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

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: iPhone 7

#391

Post by melling »

gyey wrote: post #196
melling wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PS/2 keyboards weren't on the way out. Apple led the way and pushed USB for a few years before it caught on.

But the lightening port is a closed standard, as opposed to USB. It would have made much more sense here if Apple had used USB-C instead of lightening.

Yep, and everyone else will drop the headphone jack for USB-C. The headphone jack is dead.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/27/11516410/intel-usb-c-audio...

Apple really can't change ports again. I think they're really going to push for wireless. When they get wireless charging they'll remove the lightening port.

Re: iPhone 7

#392

Post by redler »

excalibur wrote: post #175
davidiach wrote: post #45

I was really impressed with the new camera. It seems to me this was a bigger improvement than what they usually do.

I'm still kind of dumbfounded that the 7 Plus has two cameras side-by-side and apparently ISN'T using them to capture 3D images. One would think this would be the best/most obvious application.

The lenses are very close together, so any 3D effect would be very subtle except perhaps in close-up/macro situations.

Re: iPhone 7

#393

Post by srikz »

niftich wrote: post #370

This is a Nice Device. You can read my other comments lamenting the headphone jack, this comment isn't about that. The screen is beautiful. The two cameras are a clever trick that I hope work as well as advertised -- and their cameras have been historically very good. Splash resistance is overdue , but appreciated. But A10 is a bit of a disappointment [1][2], only as powerful as the A9X. Do they have any new hardware…

damn! here I was thinking that A10 is a big jump. I guess A10X Fusion will be a hell of a chip in the next iPads.

Re: iPhone 7

#394

Post by overcast »

hbosch wrote: post #290
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.

I stand corrected.

Re: iPhone 7

#395

Post by eridius »

yock wrote: post #240
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…

> They're ok with a bulge for the camera but not headphones? This confuses me too. The camera wart is ridiculous, and I bet if they made the device just that slight bit thicker they'd have room to retain the 3.5mm jack. The other possibility is that the headphone jack makes water resistance that much more difficult. Maybe they think it's worth it?

What I read a while ago is the removal of the headphone jack lets them put in another speaker there. I bet that's a big part of how they're able to get 2x louder speakers with higher dynamic range, and, while they didn't mention this, it's possible they might get a bit of stereo when the phone is held in portrait this way.

Edit: Why the heck am I being downvoted for this? I'm not even expressing an opinion as to whether I think the jack should have been removed or not.

Re: iPhone 7

#396

Post by DCKing »

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…

To be fair to Apple, I think they have a good point. Digital connectors are superior in almost every way (space use, port flexibility, sound quality, even cable integrity). I admire them for ripping off the bandaid, like they did previously with disk drives and parrallel ports. Someone needs to lead the way to abandon legacy, and Apple can do that far more effectively than others (e.g. Motorola has also abandoned headphone jacks with their Moto Z line).

One thing I cannot get over though, is that they chose their own propietary, you-have-to-pay-Apple-for-a-license, cannot-use-them-with-anything-else Lightning 'standard'. USB Type C is the standard for this stuff now, and any trivial technical merits Lightning might have over USB Type C don't weigh up against the universal nature of USB Type C. The sheer arrogance.

Digital connectors the future? I'm on board with that. Propietary connectors? Fuck that.

Re: iPhone 7

#397

Post by Unklejoe »

Longhanks wrote: post #368
Unklejoe wrote: post #211

Can the 3.5mm to Lightning adapters be legally produced without paying royalties to Apple for using the Lightning connector? On a related note: I wonder if one reason for eliminating the jack is to close that open interface which some devices like the "Square" were using. I'm not sure how much of an impact this has though; it was just a thought.

Apple's adapter is only $9 ( http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MMX62AM/A/lightning-to-35-... ).

I don't see how this is related to my comment.

My concern was basically about Apple being able to prohibit manufacturers from making hardware that they don't explicitly approve. (I don't know if they can or can't.)

Re: iPhone 7

#398

Post by coryfklein »

strictnein wrote: post #23
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…

And to say it was about "Courage". No, we all understand that it's a way for them to make more money selling their horrible headphones and licensing lightning to headphone makers.

I saw it more as a push to eliminate the cord from headphones entirely. I personally hate the cord, but I hate charging bluetooth headphones even more. I hope eliminating the jack will result in better wireless headphones, but I'm not super confident that it will.

Re: iPhone 7

#399

Post by bzudo »

alkonaut wrote: post #71

They claim the plus as "optical zoom" and talk about a 2x factor. Do they mean it can switch between a wide and tele focal length? That isn't "zoom" (at least not in the normal sense) - it's just two focal lengths with a switch. Did I understand the feature correctly?

I think it's 'switch' only, which is unfortunate. It would be nice to have the zoom slider and depth of field feature when shooting video.

Re: iPhone 7

#400

Post by joakleaf »

troncheadle wrote: post #105
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…

Bluetooth headphones outsold standard audio jack headphones in the US last month for the first time. This is perfectly timed.

Does the survey account for the number of phones that are sold with audio jack headphones?

It could be that the only reason bluetooths outsells jacks, is because people get jacks anyway for free.

Post reply on HN