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

AirPods Pro

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 391 posts

Re: AirPods Pro

#381

Post by shanemlk »

the_gastropod wrote: post #172
shanemlk wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "everyone" with "large corporations" and I think it's a pretty sound argument.

Uuuugh. This line of thinking, though rooted in good intentions (hold corporations responsible for better behavior) is deeply flawed. Corporations don't exist in a vacuum. They have customers they're serving. We don't get to just pretend our behavior doesn't matter because some bogeymen (corporations) are doing worse things, then continue to voluntarily hand our money to those very same corporations. We (individuals)…

I like this line of thinking too, but there should be a line drawn somewhere between consumer's responsibility and law maker's responsibility to hold corporations accountable for their environmental impact. It is not a single person at home dumping pollution into a river or factory smoke into the air. And it's downright difficult for an average consumer to know what impact each option for a purchase has on the environment.

Re: AirPods Pro

#382

Post by mcculley »

somehnguy wrote: post #217
mcculley wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use mine every day for at least an hour of running. Yesterday they ran out of power at just over two hours of running. I have had mine for a couple of years now. I’m looking forward to buying these new ones as they are water resistant and the original model is not, requiring me to dry the sweat off of them very carefully.

They don't advertise the water resistance but I run with mine drenched in sweat and have never had an issue. I also put them through the washer and dryer (not in the case) and they work fine almost a year later. I wouldn't worry about carefully drying them..

I have not had the same success as you. I do a lot of running and I sweat a lot while running at full speed. Formerly, I would put my AirPods into their case as quickly as possible after a run to avoid losing them. The charging contacts ended up becoming corroded and I have cleaned them off multiple times to get the batteries to charge. The AirPods were not fully wet, they just had a sheen of sweat on them. Now I set them out to dry in the air for a while before putting them in the case. I suspect the new version will have the same problem. They are not really meant for vigorous exercise.

[Edited to answer your question to which I cannot reply because it is marked as dead:] The corrosion to which I was referring is clearly oxidation to my eye. It has a green color and requires scraping. Maybe our environments and usage are too different for comparison. I live in Central Florida, where it is quite hot and humid. According to my receipts, I bought these AirPods on April 5, 2017. I have been running with them almost every day since then.

Re: AirPods Pro

#383

Post by somehnguy »

mcculley wrote: post #382
somehnguy wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't advertise the water resistance but I run with mine drenched in sweat and have never had an issue. I also put them through the washer and dryer (not in the case) and they work fine almost a year later. I wouldn't worry about carefully drying them..

I have not had the same success as you. I do a lot of running and I sweat a lot while running at full speed. Formerly, I would put my AirPods into their case as quickly as possible after a run to avoid losing them. The charging contacts ended up becoming corroded and I have cleaned them off multiple times to get the batteries to charge. The AirPods were not fully wet, they just had a sheen of sweat on them. Now I set…

Thats pretty interesting, you made me take a look at my charging contacts and they're still completely new looking.

I wonder why you experienced that and I didn't - I don't take particularly good care of my AirPods. The only thing I do occasionally is hit them with a paperclip to remove any earwax buildup because they get pretty gross after a few weeks of use.

I mean I'll go for runs in the rain, run in super humid weather, sleep with them in sometimes, and a host of other probably not good ideas and they just keep on working perfect after a year of this 'abuse'.

I would guess however that they weren't corroded in the traditional sense of the word, more likely just covered in a gross film?

Re: AirPods Pro

#384

Post by lfowles »

coldtea wrote: post #309
lfowles wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All active noise cancelling headphones just hurt my ears after extended periods of time.

Do they physically hurt your ears, or is it just some personal discomfort you can get used to?

It's somewhere between a headache and physical discomfort. Hard to describe because I've only ever experienced it with active noise cancelling (over the ear) headphones and I gave those up 5+ years ago.

Re: AirPods Pro

#385

Post by mcphage »

lm28469 wrote: post #376
mcphage wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the older bose headsets you could slap an AAA batteries and be good for a while. These types of batteries won't disappear anytime soon. You'll generate far more waste from AAA batteries in the time it takes for the Airpod batteries to require disposal.

There are rechargeable ones.

Yep, just like in the Airpods. And just like the ones in the Airpods, they'll eventually stop holding a charge. The only difference is, they're significantly bigger than the Airpods, and have more of the toxic waste.

Re: AirPods Pro

#386

Post by EA »

I like this tech but unless I buy a second pair, I don't see a reasonable way to use these on long airplane flights as they only offer 4.5 hours of battery power.

Re: AirPods Pro

#387

Post by eyeball »

krastanov wrote: post #34
webwielder2 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why spend $100 on a nice dinner, we'll just have to eat again in 8 hours.

There used to be an expectation of longevity in the electronics we purchase. Even while Moore's law was in full effect, you could find good uses for a 6 year old computer. Today's computer hardware can easily remain fully usable for a decade. The notion of buying a laptop or phone, let alone headphones, every year is ludicrous and actively harmful to the environment.

I’ve been using the same etymotic ear buds since 2004.

Re: AirPods Pro

#388

Post by bbrr »

pohl wrote: post #169
whalesalad wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No physical buttons on them, but each pod can be programmed to do things based on taps. For instance, my right pod will skip to the next song with a double-tap. My left pod activates Siri. I left my airpods at home today (what a coincidence) so I cannot visit that menu to let you know whether or not mute is one of the possibilities for the tap gestures.

Play/Pause is an option, and serves that purpose

False, it hangs the call up. Source: just hung up on 40 min PG&E on hold call.

Re: AirPods Pro

#389

Post by krolley »

EA wrote: post #386

I like this tech but unless I buy a second pair, I don't see a reasonable way to use these on long airplane flights as they only offer 4.5 hours of battery power.

Some long flights with newer planes have USB, so that would be an option.

Re: AirPods Pro

#390

Post by etherealG »

reaperducer wrote: post #294
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found it awful. I'm running on a very beefy development machine in the latest version of Firefox and it was kinda sluggish and very hard to read all of the information (felt like I had to scroll forever just to see a few sentences and pictures). It's also very inaccessible.

I'm running on a very beefy development machine in the latest version of Firefox and it was kinda sluggish Then your "beefy" development machine is less powerful than an iPhone, since I tested it on that, and it works fine. When I get to a full computer, I'll try it on that. I wonder if the ones I have are "beefy" enough.

Perhaps the reason for that is it’s been tested on Safari on an iPhone but not on Firefox on a fast desktop processor because the method used to animate is something fast in 1 browser but not in the other. Perhaps your comment didn’t consider that Apple’s marketing team only cater to their existing core demographic most likely already using an iPhone and not interested in the product at hand. But most of all, you didn’t bother to consider the software stack that had a huge impact on performance. And neither did Apple.
Post reply on HN