haha He beat me to it! :) I disagree. I broke a set of wired headphones once, and used a back-up pair of Bluetooth headphones for a while until I could replace the wired headphones. My biggest...
As this article is like the countless others that follow Betteridge’s law of headlines, Journalism wonks already know the answer to that question
haha He beat me to it! :)
I should point out that Bluetooth’s downsides are largely limited to consequences of having yet another battery, and a lack of cross-platform compatibility.
I disagree. I broke a set of wired headphones once, and used a back-up pair of Bluetooth headphones for a while until I could replace the wired headphones. My biggest problem with the Bluetooth headphones was that the signal kept dropping out. Only for fractions of a second at a time, but it was noticeable enough to be annoying. And when I walked through a busy area like a train station (on my way to work), the frequency of drop-outs increased to a few times per minute. I never get drop-outs with wired headphones!
Secondarily, there was the issue of having to remember to charge my headphones: another annoyance.
When Apple kills headphone jacks on their products, they’re simultaneously trying to lock people into their own ecosystem, and increase demand for other high-margin products they peddle.
Exactly. This has been their strategy since before iPhones existed. To use their iPod, you had to install their iTunes software to buy music - because iPods would play only music downloaded from iTunes. You weren't allowed to buy music elsewhere: Apple wants to be your gatekeeper to all online content. They want to lock you into an ecosystem to get 100% share of your wallet (as the banking industry says about their very similar strategy).
Technically you were allowed to buy music from elsewhere, since iTunes could add MP3 files from local storage or CDs (that's how I used to do it for the longest time) but it was far less...
Technically you were allowed to buy music from elsewhere, since iTunes could add MP3 files from local storage or CDs (that's how I used to do it for the longest time) but it was far less convenient, and it didn't really change the fact that your iDevice was chained to whichever computer you configured it on. So if you just wanted to grab some tunes from a friend's place or on your laptop you had to have a USB key ready.
Apple didn't even sell music for the first two years of the iPod's life. They'd have been a bit of a downer without the ability to play files from other sources ;)
Apple didn't even sell music for the first two years of the iPod's life. They'd have been a bit of a downer without the ability to play files from other sources ;)
I'm not disagreeing with any of your points, but please don't judge all Bluetooth headphones by whatever janky crap you own. My AirPods never drop out, ever. Not walking thru a busy convention...
I'm not disagreeing with any of your points, but please don't judge all Bluetooth headphones by whatever janky crap you own. My AirPods never drop out, ever. Not walking thru a busy convention center, not leaving my phone at my desk and walking all over my house, never. It's magic.
That's lovely, but I shouldn't have to pay $160 to have such capability. The price is what it all comes down to for me. Would also be nice if the listening device I use for my phone worked with my...
That's lovely, but I shouldn't have to pay $160 to have such capability. The price is what it all comes down to for me. Would also be nice if the listening device I use for my phone worked with my Roku remote headphone jack - I can listen to my TV quietly over headphones while my wife is sleeping thanks to that nifty jack.
I'm on the best iPhone with a headphone jack (iPhone 6S+ with max storage), and I will probably give Apple up after this one dies. I want headphones that work on all devices, I want a car stereo that can play without an Apple adapter, and I want to be able to charge while I listen using my audiophile headphones without an Apple adapter. It's insane they are forcing consumers into this decision, but iPhone 7 is where they lost me.
I bought one of the cheapest pair of wireless earbuds on Amazon because the headphone jack on my super-cheap Alcatel phone completely quit working. I think they were $13. They work flawlessly. I...
I bought one of the cheapest pair of wireless earbuds on Amazon because the headphone jack on my super-cheap Alcatel phone completely quit working. I think they were $13. They work flawlessly. I really only use them for cutting grass and other yard work, but I've never had an issue. I just plug them in when I get back in the house, and they're charged in about fifteen minutes.
If your car is relatively new (around '13 or newer), it likely provides bluetooth for music, which, despite my initial reservations, is really, really handy. Jump in the car, flip over to my music app, and it's already connected and playing.
I'm a bit of an "audiophile" myself, although I hate that term because I have minimal investment—but I care a lot about sound quality. I don't use my phone for my good headphones. In fact, they never leave the house.
I still do miss the headphone jack at times, but it's becoming more and more rare. I don't even think it's that I've "learned to live with it," I think it's more that "the alternatives aren't as bad as they initially seemed."
Sadly, my car is a 2011. If I don't have a phone with a headphone jack, then I have two options: 1) keep an adapter in my car for the aux cable at all times, 2) plug into the USB jack straight to...
Sadly, my car is a 2011. If I don't have a phone with a headphone jack, then I have two options: 1) keep an adapter in my car for the aux cable at all times, 2) plug into the USB jack straight to the stereo but lose the ability to charge at a normal speed.
You have a third option: get a cheap bluetooth adapter like this. I paid $14 for mine a year and a half ago, so there might be newer, better models out there now (I'd search if you're going to get...
You have a third option: get a cheap bluetooth adapter like this. I paid $14 for mine a year and a half ago, so there might be newer, better models out there now (I'd search if you're going to get one), but the majority of them are in that price range. Works great, with the added bonus that you can carry it to any rental car and not have to figure out the car's bluetooth pairing.
It largely depends on which version of bluetooth it runs. The one I linked is 4.1, which is pretty good for music. I mainly use it for podcasts and recorded satellite radio, so it serves me well,...
It largely depends on which version of bluetooth it runs. The one I linked is 4.1, which is pretty good for music. I mainly use it for podcasts and recorded satellite radio, so it serves me well, but I've used it for music and on my car's relatively crappy speaker setup, you can't tell a difference from wired.
If you're picky about it, there may be 5.0 (or whatever the new standard is) models available now. I can do some research later if you need one.
You can't use your airpods on an airplane though, right? EDIT: I just realized I responded to the wrong comment, but oh well, it's still vaguely on topic.
You can't use your airpods on an airplane though, right?
EDIT: I just realized I responded to the wrong comment, but oh well, it's still vaguely on topic.
I guarantee you the majority of people don't even put their phone in airplane mode. The FCC guidelines on bandwidth don't have overlap between what airplanes use and cell phones use anyways, so...
I guarantee you the majority of people don't even put their phone in airplane mode. The FCC guidelines on bandwidth don't have overlap between what airplanes use and cell phones use anyways, so it's a bit silly that they still do this.
Well it may be silly and people may not listen, but I'm the kind of person who prefers to follow rules imposed by people who have my life in their hands.
Well it may be silly and people may not listen, but I'm the kind of person who prefers to follow rules imposed by people who have my life in their hands.
You can turn BT back on after you turn on airplane mode in the US, but I know some other countries make you wait until you're up to cruising altitude to turn it back on.
You can turn BT back on after you turn on airplane mode in the US, but I know some other countries make you wait until you're up to cruising altitude to turn it back on.
Whenever I'm flying they just say you should turn off your devices or put them in airplane mode. They don't make any exceptions for bluetooth. Maybe it's just an EU thing. Of course you can simply...
Whenever I'm flying they just say you should turn off your devices or put them in airplane mode. They don't make any exceptions for bluetooth. Maybe it's just an EU thing.
Of course you can simply ignore what they say, but that doesn't feel right.
Ramble warning. Skip to the end for the TLDR. I believe there's a place for both Bluetooth and wired headsets. Personally, I've had many pairs of bluetooth headphones. Every single one of them...
Ramble warning. Skip to the end for the TLDR.
My biggest problem with the Bluetooth headphones was that the signal kept dropping out. Only for fractions of a second at a time, but it was noticeable enough to be annoying. And when I walked through a busy area like a train station (on my way to work), the frequency of drop-outs increased to a few times per minute. I never get drop-outs with wired headphones!
I believe there's a place for both Bluetooth and wired headsets.
Personally, I've had many pairs of bluetooth headphones. Every single one of them with more than one fault, and sometimes very annoying to use. But I always come back to them, since they do have a set of advantages that the wired ones don't have while also escaping certain shortcomings typical of the latter.
The signal dropping out sort of depends on the pair of bluetooth headphones. It is an issue with very cheap headphones. To the point of not being able to have my phone in my back pocket because the signal would drop constantly, and being forced to have the phone on my front left pocket (yeah, the right didn't work). But that was only with one pair of headphones and mostly only when they were low on battery. So, I wouldn't say this is an issue pertaining to all BT (bluetooth) HP (headphones).
I never get drop-outs with wired headphones!
You never get drop-outs with wired heaphones, but you also never snatch them violently out of your pocket or hand because they got caught up in some door handle or chair or anything that's sticking out while you're walking. That violent and sudden interruption that most of the times ends up with your phone on the floor and you have to examine it for scratches and other kinds of damages (and checking the wired HP, too which can sometimes completely break if they're on the cheaper end) is one of the most annoying things of using wired HP.
Plus, there's the whole noise traveling through vibrations on wired HP. Personally, I don't even notice it if I've been using wired for a while. But when you switch from BT to wired, oh boy do you feel it. And it's a very annoying thing to deal with. Specially in winter (using wired HP with winter clothes is the worst, nevermind if you wear a laptop bag).
Regarding the charging of BT HP, it can be more or less comfortable depending on the individual pair of HP. You have those who need to be directly connected to a USB charger (which is more often than not micro-USB, meaning you have to use a specific cable for them and not your smartphone's) and you have those who can be easily left on a charging dock. And even then there's a difference between those who need to basically be charged every day vs those who can go days and weeks without needing a charge (the most expensive ones of course). Oh, and there's those BT HP who do have cables between the two units, who aren't as uncomfortable as completely wired headphones, but not as comfortable as the ones completely devoid of cables either, then again, the ones who don't have any cables are quite prone to falling out of your ears, without any cable preventing them from falling to the floor.
TLDR: Overall, I feel like both have a place right now. For the future, I can only see wired ones going away. But for that, the BT options have to improve a lot. Which isn't going to happen for the next few years.
PS: Off-topic, but is it only me or buying cheap BT HPs on Amazon is a pain in the ass? They either come broken, or break after a very brief period of time. Alternatively, most wired cheap ones break after 6 months no matter how good you take care of them.
How do you think I broke my wired headphones in the first place? ;) Yes, this is a risk, but I still prefer it over the dodgy sound quality I get with Bluetooth headphones.
You never get drop-outs with wired heaphones, but you also never snatch them violently out of your pocket or hand because they got caught up in some door handle or chair or anything that's sticking out while you're walking.
How do you think I broke my wired headphones in the first place? ;)
Yes, this is a risk, but I still prefer it over the dodgy sound quality I get with Bluetooth headphones.
Can I question if, pragmatically, this is really a bad thing? How does it affect you in day to day life? Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal? If Google isn't right now, they're...
Apple wants to be your gatekeeper to all online content. They want to lock you into an ecosystem to get 100% share of your wallet (as the banking industry says about their very similar strategy).
Can I question if, pragmatically, this is really a bad thing? How does it affect you in day to day life? Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal? If Google isn't right now, they're certainly heading in that direction: google continues to get more restrictive with its Android platform, more components are closed source. I mean, you no doubt saw just recently Google exposed their ability to remotely update consumer's phone settings. This isn't possible on the iOS platform, where Apple sees consumer data as a liability, not a profit-generation technique.
I've never once found myself constrained by being inside the "Apple walled garden". Sure, I give them money for that. I pay for Apple Music. I buy iCloud storage. At the end of the day however, I don't feel hard-done-by, or manipulated. I get a quality experience that is worth the money I pay. With Apple, I'm buying a product. With google, I am the product.
What if Apple doesn't get the distribution rights to a song, movie, show, or book you want? You're relying on Apple to get the rights to all available content, but that's not possible. You're...
Can I question if, pragmatically, this is really a bad thing? How does it affect you in day to day life?
What if Apple doesn't get the distribution rights to a song, movie, show, or book you want? You're relying on Apple to get the rights to all available content, but that's not possible. You're therefore limited in what content you can access via Apple. And if you choose to go outside their walled garden to obtain some content, they're going to make it as difficult as possible to bring that content into their precious garden.
Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal?
Yes, but that doesn't mean we should blindly accept it.
I have a large collection of music. Some of it is from independent artists who aren't even signed to a label. I obviously won't find their music on iTunes. It's very simple to add it to iT and put...
And if you choose to go outside their walled garden to obtain some content, they're going to make it as difficult as possible to bring that content into their precious garden.
I have a large collection of music. Some of it is from independent artists who aren't even signed to a label. I obviously won't find their music on iTunes. It's very simple to add it to iT and put it on my phone. Same with any other file I want there, if it exists, I'll get it on my phone.
There are music players on the app store that will draw music/audio directly from a Google Drive account. No checking for DRM, no restrictions (that I've found). We've heard all the way back to the earliest iPhones and even iPods that "they're not going to let you put the stuff you want on your phone," but it's never really proven true. They may want to put up appearances, but in action, it's very simple to work around any limitations.
It feels like the market is moving in that direction. And for that I blame Apple. Another reason I'm not a fan of them. Even if they're not an Android phone, they have the ability to completely...
Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal?
It feels like the market is moving in that direction. And for that I blame Apple. Another reason I'm not a fan of them.
Even if they're not an Android phone, they have the ability to completely direct the market. The most recent examples of it being the infamous notch and the headphone jack removal.
Phone manufacturers just seem to follow Apple, for good and bad. And it's a very frustrating thing. Because often it seems they're being held back by this.
Not sure if Apple is to blame here. You said it yourself, Apple doesn't make Android devices. Android OEMs do. You should redirect your anger towards the OEMs for copying Apple without thinking...
Not sure if Apple is to blame here. You said it yourself, Apple doesn't make Android devices. Android OEMs do. You should redirect your anger towards the OEMs for copying Apple without thinking about their consumers. Apple knows their consumers well enough to make such a move knowing their sales won't take a hit. Companies like HTC attempted to remove it as well but because their audience is not 1 to 1 with Apples they have suffered heavily.
True, and an iPhone is probably more secure than a phone running a generic Android ROM, but it's not a binary option. Apple is a completely closed off ecosystem. Even with Android being Google's...
With Apple, I'm buying a product. With google, I am the product.
True, and an iPhone is probably more secure than a phone running a generic Android ROM, but it's not a binary option. Apple is a completely closed off ecosystem. Even with Android being Google's version of "open-source", it's still much more open: I can run an open-source, privacy-respecting ROM (like Lineage OS), without Google Play services (or with MicroG, an open-source, privacy-respecting alternative), using apps from an open-source app store (F-Droid). AFAIK, the most you can do on an iOS device is jailbreak it, which doesn't help that much in knowing what your device is doing.
I think it is. In the sense that I believe it is anti-consumer. I believe the users should have the options to choose as much as they want, and be able to combine all sorts of products to better...
Can I question if, pragmatically, this is really a bad thing? How does it affect you in day to day life? Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal?
I think it is. In the sense that I believe it is anti-consumer. I believe the users should have the options to choose as much as they want, and be able to combine all sorts of products to better fit their usage habits and pocket.
Now, I can accept the existence of an ecosystem per se, like Samsung products working better with each other than they work with LG products. What I cannot accept is Samsung products downright not being able to work with LG products because of Samsung's arrogance.
And, as I said in another comment, one of the most frustrating things about this subject is Apple's massive ability to influence the market, which translates into Google slowly but surely changing their system to resemble Apple's. Which, in my opinion, is a negative outcome for the consumer.
I believe when you artificially limit a users's choices in a way that directl benefits you and keeps the competence at bay, you're kind of being an asshole.
And don't even get me started on Apple's war against the right to repair.
Bluetooth still has a long way to go, but you also get what you pay for. You can have a wireless headset with great sound, no cut-offs and a battery that lasts for a week, but it's above $100 for...
Bluetooth still has a long way to go, but you also get what you pay for. You can have a wireless headset with great sound, no cut-offs and a battery that lasts for a week, but it's above $100 for sure.
I only ever like the Macbook. It's their only product that was worth anything. The hardware was great and the OS had all yhe great Unix built in and supported proprietary software. I tried an...
I only ever like the Macbook. It's their only product that was worth anything. The hardware was great and the OS had all yhe great Unix built in and supported proprietary software.
I tried an iPhone and hated it. It always tagged my locatuon no matter what. It limited the apps I could use. I couldnt access the file system. And a big one was, I never got an alert when I had an mms message when my data was off. I always have access to wifi. So I never turnes my data on unless I had an mms. When I went to an iphone I never got them because how imessage worked. And even with it off it didn't work.. Went back to Android and got my alerts fine.
Going to remind everyone of this EFF article from 2016: "Analog: The Last Defense Against DRM". Ditching the headphone jack gives Apple complete control over every aspect of audio on your device....
Going to remind everyone of this EFF article from 2016: "Analog: The Last Defense Against DRM". Ditching the headphone jack gives Apple complete control over every aspect of audio on your device.
The argument that it was to make the phone thinner is complete nonsense (see the guy who added a headphone jack to an iPhone 7). If they cared, they would've at least added a second USB port and made dongles cheaper, but really, they're just pushing people to bluetooth.
Honestly, at least for me, nestled nicely into the Apple ecosystem with the phone, the watch, and my AirPods, it's been totally worth the upgrade from a wired set of headphones. I think I...
Honestly, at least for me, nestled nicely into the Apple ecosystem with the phone, the watch, and my AirPods, it's been totally worth the upgrade from a wired set of headphones. I think I encountered, one time, with my iPhone, where prior to owning AirPods, I wanted to charge and listen to music at the same time, in my 2+ years of device ownership. The "FOMO anxiety" of not having a 3.5mm never got to me, really.
And now, anecdotally, one of the biggest banes of my commute in the morning was taking my satchel on and off from work, to the train station, off the train, into the car, etc. multiple times per trip. This conflicted with the wired cord's existence frequently. AirPods completely removed that problem for me.
Don't think I can go back to wired headphones. AirPods sound great: I'm not using them in a studio-quality environment where I need perfect sound reproduction. I'm walking around traffic, in public, on the train, etc. I just need a decent pair of wireless headphones, and that's what they are.
Oh, I did. And they were all garbage: latency issues, short battery life, bad sound quality, bulky, etc, etc. Had I not upgraded to an iPhone 7 I would have bought AirPods to use with my iPhone 6S...
Oh, I did. And they were all garbage: latency issues, short battery life, bad sound quality, bulky, etc, etc. Had I not upgraded to an iPhone 7 I would have bought AirPods to use with my iPhone 6S anyways.
AirPods are the best "carry them with you" headphones I've ever owned. I'll never go back to wires for my portable headphones. I have a pair of AKG 702s connected to a USB DAC on my desk, but that's obviously a totally different story and isn't a portable setup. For portable, nothing beats AirPods.
Given the vote counts on these threads, it seems like no one here is going to be swayed with any arguments so I'll just shut up and let you continue this thread without my input. :)
Given the vote counts on these threads, it seems like no one here is going to be swayed with any arguments so I'll just shut up and let you continue this thread without my input. :)
Of course there is. I'm not claiming otherwise. But it's not just that people dislike Apple—it's that they demonstrate utter contempt for people who like Apple. Look at the assumption baked into...
Of course there is. I'm not claiming otherwise. But it's not just that people dislike Apple—it's that they demonstrate utter contempt for people who like Apple. Look at the assumption baked into your own language:
If wireless headphones are so great, why didn't you buy them before Apple forced you to?
Forced me too. As if us Apple lemmings are too stupid to make our own decisions about how we want to connect our headphones to our devices, and we need Apple to show us the way, or we are lost. This language completely discounts the fact that I searched for good wireless headphones for years and went through three or four different kinds before finally being satisfied with AirPods. This language completely discounts the fact that Apple didn't force anyone to use wireless headphones, iPhone 7 came with wired earbuds and a lighting-to-TRRS adapter in the box. It completely discounts the fact that anyone can buy a lighting-to-TRRS adapter for $9 if they really want to use wired headphones. It glosses over all the nuances and options of the situation and distills it down to the implication that Apple told us what to do and we all happily went along with it, not applying any critical thought to the situation whatsoever.
Your second comment here has that same contempt in it too, as if I either don't know about or cannot perceive Apple's flaws. Of course I can. I could talk for days about how badly Apple's fouled up the MacBook lineup—and don't even get me started on the Mac Mini and Mac Pro situation. But the headphone jack discussion? That's boring. That's old hat. That's been done to death and back again. Meh.
The problem isn't dislike, the problem is that Apple fans get treated like morons because we have the audacity to like what we like. And you're my friend. You know me and you know I'm intelligent—imagine how much worse it is between strangers!
Please note that I did not ask that question about headphones to someone like you, who tried a variety of wireless headphones before settling on the one they liked the best. I asked it of someone...
As if us Apple lemmings are too stupid to make our own decisions about how we want to connect our headphones to our devices, and we need Apple to show us the way, or we are lost.
Please note that I did not ask that question about headphones to someone like you, who tried a variety of wireless headphones before settling on the one they liked the best. I asked it of someone who had used only wired headphones until Apple changed their iPhone design, and who was then forced to change over to wireless headphones whether they wanted to or not (dongle be damned - dongles are another problem, not a solution).
Your second comment here has that same contempt in it too, as if I either don't know about or cannot perceive Apple's flaws. Of course I can.
So why be surprised, when a majority of phone buyers don't buy iPhones, and there are known problems with Apple's devices, that most people can find a reason to criticise Apple and its ideology? That's what I was questioning: not that you couldn't identify faults in Apple and its devices, but that you seemed to be surprised that there's not a majority of people celebrating Apple.
But the headphone jack discussion? That's boring. That's old hat. That's been done to death and back again. Meh.
It's an ongoing issue, as more and more manufacturers make the decision to leave out the headphone jack from their latest smartphone - or to leave it in. Every time a manufacturer designs a smartphone now, they have to actively decide to include a headphone jack, rather than it being a default option. We need to keep this issue live for designers making these decisions today, tomorrow, and next week.
Again, it's not the criticism that surprises me, it's the contempt. Tildes is supposed to be better for in-depth discussion, right? So why are people still talking down to me here as much as they...
So why be surprised, when a majority of phone buyers don't buy iPhones, and there are known problems with Apple's devices, that most people can find a reason to criticise Apple and its ideology?
Again, it's not the criticism that surprises me, it's the contempt. Tildes is supposed to be better for in-depth discussion, right? So why are people still talking down to me here as much as they do on Reddit when I pipe up and say "I like my iPhone?"
My point is I don't see contempt. Just disagreement (which might be born out of skepticism and cynicism towards Apple and their fans rather than contempt for them).
My point is I don't see contempt. Just disagreement (which might be born out of skepticism and cynicism towards Apple and their fans rather than contempt for them).
Yes you've made that clear, and I understand disliking Apple, their products, or their marketing tactics, but I don't know what you mean by "skepticism."
Yes you've made that clear, and I understand disliking Apple, their products, or their marketing tactics, but I don't know what you mean by "skepticism."
Looking at some statistics I just found via Google, I see that Apple's market share of smartphones (which is what we're discussing in this thread) is only 12.1%, and has never reached 20%...
Looking at some statistics I just found via Google, I see that Apple's market share of smartphones (which is what we're discussing in this thread) is only 12.1%, and has never reached 20% (honestly, I thought their market share was higher than that!). This means that more than 80% of people are not buying iPhones.
Suddenly, I understand why @kraetos can perceive internet forums as anti-Apple: more than 4 in 5 people don't buy Apple phones. Apple iPhone users are a minority.
worldwide, Apple has no way to compete with the market share of Android, just because there are Android Smartphones for under 100 USD and people without a lot of money are not able to buy them. I...
worldwide, Apple has no way to compete with the market share of Android, just because there are Android Smartphones for under 100 USD and people without a lot of money are not able to buy them. I would be more interested in the market share of top smartphones or maybe smartphones sold in the US.
I love Apple products because of the usability they offer and I only got my first apple product since my ipod touch last year. I don't have an iPhone though, I use a Google Pixel. I never had an iPhone, but I will probably get one next, just because I am sick of not getting any updates after 1 or 2 years.
You say that like Apple couldn't make a cheap phone themselves to compete in that low-end market. They choose not to make anything in that price range; it's not forced on them.
Apple has no way to compete with the market share of Android, just because there are Android Smartphones for under 100 USD
You say that like Apple couldn't make a cheap phone themselves to compete in that low-end market. They choose not to make anything in that price range; it's not forced on them.
That's apparently their market strategy. They want to be a luxury brand, although they don't really admit it outright. But when you release three new phones and only one of them is sub-$1000, it's...
That's apparently their market strategy. They want to be a luxury brand, although they don't really admit it outright. But when you release three new phones and only one of them is sub-$1000, it's quite clear you're not really going after the "everyman" market. It's cachet; it's status. You rocking an iPhone means you can afford an iPhone, and there's a market for that exclusivity, just like there is for high-end watches or expensive jewelry. I think it's a bit less than coincidence that the one new color they released on their highest-end phones is gold.
If they went after the low-end market, suddenly you have every meth head in the 'hood carrying an apple-branded phone, and that cachet is cheapened, if not lost. Apple clearly doesn't want that market.
Edit: changed link to the one I was looking for in the first place.
I'm curious about what you think "admitting" that they are a luxury brand looks like. I'm equally curious how you square the $449 iPhone 7 with the idea that Apple is a luxury brand.
That's apparently their market strategy. They want to be a luxury brand, although they don't really admit it outright.
I'm curious about what you think "admitting" that they are a luxury brand looks like. I'm equally curious how you square the $449 iPhone 7 with the idea that Apple is a luxury brand.
$449 is still quite a high price for a smartphone, higher than the overwhelming majority sold. If that's their cheapest model, it's pretty safe to call them a luxury band. Not that there's...
$449 is still quite a high price for a smartphone, higher than the overwhelming majority sold. If that's their cheapest model, it's pretty safe to call them a luxury band.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. Apple is free to target whatever market segment they want. I don't think anyone can argue their strategy has been unsuccessful.
Breitling markets themselves as "Swiss Luxury Watches." Rolex uses the exact same terminology. I've never seen Apple say an iPhone is a "Chinese Luxury Phone." That's what I meant by "admitting"...
Breitling markets themselves as "Swiss Luxury Watches." Rolex uses the exact same terminology. I've never seen Apple say an iPhone is a "Chinese Luxury Phone." That's what I meant by "admitting" it.
@spctrvl said it right: $449 isn't a cheapie Metro PCS phone that you get for virtually nothing. I use Cricket as my carrier, and they'll give you a free smartphone with certain qualifications. Apple isn't in that market. Their phones are never "on sale" or discounted in any way, unless it's been a year and new models come out to supplant the phone.
Interesting perspective. So just so I understand, you're saying it's disingenuous that Apple doesn't explicitly identify the iPhone as a "luxury phone" given that you can't get an iPhone on sale...
Interesting perspective. So just so I understand, you're saying it's disingenuous that Apple doesn't explicitly identify the iPhone as a "luxury phone" given that you can't get an iPhone on sale from Apple, and that they don't have a model that costs less than $200 or so?
I did not say it was disingenuous, and I'm not sure that analysis of my comment is applying a charitable interpretation, one of the stated goals for content on Tildes. In reply, I do not think...
I did not say it was disingenuous, and I'm not sure that analysis of my comment is applying a charitable interpretation, one of the stated goals for content on Tildes.
In reply, I do not think it's disingenuous. Their marketing department is genius, and I'd never claim otherwise. They know how to capture an audience, cater to it, and nurture it. Just so you can "remember the person," I dropped $1240.92 on an iPhone last Friday (iPhone Xs, 256 GB, plus tax) that I'll be picking up this Friday. I haven't owned an iPhone since the 3GS, but I'm just tired of Android; I'm tired of slow or non-existent updates—I was just ready for a change. Do I think that's a ton of money to spend on a phone? I do. But if I keep it two years, it'll cost me $1.70/day, and I'll still have a phone that's worth quite a bit for sale or on trade-in. If I keep it for one year, it'd cost me $3.70/day, and I'll have a phone that's worth quite a bit, so the next phone's price is mitigated considerably.
I'm just trying to understand your position, but it's eluding me because some of your word choices are somewhat contradictory. You said: "Want" implies ambition without success, and "admit"...
I'm just trying to understand your position, but it's eluding me because some of your word choices are somewhat contradictory. You said:
They want to be a luxury brand, although they don't really admit it outright.
"Want" implies ambition without success, and "admit" implies they are hiding something. But the rest of your comments make a pretty cogent case for "Apple is a luxury brand."
Look at their market share by wealth, though, and its a different story. They've never had the market penetration that google does (although there was a time where they did compete to some...
Look at their market share by wealth, though, and its a different story. They've never had the market penetration that google does (although there was a time where they did compete to some extent), and yet many apps are still developed apple first, android later.
Some of this is due to the simplicity of developing for apple over android, but a lot of it has to do with the fact that apple users, by a large, are more willing to pay for an app because they have more disposable income.
Interestingly, it's been theorized for some time that piracy actually helps sales because the people who aren't going to pay aren't going to pay, but it provides "try before buy" access that...
Interestingly, it's been theorized for some time that piracy actually helps sales because the people who aren't going to pay aren't going to pay, but it provides "try before buy" access that otherwise wouldn't exist.
Agreed. I was hopeful when these threads on tildes finally started popping up we'd be able to have reasonable discussions instead of having people being shut down because their opinions are wrong,...
Agreed. I was hopeful when these threads on tildes finally started popping up we'd be able to have reasonable discussions instead of having people being shut down because their opinions are wrong, which is exactly what happened in this thread and every other technology-related subreddit on Reddit.
Oh well, I guess I'll just wait for an ~tech.apple to appear. It's honestly quite stifling.
I don't see people shutting anyone down, though. I don't see anyone telling other people that their opinion is wrong, I just see people disagreeing with each other, which I don't see as a bad...
I don't see people shutting anyone down, though. I don't see anyone telling other people that their opinion is wrong, I just see people disagreeing with each other, which I don't see as a bad thing. That's sort of how discussion boards are supposed to work, no?
Both sides have their arguments and both are being allowed to share them. I don't see any insults, no tag abuse, no mocking...
Unless we have a different understanding of shutting someone else down.
How about this? As if, me, incapable of making my own purchasing decisions, was forced like some bleating sheep, to purchase a product I had no choice in? If you're on the opposing end of this...
How about this?
If wireless headphones are so great, why didn't you buy them before Apple forced you to?
As if, me, incapable of making my own purchasing decisions, was forced like some bleating sheep, to purchase a product I had no choice in? If you're on the opposing end of this conversation, would you feel like that's a fair response?
If it was me in charge, I'd make something like ~tech.smartphones, to nurture discussions around the technology itself rather than around brands (and prevent hivemind-formation).
Oh well, I guess I'll just wait for an ~tech.apple to appear.
If it was me in charge, I'd make something like ~tech.smartphones, to nurture discussions around the technology itself rather than around brands (and prevent hivemind-formation).
I don't think it's anything specific to Apple. I've never used an iPhone, but I'm just as annoyed at Google for removing the headphone jack from the Pixel 2.
I don't think it's anything specific to Apple. I've never used an iPhone, but I'm just as annoyed at Google for removing the headphone jack from the Pixel 2.
Sure, but you could live the same life WITH a headphone jack. Sure, you like bluetooth, but give one good reason to remove the headphone jack. It's not a mutually exclusive concept.
Sure, but you could live the same life WITH a headphone jack. Sure, you like bluetooth, but give one good reason to remove the headphone jack. It's not a mutually exclusive concept.
I rarely used the headphone jack before Apple removed it and have not once missed it since it was removed. I even bought one of these just in case. In two years I have literally never needed to...
Sure, you like bluetooth, but give one good reason to remove the headphone jack.
I rarely used the headphone jack before Apple removed it and have not once missed it since it was removed. I even bought one of these just in case. In two years I have literally never needed to use the adapter.
I'll take the extra hour of battery life and the improved waterproofing over something I almost never used, particularly considering that Apple's given me a superior replacement in the form of AirPods. It's not even a contest, actually.
As a contrast, I've had use the dongle (or wish I had it on me) multiple times because my ~$250 Bose headphones died. Keeping up with charging them is too much of a hassle.
As a contrast, I've had use the dongle (or wish I had it on me) multiple times because my ~$250 Bose headphones died. Keeping up with charging them is too much of a hassle.
Well, AirPods are a quality of life improvement for me; and I consider that justification enough with my commentary about my satchel. It's like, sure you could live life WITH a bike instead of a...
Well, AirPods are a quality of life improvement for me; and I consider that justification enough with my commentary about my satchel. It's like, sure you could live life WITH a bike instead of a car. But people still buy cars; and people still buy bikes; so I agree, it's not mutually exclusive, and I never said it was.
Apple is clearly on a path of eliminating all external ports and buttons on their devices. It makes water resistance easier to build in. It allows for thinner products (yes, you can question whether this is worthwhile, but it doesn't matter, that's what Apple is seeking out, and they know it sells, take a look at iPhone sales).
I personally don't need a headphone jack, so its removal benefits me in these ways.
His point is, you can live a better life with a car without needing to get rid of your bike. Having a car doesn't mean you have to get rid of your bike. You can perfectly have both. Samsung...
It's like, sure you could live life WITH a bike instead of a car.
His point is, you can live a better life with a car without needing to get rid of your bike. Having a car doesn't mean you have to get rid of your bike. You can perfectly have both.
It makes water resistance easier to build in.
Samsung flagship phones have better water resistance IP68 vs IP67 while still keeping the jack. And a company with Apple's money can perfectly do it too if they want to, they do charge a pretty swift premium for their phones after all. They just want to sell you their AirPods.
I personally don't need a headphone jack, so its removal benefits me in these ways.
Using Airpods benefit you, that's perfectly clear so far. But does the lack of a jack benefit you?
Bluetooth headphones can be convenient (I have a cheap pair that I use occasionally), but that doesn't provide any justification for removing a headphone jack. Having a headphone jack isn't...
Bluetooth headphones can be convenient (I have a cheap pair that I use occasionally), but that doesn't provide any justification for removing a headphone jack. Having a headphone jack isn't preventing you from using bluetooth headphones, removing it is just removing a proven, reliable option.
I've been using a cheaper Bluetooth headset I got off of Amazon a while ago. It actually has a little mini-jack port to convert it back to a wired headset and I like it a lot for that very reason....
I've been using a cheaper Bluetooth headset I got off of Amazon a while ago. It actually has a little mini-jack port to convert it back to a wired headset and I like it a lot for that very reason. Wired audio doesn't have problems with stuttering, delays, or need to be charged but sometimes the wire just gets in the way or forces me to lug the phone around when I don't want to. Bluetooth shines in those cases, but no so much in most others, in my opinion.
In this I echo the general sentiment: headphone jacks should stay, there's no real replacement for them, Bluetooth serves a wholly different function. And it simply doesn't make sense to fracture a standard that's both so ubiquitous and reliable.
Usually with those it's just a standard 3.5mm jack, so it's purely audio. They can keep your headphones functioning when the battery runs dry but it can't charge them back up.
Usually with those it's just a standard 3.5mm jack, so it's purely audio. They can keep your headphones functioning when the battery runs dry but it can't charge them back up.
That's what I meant, seems like you'd be missing half the advantage of going wired if your headphones could still die while listening to music. Good to know.
They can keep your headphones functioning when the battery runs dry but it can't charge them back up.
That's what I meant, seems like you'd be missing half the advantage of going wired if your headphones could still die while listening to music. Good to know.
I found this article very poorly written. There are several unbacked claims here. Q: Why is Apple a tech leader? A: Because they tend to be early to push new technologies—and sometimes the tech...
I found this article very poorly written.
While it’s understandable that many look to Apple as a leader in the tech world, in this case the headphone jack fiasco was nothing more than an attempt at a hostile takeover of the headphone industry, and Android may be the only thing standing in the way of that.
There are several unbacked claims here.
Q: Why is Apple a tech leader?
A: Because they tend to be early to push new technologies—and sometimes the tech they adopt early doesn’t stick (I think it’s still too early to say if wireless headphones will win out).
Q: Why did Apple decide to drop the headphone jack from its iPhones?
A: Because the headphone jack was limiting the physical designs of their devices in addition to audio quality.
Q: Was it a "fiasco" when Apple removed the headphone jack from their flagship iPhones?
A: No—and they even provide a Lighting to aux adapter if you want.
Q: Is Android standing the way of a "hostile takeover of the headphone industry"?
A: This is an emphatic no—Android is an operating system, and can’t stand in the way of anything. This statement belies a fundamental lack of understanding of the subject matter. I can’t take anything else in the article seriously after this.
Did I say 'courage'? No, I didn’t. You’re arguing in bad faith if you’re going to put words in my mouth. The Lightning cables, Ear Pods, and Lightning-to-aux adapters that Apple sells (and...
Did I say 'courage'? No, I didn’t. You’re arguing in bad faith if you’re going to put words in my mouth. The Lightning cables, Ear Pods, and Lightning-to-aux adapters that Apple sells (and provides along with iPhones depending on the model) provide a DAC which has to be built into the device if the device outputs to a 3.5 mm jack. Apple was able to save space in the handset by offloading the DAC. This is absolutely an advantage for their physical design.
From your linked video:
So let’s say as a third party manufacturer, I want to design a new car charger, docking station, or charging cable for the iPhone 7 using that Lighting port. I get to pay Apple royalties for each cable I make, even though Apple is not producing or manufacturing that cable.
This is a horrible argument. I’ve used Lightning port iPhones in my 2012 model car (made before the Lightning port even existed) simply by using the Lightning to USB type A charging cable that Apple provided to me along with my iPhone when I bought it. 3rd party docks/cables etc. don’t need to use the Lightning port at all. If they want to, they are free to pay Apple for the license to use them, but it’s absolutely not necessary! The only thing Apple is forcing on anyone is that if you want the ability to charge the handset and use the port for data at the same time, you have to buy a 3rd party splitter cable. In my 2+ years of using an iPhone 7 and then an iPhone X, I have never once needed to do this. Obviously, my use cases may be different from others, but I really don’t think it’s too big a deal if you are spending the money on an iPhone (a luxury handset) to also buy a $10 splitter cable if you really need that functionality.
Edit: I also think there’s some hilarious irony in linking to a Youtube video ripping Apple for being greedy money-grubbers when there’s a 'Buy JerryRigEverything merchandise' link right below the video.
Memories of almost traumatic yet liberating experience of converting an included Nokia headset into a 3.5 mm jack dongle back in school days definitely suggest the answer is no. The first phone...
Memories of almost traumatic yet liberating experience of converting an included Nokia headset into a 3.5 mm jack dongle back in school days definitely suggest the answer is no. The first phone with a headphone jack later was a breakthrough. And the contemporary removal of it feels like poking a sore place.
Friend's Airpods are super comfy and work amazingly with my somewhat old Android phone, but they still cannot compare to that nice click of Porta Pro being plugged in phone before an audio storm of joy.
I'm my case it definitely wasn't, Google has lost me as a customer. I bought a g1 pixel and have been riding the no questions asked warranty hoping they would come to their senses and bring back...
I'm my case it definitely wasn't, Google has lost me as a customer. I bought a g1 pixel and have been riding the no questions asked warranty hoping they would come to their senses and bring back the jack for g3. I will probably be getting a Samsung s9, first non-google phone since the Nexus one. It's a bit of a bummer because I'm a big fan of stock android.
haha He beat me to it! :)
I disagree. I broke a set of wired headphones once, and used a back-up pair of Bluetooth headphones for a while until I could replace the wired headphones. My biggest problem with the Bluetooth headphones was that the signal kept dropping out. Only for fractions of a second at a time, but it was noticeable enough to be annoying. And when I walked through a busy area like a train station (on my way to work), the frequency of drop-outs increased to a few times per minute. I never get drop-outs with wired headphones!
Secondarily, there was the issue of having to remember to charge my headphones: another annoyance.
Exactly. This has been their strategy since before iPhones existed. To use their iPod, you had to install their iTunes software to buy music - because iPods would play only music downloaded from iTunes. You weren't allowed to buy music elsewhere: Apple wants to be your gatekeeper to all online content. They want to lock you into an ecosystem to get 100% share of your wallet (as the banking industry says about their very similar strategy).
Technically you were allowed to buy music from elsewhere, since iTunes could add MP3 files from local storage or CDs (that's how I used to do it for the longest time) but it was far less convenient, and it didn't really change the fact that your iDevice was chained to whichever computer you configured it on. So if you just wanted to grab some tunes from a friend's place or on your laptop you had to have a USB key ready.
I stand corrected. (I have never bought or owned an iDevice of any kind, precisely because of Apple's gatekeeping strategy.)
Apple didn't even sell music for the first two years of the iPod's life. They'd have been a bit of a downer without the ability to play files from other sources ;)
I'm not disagreeing with any of your points, but please don't judge all Bluetooth headphones by whatever janky crap you own. My AirPods never drop out, ever. Not walking thru a busy convention center, not leaving my phone at my desk and walking all over my house, never. It's magic.
That's lovely, but I shouldn't have to pay $160 to have such capability. The price is what it all comes down to for me. Would also be nice if the listening device I use for my phone worked with my Roku remote headphone jack - I can listen to my TV quietly over headphones while my wife is sleeping thanks to that nifty jack.
I'm on the best iPhone with a headphone jack (iPhone 6S+ with max storage), and I will probably give Apple up after this one dies. I want headphones that work on all devices, I want a car stereo that can play without an Apple adapter, and I want to be able to charge while I listen using my audiophile headphones without an Apple adapter. It's insane they are forcing consumers into this decision, but iPhone 7 is where they lost me.
I bought one of the cheapest pair of wireless earbuds on Amazon because the headphone jack on my super-cheap Alcatel phone completely quit working. I think they were $13. They work flawlessly. I really only use them for cutting grass and other yard work, but I've never had an issue. I just plug them in when I get back in the house, and they're charged in about fifteen minutes.
If your car is relatively new (around '13 or newer), it likely provides bluetooth for music, which, despite my initial reservations, is really, really handy. Jump in the car, flip over to my music app, and it's already connected and playing.
I'm a bit of an "audiophile" myself, although I hate that term because I have minimal investment—but I care a lot about sound quality. I don't use my phone for my good headphones. In fact, they never leave the house.
I still do miss the headphone jack at times, but it's becoming more and more rare. I don't even think it's that I've "learned to live with it," I think it's more that "the alternatives aren't as bad as they initially seemed."
Sadly, my car is a 2011. If I don't have a phone with a headphone jack, then I have two options: 1) keep an adapter in my car for the aux cable at all times, 2) plug into the USB jack straight to the stereo but lose the ability to charge at a normal speed.
You have a third option: get a cheap bluetooth adapter like this. I paid $14 for mine a year and a half ago, so there might be newer, better models out there now (I'd search if you're going to get one), but the majority of them are in that price range. Works great, with the added bonus that you can carry it to any rental car and not have to figure out the car's bluetooth pairing.
How's the audio quality on it?
It largely depends on which version of bluetooth it runs. The one I linked is 4.1, which is pretty good for music. I mainly use it for podcasts and recorded satellite radio, so it serves me well, but I've used it for music and on my car's relatively crappy speaker setup, you can't tell a difference from wired.
If you're picky about it, there may be 5.0 (or whatever the new standard is) models available now. I can do some research later if you need one.
You can't use your airpods on an airplane though, right?
EDIT: I just realized I responded to the wrong comment, but oh well, it's still vaguely on topic.
I guarantee you the majority of people don't even put their phone in airplane mode. The FCC guidelines on bandwidth don't have overlap between what airplanes use and cell phones use anyways, so it's a bit silly that they still do this.
Well it may be silly and people may not listen, but I'm the kind of person who prefers to follow rules imposed by people who have my life in their hands.
I would venture to say that's almost always a good policy
Is that true? Never heard that claim before.
Well you're supposed to put your device in airplane mode, right? You can't use bluetooth in airplane mode.
You can turn BT back on after you turn on airplane mode in the US, but I know some other countries make you wait until you're up to cruising altitude to turn it back on.
Whenever I'm flying they just say you should turn off your devices or put them in airplane mode. They don't make any exceptions for bluetooth. Maybe it's just an EU thing.
Of course you can simply ignore what they say, but that doesn't feel right.
I just put my iPhone in airplane mode with bluetooth still on. No idea if that means AirPods will work, but I assume so.
Ramble warning. Skip to the end for the TLDR.
I believe there's a place for both Bluetooth and wired headsets.
Personally, I've had many pairs of bluetooth headphones. Every single one of them with more than one fault, and sometimes very annoying to use. But I always come back to them, since they do have a set of advantages that the wired ones don't have while also escaping certain shortcomings typical of the latter.
The signal dropping out sort of depends on the pair of bluetooth headphones. It is an issue with very cheap headphones. To the point of not being able to have my phone in my back pocket because the signal would drop constantly, and being forced to have the phone on my front left pocket (yeah, the right didn't work). But that was only with one pair of headphones and mostly only when they were low on battery. So, I wouldn't say this is an issue pertaining to all BT (bluetooth) HP (headphones).
You never get drop-outs with wired heaphones, but you also never snatch them violently out of your pocket or hand because they got caught up in some door handle or chair or anything that's sticking out while you're walking. That violent and sudden interruption that most of the times ends up with your phone on the floor and you have to examine it for scratches and other kinds of damages (and checking the wired HP, too which can sometimes completely break if they're on the cheaper end) is one of the most annoying things of using wired HP.
Plus, there's the whole noise traveling through vibrations on wired HP. Personally, I don't even notice it if I've been using wired for a while. But when you switch from BT to wired, oh boy do you feel it. And it's a very annoying thing to deal with. Specially in winter (using wired HP with winter clothes is the worst, nevermind if you wear a laptop bag).
Regarding the charging of BT HP, it can be more or less comfortable depending on the individual pair of HP. You have those who need to be directly connected to a USB charger (which is more often than not micro-USB, meaning you have to use a specific cable for them and not your smartphone's) and you have those who can be easily left on a charging dock. And even then there's a difference between those who need to basically be charged every day vs those who can go days and weeks without needing a charge (the most expensive ones of course). Oh, and there's those BT HP who do have cables between the two units, who aren't as uncomfortable as completely wired headphones, but not as comfortable as the ones completely devoid of cables either, then again, the ones who don't have any cables are quite prone to falling out of your ears, without any cable preventing them from falling to the floor.
TLDR: Overall, I feel like both have a place right now. For the future, I can only see wired ones going away. But for that, the BT options have to improve a lot. Which isn't going to happen for the next few years.
PS: Off-topic, but is it only me or buying cheap BT HPs on Amazon is a pain in the ass? They either come broken, or break after a very brief period of time. Alternatively, most wired cheap ones break after 6 months no matter how good you take care of them.
How do you think I broke my wired headphones in the first place? ;)
Yes, this is a risk, but I still prefer it over the dodgy sound quality I get with Bluetooth headphones.
Can I question if, pragmatically, this is really a bad thing? How does it affect you in day to day life? Isn't this nearly every for-profit company's goal? If Google isn't right now, they're certainly heading in that direction: google continues to get more restrictive with its Android platform, more components are closed source. I mean, you no doubt saw just recently Google exposed their ability to remotely update consumer's phone settings. This isn't possible on the iOS platform, where Apple sees consumer data as a liability, not a profit-generation technique.
I've never once found myself constrained by being inside the "Apple walled garden". Sure, I give them money for that. I pay for Apple Music. I buy iCloud storage. At the end of the day however, I don't feel hard-done-by, or manipulated. I get a quality experience that is worth the money I pay. With Apple, I'm buying a product. With google, I am the product.
What if Apple doesn't get the distribution rights to a song, movie, show, or book you want? You're relying on Apple to get the rights to all available content, but that's not possible. You're therefore limited in what content you can access via Apple. And if you choose to go outside their walled garden to obtain some content, they're going to make it as difficult as possible to bring that content into their precious garden.
Yes, but that doesn't mean we should blindly accept it.
I have a large collection of music. Some of it is from independent artists who aren't even signed to a label. I obviously won't find their music on iTunes. It's very simple to add it to iT and put it on my phone. Same with any other file I want there, if it exists, I'll get it on my phone.
There are music players on the app store that will draw music/audio directly from a Google Drive account. No checking for DRM, no restrictions (that I've found). We've heard all the way back to the earliest iPhones and even iPods that "they're not going to let you put the stuff you want on your phone," but it's never really proven true. They may want to put up appearances, but in action, it's very simple to work around any limitations.
It feels like the market is moving in that direction. And for that I blame Apple. Another reason I'm not a fan of them.
Even if they're not an Android phone, they have the ability to completely direct the market. The most recent examples of it being the infamous notch and the headphone jack removal.
Phone manufacturers just seem to follow Apple, for good and bad. And it's a very frustrating thing. Because often it seems they're being held back by this.
Not sure if Apple is to blame here. You said it yourself, Apple doesn't make Android devices. Android OEMs do. You should redirect your anger towards the OEMs for copying Apple without thinking about their consumers. Apple knows their consumers well enough to make such a move knowing their sales won't take a hit. Companies like HTC attempted to remove it as well but because their audience is not 1 to 1 with Apples they have suffered heavily.
I'm a simple man, I plug thing into computer, open folder and put stuff into it. Apple does not let me do simple things and treats me like I'm stupid.
True, and an iPhone is probably more secure than a phone running a generic Android ROM, but it's not a binary option. Apple is a completely closed off ecosystem. Even with Android being Google's version of "open-source", it's still much more open: I can run an open-source, privacy-respecting ROM (like Lineage OS), without Google Play services (or with MicroG, an open-source, privacy-respecting alternative), using apps from an open-source app store (F-Droid). AFAIK, the most you can do on an iOS device is jailbreak it, which doesn't help that much in knowing what your device is doing.
I think it is. In the sense that I believe it is anti-consumer. I believe the users should have the options to choose as much as they want, and be able to combine all sorts of products to better fit their usage habits and pocket.
Now, I can accept the existence of an ecosystem per se, like Samsung products working better with each other than they work with LG products. What I cannot accept is Samsung products downright not being able to work with LG products because of Samsung's arrogance.
And, as I said in another comment, one of the most frustrating things about this subject is Apple's massive ability to influence the market, which translates into Google slowly but surely changing their system to resemble Apple's. Which, in my opinion, is a negative outcome for the consumer.
I believe when you artificially limit a users's choices in a way that directl benefits you and keeps the competence at bay, you're kind of being an asshole.
And don't even get me started on Apple's war against the right to repair.
Bluetooth still has a long way to go, but you also get what you pay for. You can have a wireless headset with great sound, no cut-offs and a battery that lasts for a week, but it's above $100 for sure.
I only ever like the Macbook. It's their only product that was worth anything. The hardware was great and the OS had all yhe great Unix built in and supported proprietary software.
I tried an iPhone and hated it. It always tagged my locatuon no matter what. It limited the apps I could use. I couldnt access the file system. And a big one was, I never got an alert when I had an mms message when my data was off. I always have access to wifi. So I never turnes my data on unless I had an mms. When I went to an iphone I never got them because how imessage worked. And even with it off it didn't work.. Went back to Android and got my alerts fine.
Going to remind everyone of this EFF article from 2016: "Analog: The Last Defense Against DRM". Ditching the headphone jack gives Apple complete control over every aspect of audio on your device.
The argument that it was to make the phone thinner is complete nonsense (see the guy who added a headphone jack to an iPhone 7). If they cared, they would've at least added a second USB port and made dongles cheaper, but really, they're just pushing people to bluetooth.
Honestly, at least for me, nestled nicely into the Apple ecosystem with the phone, the watch, and my AirPods, it's been totally worth the upgrade from a wired set of headphones. I think I encountered, one time, with my iPhone, where prior to owning AirPods, I wanted to charge and listen to music at the same time, in my 2+ years of device ownership. The "FOMO anxiety" of not having a 3.5mm never got to me, really.
And now, anecdotally, one of the biggest banes of my commute in the morning was taking my satchel on and off from work, to the train station, off the train, into the car, etc. multiple times per trip. This conflicted with the wired cord's existence frequently. AirPods completely removed that problem for me.
Don't think I can go back to wired headphones. AirPods sound great: I'm not using them in a studio-quality environment where I need perfect sound reproduction. I'm walking around traffic, in public, on the train, etc. I just need a decent pair of wireless headphones, and that's what they are.
If wireless headphones are so great, why didn't you buy them before Apple forced you to?
Oh, I did. And they were all garbage: latency issues, short battery life, bad sound quality, bulky, etc, etc. Had I not upgraded to an iPhone 7 I would have bought AirPods to use with my iPhone 6S anyways.
AirPods are the best "carry them with you" headphones I've ever owned. I'll never go back to wires for my portable headphones. I have a pair of AKG 702s connected to a USB DAC on my desk, but that's obviously a totally different story and isn't a portable setup. For portable, nothing beats AirPods.
I was trying to make a point to @lukeify! Stop undermining my oh-so-smart leading questions with your sensible answers. :)
Oh right, sorry! Uh, never mind everyone, I'm just a brainwashed Apple drone. Carry on, carry on.
Given the vote counts on these threads, it seems like no one here is going to be swayed with any arguments so I'll just shut up and let you continue this thread without my input. :)
Tildes is just as Apple-hostile as Reddit is, if not more so. It's a shame.
Maybe it's not just "Tildes" or "Reddit". Maybe there's some actual basis to people's dislike of Apple.
Of course there is. I'm not claiming otherwise. But it's not just that people dislike Apple—it's that they demonstrate utter contempt for people who like Apple. Look at the assumption baked into your own language:
Forced me too. As if us Apple lemmings are too stupid to make our own decisions about how we want to connect our headphones to our devices, and we need Apple to show us the way, or we are lost. This language completely discounts the fact that I searched for good wireless headphones for years and went through three or four different kinds before finally being satisfied with AirPods. This language completely discounts the fact that Apple didn't force anyone to use wireless headphones, iPhone 7 came with wired earbuds and a lighting-to-TRRS adapter in the box. It completely discounts the fact that anyone can buy a lighting-to-TRRS adapter for $9 if they really want to use wired headphones. It glosses over all the nuances and options of the situation and distills it down to the implication that Apple told us what to do and we all happily went along with it, not applying any critical thought to the situation whatsoever.
Your second comment here has that same contempt in it too, as if I either don't know about or cannot perceive Apple's flaws. Of course I can. I could talk for days about how badly Apple's fouled up the MacBook lineup—and don't even get me started on the Mac Mini and Mac Pro situation. But the headphone jack discussion? That's boring. That's old hat. That's been done to death and back again. Meh.
The problem isn't dislike, the problem is that Apple fans get treated like morons because we have the audacity to like what we like. And you're my friend. You know me and you know I'm intelligent—imagine how much worse it is between strangers!
Please note that I did not ask that question about headphones to someone like you, who tried a variety of wireless headphones before settling on the one they liked the best. I asked it of someone who had used only wired headphones until Apple changed their iPhone design, and who was then forced to change over to wireless headphones whether they wanted to or not (dongle be damned - dongles are another problem, not a solution).
So why be surprised, when a majority of phone buyers don't buy iPhones, and there are known problems with Apple's devices, that most people can find a reason to criticise Apple and its ideology? That's what I was questioning: not that you couldn't identify faults in Apple and its devices, but that you seemed to be surprised that there's not a majority of people celebrating Apple.
It's an ongoing issue, as more and more manufacturers make the decision to leave out the headphone jack from their latest smartphone - or to leave it in. Every time a manufacturer designs a smartphone now, they have to actively decide to include a headphone jack, rather than it being a default option. We need to keep this issue live for designers making these decisions today, tomorrow, and next week.
Again, it's not the criticism that surprises me, it's the contempt. Tildes is supposed to be better for in-depth discussion, right? So why are people still talking down to me here as much as they do on Reddit when I pipe up and say "I like my iPhone?"
I don't see contempt, I see skepticism and cynicism.
Skepticism of what?
Of the other side's arguments.
I don’t understand the point you’re making. What exactly are you skeptical about?
My point is I don't see contempt. Just disagreement (which might be born out of skepticism and cynicism towards Apple and their fans rather than contempt for them).
Yes you've made that clear, and I understand disliking Apple, their products, or their marketing tactics, but I don't know what you mean by "skepticism."
I just meant it as in “not easily accepting (or believing?) the other side's argument”. Maybe it's not the right word.
That's not the way I would have phrased it, but I think I understand what you're saying now.
Well, it’s a bit odd that Apple continues to sell millions upon millions of devices then :)
Looking at some statistics I just found via Google, I see that Apple's market share of smartphones (which is what we're discussing in this thread) is only 12.1%, and has never reached 20% (honestly, I thought their market share was higher than that!). This means that more than 80% of people are not buying iPhones.
Suddenly, I understand why @kraetos can perceive internet forums as anti-Apple: more than 4 in 5 people don't buy Apple phones. Apple iPhone users are a minority.
worldwide, Apple has no way to compete with the market share of Android, just because there are Android Smartphones for under 100 USD and people without a lot of money are not able to buy them. I would be more interested in the market share of top smartphones or maybe smartphones sold in the US.
I love Apple products because of the usability they offer and I only got my first apple product since my ipod touch last year. I don't have an iPhone though, I use a Google Pixel. I never had an iPhone, but I will probably get one next, just because I am sick of not getting any updates after 1 or 2 years.
For whatever is worth, whenever I get an Android update, I'm thoroughly disappointed by the lack of anything remotely interesting or innovative.
I liked the recent additions to Android. For example the digital wellbeing, a button suggesting me to rotate and the new gesture navigation
You say that like Apple couldn't make a cheap phone themselves to compete in that low-end market. They choose not to make anything in that price range; it's not forced on them.
That's apparently their market strategy. They want to be a luxury brand, although they don't really admit it outright. But when you release three new phones and only one of them is sub-$1000, it's quite clear you're not really going after the "everyman" market. It's cachet; it's status. You rocking an iPhone means you can afford an iPhone, and there's a market for that exclusivity, just like there is for high-end watches or expensive jewelry. I think it's a bit less than coincidence that the one new color they released on their highest-end phones is gold.
If they went after the low-end market, suddenly you have every meth head in the 'hood carrying an apple-branded phone, and that cachet is cheapened, if not lost. Apple clearly doesn't want that market.
Edit: changed link to the one I was looking for in the first place.
I'm curious about what you think "admitting" that they are a luxury brand looks like. I'm equally curious how you square the $449 iPhone 7 with the idea that Apple is a luxury brand.
$449 is still quite a high price for a smartphone, higher than the overwhelming majority sold. If that's their cheapest model, it's pretty safe to call them a luxury band.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. Apple is free to target whatever market segment they want. I don't think anyone can argue their strategy has been unsuccessful.
Breitling markets themselves as "Swiss Luxury Watches." Rolex uses the exact same terminology. I've never seen Apple say an iPhone is a "Chinese Luxury Phone." That's what I meant by "admitting" it.
@spctrvl said it right: $449 isn't a cheapie Metro PCS phone that you get for virtually nothing. I use Cricket as my carrier, and they'll give you a free smartphone with certain qualifications. Apple isn't in that market. Their phones are never "on sale" or discounted in any way, unless it's been a year and new models come out to supplant the phone.
Interesting perspective. So just so I understand, you're saying it's disingenuous that Apple doesn't explicitly identify the iPhone as a "luxury phone" given that you can't get an iPhone on sale from Apple, and that they don't have a model that costs less than $200 or so?
I did not say it was disingenuous, and I'm not sure that analysis of my comment is applying a charitable interpretation, one of the stated goals for content on Tildes.
In reply, I do not think it's disingenuous. Their marketing department is genius, and I'd never claim otherwise. They know how to capture an audience, cater to it, and nurture it. Just so you can "remember the person," I dropped $1240.92 on an iPhone last Friday (iPhone Xs, 256 GB, plus tax) that I'll be picking up this Friday. I haven't owned an iPhone since the 3GS, but I'm just tired of Android; I'm tired of slow or non-existent updates—I was just ready for a change. Do I think that's a ton of money to spend on a phone? I do. But if I keep it two years, it'll cost me $1.70/day, and I'll still have a phone that's worth quite a bit for sale or on trade-in. If I keep it for one year, it'd cost me $3.70/day, and I'll have a phone that's worth quite a bit, so the next phone's price is mitigated considerably.
I'm just trying to understand your position, but it's eluding me because some of your word choices are somewhat contradictory. You said:
"Want" implies ambition without success, and "admit" implies they are hiding something. But the rest of your comments make a pretty cogent case for "Apple is a luxury brand."
Look at their market share by wealth, though, and its a different story. They've never had the market penetration that google does (although there was a time where they did compete to some extent), and yet many apps are still developed apple first, android later.
Some of this is due to the simplicity of developing for apple over android, but a lot of it has to do with the fact that apple users, by a large, are more willing to pay for an app because they have more disposable income.
And, because they just can't pirate apps the way Android users can.
Interestingly, it's been theorized for some time that piracy actually helps sales because the people who aren't going to pay aren't going to pay, but it provides "try before buy" access that otherwise wouldn't exist.
Here's a more reputable study by the EU if you don't trust the article.
Agreed. I was hopeful when these threads on tildes finally started popping up we'd be able to have reasonable discussions instead of having people being shut down because their opinions are wrong, which is exactly what happened in this thread and every other technology-related subreddit on Reddit.
Oh well, I guess I'll just wait for an ~tech.apple to appear. It's honestly quite stifling.
I don't see people shutting anyone down, though. I don't see anyone telling other people that their opinion is wrong, I just see people disagreeing with each other, which I don't see as a bad thing. That's sort of how discussion boards are supposed to work, no?
Both sides have their arguments and both are being allowed to share them. I don't see any insults, no tag abuse, no mocking...
Unless we have a different understanding of shutting someone else down.
How about this?
As if, me, incapable of making my own purchasing decisions, was forced like some bleating sheep, to purchase a product I had no choice in? If you're on the opposing end of this conversation, would you feel like that's a fair response?
If it was me in charge, I'd make something like ~tech.smartphones, to nurture discussions around the technology itself rather than around brands (and prevent hivemind-formation).
I agree, I can barely look at /r/android and /r/apple anymore because both are just huge echo chambers.
I don't know about r/Apple, but on r/Android I always find differing opinions. I think there's lots of different factions of people there.
I'm not sure ~tech.apple would do the trick... /r/Apple is hot garbage, and subtildes are way less distinct than subreddits.
I don't think it's anything specific to Apple. I've never used an iPhone, but I'm just as annoyed at Google for removing the headphone jack from the Pixel 2.
Sure, but you could live the same life WITH a headphone jack. Sure, you like bluetooth, but give one good reason to remove the headphone jack. It's not a mutually exclusive concept.
I rarely used the headphone jack before Apple removed it and have not once missed it since it was removed. I even bought one of these just in case. In two years I have literally never needed to use the adapter.
I'll take the extra hour of battery life and the improved waterproofing over something I almost never used, particularly considering that Apple's given me a superior replacement in the form of AirPods. It's not even a contest, actually.
As a contrast, I've had use the dongle (or wish I had it on me) multiple times because my ~$250 Bose headphones died. Keeping up with charging them is too much of a hassle.
Can't you leave the dongle attached to the cable of your headphones?
I use my headphones for more than just my phone, so no.
But you can take the adapter off the headphones as well?
But now my dongle's all loose.
Well, AirPods are a quality of life improvement for me; and I consider that justification enough with my commentary about my satchel. It's like, sure you could live life WITH a bike instead of a car. But people still buy cars; and people still buy bikes; so I agree, it's not mutually exclusive, and I never said it was.
Apple is clearly on a path of eliminating all external ports and buttons on their devices. It makes water resistance easier to build in. It allows for thinner products (yes, you can question whether this is worthwhile, but it doesn't matter, that's what Apple is seeking out, and they know it sells, take a look at iPhone sales).
I personally don't need a headphone jack, so its removal benefits me in these ways.
His point is, you can live a better life with a car without needing to get rid of your bike. Having a car doesn't mean you have to get rid of your bike. You can perfectly have both.
Samsung flagship phones have better water resistance IP68 vs IP67 while still keeping the jack. And a company with Apple's money can perfectly do it too if they want to, they do charge a pretty swift premium for their phones after all. They just want to sell you their AirPods.
Using Airpods benefit you, that's perfectly clear so far. But does the lack of a jack benefit you?
Bluetooth headphones can be convenient (I have a cheap pair that I use occasionally), but that doesn't provide any justification for removing a headphone jack. Having a headphone jack isn't preventing you from using bluetooth headphones, removing it is just removing a proven, reliable option.
I've been using a cheaper Bluetooth headset I got off of Amazon a while ago. It actually has a little mini-jack port to convert it back to a wired headset and I like it a lot for that very reason. Wired audio doesn't have problems with stuttering, delays, or need to be charged but sometimes the wire just gets in the way or forces me to lug the phone around when I don't want to. Bluetooth shines in those cases, but no so much in most others, in my opinion.
In this I echo the general sentiment: headphone jacks should stay, there's no real replacement for them, Bluetooth serves a wholly different function. And it simply doesn't make sense to fracture a standard that's both so ubiquitous and reliable.
Does the audio cable also charge/power the headphones or is purely for data?
Purely data, as far as I'm aware mini-jacks can't transport enough power to charge something.
Usually with those it's just a standard 3.5mm jack, so it's purely audio. They can keep your headphones functioning when the battery runs dry but it can't charge them back up.
That's what I meant, seems like you'd be missing half the advantage of going wired if your headphones could still die while listening to music. Good to know.
I found this article very poorly written.
There are several unbacked claims here.
Q: Why is Apple a tech leader?
A: Because they tend to be early to push new technologies—and sometimes the tech they adopt early doesn’t stick (I think it’s still too early to say if wireless headphones will win out).
Q: Why did Apple decide to drop the headphone jack from its iPhones?
A: Because the headphone jack was limiting the physical designs of their devices in addition to audio quality.
Q: Was it a "fiasco" when Apple removed the headphone jack from their flagship iPhones?
A: No—and they even provide a Lighting to aux adapter if you want.
Q: Is Android standing the way of a "hostile takeover of the headphone industry"?
A: This is an emphatic no—Android is an operating system, and can’t stand in the way of anything. This statement belies a fundamental lack of understanding of the subject matter. I can’t take anything else in the article seriously after this.
Was it really, though?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTSN4zWeQ0
Did I say 'courage'? No, I didn’t. You’re arguing in bad faith if you’re going to put words in my mouth. The Lightning cables, Ear Pods, and Lightning-to-aux adapters that Apple sells (and provides along with iPhones depending on the model) provide a DAC which has to be built into the device if the device outputs to a 3.5 mm jack. Apple was able to save space in the handset by offloading the DAC. This is absolutely an advantage for their physical design.
From your linked video:
This is a horrible argument. I’ve used Lightning port iPhones in my 2012 model car (made before the Lightning port even existed) simply by using the Lightning to USB type A charging cable that Apple provided to me along with my iPhone when I bought it. 3rd party docks/cables etc. don’t need to use the Lightning port at all. If they want to, they are free to pay Apple for the license to use them, but it’s absolutely not necessary! The only thing Apple is forcing on anyone is that if you want the ability to charge the handset and use the port for data at the same time, you have to buy a 3rd party splitter cable. In my 2+ years of using an iPhone 7 and then an iPhone X, I have never once needed to do this. Obviously, my use cases may be different from others, but I really don’t think it’s too big a deal if you are spending the money on an iPhone (a luxury handset) to also buy a $10 splitter cable if you really need that functionality.
Edit: I also think there’s some hilarious irony in linking to a Youtube video ripping Apple for being greedy money-grubbers when there’s a 'Buy JerryRigEverything merchandise' link right below the video.
Memories of almost traumatic yet liberating experience of converting an included Nokia headset into a 3.5 mm jack dongle back in school days definitely suggest the answer is no. The first phone with a headphone jack later was a breakthrough. And the contemporary removal of it feels like poking a sore place.
Friend's Airpods are super comfy and work amazingly with my somewhat old Android phone, but they still cannot compare to that nice click of Porta Pro being plugged in phone before an audio storm of joy.
I'm my case it definitely wasn't, Google has lost me as a customer. I bought a g1 pixel and have been riding the no questions asked warranty hoping they would come to their senses and bring back the jack for g3. I will probably be getting a Samsung s9, first non-google phone since the Nexus one. It's a bit of a bummer because I'm a big fan of stock android.
I thought all this was about Bluetooth beacons?
No.
Care to expand on your position?