6 ms·

what's the issue here? if you buy large headphones from the same company you buy the your phone from, in a future where fairphone no longer exists (which playin

what's the issue here? if you buy large headphones from the same company you buy the your phone from, in a future where fairphone no longer exists (which playing the odds, is likely) at some point your also no-longer-supported phone (which functionally becomes slower every year because mobile application hardware requirements appear to double every year) might advance to support new fancy bluetooth things your headphones don't support? I honestly (not hyperbolicly) don't see how a phone not having a 3.5mm jack is relevant to the headphones _having_ a 3.5mm jack

lmm 3y ago
If the headphones are meant to be used with the phone, then the idea that the headphones are future-proofed because they have a 3.5mm jack is pretty meaningless if you can't connect them to the phone with that jack.
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  In 2023, most people who give two shits about running wired headphones are using a USB DAC, even if their phone has a 3.5mm socket as the onboard AD/DA chipset is usually mediocre and struggles to drive most high-end cans.
  - lmm 3y ago
    It's not about high-end or whatever. It's about whether these headphones are going to be usable at all in 5 years' time.
    - hammyhavoc 3y ago
      And they will be if they're sound in terms of construction and somebody is willing to spend a few dollars on a USB DAC. By your same logic, if you need to use dongles with a brand new MacBook, today, is the MacBook thus not useable?
      - lmm 3y ago
        I see the small number of ports and reliance on dongles as a big mark against the MacBook's sustainability, yes.
        hammyhavoc 3y ago
        If ultimately you still need to plug something in, what makes it less sustainable exactly? (I don't use a MacBook in 2023)
        lmm 3y ago
        If you can't use thing A with thing B unless you also have thing C, to my mind that obviously reduces the expected lifetime of being able to use the combination, especially when thing C is a third party part.
        aziaziazi 3y ago
        It’s simplicity I terms of construction and standard. Here, the older standard (3.5mm jack) seems stronger (not an expert but an user opinion) and easier to source than usb c.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

lmm 3y ago

If the headphones are meant to be used with the phone, then the idea that the headphones are future-proofed because they have a 3.5mm jack is pretty meaningless if you can't connect them to the phone with that jack.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
In 2023, most people who give two shits about running wired headphones are using a USB DAC, even if their phone has a 3.5mm socket as the onboard AD/DA chipset is usually mediocre and struggles to drive most high-end cans.
- lmm 3y ago
  It's not about high-end or whatever. It's about whether these headphones are going to be usable at all in 5 years' time.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    And they will be if they're sound in terms of construction and somebody is willing to spend a few dollars on a USB DAC. By your same logic, if you need to use dongles with a brand new MacBook, today, is the MacBook thus not useable?
    - lmm 3y ago
      I see the small number of ports and reliance on dongles as a big mark against the MacBook's sustainability, yes.
      - hammyhavoc 3y ago
        If ultimately you still need to plug something in, what makes it less sustainable exactly? (I don't use a MacBook in 2023)
        lmm 3y ago
        If you can't use thing A with thing B unless you also have thing C, to my mind that obviously reduces the expected lifetime of being able to use the combination, especially when thing C is a third party part.
        aziaziazi 3y ago
        It’s simplicity I terms of construction and standard. Here, the older standard (3.5mm jack) seems stronger (not an expert but an user opinion) and easier to source than usb c.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]