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

iPhone 7

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: iPhone 7

#281

Post by sanswork »

coryfklein wrote: post #271
acomjean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get over the headphone jack either. Another dongle to loose. Tons of headphones obsoleted. Can't charge while listening. Laggy audio. more batteries in the world. They're ok with a bulge for the camera but not headphones? I work in a lab and a phone with headphones is standard equipment on the commute and work (for at least part of the day). I would seriously move off iOS if I was making music with it. If onl…

> if I was making music with it Is iOS used as a platform in professional music making? Is that really a thing?

ipads are used pretty commonly in it.

Re: iPhone 7

#282

Post by coredog64 »

elliotec wrote: post #243
tebruno99 wrote: post #183

I'm not even upset about the headphone jack. Whatever. I'm really upset because you won't be able to do the following: 1.) Audio+GPS+Charging in non-Bluetooth Car. 2.) Listening to music at desk and still have enough charge for the Audio+GPS for the drive home. 3.) No more listening to music/audiobooks as I fall asleep because in the morning the iPhone won't be charged for my desk usage the next day unless I wake up…

1. Most cars are Bluetooth enabled, and many old ones have aftermarket systems that are. 2. Most people listen to music at their desk with their computers 3. That does seem a bit of an issue, but part of the point of the AirPods

My computer belongs to my employer, my iPhone/iPod/whatever belongs to me. I think my employer would be a little pissed if I filled the 256GB SSD with nothing but my music.

Re: iPhone 7

#283

Post by ceejayoz »

jjawssd wrote: post #181
kirykl wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of Apple's core tenents is 'to hell with legacy' Lightning headphones are a stop gap. The future is wireless.

That would make sense if wired wasn't far superior to wireless from a reliability and throughput standpoint

The iPhone's Bluetooth 4 is capable of 24 Mbps. If that's not enough throughput for your music listening, I'm not sure what to tell you.

Re: iPhone 7

#284

Post by matthewmcg »

tdy721 wrote: post #215
qnk wrote: post #134

The high-gloss finish of the Jet Black iPhone 7 is achieved through a precision nine-step anodization and polishing process. Its surface is equally as hard as other anodized Apple products; however, its high shine may show fine micro-abrasions with use. If you are concerned about this, we suggest you use one of the many cases available to protect your iPhone.[1] I think I'd go for the Black one instead. [1] http://ww…

I never use a case for my phones. Honestly, I kinda like the way phones "wear down". It's mine, and I scratched it up a bit, no problem.

Same. It reminds me of the "brassing" you see on well-used cameras that have a black finish over metal. The coating wears off in a distinctive way with heavy use.

Example: http://leicaphilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/BP-M3-5414...

Re: iPhone 7

#285

Post by jdmoreira »

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #238
acomjean wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't get over the headphone jack either. Another dongle to loose. Tons of headphones obsoleted. Can't charge while listening. Laggy audio. more batteries in the world. They're ok with a bulge for the camera but not headphones? I work in a lab and a phone with headphones is standard equipment on the commute and work (for at least part of the day). I would seriously move off iOS if I was making music with it. If onl…

The lag is what I'm curious about. Given the lag I experience while streaming Bluetooth from my iPhone to my car, I'm expecting to see about the same amount of lag. Which is annoying because it's definitely a worse experience than a cable.

I'm not defending the the removal of the headphone by any means, but you are unlikely to experience any lag with the lightning cable. It's just a pcm bytestream getting out of the phone into a dac in the headphones. The latency won't be any different than what already is.

If you are talking about their new wireless headphones, It will probably have some delay but probably not even close to bluetooth. They could just modulate that same bytestream to some ghz radio frequency without adding anything remotely as over engineered and cumbersome as a bluetooth stack. I'm pretty sure those airpods are not bluetooth compatible.

Re: iPhone 7

#286

Post by takeda »

SurrealSoul wrote: post #25

Honestly if you had an iPhone 6 why would you upgrade? Better battery life is cool, and it being waterproof is novel. However, its basically the same phone for the end consumer.

How waterproofing is novel if pretty much all competitors already did it?

Re: iPhone 7

#287

Post by esolyt »

ceejayoz wrote: post #32
slg wrote: post #5

I still can't get over the headphone jack. Apple does have a good record of abandoning technologies at the right time (floppies, CDs, Flash, etc) but the biggest difference is that those technologies were all on the downward slope of their popularity when Apple made the move and all had solid replacements available at the time. The headphone jack is just as popular today as it has ever been and it is still more conve…

> the biggest difference is that those technologies were all on the downward slope of their popularity when Apple made the move and all had solid replacements available at the time Was that downward slope clear at the time Apple made the changes, though? I remember "no Flash on iPhone" being a major complaint of many pundits.

Flash never worked well on mobile devices. So Apple never tried to implement it. Headphones worked fine with every mobile device in the world.

Re: iPhone 7

#288

Post by brainfire »

balabaster wrote: post #185

It's water resistant but water damage isn't covered under warranty? How can you have it both ways like that? "Water resistance IP67 under IEC standard 60529. Liquid damage not covered under warranty." How does one make such a big deal of it being water resistant (Product film: 1m 35s; "...to make this the first water resistant iPhone") but not cover liquid damage under warranty?

The same way they use durable glass and don't cover broken glass under the warranty.

Re: iPhone 7

#289

Post by 0x0 »

SurrealSoul wrote: post #25

Honestly if you had an iPhone 6 why would you upgrade? Better battery life is cool, and it being waterproof is novel. However, its basically the same phone for the end consumer.

Wide color is actually the one thing that sticks out as a quality-of-life improvement that might be worth it. Lack of 3.5mm is a very hard price to pay, though. I'll probably still wait and see what's coming for next year's 10th anniversary of the iPhone.

Re: iPhone 7

#290

Post by hbosch »

overcast wrote: post #267

I especially enjoyed the last second comment under his breath regarding the matte black iPhone 7 pricing. 32GB standard for all models, except the matte black, which will ONLY come in 128GB, and you'll be paying $100 more at $750. Nice underhanded move by Apple to maximize profit for what will undoubtedly be the most popular color. First they force everyone to buy the 32GB upgrade last year on the 6S, now you're forc…

Nit: I think you are talking about the Jet Black color, not the Matte (regular) black.
Post reply on HN