Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
cryoenthusiast
· 5 years ago
· FIRST
At least it’s usb c instead of some proprietary shit. Still sucks tho.
3
kittyrawrrawr
· 5 years ago
What really sucks is the charging point... both ends are USB c instead of one end just being plain USB... and it doesnt come with a converter for normal auc cords... so you're paying unnecessarily
cryoenthusiast
· 5 years ago
ooh yeah, usb a is still being used so trying to replace it in power cables isn't really consumer friendly, but i think the decision there was that usb c allows for faster charging which may be the reason it doesn't have a charging cable that's usb a to usb c
1
guest_
· 5 years ago
I do believe I recall saying, about the time everyone was outraged by apples lack of jack, that likely just signaled the direction the technology was eventually heading. For all the exact technical reasons Apple removed the jack, it makes sense other companies would too. I occasionally miss having a jack when I’m at work and I can’t listen to my phone and charge but am low on battery (I don’t use wireless headphones,) and when I forget headphones but need them (very rare) and can’t just grab $3 gas station ones etc. But people moaned when laptops started eliminating physical media drives like disk and then CD as well. Heck, people were mad when they had to go from tapes to CD, and for a short while they sold hard drives for cars to hold MP3 files before satellite and Bluetooth streaming etc. became now almost ubiquitous. Things change. If you want a jack, get an older phone- or get good at soldering I guess. They do sell jack adaptors too.
bluefrost51
· 5 years ago
As far as phones are considered yes adapter based audio devices are where the market is heading, but it isn't due to a technological improvement or succession. This is mainly about increasing profit margins as well as lowering cost per unit. While Bluetooth is becoming a more viable option it is still several years behind the 3.5 mm jack, and while adapters in theory should work just as a good as a 3.5 mm jack in practice they don't. This is because of audio conversion. So the result is you are left with a poorer audio experience for the extra price of a conversion dongle.
1
guest_
· 5 years ago
There is truth in what you say- but what you say is not the truth. Yes, removing the audio jack increase profit. It also creates a profit stream for adapters. Also yes- audiophiles suffer. Compressed common digital audio like what is downloaded or streamed from many popular services is already relatively poorer quality, but using an adaptor or blue tooth further degrades it. Even expensive devices made to clean up the signal cant restore it to a level a discerning audiophile would like. So that I can agree with.
Show All
guest_
· 5 years ago
HOWEVER- there are technological reasons for the changes. Not everyone is well versed in computer engineering or micro electronics so we will speak plain English only. A headphone jack pulls power, it takes up physical space. It takes up I/O and resources in the system. It is also a giant hole that leads to the guts and connects to the power systems of the device.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Eliminating said jack makes water resistance etc. easier. It makes packaging easier and allows more flexibility on design and layout. It frees up resources and reduces draw on the device. The target market of phone audio isn’t the high fidelity crowd. Many don’t even use their phones to play files if they play music on it at all. They stream. Many have a second device used for their workout music etc. so music and the like isn’t the primary focus of most phones. In a world of specialized electronics for every use from desktop to tablet to phone and many in between like smart watch, web enabled tv or multimedia console etc- the phone is a “jack of all trades” that CAN do many things but does none particularly well.
guest_
· 5 years ago
No home entertainment buff is going to use their PS4 or Xbox as their main head unit even if it can play music and movies and games. You aren’t going to get the quality out of a console you will from a dedicated machine built for those things. But it makes sense to offer them- even if many like the Xbox don’t come with the function native and you add it if you want it. They have the hardware to do it so they throw it in for “free” as a feature to build value.
guest_
· 5 years ago
The wired headphone was long ago replaced as the common “handsfree” way of using a mobile phone- so there isn’t a huge loss of function to the “phone” aspect of the experience by removing said jack- not to mention in this application a non 3.5mm unit is generally available and doesn’t require a control schema be assigned to the jack port (further complicating its implementation and requirements.)
guest_
· 5 years ago
Micro electronics are about micro efficiency. A jack is small, but it’s also bigger than most of the singular components of the phone. The draw is small- but in mobile phones of OE caliber every piece of software and every operation is designed to eek out as much gain as possible because it matters in ultimate performance.
guest_
· 5 years ago
So I mean, what you say are mostly facts- but there are more facts than you say. By nature of the popular usage of technology and the direction technology is going, the jack becomes an anachronism for niche users. If keeping it had no financial cost or cost in design and performance considerations they would- but something that costs you and isn’t needed... inevitably it gets removed. That’s how even biological evolution works. How do I know the world doesn’t need the jack? I look around. It still spins, life has continued for many who don’t have it. For the record- I liked having a 3.5 jack. But- here I am these years later still going strong. I found a way to manage. Nature always finds a way.
bluefrost51
· 5 years ago
Headphones jack's only pull power when they are actively connected to a 3.5 mm jack. In the case of using an adapter they would still pull power but from the usb-c or lightning port. I agree that the jack is one of the larger more obtrusive pieces to a phone, and yes it adds another problem spot in the area of water resistance. There wouldn't be a need for the adapters without the removal of the jack. The demand for that market only increased once it was forced into being a necessity. Ultimate performance of phones is severally bottlenecked by the reliance on passive cooling. Which results in severely reduced performance as the phone generates more and more heat. As for making packaging easier I don't follow as removing the jack isn't going to change a fairly standard shape.
bluefrost51
· 5 years ago
As for phone jacks being a giant hole leading to the core aspects of the system would be a huge oversight in design. As even small metal particles getting into the system would cause catastrophic damage. Which they would also have entry points at the main charging port as well as the speaker locations. Naturally any and all of these places would have some sort of reinforced protection as to protect from metal or water .
bluefrost51
· 5 years ago
As for the world not needing the jack I agree with you but it's not quite time to do away with it. As it still is the best option for small form factor audio devices. Allowing it to be killed isn't even all that good for the consumer. While yes it allows them a bit more flexibility in design they aren't an engineering firm. They're a business that employs engineers. Not to mention a business that has its own closed ecosystem. While Apple is heralded for innovation it seems to be innovating in the area of marketing rather than engineering.
cryoenthusiast
· 5 years ago
Question: How would the quality of the audio be reduced with the cable adapters if they're just modifying the shape of the end to fit the port? There's certainly a greater risk for the adapter or cable to get damaged, but that's different from a reduction in audio quality.
guest_
· 5 years ago
@cryoenthusiast: a very simple way to put it and a contributing factor is that every connection you have in an audio system degrades quality or adds a point for degradation. Contacts wear and can get dirtied or otherwise have some contamination, and an unshielded connection is always a theoretical point for interference. But depending on the system employed and hardware/software specifics there are factors concerning how signals are translated and transmitted through an adapter as well as what types of signal and response or breakdown offered by the type of connection used (lightening, usbc etc.) in general though- a single dedicated path designed for audio will offer a better audio signal than a data path converted to transmit to audio.
guest_
· 5 years ago
@bluefrost51- cooling is a major issue with phones and small powerful electronics as well as a limiter. But where gains can be made elsewhere, wether that be through technology or logic to reduce processor activity or otherwise impact heat, or in whatever way- they’ll try. There are several physical styles of 3.5 jack as well as methods of switching- but sticking to the most common: a 3.5 jack with mechanical sensors will draw power whenever the switches are triggered. This includes if the switches malfunction, are damaged through use or wear, or are contaminated. Likewise, a jack using a self test to detect an insertion can also draw power even if an actual accessory isn’t in use or fully connected. Those are a bit less common- but it’s still a potential point of failure.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I was a bit hyperbolic when I said “a big hole leading to...” but it’s a hole which does interface core components through its circuitry and the space around the jack is just a hole in the device case with some type of seal which can fail. As agreed- it causes extra issues with “water resistance.”
guest_
· 5 years ago
For packaging there are 3 primary areas. When I say packaging- to be clear- I don’t mean retail boxing. I mean the layout and design of the phone. A 3.5 jack by its nature will require the phone be a certain thickness. Regardless of technology you could not ever make a phone thinner than the Jack opening and then the amount of phone body thickness required to provide support to the jack. External design of the phone, dimensions, and the location of controls etc. must account for the jack.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Internally you can have less components for a given external size of the phone. The jack by nature must be as large as the male prong that will be inserted plus some space and then the electronics to make it work. That real estate adds to the size of your device or reduces space for things like heat sinks etc. your layout of components internally must facilitate the jack. It is a design constraint.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I like 3.5. I am not a Luddite but I also prefer tested established technologies with many decades of use to newer more advanced but also less tested ones. I like redundancy and robustness. I like technology that has versatility and passes the “end of days” test as to wether it has alternate uses etc. or salvage value in a post technological society. Not because of some impending apocalypse. But because there are many situations and places in today’s world that electronics that pass that test can be more useful than advanced but finicky ones that rely heavily on a sealed ecosystem and things that can’t be easily serviced, modified, built, or procured as common items.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Apple has some great engineers and engineering- but their claim to fame and evil empire are built on obscurity and control. A large part of their security design relies on both the more obscure nature of their technology, and the control they world over it. Philosophically this is a dictatorship where all are safe, but absolute power rests with the state. The philosophy of the matter asides- the practical result to the consumer is... no thinking. But what they say to buy, they’ll set it up. Use it for what they intended it for how they intended. You’ll have little or no problems. Repeat. The practical effect on consumers is a product they can be confident and feel safe with and won’t bite them in the behind.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I drive old cars. Always have.They break, I fix them, replace old with new parts. Enough stuff breaks- you end up with a new car that’s 50 years old. Usually costs less than $40-40k too so money wise it’s a win over new. I build hackentoshes and off boxes. They require more attention than an out of box or even most home brew windows or Mac machines. But I can do these things, I have spare machines for if I NEED something to work right NOW and can’t wait to get my finicky child to behave.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Apple engineering serves people who can’t or don’t want to deal with that stuff. Like people who just lease new cars and turn them in every few years. That’ll usually end up costing more. You’ll be restricted in what you can do and who’s stuff you can put in your car- but you’ll always have a new and working machine and likely never experience problems.
guest_
· 5 years ago
So it’s just a different consumer. And we can’t blame Apple. They’re giving the market what it wants. Most carriers have popular plans where you get a new device every year or two for a monthly cost that works out much higher than buying the devices. It allows people to have a new device now- forget that you could save for next years new device, save on the cost, have liquidity, sell the old device. People generally don’t like having to know anything about the machines they operate.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Most media drives auto open or auto play media. Compressed or “zipped” files decompress themselves. Telnet commands or simple SQL queries are made into button presses. Because people don’t want to learn it, think about it, or have to do it let alone deal with figuring out what went wrong if they don’t get the result they wanted. Modern cars are a perfect example again. Backup cameras- many cars now have forward parking cameras(!) anti lock brakes, blind spot monitoring, auto parking, and now auto drive or a computer that brakes for you if you forget. It’s too much work or too hard to press one of (usually 2 for most people) pedals to save your own life when a solid object appears before you. And they introduced EBD a long time ago because even when people hit the brakes they managed to to it wrong.
guest_
· 5 years ago
But you know? My partner, my grandfather, other’s I know- they don’t have many thousands of hours spent perfecting dancing at the edge of brake lock up, and a modern well done computer can brake better than the greatest human ever could when it comes to ABS. So I’m glad they have that technology. They want to drive, they lack the skills to do it safely- technology comes along and lets them drive. So Apple does that to technology. You don’t have to choose between all these specs and jargon that for most people would require reading and then misunderstanding. Apple basically gives you a “good better best” or says: “if you’re this type of person but this. If you’re this type buy that.”
guest_
· 5 years ago
They strangle the ecosystem and that mitigates malware and shovelware. The fact they control the hardware and software cuts down on bugs. A consumer can’t stand in front of an isle with 50 products that do the same function because Apple chokes it so hard there’s maybe 3 or so choices. You won’t buy a mouse and find out that one button or the whole thing doesn’t work because as long as you’re using it for what Apple said use it for- they know it works. That’s their angle.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Tl:dr- Apple is basically those “jitterbug” style phones and remotes (the simple ones for the elderly) but for tech. They made all the choices for you and just left you less than a handful. That’s their band, and their success- and that isn’t their fault. That’s what the public has shown the masses want with cash. Thinking is hard, and people like shiny and new. You can put your grandma in front of an Apple device set up where they don’t have privileges and basically never worry about them. You tell them if they buy anything- go to apple, buy what Apple says. For people just doing boring basic stuff who don’t want to expend brain power on their device- Apple. Buy it, it works, go do basic stuff. That’s their engineering.
cryoenthusiast
· 5 years ago
Oh man, without ABS I probably would have died a long time ago. Almost ran into the underbelly of a tractor trailer going at 40 while coming out of a gas station, granted it was my fault for pressing the accelerator too hard. I didn't slam the brakes but i pressed pretty hard, and i swerved out of the way and back to my lane. It was rough, drove slowly for the rest of the day.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I’m glad you’re ok. I used to hate ABS and all the “nannies.” Some still bother me- but long ago I realized that we can’t all be skilled at everything, and for most people- driving wasn’t that serious but it was something they were going to do either way. So may as well build cars that everyone can drive. The only thing that upsets me is that as these sorts of features become more integrated it gets harder and harder to find a real “drivers car.” But hey- someday I myself may need nannies.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I can tell how much slower my reflexes have gotten, how much quicker I get mental fatigue and my eyes start to get dull. So I think I’d like to drive when I’m 100 if it live that long and still can safely- and things like ABS and TCS and lane departure and BSM and all that junk will probably help when it’s hard enough to keep track of what I’m looking at let alone balance a car.
guest_
· 5 years ago
The same is certain true with Apple. I disliked the company since at least the 80’s. But when they started their “Renaissance” in the early 2000’s I was philosophically opposed to their models and wouldn’t touch their product if it could be helped. An old boss, a couple decades my senior turned me around. He was quite savy and tech wise, and he could do anything I could better. And he asked me, why did I want to do things the hard way?
guest_
· 5 years ago
We went over a list of things I commonly do- and he illustrated how an Apple product would do all of them. I kept saying “but what if I want to...” and he kept answering “do you want to do that?” I did not. But could only ask: “but what if I did?” There was no single thing I needed a portable device to do that the Apple couldn’t. A free iPhone sealed the deal.
guest_
· 5 years ago
Apple isn’t the best company, and they don’t make the best products. They make products that fit the lives of a whole lot of people and don’t generally have issues. If I want to do weird stuff I can buy another machine for that. Why would I want the device I rely on every day to me my science fair project of home brew code and work arounds?
guest_
· 5 years ago
If a person wants to do something they can’t with an Apple, doesn’t like the interface whatever- then another product is probably better for them. Apple computers don’t make the best gaming rigs for example if you want to play all the newest and coolest games. But... I play games on my consoles or portables or my gaming machine. I wouldn’t waste time and wear on that machine just surfing the web or doing spread sheets. I have my work machines for that any way.
guest_
· 5 years ago
I barely play games on my phone, etc. etc. For work I use a Windows machine. For games I use Windows or Linux. But I’ve never been shown a single thing that an android can do that I need a phone to do and an iPhone doesn’t do.
guest_
· 5 years ago
For someone else- that may be different. More power to them. That’s why there are options in the market place. Apples primary customer base are people who don’t want to be overwhelmed by options.
