3 ms·
But that argument is justification works for removing any technology, whether superior or not. If you allow only one technology, it will be cheaper irrespectiv
by 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 agoI 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 agoI 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 agoBut 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.")