
The End of Headphone Jacks, the Rise of DRM - dwaxe
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/09/end-headphone-jacks-rise-drm
======
AceJohnny2
_> When you plug an audio cable into a smartphone, it just works._

No, hardware-wise you're still going through a DAC, and the complex audio
subsystem of the OS is still deciding, upon receiving the connection signal,
to re-route the application audio through that headphone DAC. Or not. Jack or
Lightning doesn't change this.

 _> Apple can choose which manufacturers get to create Lightning-compatible
audio devices._

Sure. Or you can use the _included_ lightning-jack adapter and just use
normal, un-DRM'd headphones.

 _> Once Apple gets the ability to add DRM, the record industry gets the
ability to insist that Apple use it_

See my first point: the audio jack wasn't your last guardian of freedom.

 _> In other words, if it’s impossible to connect a speaker or other audio
device to an iPhone without Apple software governing it_

Use the adapter. And see the first point.

 _> the only way to connect an iPhone 7 to a recording or mixing device will
be over the suboptimal Bluetooth connection or a dongle provided by Apple._

Aha! They finally acknowledge the adapter! But do they acknowledge that it's
functionally identical to a built-in DAC?

 _> It's possible that iOS or specific apps will be able to disable the
dongle._

It's also possible the phone will halt and catch fire if you run an unapproved
app. But disabling the dongle would be moronic. For one thing, they'd be
incurring the wrath of ADA-defender groups.

 _> the converter you rely on to hear your phone on your hearing aids—just
became less useful._

See previous point.

 _> But you shouldn’t have to depend on a manufacturer’s permission to use its
hardware however you like._

Then don't even buy Apple. They've been locked down in so many other ways for
a long time.

Anyhow.

The simple explanation (see Occam's Razor) is that the designers noticed that
they were using valuable internal space for a redundant connector (considering
the hardware has been able to route audio over Lightning for a long time), and
figured they could reclaim that space for something else. Clearly, people
disagree with this change. The market will tell.

~~~
_ph_
And it is worth noting that Apple was rather pushing the record industry to go
off DRM and they finally succeeded in it.

~~~
jtrip
How did they succeed?

~~~
mcpherrinm
Rumour is, Amazon threatened to stop selling CDs for record companies who
wouldn't let them sell DRM-free MP3 files. Certainly they used their massive
sales presence to negotiate a deal with the record companies.

I think that was the major tipping point for DRM on music. Apple followed
after that.

~~~
criddell
I wish Amazon would take the same stand for ebooks.

~~~
mcpherrinm
My understanding, talking from a few folks who worked on that sort of thing,
is that they tried. Of course this is all rumours and chit-chat, so I have no
idea how true it is.

But the book publishers would apparently be happy for ebooks to go away,
Amazon to stop selling books, and their higher margin deals with Borders to
come back. So they called Amazon's bluff.

~~~
BatFastard
No shit!

The only DRM that should be on ebooks is there should only be one version of
it at a time. Just like a printed book.

------
agentgt
_> Besides, with only Apple earbuds currently supporting the Lightning audio
connection, the only way to connect an iPhone 7 to a recording or mixing
device will be over the suboptimal Bluetooth connection or a dongle provided
by Apple._

If you are recording stuff from your iPhone using the 3.5mm jack you are
already suboptimal perhaps even to the bluetooth.

For one you are going through the iPhone DAC (luckily the iphone DACs are
pretty descent) then through a generally crappy mini amplifier. If you are
doing this you are expecting suboptimal or really don't care about the music
quality. I'm not audiophile and hardly care about extreme music quality but If
you are mixing/recording you shouldn't be adding artifacts.

If you do care about quality recording you either tranfer content off the
iphone, bypass the phone jack (aka amplifier), or bypass even the DAC (and get
a stream directly). There are several products that already do this on the
market for the existing iPhone.

(It would be nice if some one would comment instead of downvoting. I don't
know if my comment is inappropriate or factually wrong... or just in the
way... seriously who records stuff off their iPhone? I'm not disagreeing with
the intent of the article just that I doubt audio/music experts are going to
be affected by this change)

~~~
ajross
> If you are recording stuff from your iPhone using the 3.5mm jack you are
> already suboptimal perhaps even to the bluetooth.

This isn't true at all, unless your hardware is legitimately bad. All but the
worst cables and amplifier chains can carry a 20 kHz signal (again, we're
talking audio here -- that's basically D/C to modern electronics) at better
than the ~45dB signal/noise ratio needed by the ADC on the other side.

And bluetooth isn't in general lossless. If the codec sets match, it's
theoretically possible to send a music file directly over an A2DP pipe, but in
practice I find almost all audio gets re-encoded for the transfer. In my car,
I actually get significantly clearer music with the jack than I do over
bluetooth.

~~~
ngoldbaum
Interesting, the reverse is true in my car, which probably says more about the
stock head unit than anything.

~~~
mmagin
I've observed a lot of ground loop problems in cars with a smartphone
connected to a stereo line input and also to a USB charger. Some of the USB
supply return currents pass through the shield of the audio cable and
nastiness ensues.

~~~
topranks
Yeah have had this too.

Still stick with the 3.5mm jack over Bluetooth for quality.

------
mead5432
I understand the argument that forcing content through a proprietary jack
opens the door for controlling said content and has huge implications for
hardware manufacturers and the way people use their stuff.

What I am having a hard time understanding is why is that any different than
the OS influencing what gets sent to the 3.5mm jack? It isn't like apps
running in iOS had to interact with APIs to do all the other things (e.g.
camera) but not the jack. Is it?

~~~
wfo
Apple has been very good at predicting (or perhaps directly causing) the
demise of certain technologies: the disk drive, the CD drive, the ethernet
port. They removed them much to the chagrin of many a loyal customer, and a
few years later they nearly ceased to exist across the entire industry (we're
still waiting on the ethernet port to go away but give it time).

How many times will it take you forgetting your dongle to just pony up and buy
the apple approved headphones? How long will it take you using the non-
default, non-apple, non-sleek, clunky dongle as you show off your fancy new
iPhone 7 to your friends before you decide it's got to go? What if they're
using it the apple-intended way?

How long will it take before nobody buys headphones anymore? A few generations
until they deprecate the dongle since nobody is using it? Where you can no
longer buy a $10 set of headphones at a drugstore and plug them in? Where
'every audio device must provide analog audio output in a universal format
that every device has been able to read since audio was invented or it is
functionally useless' is no longer a maxim?

Long-term, we are giving up a universal and open protocol that all devices
work with for a proprietary one. If you don't expect companies to abuse this
to make money and to stop you from doing what you want with your equipment,
well, I've got a bridge to sell you.

~~~
stinkytaco
Floppy disks, optical disks, ethernet were all replaced by unencumbered
standards and they all lead to a superior experience (well, maybe not
ethernet, but there are definitly advantages to wireless). If you're old
enough to have used a floppy disk drive you do not miss them.

Any time you introduce two way communication, you introduce the possibility of
DRM, but that does not guarantee it. I can still use my HDMI with my linux PC.
DRM is exclusive of the technology and I see no reason to hold back the
technology because we are worried about DRM.

There are lots of compelling reasons to dislike this change. Among them the
fact that I have a large investment in traditional headphones and devices that
work well with them (my iPod, my HTC Phone, my stereo, TV, piano, guitar amp,
etc etc etc), a decrease in quality, convenience and weight of wireless
headsets (how long do they work? How much do they weigh? Can I swim or workout
with them?). But DRM is not automatic.

~~~
dTal
>If you're old enough to have used a floppy disk drive you do not miss them.

I am, and I do. Floppies were ubiquitous, durable, reusable, and cheap enough
to give away. There's no replacement today - flash drives are the closest
thing but when was the last time someone handed you one with no expectation of
getting it back? Or bought a box of 50?

Sneakernet became much less vibrant with the death of the floppy.

~~~
astrodust
Flash drives cost almost nothing. I'm not going to lose any sleep over a $4
flash drive being given to someone and never getting it back. In terms of
inflation that's _cheaper_ than giving someone a floppy that cost $1.

Floppy disks were always terrible. Slow, unreliable, prone to failure at the
worst possible time. A simple magnet could trash them beyond repair. A bit of
water could render them unreadable. Leave it loose in your bag and it gets
bent? The thing was toast.

In the dying days of the floppy disk, around the time Apple introduced the
iMac with no floppy drive, they were already obsolete. 1.44MB could barely
hold anything useful at that time, most people doing any serious exchange had
already moved on to Zip drives because they held a more reasonable 100MB, or
CD-R since you could burn six times more than that onto them. If you had tiny
WordPerfect files then floppies were adequate, barely, but what kind of a
market is that?

So long floppy. You won't be missed.

------
michrassena
The discussion seems to be easily diverted into one about audio, but I think
something that I've not seen in discussion about this issue is the way some
app makers have used the analog audio port as a data jack. I've long had the
impression this was a workaround that was begrudgingly tolerated by Apple.
Though we've all heard about how heavy-handed their app store policies are, so
maybe I'm imagining things. But anyway, how does this new port affect the use
of those devices and how does it affect future devices? Are there Lightning-
only devices in the works, does Lightning allow the same sort of communication
that the analog port did?

Plugging the audio jack seems to be Apple closing a loophole. It's not at all
different from soldering RAM on motherboards to close the after-market RAM
upgrade loophole and force customers to decide at purchase time how they'll
use the computer in the future. Either they'll by too-low spec'd machine and
have to upgrade sooner, or buy high spec'd and pay more upfront. Either way
Apple wins. Their phones don't have card slots but my $50 LG phone does, so
it's not a question of capability. When you can add 32GB of storage for $15,
that money doesn't go to Apple.

The truly bothersome thing is how in denial people are about Apple's true
intentions, or maybe it's simply that they own Apple stock. Apple's a public
company, this is profit motivated pure and simple. Whether this move will also
coincide with the interests of the customer remains to be seen.

(edit for typos and clarification)

~~~
TheGRS
Yea the one that comes to mind for me would be the card swiper by Square and
other companies. That thing is amazing for small businesses, especially mobile
food carts. I'm starting to see many are moving over to the card reader
however, which I'm not sure if that is lightning-based or not.

Anyway, I think that is a great point. Smart phones need a good serial port
for 3rd-party hardware. USB would work, but everyone uses a different
standard. Is the lightning port any easier or more difficult to work with? I
imagine there's some sort of cost to using a proprietary port like that as
well.

~~~
throwanem
> Yea the one that comes to mind for me would be the card swiper by Square and
> other companies.

At the hardware level, that's a microphone. I don't see any a priori reason to
imagine it would fail to work via the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter, any more
than any other microphone would. It's less convenient mechanically because the
connection is no longer rigid, which may make swiping uncomfortable, but
that's the only drawback I see.

(And a sibling comment mentions having seen Apple explicitly call that out as
something which will keep working, so maybe we don't need to reason a priori
here.)

------
audunw
I'm not convinced. The record industry has already given up on DRM except for
streaming. A lot has to happen before DRM is applied to headphones.

Audio is not like video, where it's hard to get a decent copy from the screen.
With audio you can always just hook up to the analog output to the speakers
themselves and get a copy indistinguishable from the original

Fighting for DRM on headphones would be an uphill battle in so many ways, and
I'm not sure the record industry is stupid enough to waste the effort. They've
already seemed to learn what everyone know: piracy is solved by making the
content easily, universally available at a reasonable price. Piracy is
tedious. Just make a better service and the customers will come to you.

~~~
TD-Linux
The movie industry has not given up, and videos also produce audio.

~~~
FreeFull
In fact, you're not even allowed to press Bluray video discs commercially
without using Bluray's DRM

------
Yetanfou
That Apple wants their users to only use 'approved' peripherals with their
stuff (i.e. only those from which they get a share of the profits) under the
guise of 'user experience' and 'convenience' does not mean the rest of the
world will suddenly give up on their analogue headphones. Apple users will be
able to buy dongles (which have to be Apple-approved, so Apple will still get
their share of the profits leading to higher prices which Apple-users are
willing to bear to be part of that exclusive community) to connect their
analogue headphones, the rest of the world will happily keep plugging those
3.5mm jacks into their phones and tablets and radios and other devices.

As an aside, what a strange creature is man that he wants to replace a device
which is analogue by nature - ears not being digital after all - with a
digital counterpart which is clearly sub-optimal, overly complex and fraught
with potential restrictions. Meanwhile that same man will brag to his friends
about the analogue turn table he purchased on which he plays his analogue
records for that true analogue experience, claiming a much warmer sound that
is clearly superior to that produced by digital players which 'chop the sound
into bits which takes away from the experience'.

Bizarre, but profitable.

~~~
Longhanks
Except they clearly explained that they had interference problems with the new
camera and the analogue jack, which they don't have by using a digital port.
Conveniently, lightning was already there.

I agree the situation is not optimal, but please, stop this "they so greedy",
"this is only for selling adapters" etc. After all, it's apple's product, and
if it doesn't appeal to you, don't buy it. As you have stated yourself, the
rest of the industry might not even follow them here.

~~~
cryptoz
> and if it doesn't appeal to you, don't buy it

This kind of attitude isn't logical and is in fact extremely dangerous. It's
the same argument as "if you don't have anything to hide, why do you mind
being spied on by corporations and governments?"

It is entirely reasonable and in fact GOOD that people have strong opinions
about things even if they do not personally interact or care about the actual
thing. When an increasingly large amount of our society is shaped by Apple or
Facebook or Google, their decisions affect everyone, even those not directly
using those services or being customers.

Opinions matter. Don't tell people that they should shut up and ignore global
implications because they themselves wouldn't buy the product.

~~~
Longhanks
I'm definitely not trying to shut down opinions. It's perfectly fine to
dislike the removal of the headphone jack.

However, I'm sick of people calling out Apple for being what it is: A
capitalistic enterprise. Ultimately, of course they want to make more money.
But they have clearly explained reasons other than "sell adapters" (which
itself is kind of stupid, since they ship a free one with every iPhone). And
after all, they don't control the market. Heck, here in Germany they don't
even have 15% market share. It's not like they force the other 85% to drop the
headphone jack.

~~~
bluehazed
It's not OK to criticize capitalistic/user harmful practices anymore?

------
aroman
_> Besides, with only Apple earbuds currently supporting the Lightning audio
connection_

This is just factually incorrect.

Even before today's announcement lightning headphones have been available from
multiple independent headphone makers, including Bose and Phillips[0].

[https://www.google.com/amp/www.mirror.co.uk/tech/dont-
panic-...](https://www.google.com/amp/www.mirror.co.uk/tech/dont-panic-apple-
fans-already-8791870.amp?client=safari)

~~~
cr1895
You can also output digital audio to USB through Apple's Camera Connect Kit,
which allows you to use an external DAC/amp for whatever headphones you want.

~~~
brokenmachine
I wonder how long Apple will allow that loophole to exist...

------
csense
The lack of a headphone jack is simply yet another excellent reason not to buy
an iPhone. What confuses me is why so many people continue to buy Apple
products when they're overpriced, locked-down and treat developers like crap.

~~~
usaphp
How is Apple iPhone more overpriced than other flagship devices from say
Samsung? Last I heard the note 7 costs more than the iPhone.

~~~
catdog
Most other manufacturers in contrast to Apple do not only sell these
overpriced "flagship devices" which few people really need these days but also
offer devices in a more reasonable price range.

The biggest problem is that others often copy stupid or customer unfriendly
decisions Apple makes, leading to a lot less choice if you want to avoid it.

~~~
djrogers
> Most other manufacturers in contrast to Apple do not only sell these
> overpriced "flagship devices" which few people really need these days but
> also offer devices in a more reasonable price range.

Like the 5 lines of iPhone that Apple offers[1]?

[1][http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/](http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/)

~~~
brokenmachine
Spoilt for choice!! Five overpriced options to choose from!

------
exabrial
Other people getting screwed: Custom IEM wearers. I had a $300 set of Alclair
Audio IEMs made so I can use an in-ear audio system on stage while making live
music. These use impressions that an audiologist takes of your ear canals for
an _exact_ fit that completely seals your ear.

There's not a snow-balls chance in hell I would have these be wireless, or a
proprietary standard:

1) Latency. Anything over 2ms is not acceptable for live music. That's the
difference between a band sounding "in-time" to "needs practice"

2) We use various tablets, phones to control the mix to our ears, and
sometimes in between sets, listen and review music.

3) Removing the 3.5mm pretty much means Apple is exiting professional audio
because it's now incompatible with 100% of everything.

4) There is no way in hell my $300 pair of custom-molded IEMs bound to a
standard that Apple is going to change in 3 years. Not only would I have to
replace my IEMs, but any equipment that's not Apple would have to be updated
to match. Not going to happen.

~~~
azinman2
So use the dongle?

~~~
sigmar
The dongle: probably has a poor quality DAC, gets lost easily, and prevents
the phone from being charged or tethered to a computer.

~~~
CarVac
Does it actually have a DAC, or does it just provide a physical interface to
one of the Lightning pins which gets connected to a DAC inside the phone?

~~~
sigmar
I assumed it had a DAC, but can't find a source that says either way.

------
the_other
This reads slightly hyperbolic. I suspect Apple will fight against DRM on
music for quite some time having made the decision to remove it.

In the past the Apple's designs needed to respect a vast pre-existing
ecosystem of headphones, amps and assorted other audio gear. Dropping the
socket largely takes them out of that ecosystem, but today the success and
reach of their devices exerts pressure on that ecosystem to move in Apple's
direction too. That pressure does the rest of the ecosystem a significant
disservice: the interoperability of the devices, cables and practices in that
ecosystem provides so much utility!

~~~
ourmandave
I thought they might be trying to get rid of the 3.5 mm jack to make a thinner
phone but the 7 is the exact same size as the 6.

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/apple-
iphone-7-full-...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/apple-
iphone-7-full-specs-key-features-uk-price-and-release-date/)

Maybe this is an evolution to a super thin iPhone 8.

~~~
bphogan
I'd heard that it caused camera interference, which I don't understand. But
the more plausible thing I heard was that they needed some room for that new
haptic thing they put under the home button.

------
hackuser
If you are interested in open hardware, one company working diligently on
solutions Purism:

[https://puri.sm/](https://puri.sm/)

You can order laptops now and they are talking about a phone. They even
negotiate with OEMs, such as Intel,[0] to provide more open versions of their
products, diligently trying to create widespread change. They aren't all the
way there,[1] but seem committed to the long run.

(I'm not affiliated, and all I know about them is what I read.)

\----

[0] [https://puri.sm/posts/petition-for-intel-to-release-an-me-
le...](https://puri.sm/posts/petition-for-intel-to-release-an-me-less-cpu-
design/)

[1] [https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-
beyond/](https://puri.sm/road-to-fsf-ryf-endorsement-and-beyond/) \- Note
that's from Aug 2015

------
PaulHoule
This is the first time I've heard that argument. It's a good one.

~~~
wccrawford
Except that there are adapters that convert to that same old jack, and so you
haven't really lost anything.

Yet, anyhow. If they ever lock you down to only approved headphones, then
we've got a real problem, and not just for being able to do what you want with
your music.

~~~
dogma1138
You can control what songs can be decoded with what adapter. You can control
the bit rate and quality.

You can effectively make songs that only play on certain headphones or songs
that play better quality when you have your beats plugged in.

This isn't the first time this has been brought up this was the first thing
everyone had in mind when the rumors about Apple ditching the headphone jack
first appeared.

~~~
rimantas
As if they cannot control what iPhone outputs to 3.5.

~~~
dogma1138
Not really, they can't tell what headphones are plugged in they might be able
to determine some very coarse profile but even that is highly questionable.

With audio being pushed through lighting port in a digital format Apple knows
for sure what device is connected to it, and even if you spoof the device id
they can still use DRM because the device decodes the digital signal and if it
doesn't have the correct set of keys or decoding configuration it would not be
able to play the audio.

------
rayiner
HeadphoneJackGate is really a damning indictment of the tech industry. The
usability of Apple products for ordinary people has been sliding downhill for
years due to trendy-but-idiotic features like hidden UI, flat UI, and gestures
(and various abominations combining the three). But the lack of a headphone
jack (a total non-issue thanks to the included adapter) is what the tech press
gets worked up over...

~~~
spikengineer
The next iphone in 2017 or 2018 probably won't have the adapter. All headphone
manufacturers should go and ask for lightning certification. The adapter is
just a temporary measure to soothe customers. It won't be supported forever.

If apple honestly wanted digital audio they would have used the universal
USB-C standard for the future. Apple wants customer lock-in to their platform
and using lightning will prevent customers from leaving because these
customers have invested a lot in their ecosystem. Ditching the lightning and
moving to USB-C was the right thing to do, converting everything to lightning
isn't.

~~~
rayiner
Apple will only drop the adapter when enough people no longer need it. And
given that Apple still sells a VGA adapter for the iPhone, it's not like they
are likely to stop making it any time soon.

------
otterley
What about the fact that Apple ships a Lighting-to-3.5mm-stereo-analog adapter
_in the box_? As far as I can tell, there is no practical difference from the
previous scenario, other than that you need to plug in the dongle to make
analog recordings.

I agree with a lot of what EFF does, but in light of the adapter provided,
they're blowing this issue way out of proportion.

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
They may be providing that for backwards compatibility to ease consumers'
transition. That doesn't diminish the concern about DRM.

------
electic
The real issue here is this might be anti-competitive, and go as far as being
an anti-trust issue. Apple can now limit who makes headphones for the iPhone
and the ones that are "allowed" could end up seeing their headphones far more
expensive than the Apple and Beats brands. This is all because 3rd party
brands will have to pay licensing fees to Apple to use the port. So we could
end up seeing headphones that are 20%+ more expensive compared to Apple or
Beats headphone units.

Sounds anti-competitive to me....

~~~
Anechoic
I might buy the argument if Apple didn't include an adapter with the phone.

~~~
electic
Which is a hassle. If you are making headphones now in 2016 and beyond, you
are going to have to deal with the lightening port to be competitive in the
iPhone accessory market.

~~~
jowiar
This wasn't a push to use the lightning port -- it was a push for accessory
makers to ask "First, can we make this wireless?". Lightning isn't really long
for this world, either -- (not sure if it goes in 2 or 4 years, but I'd bet
pretty heavily against it surviving for 6).

The next iteration of the watch is probably self-sufficient, no phone needed,
and will require BT accessories.

~~~
electic
Well again, that is another problem. BT headphones have proven to be a pain to
deal with in the past. Pairing especially is a huge issue. Instead of working
with the industry on that, they went with a proprietary solution which is
implemented in the W1 chip. If you want to use that...you have to pay
licensing fees.

------
Kenji
> _It advertises that the move helps make the phone more water-resistant._

Absolute, utter nonsense. I have a 3 year old Samsung Galaxy S4 Active that
sports an open headphone jack and can be SUBMERGED in water without any
problems.

I don't want to have any heavy batteries sitting over, on or in my ears. Let
alone the trash DAC and amplifier that these bluetooth devices have.

------
noonespecial
I think removing the headphone jack is stupid. But it has zero to do with DRM.
Moving the DAC to the other side of a connector changes nothing at all about
Apple's ability to implement DRM.

There was an Apple controlled DAC in your phone before, now its in a dongle
2cm away. Its annoying but not a diabolical plot.

~~~
kylewpppd
It cannot be about removing the DAC, there's still one for the internal
speakers.

~~~
noonespecial
Certainly not. Its about removing the jack to make the phone slimmer or more
aesthetic or more waterproof. Or all of the above. The internal DAC is
certainly part of a SOC anyway.

The point is that having an Apple DAC in a dongle makes no fundamental
difference from a DRM perspective over just using the internal one on old
phones. Its not a plot. We're in Texas here, hearing hoofbeats and everyone is
insisting that zebras are coming.

~~~
jshevek
> Its about removing the jack to make the phone slimmer or more aesthetic or
> more waterproof.

Other manufacturers seem to be able to achieve these ends without removing the
headphone jack.

------
slicktux
So, apple gets rid of the headphone jack and the fear of the END of headphone
jacks propagates. . . This is somewhat depressing and frustrating; depressing
because one companies' decision has the potential to influence other companies
implementations that therefore will affect us all? Frustrating because
homogenization is apparently that simple to implement? I guess this quote by
who knows who is ever so true. . . "there is no profit in the current
paradigm. . .you have to create problems to create profits", unfortunately.

~~~
jshevek
I don't disagree, but I believe the 3.5 millimeter jack was destined to be
replaced eventually (not universally, but in common usage) by USB type-c
regardless of Apple's move.

------
zonovar
I am paranoid I know, however the first thing I thought is that, as headphone
can be used in a reverse way as microphones, that Apple made a secret deal
with the NSA (or else...) so they will be able in a Bluetooth range to connect
(as Bluetooth is far away from being secure) and listen to people. Those plugs
all around are just free and easy tool for spies. Of course they could also
listen to non encrypted conversations during phone calls between people using
encrypted channels/tools. Am I the only one thinking about that?

------
k-mcgrady
1\. Apple has already publicly stated this is not about DRM and, at least when
it comes to music, they have been very anti-DRM for a long time.

2\. Apple earbuds aren't the only one's you can use. There are lots of
lightning compatible headphones and they've been around a while.

3\. This is not 'The End of Headphones Jacks'. It's one phone manufacturer.
Globally iPhone market share is less than 20% so if you want a headphone jack
you have a lot of great options.

~~~
jshevek
> Apple has already publicly stated this is not about DRM

I'm not sure why anyone considers this relevant. It is not like apple is
signing a contract which would allow us to sue them if they "change their
minds".

~~~
k-mcgrady
Not only has Apple stated this isn't about DRM but throughout their recent
history they've tended to back up their anti-DRM stance be getting the music
labels to drop it at a time when that was pretty controversial. Any statement
from them should hold some weight considering this whole debate is a
conspiracy theory at best.

~~~
jshevek
> Any statement from them should hold some weight considering this whole
> debate is a conspiracy theory at best.

Those are two separate issues. Whether or not the "whole debate is conspiracy
theory at best" has no bearing on whether a statement like this from apple
should hold any weight. Apple's claim may or may not be true, but we should
look to other sources of evidence to evaluate this, and completely disregard
'because apple said so'.

~~~
k-mcgrady
My previous sentence explains why their statement should hold weight. They
have backed it up with previous actions.

~~~
jshevek
I took "A considering B" to mean "The truth of B strengthens the claim A."

Regarding Apple's history with DRM, that's not something to completely ignore
but its not very compelling, either. I see no evidence that Apple (especially
as it exists today) has a true, sustained ideological position against DRM.
Apple explicitly positions themselves as the platform with the least regard
for empowering their users to use their (mobile) devices as they see fit
(because being seen as 'more secure' is marketing gold). If the situation
arose in which Apple's leadership believed they would make more money (on the
whole, and long term) by embracing DRM in more places, they would do so.

------
kazinator
So what? Early consumer computers (including ones from Apple) didn't have
audio jacks either; you had to add audio adapter interfaces to have audio at
all. It's just going full circle.

DRM has nothing to do with whether a device has an analog audio jack. Nobody
in their right mind copies audio through the headphone jack output.

If an audio output device enforces DRM, that can be done just as well by a
built-in analog out as by some bluetooth add-on or whatever. Analog out starts
out digital. The audio data flows to some audio chips. Those chips have
drivers, and the drivers can be signed, part of a signed OS image, etc. You
can make a device that will only play digital-rights-managed content, even if
it has analog outputs.

------
draw_down
I don't like this change but I think the argument that it's about DRM is
pretty silly.

------
peterkelly
> _" Other developers must ask Apple for permission to create and sell
> Lightning-compatible devices"_

I wonder how well that's going to work in China (and for that matter most of
the rest of Asia)

------
api
This is interesting but personally I think this move is more about Apple being
able to take more profit from its Beats brand and from any third party speaker
maker that now has to license to work with iOS.

Of course I guess they can also sell "premium DRM" snake oil to recording
companies now, because nobody can tap audio from hardware. That's totally
impossible right?

Apple just loves to tax their ecosystem. They also have a huge fetish for
eliminating connectors, plugs, etc. even when they are well past the point of
diminishing returns there.

------
cdnsteve
The also just made it so their phone no longer works with millions of car
audio systems that have an auxiliary input jack. Not all of us have 2016's
with fancy Car Play or Android Auto.

------
zepto
[http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MMX62AM/A/lightning-
to-35-...](http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MMX62AM/A/lightning-to-35-mm-
headphone-jack-
adapter?fnode=94076bf4300fc94de38ac0dce6111bffeb1641842210382677ece98e45d55bb5dfe114c8b3c2ecb222de3df55d5e0b52aedf2fb9744a0d879dd7551e2d0c9dc34f5a2ff6bb54cecedd46fcbfeecd3e00f337b3dee2e343eec5759acccf1c45a5)

~~~
0x0
This adapter requires the cooperation of the OS to function.

~~~
intrasight
The headphone jack also requires the cooperation of the OS to function

~~~
aikah
an OS cannot deny an analog jack. An OS can however deny an digital adapter.

~~~
lucozade
iOS can refuse to play anything it fancies. If Apple wanted to add DRM it
could have done it already (I thought it did once but took it off but I may be
recalling incorrectly). I can't for the life of me see how this makes any
difference.

BTW I don't mean this as some sort of "Apple are too nice to do this" thing.
TBH I think they don't enforce audio DRM largely because they wouldn't be the
beneficiaries. If and when that changes then I'm sure we'll hear different
rhetoric.

~~~
the_other
They limit their market to only those people who'll put up with DRMd music. I
don't recall the dates of the decisions and changes too well but I'm pretty
confident iTunes sales would have sky-rocketed some time AFTER the DRM came
off.

Is the number of people who only buy music from iTunes really enough to keep
iPhone where it is in the market?

~~~
lucozade
> Is the number of people who only buy music from iTunes really enough to keep
> iPhone where it is in the market?

I'm going to take a punt and suggest that the answer is no. Why do I think
that? Because Apple haven't restricted music to DRM only.

~~~
selectodude
Apple was the one that forced the hand of the record companies to eliminate
DRM requirements.

Removing the headphone jack sucks, but the reasons given are not why.

------
astral303
If there is a 3.5mm dongle available, how is this truly the end of the
headphone jacks?

The headphone jack is still there, it just has to be accessed via the dongle.
It's gone from being physically on the device, but the capability is not gone.

I think a post like this undermines EFF's credibility. Steve Jobs has railed
against DRM for music and finally was able to get it. iTunes music has been
DRM-free for years now. Why would Apple back out on DRM-free music?

------
aluhut
I don't get it.

The customer base of Apple has no problems spending huge amounts of money. Why
should they need to be controlled in such a way?

~~~
trhway
>The customer base of Apple has no problems spending huge amounts of money.

exactly, and thus it is probably to control other manufacturers' access to
that customer base. With digital non-public interface to headphones, you'd
have to buy a license to produce such headphones. Basically extending "in-app
purchase" 30% house cut to hardware accessories. Or another example from
history - PC architecture vs. PS2.

------
hackuser
It's frustrating that there's not a (significant) phone vendor committed to
both user confidentiality and end-user control (libre/free/open).

Apple seems to provide confidentiality, if you buy their marketing, and Google
is much more open/free. These should be, IMO, fundamentals of IT, but it's not
even a realistic option.

------
javajosh
Isn't this tacitly assuming that Apple will be able to single-handedly
eliminate the headphone jack? I think it is quite likely that post-Jobs Apple
has finally overstepped it's bounds, and despite it's good qualities the
iPhone 7 will be a relative dud. In which case the iPhone 8 will (reluctantly)
put the jack back.

~~~
Klathmon
I just don't see that happening.

To be completely honest, literally 0 of the people I know with iphones have
anything other than official Apple headphones. Even when they break, they go
into an apple store and buy new ones.

There will be lots of complaining, but for most people this won't change
anything except the annoyance of not being able to charge while using the
headphones without an adapter (which is the only reason I see the average joe
complaining about this change).

~~~
javajosh
The headphone industry was generating $2.3B in revenue in 2013 [1], with
premium headphones making $1B of that. Needless to say, the world is much
larger than your friend group.

[1] [https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-
releases/pr...](https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-
releases/premium-us-headphone-market-surpasses-$1-billion-in-2013-according-
to-npd/)

~~~
hbosch
I wonder how much of that "premium" segment is owned by Beats? Regardless of
their quality, this CNN article[0] claims that beats owns a quarter of the
total headphones market and over half of the "premium headphones" segment.

These other stats claim that Apple & Beats, combined, account for 70% of
future purchase plans for teens.[1] Th definitely have the edge with regards
to marketing.

And also, looks like just recently Bluetooth headphones are outselling wired
headphones.[2]

With Apple controlling Beats, and Beats nearly controlling the headphones
market, I still think this problem will end up affecting a mere niche
demographic one year from today.

\--

0\. [http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/tech/beats-headphones-audio-
ma...](http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/tech/beats-headphones-audio-market/)
(from 2014. Also, beware opening on mobile, it's banner heavy for me)

1\. [http://www.statisticbrain.com/headphone-industry-market-
shar...](http://www.statisticbrain.com/headphone-industry-market-share-
statistics/) (March 2016)

2\.
[http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/28/bluetooth-h...](http://iphone.appleinsider.com/articles/16/07/28/bluetooth-
headphone-sales-surpass-others-for-first-time-with-apples-beats-in-top-spot)
(July 2016)

------
jasonlingx
You can still get a headphone jack via a lightning adapter which comes with
every iPhone 7...

~~~
jonlucc
I'm not positive but I think that requires Apple to do that indefinitely (they
won't) and/or to approve the third party lightning->aux adapters.

------
ybrah
if a certain artist's musics is not easily accessible because of DRM or
whatever reason, Ill just find something different to listen to.

There is no shortage of good local bands anywhere in the world so I'm not
worried

------
EGreg
I like how the last paragraph started with "one more thing". :)

------
jccalhoun
It is just so weird to me that apple hates buttons but loves dongles.

------
protomyth
I guess Android phones will probably go for something based off USB-C. I
wonder if Apple will approve an adapter from lightning to some other digital
connector?

~~~
Roritharr
Already happened: [http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/06/09/moto-z-
doesnt-3-5mm-...](http://www.androidpolice.com/2016/06/09/moto-z-doesnt-3-5mm-
headphone-jack/)

------
AndrewKemendo
Is it possible Apple wants to kill Square because they want everyone to use
pay anywhere and are going to release a new card reader dongle soon?

~~~
djrogers
No - the old square reader still works with the dongle (per square) and the
new one is wireless anyway.

------
Sidgup1
L, R and GND will still exist abd it will be analog signal. Speakers are
analog.

------
shmerl
Yeah, how Apple of them.

------
zelias
There's a lot of potential for anti-competitive practice here -- for example,
Apple could theoretically prevent the Spotify app from transmitting audio over
Bluetooth or Lightning, forcing users into the Apple Music ecosystem.

~~~
amazingman
And if they do, they'll end up in antitrust courts in multiple countries while
paying out a crushingly large and sustained PR cost.

~~~
pjmlp
Usually such cases only apply to monopolies and Apple is very far from being
one, considering the world market.

~~~
jdmichal
Antitrust law is _not_ just about monopolies, and it _does not_ only apply to
monopolies. Also, the world market wouldn't matter, because any individual
case would be brought in a specific legal jurisdiction, where only that
specific jurisdiction's market would be relevant.

------
matthewhall
Just saying drm sucks. Apple calls in digital resources management not rights

