
Courage - duck
https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/07/courage/
======
BatFastard
The last sentence summed it up.

"It’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s a business plan."

Apple has a habit of killing tech they can't control.

Headphone jack is eliminated so they can license and control what talks to the
phone.

Safari is intentionally the worst browser for HTML5 so that people don't go
around the app store.

Flash is banned from browsers because then you have to go thru the app store
and give them your 30%.

You have to have a Mac to write apps for iOS or Macs, why because it increases
their sales.

So drink the cool aid if you must, but recognize it as great business plan
that encourages you to buy only apple licensed products

~~~
yoran
Apple is like the Microsoft of the 90's with a good taste for design.

~~~
mightykan
Even that is not true any more. A few recent examples:

\- iPhone 6s/6s+ are heavier & thicker than iPhone 6. They have worse,
especially low-light, cameras compared to iPhone 6 and have smaller, therefore
worse, batteries. All of this for a gimmicky, screen that pops up a contextual
menu that is covered by your finger that brought it up.

\- A computer with a single port for everything, even charging, i.e. MacBook.

\- Apple TV 4th gen. remote and usability.

\- Charging situation with Magic Mouse 2.

\- Charging situation with Apple Pencil.

\- Removal of the perfectly usable headphone jack on iPhone 7.

\- iPhone 7 has stereo speakers in landscape orientation but the Music apps in
iOS is portrait only.

And don't get me started on their software.

------
spaceisballer
I'll agree the courage statement was a bit silly and me laugh when I watched
it go down. I for one am totally ok with the headphone jack going away. I have
wireless headphones and I have wired headphones I'll make it work. More often
than not the wired headphones become the hassle, whether it's tangled cords or
just keeping them out of the way. I'm sure there are plenty of people who use
wired headphones every day but there are also plenty of people who just have
this unused hole in their phone. The earpods look great but are a bit steep
for me. The way they pair looks great. It's definitely an Apple product, looks
nice and is convenient (and perhaps a bit pricey but not ludicrously so). Also
the battery life is great (when compared to similar independent wireless
earbuds) and that case is an awesome way to charge/not lose them.

Apple it obviously trying to go to wireless everything and removing cables.
Now they need to make wireless charging happen. If I could set my phone down
on my desk and charge it and never again have to plug something in again, that
would be great.

~~~
pavel_lishin
> _there are also plenty of people who just have this unused hole in their
> phone._

Having a useless hole doesn't inconvenience them, but taking it away
inconveniences a large swath of people who use it daily.

~~~
melling
There's a free adapter in every box. If you keep it plugged into your
headphones, how is your day going to be any different?

~~~
ultramancool
I can no longer charge my phone and listen to audio at the same time.
Something I do at my desk every day.

~~~
joekrie
No worries, Apple's got you covered with AirPods

~~~
brainfire
Which last 5 hours, and also can't be charged while in use.

I guess you could buy two pairs and swap them out...?

~~~
joekrie
Luckily you get a rechargeable charger that lasts up to 24 hours. Furthermore,
"you can charge the charger and charge the earphones at the same time".
[http://www.avclub.com/article/apple-courageously-forgets-
put...](http://www.avclub.com/article/apple-courageously-forgets-put-
headphone-jack-new--242282)

~~~
brainfire
So? Unless I can wear the case on my head to charge them while I use them it
doesn't help.

------
DCKing
The thing is, had Apple announced the _exact same thing_ but replaced the
Lightning-connector with USB Type C, everything would have been sort-of-okay.
Yeah, losing legacy support sucks but there's at least a decent argument to be
made for the advantages of going digital audio only [1]. More importantly, USB
is also an open, well-known standard that everyone can develop for, whilst the
Type C connector covers all technical and functional requirements Apple has
for the connection [2]. Would it have been "courageous" to take this step,
cutting out legacy and receiving all the criticism for cutting out our
favourite audio connection? I guess you could call it that, it's a big step to
take.

But Apple didn't. They announced it with their own propietary standard that
you have to pay them money for, and doesn't work on any other manufacturer.
They are creating their own little bubble of peripherals because they have the
market power to do so. It's pure douchebaggery, and them calling that courage
is supreme arrogance.

[1]: That is in fact the Apple tried to make to distort the discussion. This
post is not about this argument though. [2]: Or could even support Apple's
additional requirements on the same connector with protocol extensions.

(I made this point in the other iPhone thread too, sorry for reiterating it.)

------
jwr
The problem with the disappearing 3.5mm jack is, as usual, a problem that only
a few geeks like us care about.

Taking myself as an example: I can't use the Apple earbuds, they immediately
fall out of my ears. Which is why I use either large over-ear headphones
(MDR7506), large over-ear noise-cancelling headphones (BOSE) for work in noisy
places, or in-ear headphones that stay put even when running (Sol Republic
Relays). And I want to have the flexibility of using any of those.

Every wireless option I've ever tried sucked badly. Some really badly. In
various interesting ways.

But "most people" (I love that phrase) won't care. It seems the included apple
earbuds are good enough for almost everyone.

~~~
TillE
Headphones aren't a niche geek thing, though. Apple _bought a company_ that
sold millions of wired headphones and successfully marketed them as trendy
fashion items.

When Apple sees kids walking around with Beats headphones, what device do they
think it's plugged into? It's all smartphones.

~~~
throwanem
> trendy fashion items

Exactly. They're already selling wireless ones, and have been for a while; I
see them regularly on the train. Now they're making the ones with wires subtly
uncool. They will succeed in so doing.

------
andrewvijay
It was courageous to make a leap of faith and all that but not so courageous
when it is at 160$. It's just ridiculous. Waiting for Xiaomi to show their
courage at 20$

~~~
rimantas
Will those $20 headphones switch seamlessly between devices, stop playing when
not in the ear, have beam forming microphones, charging container, charge for
3hours in 15 minutes?

~~~
falcolas
The seamless switching is going to be handled by the devices (thus the
comments about pairing being shared via iCloud), not the headphones alone.

Beamforming with two microphones creates a plane of enhanced sound, so
anything directly in front (or behind) of you will be as enhanced as your
voice is.

15 minutes of not having access to your headphones is not a trivially short
amount of time, nor is 3 hours a reasonably long amount of time. I've had
conference calls and remote coding sessions last longer than that, not to
mention music listening periods.

------
ebbv
That moment was absolutely the ultimate in Apple Reality Distortion Field in
recent years, but this article is also over the top hyperbole.

The reality is the audio jack did take a significant amount of internal volume
on the phone, and there are advantages to using wireless headphones. In a few
years I won't be surprised if most Android phones also forego the audio jack.

If you really think it was a huge mistake for Apple to do this, short Apple
stock. The market will reflect it. Otherwise, it may be annoying but it was
probably the right thing to do in the long term and you're just repeating the
same silliness of the people who cried about the lack of floppy drive on the
iMac or the lack of ethernet port on the MacBook Air.

~~~
randcraw
No, don't short their stock. Show your displeasure by selling your iPhone and
BUYING SOMETHING ELSE.

What idiot owns Apple stock?

~~~
tigroferoce
Is your decision about a phone based upon the audio connector?

~~~
randcraw
Of course, among several other criteria, some surely more important.

But my thoughts on the audio connector are independent of my thoughts on
Apple's stock value, and everyyone else's. Imagining that you can
constructively send a message of displeasure to Apple about changes to their
audio jack by shorting their stock... _this_ is what's nuts.

------
iamthepieman
I don't get this quote

"They’re able to do this because no one can do anything about it. "

You can not buy a phone without a headphone port. I don't see what a big deal
this is. Is there another situation besides two that I'm missing?

1\. Apple is right. There is a big advantage (or at least no/inconsequential
downasides) to replacing the 3.5mm audio jack. In a year or two everyone has
forgotten about this and people are wondering when 3.5mm is going to finally
die.

2\. Apple is wrong. The 3.5mm jack shows back up on iphone 8,9,10 or however
long it takes them to realize they were wrong. In the meantime they lose
market share over this and even after the hoopla has died down people are
still speaking with the wallets by not buying an iphone.

~~~
BatFastard
I know a number of people in the music business who swear they will never buy
another apple product because of the 3.5 jack business. Lets see if they stick
to it.

~~~
J5892
Some will. Most will complain about it and buy an iPhone anyway because it's
such a hassle to switch between iPhone/Android.

------
simonbarker87
I'm amazed at the rage around this, a good friend of mine is about as anti
Apple as the come and back in July he asked what I, a Mac and iPhone user,
thought of them removing the headphone socket in the then rumoured 7. I said I
was, and still am, largely indifferent.

He on the other hand was full of praise for Apple, he said he can't remember
the last time he or his wife plugged head phones in to their phones and with
bluetooth headphones being so cheap now (he as some of the MPow £20 ones)
there is no reason to keep a piece of legacy equipment around for nostalgia
purposes.

I was amazed given his usually anti Apple stance, but then I remembered that
while he is anti Apple he is very pro progress, any kind of progress and
technology change. Try something, see if it works and then move forward or try
something else.

The phone market has become relatively stale, this is at least a company
attempting (along with Motorola let's not forget) something radical. I didn't
think it was radical but based on the online eruption it clearly is, people
seem to have forgotten that there's a lot that's not great about 3.5
headphones that, I think, equally balances out the issues with wireless only.

If you don't like it that much then just don't buy the phone, if enough people
do that then Apple will respond to market forces and backtrack. No one is
forcing you to buy an iPhone.

~~~
iambateman
By contrast, I (and hundreds of millions of other people) use the headphone
jack every day.

Aside from having a cord to your ears, I can't think of anything that's not
great. If I wanted noise cancelling headphones, I could get some with
batteries.

Also what if I want to charge and listen to music simultaneously? I guess
that's no longer an option with wired headphones?

~~~
simonbarker87
At the risk of coming over as flippant and rude, don't buy the phone if it's
that much of a problem. There is no reason you have to have an iPhone, there
is no right/law that says Apple must maintain an old standard if they don't
want to.

Also, I'm sure Belkin/Anker will be making a little splitter that enables you
to plug 3.5mm headphones and a lighting cable in at the same time. Many
lighting docks already have 3.5mm jack socket in them for this purpose since
when the phone is in the dock you can't plug headphones in.

------
ookblah
i think it was more like convenience. there was another article where schiller
talks about having to remove the jack so that they could get the components to
fit or something, specifically the haptic engine and also maintain water
resistance.

i don't want to be making comparisons to steve jobs (okay, i actually am
haha), but i feel like he would never let this fly and just tell them to
figure out how to get all the components to fit or don't do it at all.

i feel like it was a lazy engineering decision to do it this way. one where
the solution is based on convenience of design rather than what is best for
the users.

~~~
lucozade
You may be right but I think it's very unlikely. Firstly, they already fit a
jack into the same form factor and this wouldn't have been the first water
resistant device with an audio jack i.e. these were solved problems. I don't
believe they would go through all this effort because they couldn't be
bothered to work out how to fit an audio jack back in.

If I were to guess it's either because they just like the idea of one
connector that does everything (I get the impression that's what Thunderbolt
was for). Either that or this a step towards a fully wireless strategy. As I
quite like the idea of the latter, I'm going to assume it's that until
evidence refutes it.

------
paulrosenzweig
Is Bluetooth less open to innovate on than the 3.5mm jack? I agree that it's
important to be able to create hardware add-ons "without Apple's permission",
but wouldn't most of those use cases just use Bluetooth today?

~~~
TeMPOraL
There's orders of magnitude of difference in complexity between Bluetooth and
3.5mm jack. Also, last time I heard, you couldn't even use Bluetooth to
transfer files from an iPhone to a non-Apple device, so there's that.

EDIT changed "data" to "files", because that's what I meant.

~~~
lucky_cloud
Yes you can. Of course you can; If you couldn't transfer data, bluetooth
headphones wouldn't work.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I meant files, not audio datastreams. Edited the comment to reflect that.

------
TeMPOraL
Losing a 3.5mm jack is not just an audio issue - this port is also the
simplest way to make phone talk to external hardware add-ons.

~~~
blockross
Precisely. I wonder in which proportion this decision was made to prevent shop
owners from using these small credit card readers connected to the audio port
and push Apple Pay down their throat.

That's the first thing I thought about after the initial laugh and I'm
surprised it's not talked about more. Not saying it's the main reason but I
can't believe it was not mentioned during the decision-making process.

~~~
throwanem
> I wonder in which proportion this decision was made to prevent shop owners
> from using these small credit card readers connected to the audio port and
> push Apple Pay down their throat.

As far as the hardware's concerned, a Square reader is a microphone.
Microphones work via the Lightning adapter. I see no a priori reason to
imagine that a Square reader won't work that way, too.

------
kristofferR
This jack-off move by Apple could perhaps be justified as courage by Apple if
they were moving to a newer standard - like USB C.

Instead they moved to a proprietary port that they only partially support.
It'll be great to be denied the option of using the same non-wireless
headphones on my iPhone as on my Macbook (unless they also implement Lightning
ports on the Macbooks, which would be horribly confusing).

Thanks Apple!

~~~
andromeduck
That's one way to look at it. Another would be that they moved to Bluetooth
while also providing a means of backwards compatibility with the lighting to
3.5 adapter as well as a pair of lighting headphones for those who prefer
that.

------
ath0
Can you spot the mistaken assumption?

It's right here: "Data doesn’t need to go to the headphones, nor do the
headphones need to send data back. Digital-to-analog conversion has to be done
eventually, because speakers don’t produce sound waves with 1s and 0s."

True for speakers, but headphones are often more than dumb speakers at this
point. They're active noise cancelling devices. They're a component of
immersive video (why do people buy 5.1 surround systems when they could just
wear headphones?).

Or even if you have the standard earphones from the box: do you ever pause the
sound, skip a track, or answer a call using the buttons on the cable? If so,
you're sending data back to the phone. Surprise!

What other forms of interactivity could we open up if we broke the "one-way,
stereo audio only" assumption explicitly?

Don't get me wrong - my preferred earphone vendor doesn't even have Bluetooth
support yet and I don't really want to buy another pair of custom Etymotics.
But despite that, I recognize there are real experience-driven reasons to do
this.

------
chaostheory
Wasn't one reason for losing the headphone jack to help further waterproof the
iPhone? That said, for even the best current bluetooth headphones, the sound
quality isn't that great. Does the bluetooth standard need an update in that
department, because there's a large difference in sound between bluetooth mode
and being plugged in for these headphones?

~~~
pixl97
While I can say I'm an expert on headphone jacks... It seems like the input
port for them is very simple and would not be difficult to waterproof.

------
jwoldan
I think there is some truth to the "we needed to make space for the other
changes we wanted to make" argument, but I think that applies even more so to
the next iPhone (8?). I think Apple made the 7 as good as they could, but in
some sense it's the sacrificial lamb for what they want to do next.

------
ChicagoBoy11
I'm surprised at how in the minority I seem to be, but I felt that this was
generally a step in the right direction. I couldn't help but think back about
the hundreds of memes we've seen about "tangled earphone cords" over the past
several years, or how many times I myself struggled with wires of my
headphones. When it comes to using the "headphone jack" for what it was
initially intended to do, I can't help but think it is pretty clear that the
right way to go about this is wireless.

Some of the comments against it seem to mirror the comments about the removal
of a physical keyboard when the initial iPhone came out -- undeniably true,
but really missing what the future will inevitably look like.

Just think about the prototypical Apple-system user, with his Macbook, iPhone,
and Apple Watch. With bluetooth earbuds, he could, at least in theory,
seamlessly transition from listening to any of his devices, without having to
"plug" anything in anywhere. That's an advantage. That's what you'd expect
"the future" to be like. We're getting rid of cords everywhere, I just don't
understand why the "headphone" is now somehow special!

There is the other argument, which I find a lot stronger but still ultimately
not really compelling, and that is that by getting rid of the 3.5mm jack Apple
removes the ability for people to plug into their phone without the licensing
fee for their technology. But is there anything specific to the 3.5mm that
makes some tech possible and others not? I don't think so. Is it pretty
convenient? Undoubtedly. But, again, I can't think of how Bluetooth couldn't
just as easily transfer that kind of data. And, with the added bonus that now
you aren't limited to ONE such device. Will it be more inconvenient for 3rd
party manufacturers at first? For sure. But I don't see how this move
inherently PREVENTS equipment from being used on the phone. It certainly does
so in its present iteration, but in the long term, why couldn't manufacturers
adapt to using wireless communication?

Make no mistake, Apple is pushing the boat out on this. But they single-
handedly have the market power to do this kind of thing. When they got rid of
the keyboard, everyone also came out and said it'd be terrible for the
enterprise. But, by being lights-out better than the competition and
anticipating a trend, they set the tone for what smartphones would look like
ever since. Haven't heard an argument cogently explaining why we shouldn't
simply expect the exact same thing this time around.

~~~
themihai
My only issue is that quality is trashed. The L and R airpods get out of sync.
There is no solution for that yet on wifi let alone bluetooth. They basically
trash quality for little convenience so you end-up paying more for worse
quality. It may be fine for phone calls (using one airpod only) but for music
is just stupid. The future of audio is wireless but I doubt it's a pair of
bluetooth earphones.

~~~
andromeduck
Source on sync issue?

~~~
themihai
I think the issue is well known in the industry. Traditional bluetooth/wifi
headphones could get away with it because L and R speakers are wired even if
there was no wire for the audio source.

There is a standard[0] being worked on but AFAIK currently there is no
wireless version.

Bluetooth is really a joke for audio. The reason why it is used on so many
speakers today it's because most(if not all) of them don't work in a multi-
channel configurations(i.e. stereo pairs) so they just allocate a big buffer
to make up for the poor connectivity. The issue in multi-channel
configurations is that you need to re-sync all the speakers constantly(i.e.
every 0.5s) so the big buffer approach is not good enough anymore. Most of the
bluetooth systems also convert the audio source to a more lossy format to
reduce the bandwidth requirements.

Shortly said bluetooth is not the future of wireless audio. At least not as it
is today. Today it's rubbish compared with wired versions. Apple just packed a
flawed technology in a nice package.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Video_Bridging](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_Video_Bridging)

~~~
andromeduck
Yeah considering they just developed a chip to specifically address Bluetooth
performance concerns, I thin it's premature to assume it'll have these issues.

~~~
themihai
The bluetooth connection/protocol is a standard, though. I would be happy to
be proved wrong but I don't think it's the case. They didn't mention the
issue(i.e. `we fixed this well known issue`) in the keynote either and I doubt
they would not take credit for a such achievement. The chip seems designed to
handle the connectivity ops (i.e. switch between mac, iphone etc) and noise
cancellation.

Bluetooth is simply not the right tool for multi-channel quality audio.

------
blackfede
It was necessary to remove the jack to be sure to sell the new headset. I
wonder if it will be available just one, as spare :-)

It's all about removing connection ports, on the iphone and on the mac to be
sure that you will be using just something that they can control.

~~~
rimantas
It's a pity they made that terrible mistake of including adapter so the whole
evil plan is now thwarted.

~~~
blackfede
Maybe they are less curageous than they think? Or not enaugh evil :-)

------
afandian
Does anyone know how Lightning headphones work? Is there an analogue line in
there (I think I read somewhere that pins can switch modes?) so they're just
traditional passive headphones with a different plug?

Or is there a DAC in the wired headphones?

~~~
rvense
I've seen some assert that they just use some of the extra pins to pass normal
audio. The adaptor is entirely dumb. And that you might get some extra noise
because now your headphone jack is also a high-speed digital connection..

Someone might make "active" headphones with their own DAC, but disregarding
those noise-cancelling cans that so many people seem enamored with, that's
going to venture into audiophile nonsense very quickly.

------
rollinDyno
I've been using bluetooth enabled hearing aids since the beginning of the year
and it has been a great experience being able to play music straight into my
ears without having to take earphones out my pocket and disentangle them.

The difference is normal people won't keep them on when they're not listening
to music, but that's what Apple wants. This is an opportunity to place their
hardware in the next step for computer interaction which is going to be
conversational assistants (voice and audio). This would give them the
opportunity to be always listening and collecting more information about what
surrounds you.

~~~
ableal
> the opportunity to be always listening

Some ten years ago Google quietly dropped a publicly proposed functionality (I
forgot what they called it) whereby the search page would listen to your room
and provide supplemental info to the TV program you were watching, etc.

Someone must have pointed out it was rather creepy, but it seems to just have
been ahead of its time ...

------
uptown
I don't have a problem with them removing the headphone jack. I do think some
aspects of Apple's messaging is tone deaf. Their "affordable" JBL bluetooth
headphones they mentioned during the presentation? $200. That's real money for
a huge portion of their customer base.

But I do think they removed it to allow the iPhone 8 to have space for dual
cameras, and wireless charging (they said they see the future as wireless) and
I'm fine with that.

------
BFatts
Phones are already so thin, it's getting crazy. Soon we'll be talking about
phone-cuts (like a paper cut) and phone-cut-gate will be the story. Seriously,
I'd be fine with a phone that is almost 2cm thick for great battery life.

------
downandout
I don't understand why they didn't simply say that it's about better sound
quality than analog can provide. They could have chosen a better word to focus
on: Fidelity. "Apple customers deserve better than the same analog headphones
they've been listening to since the beginning of music".

They could have at least swayed the Apple loyal with that position - the
thought would have been that they're getting something better than everyone
else has. At the very least there wouldn't be justifiable headlines mocking
what they said.

~~~
degenerate
Pretending that $170 gets you _better sound_ would put them in an even worse
position. The world hasn't heard what they sound like yet, and I'm sure they
sound great. But they won't sound $170 better than the regular wired ones.
Apple would get slammed even harder by using that selling point.

Besides, high fidelity is the selling point of their overpriced Beats brand,
which they will position as a better version of the Apple ones after
everyone's spent their money on it.

~~~
downandout
I was talking about the lightning ear buds that come with it, not the wireless
ones.

------
waldfee
Yeah sure. money does not come into the equation at all

------
BFatts
How long, do we suppose, before the government steps in and orders that all
phones support the 3.5mm jack? I don't think it'll be long... Well, because
government

~~~
elmigranto
I believe there is EU regulation requiring that all phones use MicroUSB for
charging, but Apple doesn't seem to care. (I might be wrong, though.)

~~~
logician76
No the regulation is that all chargers use USB, the other end of the cable
doesn't matter. The situation that arose out of that is that you can charge
pretty much any phone with any USB charger, which was the intent.

I'd like Apple to have chosen a USB standard for the other end of the cable,
however to be honest, the lightning connector and it's counterpart look a lot
more robust than USB-C or micro/nano USB. USB-C is also quite a bit bigger
than lightning. So perhaps some day we'll see USB adopt lightning as a
standard if that is at all possible. iPad Pro lightning supports USB3 speed,
so we know lightning can do USB3.

------
tempodox
It comes down to two words: Horse manure. Color me a coward.

------
nickysielicki
Can we just take a moment and be happy about the fact that we're on the edge
of an era where every smartphone charger will work with every phone?

Edit: Google is leading me to believe this might not actually be the case? Are
they just rebranding USB-C as "Lightning", or is Apple seriously going with
_another_ proprietary standard?

~~~
OberstKrueger
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(connector)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_\(connector\))

It's been the standard connector for mobile Apple devices since the iPhone 5.
Nothing new about it.

~~~
nickysielicki
Disregard me, I just get confused with all the different proprietary Apple
peripherals. Thunderbolt was the same port as with mini-displayport. Firewire
was IEEE 1394. Now I guess I know about Lightning, too.

I look forward to the day when we can all use the same standards.

~~~
evanriley
Thunderbolt isn't Apple proprietary either. Thats designed by intel, and
Thunderbolt 3 even works with USB-C

