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

AirPods don't “just work”

philip.design

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 966 posts

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#801

Post by cuddlybacon »

nsxwolf wrote: post #759
Hokusai wrote: post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's untold little quirks you have to deal with when using a general-purpose operating system "Though initial iterations of the software for the original Xbox and Xbox 360 were based on heavily modified versions of Windows, the newer consoles feature operating systems that are highly compatible with Microsoft's desktop operating systems, allowing for shared applications and ease-of-development between personal c…

There's also a lot of little things. Like, you launch a game and there's no audio. Well, Windows at some point decided to switch audio outputs on you. You may have a lot of them. Line out, headphones, a bluetooth headset, a virtual out for streaming software, a monitor with built-in speakers - and now you've got to click the little speaker icon and try to figure out what should be selected, which may be named after t…

On my PC each legitimate output device has a duplicate with the same name that does nothing. Every once in a while when I launch a game it will switch to the duplicate entry and I will have to switch it back. It's a quirk where the fix has become a reflex.

I've never had to deal with this on any console I've owned.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#802

Post by Gigachad »

emilecantin wrote: post #204
macNchz wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of my roommate’s Jambox bluetooth speaker years ago…I learned that it had this behavior while fully asleep at 4:30am after we’d had a party, when, every few minutes it started loudly blasting “BOOOOP. LOW BATTERY” alerts. The trouble was that it was hidden somewhere in our messy living room, and the alerts weren’t frequent enough to find it quickly, so I was standing around in my underwear for ages, waitin…

Sounds like the small slice of hell that is a low battery in most smoke detectors: one short (and loud AF) beep every ~15 minutes. Fine when you have only one, but in a large house you never know which one of these f*ckers is actually the one complaining.

The first time I had this happen I didn't know what the sound was and it took me weeks to work out because it's so hard to locate where it comes from.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#803

Post by orhmeh09 »

GraemeMeyer wrote: post #764
davidmurdoch wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How have consumers let companies get away with "premium" phones being the ones with fewer features?

I think of it like USB A ports. You miss it for a few years. And then you don't. And the products generally continue to improve along other lines

I’ve never had the bit snap off a USB A cable when it was plugged in yet it’s happened to me twice with USB C. I’ve also had to replace ports due to the wear on the cable futon not being able to stay in place. Furthermore, I’m less certain if a cable I have lying around is going to be fully compatible. I also have to keep USB A around so there’s this big growth in the number of cables and adapters that are necessary.

In almost every way that is meaningful to me USB C has been a downgrade. I can’t think of anything that improved my experience beyond saving a minute when I plug the laptop into only the monitor and not the power cable too.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#804

Post by [deleted] »

oynqr wrote: post #770
TylerE wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to wonder if it's time to just say screw Bluetooth, and deploy a new standard that's specially oriented for audio. Requirements aren't crazy. It just needs to support uncompressed 96/24, full duplex.

Why waste a bunch of bandwidth on 96 kHz when 44.1 is fine?

[deleted]

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#805

Post by orhmeh09 »

tonymet wrote: post #651
ho_schi wrote: post #564

3.5 mm jack Nasty. Yes ;) I'm sorry but it solves these problems and I think most of us have more prominent issues. Bluetooth - and even overpriced Apple products - are usually working well with one connection only. And the headset profile needs to sacrifice quality for voice input. This is to large degrees a question about priority of the user. If you need good or even excellent quality - opt for a good headset and…

Let's stop to admire the excellent UX of the 3.5mm jack * tactile feedback when connected (it clicks, you hear it & feel it). * "find my device" : just pull on the wire * quickly switch between devices * instant pairing We just need a marketing guru to sell people on the 3.5mm wired headphones

We really might need one if chip shortages are gonna be a problem.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#806

Post by jonwinstanley »

_23sd wrote: post #794

I really hope Apple decides to improve things for their ecosystem within the framework of Bluetooth rather than go their own way as some people here have suggested. That route would almost certainly lead to a proliferation of proprietary PAN standards and allow cell manufacturers to tax (or just acquire) consumer audio companies, many of which are struggling to compete with AirPods already. Anyway, we're going to fin…

The bluetooth standard seems to move very slowly though. We've had bluetooth headphones around for so many years and they usually leave a lot to be desired.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#807

Post by quacker »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #596
quacker wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another option is 2.4 GHz wireless, which is common in gaming headsets, at least, for low-latency / high-quality audio. The downside is it requires a dongle.

>Another option is 2.4 GHz wireless Sorry to break it to you but Bluetooth also operates on the 2.4GHz ISM band. Those 2.4GHz dongles you're talking about is basically a custom wireless protocol that doesn't follow Bluetooth or any other open standard or OSI stack but is most likely based on some internal protocol of what the three major chip makers in the 2.4GHz space offer (Texas Instruments, Silicon Labs, Nordic S…

>Sorry to break it to you but Bluetooth also operates on the 2.4GHz ISM band.

Right, but "2.4 GHz wireless audio" is what to search to find information and non-BT products.

It is interesting to see your comments about Bluetooth. I appreciate the standard. It's useful. But as a user I like things that just work, and Bluetooth audio has been subpar in my experience.

Sample size of one, but my experience with non-BT wireless headsets is superior to Bluetooth headsets in pretty much every way: no pairing issues and no BT profile switching madness with varying audio quality when I want to use a mic. I get low latency, high quality (even lossless) audio. On my particular headset, replacement dongles can be purchased and you pair it with the headset once (I've not had to do this myself yet though).

I would love to only use Bluetooth everywhere, but it is not without its shortcomings.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#809

Post by jonwinstanley »

bsder wrote: post #760
TylerE wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to wonder if it's time to just say screw Bluetooth, and deploy a new standard that's specially oriented for audio. Requirements aren't crazy. It just needs to support uncompressed 96/24, full duplex.

Except that requirement IS crazy--when you put all the other stuff around it. Must work at 2.4Ghz--even in the face of 200 WiFi access points and 3 times that number of devices. Must stay in sync to within a millisecond ... even though there is a large bag of RF absorbing water in between them. Should work on a battery smaller than a thumbnail. Should process audio but not generate enough heat that you notice it in y…

So true, we take the complexity for granted. It's actually a really hard problem.

Re: AirPods don't “just work”

#810

Post by fphhotchips »

Gigachad wrote: post #783
smoldesu wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know some people have experimented with WiFi direct for that, but I'm not really familiar with it's limitations besides "you have to be hooked up to a router for it to work". One thing's for certain though, if someone made a pair of lossless cans that could "find" devices over arbitrary WiFi networks, I'd probably switch just for the improvement in latency alone.

Wifi has an ad-hoc mode which doesn't require a router.

Ah yes, the famously well supported and not at all prone to weird bugs Wifi Ad-hoc mode.
Post reply on HN