacturers are doing this is to increase profits. By removing the 3.5mm jack companies no longer have to pay for the part or attaching the part to the board. On top of this, manufacturers can now charge for special dongles and proprietary wireless headphones.
  - striking 9y ago
    Some devices can send AAC at up to 96KHz over Bluetooth, and its compression is considered transparent by the ITU at 128kbit/s. I think the manufacturers didn't want to add cruft to their headphones, as the batteries and decoding circuitry would probably begin to crowd out the actual sound reproduction hardware. Of all the complaints I've heard (and agreed with) on removing the 3.5mm jack, inability to send high-fidelity audio over BT is the one I think I disagree with the most. (I agree with the rest of your comment, though.)
princekolt 9y ago
Apple's AirPods, in their tiny package, are capable of 5h of battery life. The case recharges the buds about 5 times, giving you almost 24h or battery. If headphone makers can't bundle at least a comparable battery life in their extremely larger package, that's not bluetooth's fault.
- gargravarr 9y ago
  AirPods are impressive in that sense, but they have the disadvantage that their integrated batteries are un-replaceable. iFixit recently dismantled them... no, that's too kind a word... they destroyed the earbuds trying to figure out their design, and concluded that it's totally impossible to replace the batteries, which are glued in place within a plastic housing that is also glued together. When your AirPod batteries no longer hold charge, you'll end up buying a new pair, and there is no option to switch to a cabled connection. You get what you pay Apple prices for.
fhood 9y ago
>We’ve tested a wide range of phones over the past year, and found that a number of premium handsets like the the iPhone 7, the Essential Phone and Xiaomi’s Mi 6 have nixed the jack. I giggled a little at the idea that testing was required to find out that the iphone 7 had ditched the headphone jack.
- 1_2__4 9y ago
  It's like sexing horses, I imagine. "Yep, that's a male."
- majewsky 9y ago
  I take this phrase as meaning something like this: "Since we're in the business of testing phones, we see a lot of different phones, and we noticed that more and more have nixed the jack."
damnfine 9y ago
Call me oldschool, but my headphones that work with everything else, should work fine for my phone. I will continue to vote with my dollar and only buy phones with 1. Removable battery 2. Removable storage 3. Headphone plug. Don't think me some luddite, I love my wireless buds when working out, or riding a bike. But when I want it to 'just work', no drivers, no batteries, no formats, just a plug and good sound. It seems steange to me, as apple used to be known for its quality D/A converters, and they are cheaper than ever now.
- userbinator 9y ago
  Replacing simple, robust and inexpensive technology with complex, fragile, and relatively more expensive electronics seems to be the "modern" trend these days, and I am also opposed to it. Wireless certainly has its advantages but I am unconvinced that it should be the only way to connect headphones or other things "going forward". But given the economic incentives, it's not surprising why things are moving in that direction.
- tarboreus 9y ago
  I would have upgraded to an iPhone 7 by now if it had included a headphone jack.
CreMindES 9y ago
First of all, LeEco’s president of R&D Liang Jun said that it is more complicated to include USB 3.1 type C than 3.5mm jack AND USB 2.0. It certainly frees up space and makes it easier to make the phone water-resistant, IP68 certified. Secondly, I personally own a pre-USB-type-C phone and a Sony bluetooth headset with a 3.5mm jack option. I'm looking at buying a new laptop, with as many USB type C 3.1 ports, as possible. Why? Because I buy one for about 5 years, and its the future, and I'm happy that we are converging to a single laptop charger and data port. Don't get me wrong, I don't say that it hurts to have a jack as an option, but I do say that it hurts not having an USB type C port. If I got the latter, but not the first, I don't mind. Anyone can buy an adapter, the USB 3.1 supports analog audio in and out and has an audio controll interface (http://www.anandtech.com/show/10719/usbif-publishes-audio-over-usb-typec-specifications http://www.anandtech.com/show/10719/usbif-publishes-audio-ov...), so no functionality is lost. Of course, it is a change, and people tend to take changes quite badly. If someone is afraid of losing the adapter, just tape it to the headphones, if they are using a 12 dollar one, I'm sure it won't make worse the experience. As for quality, I'm sure audiophiles will welcome that now they have more power over the DAC. And yes, it can help a lot. So stop whining, if you want a phone with a 3.5mm jack, buy one, there is plenty, and there will be quite a few for many years. Postpone the change, but keep it in mind when you buy your new pair of headphones.
zeveb 9y ago
I frankly don't get the obsession with wireless: it's consistently a worse experience than wired. Wireless networking is slower & less predictable than wired. Wireless keyboards enable attackers to sniff one's password. Wireless mice need charging (remarkably, Apple's wireless mouse is unusable whilst charging — notably poor UX). Wireless headphones cost more, have worse quality, introduce lag & last a shorter time — and they (at least potentially) enable an attacker to listen to what one's hearing. Wireless is convenient, yes. But I'd rather have a living room keyboard with a 24-foot cable than a wireless keyboard from which my neighbour's kid can steal my passwords. I'd rather have a pair of wired, electric earbuds for a decade or more than a pair of wireless, electronic earbuds which last a year or two. Getting rid of the headphone jack isn't courage: it's folly.
- dyarosla 9y ago
  Some people value convenience over other things. Apple certainly lot believes that's what their customers value more.
- userbinator 9y ago
  I'd rather have a pair of wired, electric earbuds for a decade or more than a pair of wireless, electronic earbuds which last a year or two. Another advantage: wired earbuds are easy to retrieve if they fall out of your ear. Depending on when and where they fall out, you might not be able to retrieve wireless ones.
ivraatiems 9y ago
I have an iPhone SE right now. I was going to upgrade to a Pixel at the next opportunity, but knowing now that the Pixel 2 has no jack, I won't. I will not buy a phone that does not have a headphone jack. Here's the thing: I don't want to listen to music from my phone most of the time (except in my car, which already has Bluetooth). When I do, though, I want a high quality experience, so I use the same (relatively nice) headphones I use with my desktop most of the time. I cannot not justify buying a pair of expensive Bluetooth headphones just for the less-common case of wanting music from my phones; Bluetooth monitors are generally worse than non-Bluetooth counterparts in the same price range. Now, I could certainly get one of the adapters others have mentioned here - but I don't want to do that, because I don't want to send the message that I'm OK with paying for more redundant dongles so that phones can be 4% thinner. I won't buy any phone that has lacks a jack.
- Eridrus 9y ago
  USB-C will actually be better for audio quality since you can have a DAC in your headphones, rather than the phone, so I would expect high end phones to get on this trend first. I do wonder if Apple will stick to the Lightning standard while the rest of the industry (and even Apple's laptops) move to USB-C.
  - ivraatiems 9y ago
    Even if they do, the device will still likely only have one USB-C port - so I would only be able to both listen to music and charge wirelessly, and we're back to square one, unless I get yet another overpriced dongle. It's still a non-starter. (Though if wireless charging becomes a big thing, maybe that'll change things.)
    - Eridrus 9y ago
      I don't see why Charging cables won't just start coming with an adapter that lets you plug in headphones. It's either stationary, so the extra bit doesn't really matter, or you're already carrying the cable + battery, and you probably don't care about the extra piece too much.
ortusdux 9y ago
Reminds me of the Apple Plug: http://appleplugs.com/ http://appleplugs.com/ The looping gif at the end is a masterpiece.
- occultist_throw 9y ago
  The other parody this reminds me of is this one. It is NSFW. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/17/airpod-accessory-subwoofer/ https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/17/airpod-accessory...
crusso 9y ago
Reasons I hate removal of the headphone jack on the iPhone: 1. Bluetooth headphones require extra charging. I'm always looking around for somewhere to plug in my phone AND my bluetooth headphones. And no, I don't want to buy Apple's easily-losable ear bud things. Since the batteries may die on my bluetooth headphones, I always still have to carry around the original headphones that came with my iPhone, leading to extra cord/dongle #1. 2. Bluetooth headphones require a charging cord that isn't the same as the one on my iPhone. Extra cord/dongle #2 to take with me everywhere for the old-style 8mm adapter. 3. My traveling Bose noise-canceling wired headphones require the carrying of extra cord/dongle #3 to take with me everywhere. 4. Bluetooth headphones don't interface in situations like that healthclub exercise bike I want to plug into. Neither do the standard iPhone headphones that come with the iPhone 7. So I need to carry extra cord/dongle #1 with me everywhere, the old style 8mm ones off a previous phone. 5. Bluetooth headphone batteries eventually stop working. I was making due with going mostly wireless for about 2 months and then the headphones I bought stopped working. Judging from Amazon reviews, people don't get a lot of life out of these little rechargeable devices - whereas normally the wired headphones I get with an iPhone last me for the life of the phone. 6. On the iPhone 7, at least, the headphones go into the combination charging/headphone jack. That means that I need extra cord/dongle #4 with me because of items #1 and #3 above, if I want to charge my phone and use headphones at the same time. So that's 4 extra cords/dongles on top of the iphone charging cord and the need to have my Bose traveling headsets. It's a shit show. [edit: tried to make formatting less hideous and to make a couple of items clearer... and because I miscounted]
- Taek 9y ago
  If we switch to a universal charging port like usb-c and then every audio device starts supporting Bluetooth, things will get better. Yeah, you'll still need 2 places to charge devices instead of one though, which is a pain
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  Reformatted for mobile: 1. Bluetooth headphones require extra charging. I'm always looking around for somewhere to plug in my phone AND my bluetooth headphones. And no, I don't want to buy Apple's easily-losable ear bud things. Since the batteries may die on my bluetooth headphones, I always still have to carry around the original headphones that came with my iPhone, leading to extra cord/dongle #1. 2. Bluetooth headphones require a cord that isn't the same as the one on my iPhone. Extra cord/dongle #2 to take with me everywhere. 3. My traveling Bose noise-canceling wired headphones require the carrying of extra cord/dongle #3 to take with me everywhere. 4. Bluetooth headphones don't interface in situations like that healthclub exercise bike I want to plug into. Neither do the standard iPhone headphones that come with the iPhone 7. So I need to carry extra cord/dongle #4 with me everywhere. 5. Bluetooth headphone batteries eventually stop working. I was making due with going mostly wireless for about 2 months and then the headphones I bought stopped working. Judging from Amazon reviews, people don't get a lot of life out of these little rechargeable devices - whereas normally the wired headphones I get with an iPhone last me for the life of the phone. 6. On the iPhone 7, at least, the headphones go into the combination charging/headphone jack. That means that I need extra cord/dongle #5 with me because of items #1 and #3 above. (Please don't reply to this comment so that I can delete it if the parent comment is edited. Thanks!)
al2o3cr 9y ago
HN: where commenters gleefully battle with Javascript standards daily, but find keeping track of a 3cm long adapter that came with their phone literally impossible.
- rafiki6 9y ago
  when things get physical, they get real...
- 1_2__4 9y ago
  HN: where commenters gleefully carry water for companies doing their best to spin naked profit motive as a customer benefit, most often by mocking the legitimate complaints of their peers.
jmull 9y ago
I'm fine with it. For a highly mobile device like a phone a wireless solution like Bluetooth makes a lot more sense. Meanwhile, for audiophile scenarios, a powered digital connection offers better options. Phones are space constrained so you really have to consider whether a large single-purpose port is worth it when there are better options avaialable. Here's another way to put it: if the 3.5mm jack didn't already exist it is nothing like what you'd propose for an optimal audio interface. The only thing it has going for it is the historical ecosystem. That's certainly not nothing, but given it's drawbacks and the availability of better options, it seems worth the cost to move on.
- gambiting 9y ago
  There aren't any better versions available though. Bluetooth audio quality is trash, even if you buy super high end headphones, the protocol is just not good enough. But even then - it's not like you can't use bluetooth with your headphone jack-equipped phone. To me the cost doesn't seem worth the move, not even a little bit.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- userbinator 9y ago
  Here's another way to put it: if the 3.5mm jack didn't already exist it is nothing like what you'd propose for an optimal audio interface. I think it's close to optimal --- and for a while, the slightly smaller 2.5mm size was also extremely common in dumbphones and media players.
  - jmull 9y ago
    The main problem is the digital to analog conversion has to happen in the phone. DACs involve trade offs and they aren't all equivalent. With the 3.5mm jack you get whatever your phone has. The early conversion to analog has other implications. Distortions in the signal can more easily affect what you hear than digital, which can do error correction. Also, you might want your headphones to do signal processing. That probably needs to be done digitally, so if your signal is analog you'll have to digitize, process, then convert back to analog. And the 3.5mm jack doesn't deliver the power. So if you want to do any processing or amplification you'll need a battery that you have to charge or some other power supply. 3.5mm also allows for only very basic controls.
jbigelow76 9y ago
Apple did away with the headphone jack, Essential too, now the Pixel 2, the trend will continue. At least in the context of the smart phone there is no more "trying", it's done, we're really just waiting for the victim to bleed out at this point.
jolux 9y ago
I would think a true audiophile wouldn't mind that much about this, because they would prefer to run their own DAC and amp off the digital signal instead of using the internal sound card anyways.
- falcolas 9y ago
  Attaching a DAC to a lightning port is always a pain (last time I tried, it require a lightning to USB host, then USB to DAC), not to mention it's not a great portable solution.
  - jolux 9y ago
    No, it's not a great portable solution, but honestly I thought most audiophiles looked down at portable music listening anyways. They prefer their big hifiman headphones and hifi speaker setups, no? I could be wrong.
    - falcolas 9y ago
      The second (somewhat ironically my setup, minus the "big" adjective) setup does not negate the first use case. I simply enjoy listening to high quality music wherever I happen to be. And I can with good headphones, which pretty much universally use a 2.5mm jack.
jlebrech 9y ago
to listen to music in future we'll have to get mp3 players again, but that'll be a good thing (independent battery, storage and a dac), mp3 players might also be able to double up as battery banks (you can keep it in you pocket at all times, less need to look at it than a phone)
faragon 9y ago
I'm not buying a phone without headphone jack nor FM radio.
notacoward 9y ago
As long as there are wired-only devices that people might want to use, having wireless-only devices as well forces lots of people to have either two headsets or one with a dongle. Somebody else mentioned treadmills at a health club. I'll add airline seats. Also, some environments just aren't that conducive to interference-free wireless listening. Hell, I've had multiple computers that created their own interference between wifi and Bluetooth. When Bluetooth is truly universal, and it's more resistant to interference, and pairing is less of a pain than it is now, then it will be time to get rid of the jack. Until then, this trend is an annoyance. Maybe it's small in the grand scheme of life, but it's enough that any such vendors are automatically on my boycott list.
SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
I wouldn't mind seeing phones with 2 USB-C connectors instead of USB + headphone jack. If I'm using 3.5mm headphones it takes a dongle anyway, or there are starting to be cheap USB-C headphones, or if I want high sound quality I'd be buying an external DAC anyway so having the USB port open would help. The problem with having only one port on the phone is trying to charge and use the headphones at the same time, which the vast majority of adapters / phones don't support.
gargravarr 9y ago
Most BS reason I heard Apple give for ditching the jack was for waterproofing. Yes, waterproofing is quite desirable in a smartphone, but Samsung managed to IP44-rate their Galaxy S5 (of which I have one) without dropping the 3.5mm jack. They didn't even put a cover over it, which they did for the USB3.0 connector. Any manufacturer who gives this as a reason for ditching this ever-useful connector, please explain how other companies have managed. I do prefer the convenience of bluetooth, but I also like that I can use a cheap 3.5mm cable to connect my phone to the stereo in my car, which does not benefit from a bluetooth adapter. It also means that when my bluetooth headphones run flat, I can switch to cabled while they charge.
Overtonwindow 9y ago
I just want cheap sound, that costs as cheap as possible to replace when I lose whatever it is I'm using to listen and talk, and no dongles.
mnm1 9y ago
There's simply no worse technology that I've used in my life than Apple's Bluetooth and I've tried most things out there. A bt speaker can literally be touching its bt source and still can't play music without constant skipping. This is in multiple environments in multiple locations. The same speaker has no problem playing from other devices. I can't imagine buying an overpriced iPhone to get such a shitty experience. Apple used to make good technology, now they just make garbage. Let the ignorant masses use this garbage and be forced for no good reason to but substandard bt headphones when they have plenty good wired ones that bt can't even come close to in quality, reliability, usability, or battery life (infinite). Companies that follow Apple are making a mistake but idiot consumers don't know any better. I'm sure there'll be plenty of phone makers keeping the jack for users who actually understand what they're buying.
- qubitcoder 9y ago
  I've had the opposite experience lately. Using both the MacBook Pro 2016 and iPhone in combination with the Bose SoundSport, and later the AirPods, has been a surprisingly seamless experience. The pairing occurs virtually instantly. I imagine this is a result of devices using the latest Bluetooth protocols. The AirPods even pair right away with my linux laptop (Dell XPS 9550), as well as my linux desktop workstation. I've begun using them with the new Xfinity cable box, for which Bluetooth can be toggled in the 'Comcast Labs' menu. In fact, the AirPods have solved every annoyance I've had with previous Bluetooth earbuds (clunky charging cables, manual power cycling, pairing speed, battery duration, portability, etc.). They're the first wireless earbuds that I use every day, easily slipping into my pocket. By contrast, the Jaybird and Bose equivalents require you to carefully wrap up the earbuds and cables, squeezing them into a small case.
calvinbhai 9y ago
I didn't hate my iPhone 7+ because I could use the regular headphones with the adapter. It was definitely a pain point though. But I must say, after I got my airpods, my usage habits have changed. That is how wireless headphones should be. Heck I have never used even the wired headphones as often as I use the Airpods. Seriously, if you don't intend to use Airpods like wireless headphones all the time, its going to be a pita to use a headphone jackless phone. As of now, there's no Bluetooth headphones out there that comes close to the amazing UX of Airpods. So think about buying that jackless phone based on how you intend to use it. Airpods will make a huge difference.
- mdekkers 9y ago
  the amazing UX of Airpods Genuinely curious. What is so amazing about it?
  - calvinbhai 9y ago
    1) I never liked wireless bt headphones earlier because they'd still tangle (like the Bose Bluetooth wirelsss which has a wire/strap connecting the two 2) I don't have to think about charging the headphones, with a dinky small usb chord, which I had to carry with the Bose. The Airpods charging case actually makes a big difference in the whole UX of Airpods. You use it as a storage case. But it charges the Airpods. I charge the chase once or twice a week when I remember to charge it. 3) It feels so comfortable in ears that i tend to forget that I'm wearing the Airpods. The only other earphones that were as comfy, were the ones from Bose with the silicone ear tips. 4) seemless pairing and switching between devices (Mac and iPhone) makes it even more amazing to use. (Certain apps on Mac though have a problem working well with the BT headsets, so I hate the MBP for that)
    - mdekkers 9y ago
      So the amazing UX comes down to a clever charging case, and comfy in-ear experience? Point 1 is a statement about your other headphones, not the airpods; Point 4 is ambiguous. That isn't really enough for me to say "lets ditch wired headphones". Here is my "Amazing UX" list: My headphones always work, across an incredibly wide variety of devices. Phones, Tablets, TV's, stereo systems, mixing consoles in studios. Basically, if it can reproduce sound, there is a near to 100% chance my headphones will work with it. never have to charge. I literally never have to worry about charging them, or battery life, or fancy charging cases (that would need to be kept on a charger) or anything like that. extreme comfort - in-ears don't do it for me, and cause me ear infections. I used to own a pair of custom-fit etymotic in-ears that would give me the comfort and quality I wanted, and would fit under my motorcycle helmet, but after a while ear infections started coming up, and my physician advised me that in-ears were not for me. superb quality - I enjoy listening to Sennheiser HD-280, HD650 or when traveling, the HD4.20s, and when the mood takes me, the AKG K701. I'm not an audiophile or sound quality snob, but once you have heard good quality playback through a pair of high quality earphones it is really difficult to listen to something else. never have to worry about using them - I plug them in, put them on my head. Done - a UX so slick and smooth, I never even have to think about it. I really don't understand why phonebuilders are getting rid of jacks. I know I won't be joining the ranks of wireless headphone users.
junkculture 9y ago
After buying a number of apple accessories, I've come to the conclusion that Apple treats them as disposable items. I've upgraded from the Apple 1 through 3 and then switched to the Fire stick. Airport Express? Got a number of those AND an old XP machine to configure them since Apple abandoned support on macOS. Their routers don't do WDS with other routers. When the 7 came out without a headphone jack, it was the last straw. I don't know what I'll buy when my 5s dies, but it's not going to be an iPhone.

77 points by kasabali 9y ago

I'm pretty sure the motivating factor is waterproofing. The more places where the insides of the phone need to connect to the outside, the harder it is to protect from water damage.

jakelarkin 9y ago
that and encouraging people to spend $160 on bt earphones
- scarface74 9y ago
  You mean by including both headphones with a lightning connector and an adapter?
imglorp 9y ago
If they add inductive charging and capacitative-only buttons, they could have a solid chunk of glass with no ports or seams. The first phone to that milestone would be an historic achievement. On that note, wtf is up with inductive charging? It's been around since the 90s at least, with the first phone maybe the Palm Pre around 2009. It's super convenient and you'd think Apple would have leaped on that feature, to drop a connector.
gargravarr 9y ago
Harder, yes, but not impossible. Samsung have managed with the Galaxy S5 and S7 without dropping the jack.

zimpenfish 9y ago

I use a Bluetooth dongle (Taotronics TT-BA08) with my normal Etymotic headphones for my iPhone 7. Works fine. The TT has ~20hr battery which is a week of usage for me. (Also doubles as a 3.5mm-to-Bluetooth transmitter but I've not used that yet. I think it also has a microphone for hands-free calling.)

OtterCoder 9y ago
My $3 headphones are guaranteed to last as long as the phone I'm using, can be toggled between my phone and laptop with one touch, have never had driver issues, are far greener and less power hungry, do not induce noticable EM interference, have perfectly fine range and fidelity, and can be used as a defensive garotte if I'm attacked. I'm sticking with jacks.
- knowaveragejoe 9y ago
  It's also a widely adopted zero configuration standard. Go figure, a real problem that needs solving. Glad we're chasing this one down, smart phone manufacturers.
- jackieON71 9y ago
  Sounds like you don’t know what the word guaranteed means.
- arethuza 9y ago
  I finally gave Bluetooth headphones a go recently with a pair that cost about £30 and I've found that I really like them - I was always finding that cables got in the way and although audio quality isn't brilliant I mostly listen to audiobooks where I don't mind it. I'll probably stick with wireless headphones in future.
  - OtterCoder 9y ago
    But are they 10x better, for the price? I listen to music. You mentioned the quality was poor. I won't compromise quality for cables, and cordless is a bit of a non-benefit to me.
    - dyarosla 9y ago
      You seem to forget you can still have wired headphones connected through the USB c port. It's just the standard jack that's gone. It's not wireless or jack as the only options. Personally I've loathed wired for almost 8years now. I was happy when they removed the jack, and kept, in my mind, still an alternative if you really want to stay wired sometimes.

shmerl 9y ago

Others should keep it as a feature, and Apple should get lost with their DRMed audio idea.

ubernostrum 9y ago
I'm getting a kick out of this comment since I remember when Apple introduced the volume + play/pause control on their earbuds and people breathlessly rushed to claim they were adding secret DRM to make only Apple-approved headphones work with Apple devices.
- damnfine 9y ago
  Well, they did purposely make a different standard. But where does the (sometimes still required by studios) DRM go now? Its not a direct comparison it that sense.
culturestate 9y ago
> Apple should get lost with their DRMed audio idea Did I miss something? What DRM are they planning in relation to headphones?
- shmerl 9y ago
  This introduces possibility of DRM, while regular audio jack has none. See https://boingboing.net/2016/08/12/how-a-digital-only-smartphone.html https://boingboing.net/2016/08/12/how-a-digital-only-smartph...
  - culturestate 9y ago
    If they wanted to add audio DRM, could they not have done so with a regular 3.5mm jack? Just because the physical interface is a "standard" doesn't mean they have to send standard data over it.
    - damnfine 9y ago

0xfeba 9y ago

I have a headphone jack on my pixel. But I just use BT headphones. I don't have a problem with it being removed.

sapphire_tomb 9y ago
I do - especially with all the BT problems that Oreo has introduced into the mix. Lots of people reporting that the connectivity between their handset and their headphones is now dropping out frequently. (Somewhere on google groups in the pixel support forum, where there's a massive thread on this - can't access google groups from work, or I'd find the link).
- cannonedhamster 9y ago
  Oh Google BT issues have been going on for far longer than Oreo. BT support on Android is garbage. Put your phone in your back pocket, lose BT. Stuck paired with your car? Restart your phone. I've had nothing but bad luck with BT as far as reliability goes. It works fine for my runs but drops out so easily it just proves how not ready for primetime it is.
  - 0xfeba 9y ago
    I had a few issues with Nougat when I first got it. At some point an update fixed all issues. I just upgraded to Oreo and other than being blinded by the UI nothing much seems to have changed.

jackieON71 9y ago

Oh look! There’s an old man yelling at sky. Might as well whine about the lack of a real keyboard and replacable battery too!

markhagan 9y ago

I am happy that someone is writing about this. Essential broke my heart when they launched without the headphone jack (okay, not really, but you they did eliminate me as a customer for this version -- maybe I won't need the headphone jack for their next release). Survey from Nov last year: https://9to5mac.com/2016/11/01/life-without-the-headphone-jack/ https://9to5mac.com/2016/11/01/life-without-the-headphone-ja... It is a survey...so who knows how real it is, but 55.86% were negatively impacted Apple removing the headphone jack. While Apple customers don't have a choice, Android users do and we will vote with our wallets.

stult 9y ago
Apple customers have a choice. Which is why I'm typing this from my brand new Galaxy instead of an iPhone.
- chrischen 9y ago
  I could suffer android, or like you know I could plug in the 3 cm converter onto my 20cm cord when my can’t find my airpods.
  - damnfine 9y ago
    Dongles are never the best answer. Either bulky and akward, or tiny and lost/broken. It would take a bit less than 3cm to just add the extra chip and jack.
    - chrischen 9y ago
      You have a massive wire attached to your headphones already...
  - wl 9y ago
    Assuming that you can find the adapter...
    - 9y ago

rm999 9y ago

>It isn’t a forward-thinking move like Apple’s decision to kill off the floppy disk, because no one’s playing along. In an article about how too many phone manufacturers are removing the headphone jack? A lot of people are playing along. The market for bluetooth headphones has blown up, covering a range of prices and form factors - it's absurd and perhaps wishful thinking to say this isn't a real trend. I also don't believe there are no benefits to the manufacturing process. I predict this article will feel very outdated in a couple years. I was very skeptical of the removal of the headphone jack, but six months ago I tried out a bluetooth headset, and I would never go back. It's easier and doesn't snag, and is easier to put away. This isn't to say everyone should get rid of the headphone jack, but I don't see why manufacturers shouldn't be able to.

scriptkiddy 9y ago
Here's my problem with bluetooth: Sound quality. Bluetooth is not able to offer the fidelity of a standard 3.5mm jack. Until it is capable of doing so, I will not even consider using bluetooth headphones. Plus, industry standard high-fidelity and studio quality headphones don't come with bluetooth due to the fidelity issue. I already have a several hundred dollar pair of awesome headphones. Why would I purchase a phone that I can't connect them to? Let's call the removal of the headphone jack what it is: a cash grab. The only reason manufacturers are doing this is to increase profits. By removing the 3.5mm jack companies no longer have to pay for the part or attaching the part to the board. On top of this, manufacturers can now charge for special dongles and proprietary wireless headphones.
- striking 9y ago
  Some devices can send AAC at up to 96KHz over Bluetooth, and its compression is considered transparent by the ITU at 128kbit/s. I think the manufacturers didn't want to add cruft to their headphones, as the batteries and decoding circuitry would probably begin to crowd out the actual sound reproduction hardware. Of all the complaints I've heard (and agreed with) on removing the 3.5mm jack, inability to send high-fidelity audio over BT is the one I think I disagree with the most. (I agree with the rest of your comment, though.)

princekolt 9y ago

Apple's AirPods, in their tiny package, are capable of 5h of battery life. The case recharges the buds about 5 times, giving you almost 24h or battery. If headphone makers can't bundle at least a comparable battery life in their extremely larger package, that's not bluetooth's fault.

gargravarr 9y ago
AirPods are impressive in that sense, but they have the disadvantage that their integrated batteries are un-replaceable. iFixit recently dismantled them... no, that's too kind a word... they destroyed the earbuds trying to figure out their design, and concluded that it's totally impossible to replace the batteries, which are glued in place within a plastic housing that is also glued together. When your AirPod batteries no longer hold charge, you'll end up buying a new pair, and there is no option to switch to a cabled connection. You get what you pay Apple prices for.

fhood 9y ago

>We’ve tested a wide range of phones over the past year, and found that a number of premium handsets like the the iPhone 7, the Essential Phone and Xiaomi’s Mi 6 have nixed the jack. I giggled a little at the idea that testing was required to find out that the iphone 7 had ditched the headphone jack.

1_2__4 9y ago
It's like sexing horses, I imagine. "Yep, that's a male."
majewsky 9y ago
I take this phrase as meaning something like this: "Since we're in the business of testing phones, we see a lot of different phones, and we noticed that more and more have nixed the jack."

damnfine 9y ago

Call me oldschool, but my headphones that work with everything else, should work fine for my phone. I will continue to vote with my dollar and only buy phones with 1. Removable battery 2. Removable storage 3. Headphone plug. Don't think me some luddite, I love my wireless buds when working out, or riding a bike. But when I want it to 'just work', no drivers, no batteries, no formats, just a plug and good sound. It seems steange to me, as apple used to be known for its quality D/A converters, and they are cheaper than ever now.

userbinator 9y ago
Replacing simple, robust and inexpensive technology with complex, fragile, and relatively more expensive electronics seems to be the "modern" trend these days, and I am also opposed to it. Wireless certainly has its advantages but I am unconvinced that it should be the only way to connect headphones or other things "going forward". But given the economic incentives, it's not surprising why things are moving in that direction.
tarboreus 9y ago
I would have upgraded to an iPhone 7 by now if it had included a headphone jack.

CreMindES 9y ago

First of all, LeEco’s president of R&D Liang Jun said that it is more complicated to include USB 3.1 type C than 3.5mm jack AND USB 2.0. It certainly frees up space and makes it easier to make the phone water-resistant, IP68 certified. Secondly, I personally own a pre-USB-type-C phone and a Sony bluetooth headset with a 3.5mm jack option. I'm looking at buying a new laptop, with as many USB type C 3.1 ports, as possible. Why? Because I buy one for about 5 years, and its the future, and I'm happy that we are converging to a single laptop charger and data port. Don't get me wrong, I don't say that it hurts to have a jack as an option, but I do say that it hurts not having an USB type C port. If I got the latter, but not the first, I don't mind. Anyone can buy an adapter, the USB 3.1 supports analog audio in and out and has an audio controll interface (http://www.anandtech.com/show/10719/usbif-publishes-audio-over-usb-typec-specifications http://www.anandtech.com/show/10719/usbif-publishes-audio-ov...), so no functionality is lost. Of course, it is a change, and people tend to take changes quite badly. If someone is afraid of losing the adapter, just tape it to the headphones, if they are using a 12 dollar one, I'm sure it won't make worse the experience. As for quality, I'm sure audiophiles will welcome that now they have more power over the DAC. And yes, it can help a lot. So stop whining, if you want a phone with a 3.5mm jack, buy one, there is plenty, and there will be quite a few for many years. Postpone the change, but keep it in mind when you buy your new pair of headphones.

zeveb 9y ago

I frankly don't get the obsession with wireless: it's consistently a worse experience than wired. Wireless networking is slower & less predictable than wired. Wireless keyboards enable attackers to sniff one's password. Wireless mice need charging (remarkably, Apple's wireless mouse is unusable whilst charging — notably poor UX). Wireless headphones cost more, have worse quality, introduce lag & last a shorter time — and they (at least potentially) enable an attacker to listen to what one's hearing. Wireless is convenient, yes. But I'd rather have a living room keyboard with a 24-foot cable than a wireless keyboard from which my neighbour's kid can steal my passwords. I'd rather have a pair of wired, electric earbuds for a decade or more than a pair of wireless, electronic earbuds which last a year or two. Getting rid of the headphone jack isn't courage: it's folly.

dyarosla 9y ago
Some people value convenience over other things. Apple certainly lot believes that's what their customers value more.
userbinator 9y ago
I'd rather have a pair of wired, electric earbuds for a decade or more than a pair of wireless, electronic earbuds which last a year or two. Another advantage: wired earbuds are easy to retrieve if they fall out of your ear. Depending on when and where they fall out, you might not be able to retrieve wireless ones.

ivraatiems 9y ago

I have an iPhone SE right now. I was going to upgrade to a Pixel at the next opportunity, but knowing now that the Pixel 2 has no jack, I won't. I will not buy a phone that does not have a headphone jack. Here's the thing: I don't want to listen to music from my phone most of the time (except in my car, which already has Bluetooth). When I do, though, I want a high quality experience, so I use the same (relatively nice) headphones I use with my desktop most of the time. I cannot not justify buying a pair of expensive Bluetooth headphones just for the less-common case of wanting music from my phones; Bluetooth monitors are generally worse than non-Bluetooth counterparts in the same price range. Now, I could certainly get one of the adapters others have mentioned here - but I don't want to do that, because I don't want to send the message that I'm OK with paying for more redundant dongles so that phones can be 4% thinner. I won't buy any phone that has lacks a jack.

Eridrus 9y ago
USB-C will actually be better for audio quality since you can have a DAC in your headphones, rather than the phone, so I would expect high end phones to get on this trend first. I do wonder if Apple will stick to the Lightning standard while the rest of the industry (and even Apple's laptops) move to USB-C.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  Even if they do, the device will still likely only have one USB-C port - so I would only be able to both listen to music and charge wirelessly, and we're back to square one, unless I get yet another overpriced dongle. It's still a non-starter. (Though if wireless charging becomes a big thing, maybe that'll change things.)
  - Eridrus 9y ago
    I don't see why Charging cables won't just start coming with an adapter that lets you plug in headphones. It's either stationary, so the extra bit doesn't really matter, or you're already carrying the cable + battery, and you probably don't care about the extra piece too much.

ortusdux 9y ago

Reminds me of the Apple Plug: http://appleplugs.com/ http://appleplugs.com/ The looping gif at the end is a masterpiece.

occultist_throw 9y ago
The other parody this reminds me of is this one. It is NSFW. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/17/airpod-accessory-subwoofer/ https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/09/17/airpod-accessory...

crusso 9y ago

Reasons I hate removal of the headphone jack on the iPhone: 1. Bluetooth headphones require extra charging. I'm always looking around for somewhere to plug in my phone AND my bluetooth headphones. And no, I don't want to buy Apple's easily-losable ear bud things. Since the batteries may die on my bluetooth headphones, I always still have to carry around the original headphones that came with my iPhone, leading to extra cord/dongle #1. 2. Bluetooth headphones require a charging cord that isn't the same as the one on my iPhone. Extra cord/dongle #2 to take with me everywhere for the old-style 8mm adapter. 3. My traveling Bose noise-canceling wired headphones require the carrying of extra cord/dongle #3 to take with me everywhere. 4. Bluetooth headphones don't interface in situations like that healthclub exercise bike I want to plug into. Neither do the standard iPhone headphones that come with the iPhone 7. So I need to carry extra cord/dongle #1 with me everywhere, the old style 8mm ones off a previous phone. 5. Bluetooth headphone batteries eventually stop working. I was making due with going mostly wireless for about 2 months and then the headphones I bought stopped working. Judging from Amazon reviews, people don't get a lot of life out of these little rechargeable devices - whereas normally the wired headphones I get with an iPhone last me for the life of the phone. 6. On the iPhone 7, at least, the headphones go into the combination charging/headphone jack. That means that I need extra cord/dongle #4 with me because of items #1 and #3 above, if I want to charge my phone and use headphones at the same time. So that's 4 extra cords/dongles on top of the iphone charging cord and the need to have my Bose traveling headsets. It's a shit show. [edit: tried to make formatting less hideous and to make a couple of items clearer... and because I miscounted]

Taek 9y ago
If we switch to a universal charging port like usb-c and then every audio device starts supporting Bluetooth, things will get better. Yeah, you'll still need 2 places to charge devices instead of one though, which is a pain
sillysaurus3 9y ago
Reformatted for mobile: 1. Bluetooth headphones require extra charging. I'm always looking around for somewhere to plug in my phone AND my bluetooth headphones. And no, I don't want to buy Apple's easily-losable ear bud things. Since the batteries may die on my bluetooth headphones, I always still have to carry around the original headphones that came with my iPhone, leading to extra cord/dongle #1. 2. Bluetooth headphones require a cord that isn't the same as the one on my iPhone. Extra cord/dongle #2 to take with me everywhere. 3. My traveling Bose noise-canceling wired headphones require the carrying of extra cord/dongle #3 to take with me everywhere. 4. Bluetooth headphones don't interface in situations like that healthclub exercise bike I want to plug into. Neither do the standard iPhone headphones that come with the iPhone 7. So I need to carry extra cord/dongle #4 with me everywhere. 5. Bluetooth headphone batteries eventually stop working. I was making due with going mostly wireless for about 2 months and then the headphones I bought stopped working. Judging from Amazon reviews, people don't get a lot of life out of these little rechargeable devices - whereas normally the wired headphones I get with an iPhone last me for the life of the phone. 6. On the iPhone 7, at least, the headphones go into the combination charging/headphone jack. That means that I need extra cord/dongle #5 with me because of items #1 and #3 above. (Please don't reply to this comment so that I can delete it if the parent comment is edited. Thanks!)

al2o3cr 9y ago

HN: where commenters gleefully battle with Javascript standards daily, but find keeping track of a 3cm long adapter that came with their phone literally impossible.

rafiki6 9y ago
when things get physical, they get real...
1_2__4 9y ago
HN: where commenters gleefully carry water for companies doing their best to spin naked profit motive as a customer benefit, most often by mocking the legitimate complaints of their peers.

jmull 9y ago

I'm fine with it. For a highly mobile device like a phone a wireless solution like Bluetooth makes a lot more sense. Meanwhile, for audiophile scenarios, a powered digital connection offers better options. Phones are space constrained so you really have to consider whether a large single-purpose port is worth it when there are better options avaialable. Here's another way to put it: if the 3.5mm jack didn't already exist it is nothing like what you'd propose for an optimal audio interface. The only thing it has going for it is the historical ecosystem. That's certainly not nothing, but given it's drawbacks and the availability of better options, it seems worth the cost to move on.

gambiting 9y ago
There aren't any better versions available though. Bluetooth audio quality is trash, even if you buy super high end headphones, the protocol is just not good enough. But even then - it's not like you can't use bluetooth with your headphone jack-equipped phone. To me the cost doesn't seem worth the move, not even a little bit.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
userbinator 9y ago
Here's another way to put it: if the 3.5mm jack didn't already exist it is nothing like what you'd propose for an optimal audio interface. I think it's close to optimal --- and for a while, the slightly smaller 2.5mm size was also extremely common in dumbphones and media players.
- jmull 9y ago
  The main problem is the digital to analog conversion has to happen in the phone. DACs involve trade offs and they aren't all equivalent. With the 3.5mm jack you get whatever your phone has. The early conversion to analog has other implications. Distortions in the signal can more easily affect what you hear than digital, which can do error correction. Also, you might want your headphones to do signal processing. That probably needs to be done digitally, so if your signal is analog you'll have to digitize, process, then convert back to analog. And the 3.5mm jack doesn't deliver the power. So if you want to do any processing or amplification you'll need a battery that you have to charge or some other power supply. 3.5mm also allows for only very basic controls.

jbigelow76 9y ago

Apple did away with the headphone jack, Essential too, now the Pixel 2, the trend will continue. At least in the context of the smart phone there is no more "trying", it's done, we're really just waiting for the victim to bleed out at this point.

jolux 9y ago

I would think a true audiophile wouldn't mind that much about this, because they would prefer to run their own DAC and amp off the digital signal instead of using the internal sound card anyways.

falcolas 9y ago
Attaching a DAC to a lightning port is always a pain (last time I tried, it require a lightning to USB host, then USB to DAC), not to mention it's not a great portable solution.
- jolux 9y ago
  No, it's not a great portable solution, but honestly I thought most audiophiles looked down at portable music listening anyways. They prefer their big hifiman headphones and hifi speaker setups, no? I could be wrong.
  - falcolas 9y ago
    The second (somewhat ironically my setup, minus the "big" adjective) setup does not negate the first use case. I simply enjoy listening to high quality music wherever I happen to be. And I can with good headphones, which pretty much universally use a 2.5mm jack.

jlebrech 9y ago

to listen to music in future we'll have to get mp3 players again, but that'll be a good thing (independent battery, storage and a dac), mp3 players might also be able to double up as battery banks (you can keep it in you pocket at all times, less need to look at it than a phone)

faragon 9y ago

I'm not buying a phone without headphone jack nor FM radio.

notacoward 9y ago

As long as there are wired-only devices that people might want to use, having wireless-only devices as well forces lots of people to have either two headsets or one with a dongle. Somebody else mentioned treadmills at a health club. I'll add airline seats. Also, some environments just aren't that conducive to interference-free wireless listening. Hell, I've had multiple computers that created their own interference between wifi and Bluetooth. When Bluetooth is truly universal, and it's more resistant to interference, and pairing is less of a pain than it is now, then it will be time to get rid of the jack. Until then, this trend is an annoyance. Maybe it's small in the grand scheme of life, but it's enough that any such vendors are automatically on my boycott list.

SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago

I wouldn't mind seeing phones with 2 USB-C connectors instead of USB + headphone jack. If I'm using 3.5mm headphones it takes a dongle anyway, or there are starting to be cheap USB-C headphones, or if I want high sound quality I'd be buying an external DAC anyway so having the USB port open would help. The problem with having only one port on the phone is trying to charge and use the headphones at the same time, which the vast majority of adapters / phones don't support.

gargravarr 9y ago

Most BS reason I heard Apple give for ditching the jack was for waterproofing. Yes, waterproofing is quite desirable in a smartphone, but Samsung managed to IP44-rate their Galaxy S5 (of which I have one) without dropping the 3.5mm jack. They didn't even put a cover over it, which they did for the USB3.0 connector. Any manufacturer who gives this as a reason for ditching this ever-useful connector, please explain how other companies have managed. I do prefer the convenience of bluetooth, but I also like that I can use a cheap 3.5mm cable to connect my phone to the stereo in my car, which does not benefit from a bluetooth adapter. It also means that when my bluetooth headphones run flat, I can switch to cabled while they charge.

Overtonwindow 9y ago

I just want cheap sound, that costs as cheap as possible to replace when I lose whatever it is I'm using to listen and talk, and no dongles.

mnm1 9y ago

There's simply no worse technology that I've used in my life than Apple's Bluetooth and I've tried most things out there. A bt speaker can literally be touching its bt source and still can't play music without constant skipping. This is in multiple environments in multiple locations. The same speaker has no problem playing from other devices. I can't imagine buying an overpriced iPhone to get such a shitty experience. Apple used to make good technology, now they just make garbage. Let the ignorant masses use this garbage and be forced for no good reason to but substandard bt headphones when they have plenty good wired ones that bt can't even come close to in quality, reliability, usability, or battery life (infinite). Companies that follow Apple are making a mistake but idiot consumers don't know any better. I'm sure there'll be plenty of phone makers keeping the jack for users who actually understand what they're buying.

qubitcoder 9y ago
I've had the opposite experience lately. Using both the MacBook Pro 2016 and iPhone in combination with the Bose SoundSport, and later the AirPods, has been a surprisingly seamless experience. The pairing occurs virtually instantly. I imagine this is a result of devices using the latest Bluetooth protocols. The AirPods even pair right away with my linux laptop (Dell XPS 9550), as well as my linux desktop workstation. I've begun using them with the new Xfinity cable box, for which Bluetooth can be toggled in the 'Comcast Labs' menu. In fact, the AirPods have solved every annoyance I've had with previous Bluetooth earbuds (clunky charging cables, manual power cycling, pairing speed, battery duration, portability, etc.). They're the first wireless earbuds that I use every day, easily slipping into my pocket. By contrast, the Jaybird and Bose equivalents require you to carefully wrap up the earbuds and cables, squeezing them into a small case.

calvinbhai 9y ago

I didn't hate my iPhone 7+ because I could use the regular headphones with the adapter. It was definitely a pain point though. But I must say, after I got my airpods, my usage habits have changed. That is how wireless headphones should be. Heck I have never used even the wired headphones as often as I use the Airpods. Seriously, if you don't intend to use Airpods like wireless headphones all the time, its going to be a pita to use a headphone jackless phone. As of now, there's no Bluetooth headphones out there that comes close to the amazing UX of Airpods. So think about buying that jackless phone based on how you intend to use it. Airpods will make a huge difference.

mdekkers 9y ago
the amazing UX of Airpods Genuinely curious. What is so amazing about it?
- calvinbhai 9y ago
  1) I never liked wireless bt headphones earlier because they'd still tangle (like the Bose Bluetooth wirelsss which has a wire/strap connecting the two 2) I don't have to think about charging the headphones, with a dinky small usb chord, which I had to carry with the Bose. The Airpods charging case actually makes a big difference in the whole UX of Airpods. You use it as a storage case. But it charges the Airpods. I charge the chase once or twice a week when I remember to charge it. 3) It feels so comfortable in ears that i tend to forget that I'm wearing the Airpods. The only other earphones that were as comfy, were the ones from Bose with the silicone ear tips. 4) seemless pairing and switching between devices (Mac and iPhone) makes it even more amazing to use. (Certain apps on Mac though have a problem working well with the BT headsets, so I hate the MBP for that)
  - mdekkers 9y ago
    So the amazing UX comes down to a clever charging case, and comfy in-ear experience? Point 1 is a statement about your other headphones, not the airpods; Point 4 is ambiguous. That isn't really enough for me to say "lets ditch wired headphones". Here is my "Amazing UX" list: My headphones always work, across an incredibly wide variety of devices. Phones, Tablets, TV's, stereo systems, mixing consoles in studios. Basically, if it can reproduce sound, there is a near to 100% chance my headphones will work with it. never have to charge. I literally never have to worry about charging them, or battery life, or fancy charging cases (that would need to be kept on a charger) or anything like that. extreme comfort - in-ears don't do it for me, and cause me ear infections. I used to own a pair of custom-fit etymotic in-ears that would give me the comfort and quality I wanted, and would fit under my motorcycle helmet, but after a while ear infections started coming up, and my physician advised me that in-ears were not for me. superb quality - I enjoy listening to Sennheiser HD-280, HD650 or when traveling, the HD4.20s, and when the mood takes me, the AKG K701. I'm not an audiophile or sound quality snob, but once you have heard good quality playback through a pair of high quality earphones it is really difficult to listen to something else. never have to worry about using them - I plug them in, put them on my head. Done - a UX so slick and smooth, I never even have to think about it. I really don't understand why phonebuilders are getting rid of jacks. I know I won't be joining the ranks of wireless headphone users.

junkculture 9y ago

After buying a number of apple accessories, I've come to the conclusion that Apple treats them as disposable items. I've upgraded from the Apple 1 through 3 and then switched to the Fire stick. Airport Express? Got a number of those AND an old XP machine to configure them since Apple abandoned support on macOS. Their routers don't do WDS with other routers. When the 7 came out without a headphone jack, it was the last straw. I don't know what I'll buy when my 5s dies, but it's not going to be an iPhone.