5 ms·

I mean if you prefer old technology, that's all good. No one is stopping you from using your old headphones with your old phone. The convenience of not having

I mean if you prefer old technology, that's all good. No one is stopping you from using your old headphones with your old phone. The convenience of not having to untangle headphones, not accidentally yanking them out of a device when walking away, or being able to exercise with a device sitting somewhere else in the room is a welcome innovation IMO. Yes, apple forced people's hand with removing the port (They aren't making these products for fun) to make money, but when has a business made bold moves if it didn't mean making money in the long run? When apple started removing ports, I bought stock, which payed for my new headphones.

blahedo 8y ago
> ...I bought stock, which payed for my new headphones. This reads as: "What's your problem? I have lots of money, so I can afford this." When people talk about classism and privilege in the tech industry, this is the sort of thing they mean. Nobody claimed that bluetooth headsets aren't better in some situations—but their benefits are not necessarily in areas that interest everyone. "Forcing people's hand" to buy the more expensive but unneeded thing is precisely what the OP is complaining about, and your post does not address that argument even a little bit.
- agitator 8y ago
  I agree my comment does sound brash, which wasn't my intention. But what I meant was, apple is selling products, and trying to maximize it's profits. If you don't like the feeling of manipulation, you don't need to buy into it. Marketting, social pressure, device ecosystems, they are all strategies that get you to buy, and keep buying. And I implicitly did address the OP's comment, in that I agree. They are forcing people's hands, it sucks. But if you are going to buy into it, you might also recognize that other's will buy into it and try to make profit for yourself by owning a portion of the company. I was in no way implying that I'm rich. I was implying that you can play the game too if you want. What do you think will happen as AI continues to develop? Either you sit idly complaining about robots taking your jobs, or you start trying to gain part ownership of the companies that will build those robots. You have to be proactive because companies don't give a sh*t about your wellbeing, they have no incentive to do so.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- tomc1985 8y ago
  You know, the classist argument is probably stronger than my old-tech cheerleading, and is a good point that I was only barely thinking about. So, thank you :)
- AmericanChopper 8y ago
  Apple’s market is people who want to pay more money for products that they at least consider to be superior. Complaining about the price of Apple products seems silly to me, it’s clear Apple doesn’t place much importance on affordability, but there are plenty of other companies that do.
- unethical_ban 8y ago
  Then buy a budget phone that is cheap and still has the jack. Don't turn a comment about picking up new headphones into your manifesto on Bay Area elitism.
  - arvinsim 8y ago
    > This reads as: "What's your problem? I have lots of money, so I can afford this." > Then buy a budget phone that is cheap and still has the jack. You see the problem with your argument? Not everyone has extra money to spare.
    - tomhoward 8y ago
      Sure, and those people won't get new iPhones at all, or if they do, can use the free dongle to use their old 3.5mm jack headphones with their new iPhone. Nobody is being forced to buy expensive new headphones, or new phones.
    - unethical_ban 8y ago
      If you don't have money, you're not buying a phone anyway, and your old one has a headphone jack.
tomc1985 8y ago
Why is this always framed this in terms of old vs new technology?? There are other ways of looking at it. Simplicity vs complexity. Established, working tech vs novel tech (with fewer use cases IMO). Flexibility and options vs "you can have it any color you want, as long as it's black" The seemingly blind fascination with novelty and "design" (extra emphasis on the finger quotes) within the tech community will be its downfall. There was nothing wrong with including both options (NOT a dongle); it is these legacy-type features which enable the rich interconnectivity that we have enjoyed up until very recently. So many seem so happy to steamroll the sometimes billions of people who are happy with what they have, just to sell them a bunch of new crap under the guise of 'innovation' I don't know about you but the last few years I have begun to seriously question some of the fundamental values of tech, such as this obsession with disruptive innovation. If existing wireless tech were truly innovative then it would be as seamless and interconnectible as past tech, which includes interoperability with existing tech without forcing the user to make sacrifices (like charging). This, and this trend towards software complexity and proprietary solutions (like lightning/thunderbolt vs usb) is the very thing that compromises that interconnectivity that so many of us enjoy and rely upon today. Knocking off ports is not design, and it is not innovation. It's corporate conquest at the cost of existing communities. edit: and the above doesn't even begin to factor in the decline in quality in nearly all areas of manufacturing over the past 30 years or so. Yes your Apple stock might have paid for a new pair of headphones but I can almost guarantee you that they were not made to nearly the same standards in materials and durability that they would have, had they been made in the past. You would have to pay considerably higher sum (not just from inflation adjustment) of money to get the same quality parts. Meanwhile (and for example), Sennheiser still makes the HD280's, they're still awesome, and now they're going for like a hundred bucks (probably because of "no bluetooth", but also economies of scale and mfring optimizations), and they knock the socks off Beats' entire product line.
- FabHK 8y ago
  > Why is this always framed this in terms of old vs new technology? Good point - that's not how it's framed for the Mac Pro: "Hey, man, forget about these old rectangular computers. New computers are round! That's just the way it is; go with the flow. Round is new, so it's better!!1!!1"

blahedo 8y ago

> ...I bought stock, which payed for my new headphones. This reads as: "What's your problem? I have lots of money, so I can afford this." When people talk about classism and privilege in the tech industry, this is the sort of thing they mean. Nobody claimed that bluetooth headsets aren't better in some situations—but their benefits are not necessarily in areas that interest everyone. "Forcing people's hand" to buy the more expensive but unneeded thing is precisely what the OP is complaining about, and your post does not address that argument even a little bit.

agitator 8y ago
I agree my comment does sound brash, which wasn't my intention. But what I meant was, apple is selling products, and trying to maximize it's profits. If you don't like the feeling of manipulation, you don't need to buy into it. Marketting, social pressure, device ecosystems, they are all strategies that get you to buy, and keep buying. And I implicitly did address the OP's comment, in that I agree. They are forcing people's hands, it sucks. But if you are going to buy into it, you might also recognize that other's will buy into it and try to make profit for yourself by owning a portion of the company. I was in no way implying that I'm rich. I was implying that you can play the game too if you want. What do you think will happen as AI continues to develop? Either you sit idly complaining about robots taking your jobs, or you start trying to gain part ownership of the companies that will build those robots. You have to be proactive because companies don't give a sh*t about your wellbeing, they have no incentive to do so.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
tomc1985 8y ago
You know, the classist argument is probably stronger than my old-tech cheerleading, and is a good point that I was only barely thinking about. So, thank you :)
AmericanChopper 8y ago
Apple’s market is people who want to pay more money for products that they at least consider to be superior. Complaining about the price of Apple products seems silly to me, it’s clear Apple doesn’t place much importance on affordability, but there are plenty of other companies that do.
unethical_ban 8y ago
Then buy a budget phone that is cheap and still has the jack. Don't turn a comment about picking up new headphones into your manifesto on Bay Area elitism.
- arvinsim 8y ago
  > This reads as: "What's your problem? I have lots of money, so I can afford this." > Then buy a budget phone that is cheap and still has the jack. You see the problem with your argument? Not everyone has extra money to spare.
  - tomhoward 8y ago
    Sure, and those people won't get new iPhones at all, or if they do, can use the free dongle to use their old 3.5mm jack headphones with their new iPhone. Nobody is being forced to buy expensive new headphones, or new phones.
  - unethical_ban 8y ago
    If you don't have money, you're not buying a phone anyway, and your old one has a headphone jack.

tomc1985 8y ago

Why is this always framed this in terms of old vs new technology?? There are other ways of looking at it. Simplicity vs complexity. Established, working tech vs novel tech (with fewer use cases IMO). Flexibility and options vs "you can have it any color you want, as long as it's black" The seemingly blind fascination with novelty and "design" (extra emphasis on the finger quotes) within the tech community will be its downfall. There was nothing wrong with including both options (NOT a dongle); it is these legacy-type features which enable the rich interconnectivity that we have enjoyed up until very recently. So many seem so happy to steamroll the sometimes billions of people who are happy with what they have, just to sell them a bunch of new crap under the guise of 'innovation' I don't know about you but the last few years I have begun to seriously question some of the fundamental values of tech, such as this obsession with disruptive innovation. If existing wireless tech were truly innovative then it would be as seamless and interconnectible as past tech, which includes interoperability with existing tech without forcing the user to make sacrifices (like charging). This, and this trend towards software complexity and proprietary solutions (like lightning/thunderbolt vs usb) is the very thing that compromises that interconnectivity that so many of us enjoy and rely upon today. Knocking off ports is not design, and it is not innovation. It's corporate conquest at the cost of existing communities. edit: and the above doesn't even begin to factor in the decline in quality in nearly all areas of manufacturing over the past 30 years or so. Yes your Apple stock might have paid for a new pair of headphones but I can almost guarantee you that they were not made to nearly the same standards in materials and durability that they would have, had they been made in the past. You would have to pay considerably higher sum (not just from inflation adjustment) of money to get the same quality parts. Meanwhile (and for example), Sennheiser still makes the HD280's, they're still awesome, and now they're going for like a hundred bucks (probably because of "no bluetooth", but also economies of scale and mfring optimizations), and they knock the socks off Beats' entire product line.

FabHK 8y ago
> Why is this always framed this in terms of old vs new technology? Good point - that's not how it's framed for the Mac Pro: "Hey, man, forget about these old rectangular computers. New computers are round! That's just the way it is; go with the flow. Round is new, so it's better!!1!!1"