Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 217 posts

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#181

Post by phil21 »

falcolas wrote: post #159
phil21 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does everyone keep saying you need a DAC? That's an option, the other option is simply using the physical connector for an old-school analog audio connection. If the concern is device manufacturers won't support USB-C analog audio that's one thing, but pretending like it isn't the (current) intention to utilize is quite strange to me. This is quite literally changing a round plug to a oval one if implemented prop…

So, correct me if I'm missing something (there's precious little documentation out there), but attempts to standardize support for analog audio over USB C using the sideband pins [1] is still fairly new, and perhaps most importantly, not required by any USB specification but the cable/port specification [2]. From this, I assume that audio accessory support is unlikely to be implemented by all USB chip manufacturers,…

I think this is a valid concern, that it will not be implemented. I just wanted to get an idea of where the initial statement was coming from.

I guess I'm a little more idealistic in that I think it's too expensive to put DACs in earbuds shipped by phones, and trying to switch both (port + expensive earbuds) at the same time may be too much. I'm hopeful this means we'll see initial implementations of analog support on the first phones that make this switch, and thus set the expectations.

Of course, I'm usually proven wrong about such things :)

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#183

Post by deong »

falcolas wrote: post #82
ghshephard wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here to say just this, but you captured every though I had, and better. USB-C finally has the chance to be the universal adapter for "phone sized" devices (there will probably have to be a micro-USB C for things that are tinier) - and if Apple really wanted to show courage/leadership, they would replace their lightning ports with a standard that every device in the world is moving to. I'd have no problem with…

> I'd have no problem with USB-C headphones. I would. Can you imagine how terrible the sound would be for 90% of the headphone market? We have all of these manufacturers racing to the bottom of the headphone market, offering crappy speakers and microphones for $50. Now we expect them to also include an amp and DAC? The least expensive, decent headphone USB DAC that I've personally used was already over $70, and it's…

The goal is reduce the size of the phone that's lovingly displayed on the wood and glass table at your local Apple store next to a tasteful sign informing you how much of your money they want. If it requires you to also purchase and carry a bag of crap tethered to it like a 1990s bag phone, they're pretty much fine with that.

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#184

Post by doktrin »

jccc wrote: post #179
doktrin wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As mentioned, I'm not a regular reader of his, so the fact that I've somehow missed 3 pieces of his published 3+ years ago shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Would you feel less defensive if I just called him a biased partisan instead of using an absolute-sounding word like "ever"?

I think Gruber has become more and more captured by the beat he covers. I really hate it when he uses language only Apple pitch-folk use, like "with iPhone" or "on iPad." I think he's lost more of his objectivity than perhaps he himself realizes. What I object to is the instant dismissal of every Gruber article by people who can't see nuance but only black and white. It's simply not true that he is as partisan and in…

> What I object to is the instant dismissal of every Gruber article by people who can't see nuance but only black and white. It's simply not true that he is as partisan and in-the-tank for Apple as many people here think he is.

Sounds fair enough, but yet it still seems reasonable to mistrust Gruber's opinions on the basis of him having established a pattern of supporting Apple. The fact that he doesn't literally always come to their defense isn't really all that much of a mitigating factor, since his editorial integrity is already suspect.

> Making assumptions about people's biases is exactly my objection about the reflex reaction many HN commenters have toward Gruber.

I make decisions based on available information. Your post came across as derisive and snarky.

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#185

Post by IkmoIkmo »

markbao wrote: post #108

Four opinions, going off of this article and partly in response to Gruber's[0]: 1. There was a functional reason that CDs and floppies went out of style: low capacity and the Internet. What’s the functional reason to get rid of analog headphones? It’s not quality – analog headphones have excellent sound quality, and 99% of people won’t be able to tell the difference with ‘digital’ sound, right? 2. So what happens if…

Great points, and mostly agree. 1. as far as I know, the jack takes up quite a bit of volume, it's a long and empty space, that could be used for battery, heatsink etc. It's a minor save, but smartphones are some of the most volume-dependent devices, and marginal benefits can be high. i.e. most users may swing around say 4 hours of screen on-time, and get frustrated with 3.8h of capacity. Small increases can push them over the contentness-edge. I'm very much reaching here, it's not a very compelling argument imo, but there's some benefit there nonetheless.

2. So apparently I'm the edge case who never charges while listening, it's just not a thing for me. I charge once, at night, and it's fine. (Galaxy S7). In a car I'm happy with my phone's speakers or a wireless setup, and in newer cars especially a usb-audio or bluetooth audio setup shouldn't be a problem. (ignoring obvious transition issues). And especially here, in a private, safe, storage area like a car is, I'm okay (obviously not thrilled) to buy and one-time mount a $25 dongle. Not the end of the world for me. Same with my fixed office space, and that's about all big usecases I can think of.

3. Completely agree, however it must be noted that stuff like this pushes wireless audio quality forward. There's suddenly a forced market demand when the port drops, which opens up industry incentives to push wireless price/performance ratio improvements which I feel are around the corner (and partially announced already). And tech wise a lot more is possible than the quality we've had in the past years. And price wise, a LOT more should be possible than the past few years of price points. Also I'm expecting Apple (let's not forget, a producer of custom earbuds for years, and buyer of Beats) to drop decent wireless tech, too. I want good wireless audio tech regardless of whether I'm forced to use it lacking a port or not. (!) Again, obvious transition issues but it's alright.

4. Rumours are hey're looking to reinvent their base model with oled screens, no home button, edge to edge screen, delayed to 2017. i.e. a move away from a phone that has ports and buttons, towards a device that's completely digital, mostly screen and almost fully wireless. And I think that makes a lot of sense, stylistically too, if rumours are true and they can pull it off. That can reinvigorate sales, because let's be fair, the iPhone 6 was 'good enough', kind of like the Nexus 5 (still a lovely phone I'd happily use) was for the mid-section, the 6 was at the top-end of the market. I've got lots of friends with a 6 who just don't care for iterations. Something radical is needed to get them to buy, and dropping this port long-term as part of the 10y iPhone anniversary update is part of that narrative. Lots of speculation here of course, just thinking out loud to try and discuss your questions.

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#186

Post by y4mi »

niels_olson wrote: post #148
vocatus_gate wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a strong distaste for what C.S. Lewis called "chronological snobbery;" the idea that something is worthless simply because it isn't new. Age is meaningless when evaluating technology and its function. It could be 1000 years old or 10; what matters if fulfills the requirements of the relevant use-case in an acceptable manner.

Hammers work great. Always have.

and yet we've got nailgun "nowadays" (though they're already ancient at this point too). people that actually need to drive in silly amounts of nails no longer use traditional hammers.

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#187

Post by y4mi »

coldtea wrote: post #168
smt88 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had Bluetooth headphones for years and still prefer wired headphones unless my phone is charging. BT headphones discharge very quickly, have terrible audio quality, and are somewhat uncomfortable due to the added weight.

Depends on the BT headphones. I've had 7+ hours of listening (normally don't go around wearing headphones for more than that in a day), and good audio quality with Parrot Zik (and they even use bluetooth 3, and not the lighter on battery and better 4 version).

and they cost $400! headphones with pretty good sound quality start at $50 and get diminishing returns around $150...

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#188

Post by illumin8 »

wlesieutre wrote: post #40
rplst8 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comparing the 3.5 mm audio jack to the floppy drive is ridiculous. The jack has become far, far, more ubiquitous than the floppy drive. Additionally, the things that use the jack are often of higher quality and not disposible like a floppy disk was. And this ignores the fact that the floppy disk/drive was technologically usurped by other removable storage formats. The 3.5 mm jack still delivers the absolute best soun…

> The 3.5 mm jack still delivers the absolute best sound quality compared to the other options available on a smart phone. That's only true because the only headphones that exist for smartphones are headphone jack or Bluetooth. You can build a USB-C or Lightning headset with much higher impedance and use a digital signal to a higher quality DAC than the one built into the phone.

I use a Lightning camera adapter (USB port) to an external DAC and headphone amplifier. It gives me the best possible sound quality, since the audio is pure digital until it hits my DAC, which, I can assure you, is much better quality than any internal DAC included in a smartphone.

Personally, I don't really care about the headphone jack because I never use it. I will admit, I'm different than 99.99% of other users.

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#189

Post by jccc »

SloopJon wrote: post #172
jccc wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe now is the wrong time, and Apple is making a mistake. I don’t know. > Patel misses the bigger problem. It’s not enforcement of DRM on audio playback. It’s enforcement of the MFi Program for certifying hardware that uses the Lightning port. Right now any headphone maker in the world can make any headphones they want for the standard jack. Not so with the Lightning port. > Presumably Apple’s Lightning earbuds w…

Gruber practically begs the question by assuming that 3.5mm is a legacy port in need of replacement, lumping it together with other short-lived artifacts of the PC era like VGA, ADB, and the 30-pin dock connector. As for quotes, cherry picked or otherwise, here are some that jump out: > But I say at some point [3.5mm] will go away > Apple has proven to be very good at timing the removal of established legacy ports. >…

You called Gruber's article "amazing apologism," and I'm responding to that alone. We're pushing things a bit far if we characterize any of the things you've listed here as either amazing or apologism.

Gruber is not just arguing pro-Apple and saying this is the right decision. Indeed, he even says maybe "Apple is making a mistake," and goes on to include several serious problems with it.

Gruber's post is a reaction to Patel's characterization of Apple's move as user-hostile and "stupid." His reply is not, "Here's why I say Apple is right to make this move." Rather it is, "Right or wrong, and like it or not, here's some sober perspective on why Apple would/could do such a thing."

Re: Taking the headphone jack off phones is user-hostile and stupid

#190

Post by riprowan »

tzs wrote: post #180
riprowan wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What’s the functional reason to get rid of analog headphones? It’s not quality – analog headphones have excellent sound quality, and 99% of people won’t be able to tell the difference with ‘digital’ sound, right? You have it backward - analog headphones are superior, generally speaking. The signal chain is: digital source > D/A converter > amplifier > transducer (speaker / headphone) "Digital headphones" simply mov…

I think it makes more sense to put the D/A and amp in the headphones. If you want a particular quality level of sound, you need a particular quality level D/A, amp, and transducer. If these are all in the headphones then you choose your quality level by choosing your headphones. If you use your headphones with more than one device you get your chosen quality level on all of those devices. With the D/A and amp in the…

> If you use your headphones with more than one device you get your chosen quality level on all of those devices.

What if you buy speakers? Now you need a different DAC for them. If you have a good DAC in source device you have no problem to begin with.

Having said that I'll retract my previous statement in the instance that the system is able to stream lossless digital audio to the headphones. In that case putting the DAC in the headphones could be used to actually deliver high quality wireless audio.

Past that, wired will "always" sound better than wireless with lossy compression (ie bluetooth).

Past that, the best DACs and headphone amps will be component. The worst ones are likely to be powered by whatever tiny battery powers the wireless headphones.

I'm just pointing out, this isn't about quality - if you want quality, you'll be using wired headphones. Lossless wireless is a nice idea that would justify DACs and amps in the cans, it just probably won't improve sound quality, just cost and troubles.

A decade or so ago Roland tried to convince the pro audio world that it needed "digital speakers." It was a dumb idea then, it's still a dumb idea, and that's what I hear when I hear "digital headphones."

Post reply on HN