8 ms·

Personally, I detest wired headphones. I find they always get caught on things while I'm wearing them, and because of the neck problems I have that's a big iss

Personally, I detest wired headphones. I find they always get caught on things while I'm wearing them, and because of the neck problems I have that's a big issue for me (and as well as that, they'd always get tangled up in my bag, which was a bit of a hassle). So I'm personally glad they've removed the headphone jack, because it will help push wireless into the mass market (and bring down prices) at a faster rate than it otherwise would have. Now of course, there's lots of people who don't find it a positive like I do. My point is not that everyone should find the jack removal great, my point is that it's wrong to claim that it's a disadvantage for everyone. On a separate note, people like to shit on Apple for that "courage" claim, but even if removing the jack was a bad decision, I think it's fair to call it a courageous one, because they knew well that they'd get a lot of shit for making that decision. Look at what gets said every time the headphone jack issue is brought up on HN.

nikofeyn 8y ago
but that doesn’t really answer the question of “why remove it?” keeping the audio jack does not prevent the use of wireless headphones. and keeping the audio jack does not really pose a problem.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  It does answer it: as I said, it forces quicker uptake of wireless, and thus quicker reduction of cost.
  - nradov 8y ago
    If wireless enables quicker reduction in cost then when do iPhones keep getting more expensive?
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      I never said that. I said if wireless is the only option in those phones then this will cause more wireless headphones to be sold, and this will cause wireless headphones to become cheaper. (This is clearer if you read the earlier comments in this sub-thread. By the time the discussion got to the comment you were replying to, that context was being assumed).
  - nikofeyn 8y ago
    i guess my point is that i don’t see how that follows. if bluetooth headphones are so great compared to wired headphones, then wasn’t that incentive and market already there? in fact, it just shows the truth, in that apple just wants to be able to sell more and more dongles and bluetooth headphones, so they force this onto their users.
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold. And if it causes Apple to sell more wireless headphones, then it will also cause other manufacturers to sell more wireless headphones. Greater volume of sales will bring down the price of wireless headphones. > in fact, it just shows the truth, in that apple just wants to be able to sell more and more dongles and bluetooth headphones The idea that this is simply a cheap cash-grab sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. But even if it's a purely financial decision, so what? Aren't financial considerations behind most things companies do? If HN is to be believed, most people absolutely hate the fact that the phones don't have headphone jacks. So if people hate it, and won't buy the phones because of it, then how can it also be a cash grab?
      - nikofeyn 8y ago
        > You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold. no i didn't. i said apple wants to sell more wireless headphones and dongles. removing the audio jack forces users to look at the new shiny airpods, or whatever they're called, and say "i need that". then they need dongles for integration purposes. yet, they didn't need the dongle before and could still buy wireless headphones. of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates. conspiracy theory? the ceo is literally an expert in operations and logistics, probably apple's greatest strength behind their marketing. it can't be any other decision, because like i said, other phone makers are able to integrate it just fine.
        jamesrcole 8y ago
        "Apple will sell more wireless headphones, but this won't mean they sell more wireless headphones." That's what you're saying. If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones, then they're going to buy them from a range of manufacturers -- in fact mostly other manufacturers because the Apple ones are so pricey. If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones then the prices will go down. Do you dispute this? Because this is the point that you originally claimed I didn't make. > i said apple wants to sell more ... dongles. Do you know that the phones (up until latest models) come with a dongle so there's not going to be a large number of sales of them? > of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates It's ridiculous to suggest that everything apple does is just a cheap cash grab.
  - addicted 8y ago
    But that argument is justification works for removing any technology, whether superior or not. If you allow only one technology, it will be cheaper irrespective of whether the disallowed technology is better or not. This makes Apple’s decision worse. It’s an admission that wireless audio is an inferior technology, and that the only way for it to succeed is by removing the alternative, ans/or making it significantly worse.
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      I think wireless headphones are a good thing, so making them cheaper is a good thing. As you can see in my original comment, I'm just saying this is my view, and I know many people see it otherwise.
      - arvinsim 8y ago
        I can see your point but I disagree that it's worth it. I think wireless would have gotten better even if we did not remove the headphone jack.
        jamesrcole 8y ago
        But that's different to my point, in two ways. 1) I was talking about cost not quality (c.f. "wireless would have gotten better even if"). 2) I wasn't arguing about whether it would get better or not, but the rate at which it happens being changed by removing the jack (c.f. "would have gotten better even if we did not remove the headphone jack.")
  - Mankrik 8y ago
    So creating a demand for a market that wasn't in demand, that sounds artificially created, infact it is.
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      So what? That's how the history of technology goes. Innovations come along that people didn't want until they were there. The technology creates the demand. Henry Ford said (and I paraphrase) "if I had asked people what they wanted they would have said 'faster horses'".
      - Mankrik 8y ago
        But people could still ride horses when cars came about and they still can, the transition happened over decades. But this change is happening over a matter of years, the reasons for which are not utilitarian.
        jamesrcole 8y ago
        And people can still use phones with headphone jacks. Did the existence of cars destroy the existence of horses? Is Apple stopping all companies from using headphone jacks?
lowlevel 8y ago
I personally feel 'cord getting caught is the real motivation behind killing the jack. Every time I've dropped my iPhones since the first one came out, it was because the headphone cable got caught on something and yanked the phone out of my hand or pocket. I am unwilling to use bluetooth as the signal cuts out, batteries are always dead and occasional pairing difficulties. When my iPhone SE dies...(my 9th iPhone) I will likely have to switch to an Android.
- ainiriand 8y ago
  The real motivation for removing the jack was to sell airpods at 180$.
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
> I think it's fair to call it a courageous one, because they knew well that they'd get a lot of shit for making that decision. Doing something you know will be unpopular is not automatically "courageous". Sometimes it's just stupid. I'm sure you can think of plenty of examples.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  Even if it was stupid, that doesn't stop something from being courageous.
  - xg15 8y ago
    Well yes, it's technically courageous, in the sense that punching a random person on the street is courageous.
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      Whether you like something or not has nothing to do with whether it is courageous or not.
      - xg15 8y ago
        I don't disagree with you, I'd just question why that particular kind of courageousness is relevant to the discussion.
        jamesrcole 8y ago
        My point is that there isn't some different kind of courage that separates this from everyday notions of "courage". Many people mock the idea that removing the headphone jack required any courage.
        yellowapple 8y ago
        No, we're mocking the idea that Apple would use "courage" as an excuse for stupidity while also pointing out that they go hand in hand. Yeah, a guy running up to a bear and punching it in the face is "courageous", but it should be no surprise when the bear gets sick of the guy's antics and decides that it's maul o'clock. In this simile, the consumers are the bear, and Apple is the moron punching it.
xg15 8y ago
I don't know, I don't think any of those personal reasons invalidates the arguments of the parent. Your mileage on cables may vary, but the removal of an interface that had been understood by laypeople and was universally supported for the last 50 years seems a more important point to me.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  It invalidates the quoted bit they endorsed that said "no human's life is measurably better since Apple had the “courage” to remove the 3.5 mm jack." "No human's life" is a blanket, absolute statement, and it's wrong. Wireless headphones are much more ubiquitous and cheap these days, and a major brand removing headphone jacks is part of the reason for this.
  - ayoisaiah 8y ago
    I don't think it's wrong. How has removing the headphone jack made anyone's life better? I can't think of one way. It's not as if you couldn't use wireless headphones before the headphone jack was removed. Now that the jack is removed, you're forced to use a USB-C dongle (which has its disadvantages) or purchase expensive Bluetooth headphones if you want a decent enough quality / battery life.
    - jamesrcole 8y ago
      > How has removing the headphone jack made anyone's life better? Ancestor comments of this have explained that. Removing headphone jack speeds up uptake of wireless headphones, and greater uptake of them makes them cheaper. These are changes that have already happened. This has benefited people who want to use wireless headphones.
      - Tade0 8y ago
        , and greater uptake of them makes them cheaper. Does it really? I haven't noticed any change in price that could be attributed to this and I bought a pair a few weeks ago, so I'm somewhat up to date with the pricing.
sneak 8y ago
See also: Floppies, RS-232 serial, optical drives.
- camelNotation 8y ago
  The options that replaces each of those items were superior to the older design. A wireless headset requires charging, requires pairing, is more expensive, is more likely to break. It's not a superior technology, it's an alternative technology. You don't eliminate options just because alternatives exist.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    They're viewed by everyone as superior in hindsight, but anytime anything gets taken away there are vocal voices complaining about how the newer alternatives are inferior in various ways (and technically the newer options are always inferior in certain ways, especially in terms of using them within existing ecosystems and usage patterns).
    - camelNotation 8y ago
      That is completely untrue. No one got rid of the floppy drive just because new technology existed. They got rid of the floppy drive because it took dozens of floppies to do what one CD could do. It was a genuinely inferior product with regard to its primary function. In the case of headphones, their primary function is to connect to a device and deliver sound to your ears. Wireless headphones do not do this better than wired headphones. At all. They have a specific use case advantage related to the connection format, but that isn't universally better because it carries drawbacks as well.
agumonkey 8y ago
I have a hate relationship with wired things too. Irony is that when I use BT ones, I stay sit thinking I can't leave or I will rip the wire from the device. I think the issue is that BT has always been a catastrophy in terms of ergonomy, today things are better but still a bit hazardous. Maybe a super simple wireless protocol for managing audio streams (and handling multiple sinks) would change that
dangerface 8y ago
> it will help push wireless into the mass market They are already in the mass market the problem is they suck. I have tried a bunch of cheap Chinese bluetooth headphones that cost from $20-$60 they all sound like $5 wired headphones have about 2 hours battery life and break after a month. I have tried bluetooth head phones that where $200 beats by drea they worked as well as the Chinese headphones they just cost 10 times the price. Removing the headphone jack has forced people to spend a lot of money on shitty headphones, thats what your glad of.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  > They are already in the mass market ...and the headphone jack was removed several years ago, so what's your point? What I'm saying is that it's makes the prices go down. That means better quality ones will get cheaper. The bluetooth headphones I use are fine. I've heard most people say that AirPods are great. > Removing the headphone jack has forced people to spend a lot of money How is it forcing anything on anyone? One, you don't have to buy the phone, and two, you can use the supplied lightning-adapter headphones, or use an adaptor.
mattmg83 8y ago
As a frequent long flight traveler I have range anxiety on my wireless headphones. I like the 3.5mm jack guarantees me one less device or peripheral to worry about, it just works (even if the noise cancellation may stop working when the battery dies, sound still goes through)
camelNotation 8y ago
Removing the headphone jack doesn't push wireless into the mass market. It was already in the mass market and it was going to be in the mass market regardless of how Apple designed their phones. If you want to use a wireless headset, you always could. Removing the headphone jack didn't give you any sort of advantages as a wireless user, it just removed an option you didn't use. And no, it's not courageous to do something dumb and getting skewered for being dumb is not evidence of courage.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  It has increased the speed of wireless headphones uptake. You can call it dumb all you like, but whether something is dumb or not is completely separate from whether it is courageous or not. I'm amazed by people hating something so much that therefore, in their minds, makes it impossible to have other qualities that might have a positive connotation.

nikofeyn 8y ago

but that doesn’t really answer the question of “why remove it?” keeping the audio jack does not prevent the use of wireless headphones. and keeping the audio jack does not really pose a problem.

jamesrcole 8y ago
It does answer it: as I said, it forces quicker uptake of wireless, and thus quicker reduction of cost.
- nradov 8y ago
  If wireless enables quicker reduction in cost then when do iPhones keep getting more expensive?
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    I never said that. I said if wireless is the only option in those phones then this will cause more wireless headphones to be sold, and this will cause wireless headphones to become cheaper. (This is clearer if you read the earlier comments in this sub-thread. By the time the discussion got to the comment you were replying to, that context was being assumed).
- nikofeyn 8y ago
  i guess my point is that i don’t see how that follows. if bluetooth headphones are so great compared to wired headphones, then wasn’t that incentive and market already there? in fact, it just shows the truth, in that apple just wants to be able to sell more and more dongles and bluetooth headphones, so they force this onto their users.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold. And if it causes Apple to sell more wireless headphones, then it will also cause other manufacturers to sell more wireless headphones. Greater volume of sales will bring down the price of wireless headphones. > in fact, it just shows the truth, in that apple just wants to be able to sell more and more dongles and bluetooth headphones The idea that this is simply a cheap cash-grab sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. But even if it's a purely financial decision, so what? Aren't financial considerations behind most things companies do? If HN is to be believed, most people absolutely hate the fact that the phones don't have headphone jacks. So if people hate it, and won't buy the phones because of it, then how can it also be a cash grab?
    - nikofeyn 8y ago
      > You say you don't see how it follows, yet you yourself say it will cause more wireless headphones to be sold. no i didn't. i said apple wants to sell more wireless headphones and dongles. removing the audio jack forces users to look at the new shiny airpods, or whatever they're called, and say "i need that". then they need dongles for integration purposes. yet, they didn't need the dongle before and could still buy wireless headphones. of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates. conspiracy theory? the ceo is literally an expert in operations and logistics, probably apple's greatest strength behind their marketing. it can't be any other decision, because like i said, other phone makers are able to integrate it just fine.
      - jamesrcole 8y ago
        "Apple will sell more wireless headphones, but this won't mean they sell more wireless headphones." That's what you're saying. If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones, then they're going to buy them from a range of manufacturers -- in fact mostly other manufacturers because the Apple ones are so pricey. If people are going to buy more wireless headphones because of these phones then the prices will go down. Do you dispute this? Because this is the point that you originally claimed I didn't make. > i said apple wants to sell more ... dongles. Do you know that the phones (up until latest models) come with a dongle so there's not going to be a large number of sales of them? > of course it's a cash grab. that is how apple operates It's ridiculous to suggest that everything apple does is just a cheap cash grab.
- addicted 8y ago
  But that argument is justification works for removing any technology, whether superior or not. If you allow only one technology, it will be cheaper irrespective of whether the disallowed technology is better or not. This makes Apple’s decision worse. It’s an admission that wireless audio is an inferior technology, and that the only way for it to succeed is by removing the alternative, ans/or making it significantly worse.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    I think wireless headphones are a good thing, so making them cheaper is a good thing. As you can see in my original comment, I'm just saying this is my view, and I know many people see it otherwise.
    - arvinsim 8y ago
      I can see your point but I disagree that it's worth it. I think wireless would have gotten better even if we did not remove the headphone jack.
      - jamesrcole 8y ago
        But that's different to my point, in two ways. 1) I was talking about cost not quality (c.f. "wireless would have gotten better even if"). 2) I wasn't arguing about whether it would get better or not, but the rate at which it happens being changed by removing the jack (c.f. "would have gotten better even if we did not remove the headphone jack.")
- Mankrik 8y ago
  So creating a demand for a market that wasn't in demand, that sounds artificially created, infact it is.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    So what? That's how the history of technology goes. Innovations come along that people didn't want until they were there. The technology creates the demand. Henry Ford said (and I paraphrase) "if I had asked people what they wanted they would have said 'faster horses'".
    - Mankrik 8y ago
      But people could still ride horses when cars came about and they still can, the transition happened over decades. But this change is happening over a matter of years, the reasons for which are not utilitarian.
      - jamesrcole 8y ago
        And people can still use phones with headphone jacks. Did the existence of cars destroy the existence of horses? Is Apple stopping all companies from using headphone jacks?

lowlevel 8y ago

I personally feel 'cord getting caught is the real motivation behind killing the jack. Every time I've dropped my iPhones since the first one came out, it was because the headphone cable got caught on something and yanked the phone out of my hand or pocket. I am unwilling to use bluetooth as the signal cuts out, batteries are always dead and occasional pairing difficulties. When my iPhone SE dies...(my 9th iPhone) I will likely have to switch to an Android.

ainiriand 8y ago
The real motivation for removing the jack was to sell airpods at 180$.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

> I think it's fair to call it a courageous one, because they knew well that they'd get a lot of shit for making that decision. Doing something you know will be unpopular is not automatically "courageous". Sometimes it's just stupid. I'm sure you can think of plenty of examples.

jamesrcole 8y ago
Even if it was stupid, that doesn't stop something from being courageous.
- xg15 8y ago
  Well yes, it's technically courageous, in the sense that punching a random person on the street is courageous.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    Whether you like something or not has nothing to do with whether it is courageous or not.
    - xg15 8y ago
      I don't disagree with you, I'd just question why that particular kind of courageousness is relevant to the discussion.
      - jamesrcole 8y ago
        My point is that there isn't some different kind of courage that separates this from everyday notions of "courage". Many people mock the idea that removing the headphone jack required any courage.
        yellowapple 8y ago
        No, we're mocking the idea that Apple would use "courage" as an excuse for stupidity while also pointing out that they go hand in hand. Yeah, a guy running up to a bear and punching it in the face is "courageous", but it should be no surprise when the bear gets sick of the guy's antics and decides that it's maul o'clock. In this simile, the consumers are the bear, and Apple is the moron punching it.

xg15 8y ago

I don't know, I don't think any of those personal reasons invalidates the arguments of the parent. Your mileage on cables may vary, but the removal of an interface that had been understood by laypeople and was universally supported for the last 50 years seems a more important point to me.

jamesrcole 8y ago
It invalidates the quoted bit they endorsed that said "no human's life is measurably better since Apple had the “courage” to remove the 3.5 mm jack." "No human's life" is a blanket, absolute statement, and it's wrong. Wireless headphones are much more ubiquitous and cheap these days, and a major brand removing headphone jacks is part of the reason for this.
- ayoisaiah 8y ago
  I don't think it's wrong. How has removing the headphone jack made anyone's life better? I can't think of one way. It's not as if you couldn't use wireless headphones before the headphone jack was removed. Now that the jack is removed, you're forced to use a USB-C dongle (which has its disadvantages) or purchase expensive Bluetooth headphones if you want a decent enough quality / battery life.
  - jamesrcole 8y ago
    > How has removing the headphone jack made anyone's life better? Ancestor comments of this have explained that. Removing headphone jack speeds up uptake of wireless headphones, and greater uptake of them makes them cheaper. These are changes that have already happened. This has benefited people who want to use wireless headphones.
    - Tade0 8y ago
      , and greater uptake of them makes them cheaper. Does it really? I haven't noticed any change in price that could be attributed to this and I bought a pair a few weeks ago, so I'm somewhat up to date with the pricing.

sneak 8y ago

See also: Floppies, RS-232 serial, optical drives.

camelNotation 8y ago
The options that replaces each of those items were superior to the older design. A wireless headset requires charging, requires pairing, is more expensive, is more likely to break. It's not a superior technology, it's an alternative technology. You don't eliminate options just because alternatives exist.
- jamesrcole 8y ago
  They're viewed by everyone as superior in hindsight, but anytime anything gets taken away there are vocal voices complaining about how the newer alternatives are inferior in various ways (and technically the newer options are always inferior in certain ways, especially in terms of using them within existing ecosystems and usage patterns).
  - camelNotation 8y ago
    That is completely untrue. No one got rid of the floppy drive just because new technology existed. They got rid of the floppy drive because it took dozens of floppies to do what one CD could do. It was a genuinely inferior product with regard to its primary function. In the case of headphones, their primary function is to connect to a device and deliver sound to your ears. Wireless headphones do not do this better than wired headphones. At all. They have a specific use case advantage related to the connection format, but that isn't universally better because it carries drawbacks as well.

agumonkey 8y ago

I have a hate relationship with wired things too. Irony is that when I use BT ones, I stay sit thinking I can't leave or I will rip the wire from the device. I think the issue is that BT has always been a catastrophy in terms of ergonomy, today things are better but still a bit hazardous. Maybe a super simple wireless protocol for managing audio streams (and handling multiple sinks) would change that

dangerface 8y ago

> it will help push wireless into the mass market They are already in the mass market the problem is they suck. I have tried a bunch of cheap Chinese bluetooth headphones that cost from $20-$60 they all sound like $5 wired headphones have about 2 hours battery life and break after a month. I have tried bluetooth head phones that where $200 beats by drea they worked as well as the Chinese headphones they just cost 10 times the price. Removing the headphone jack has forced people to spend a lot of money on shitty headphones, thats what your glad of.

jamesrcole 8y ago
> They are already in the mass market ...and the headphone jack was removed several years ago, so what's your point? What I'm saying is that it's makes the prices go down. That means better quality ones will get cheaper. The bluetooth headphones I use are fine. I've heard most people say that AirPods are great. > Removing the headphone jack has forced people to spend a lot of money How is it forcing anything on anyone? One, you don't have to buy the phone, and two, you can use the supplied lightning-adapter headphones, or use an adaptor.

mattmg83 8y ago

As a frequent long flight traveler I have range anxiety on my wireless headphones. I like the 3.5mm jack guarantees me one less device or peripheral to worry about, it just works (even if the noise cancellation may stop working when the battery dies, sound still goes through)

camelNotation 8y ago

Removing the headphone jack doesn't push wireless into the mass market. It was already in the mass market and it was going to be in the mass market regardless of how Apple designed their phones. If you want to use a wireless headset, you always could. Removing the headphone jack didn't give you any sort of advantages as a wireless user, it just removed an option you didn't use. And no, it's not courageous to do something dumb and getting skewered for being dumb is not evidence of courage.

jamesrcole 8y ago
It has increased the speed of wireless headphones uptake. You can call it dumb all you like, but whether something is dumb or not is completely separate from whether it is courageous or not. I'm amazed by people hating something so much that therefore, in their minds, makes it impossible to have other qualities that might have a positive connotation.