
“Pixel 2 and Pixel XL 2 will both ditch the headphone jack.” - kevlar1818
https://twitter.com/hallstephenj/status/893093302635036673
======
Zorlag
Bluetooth Headset:

PRO:

\- no cable that annoys you

CON

\- heavy, thus fall out your ear while running. \- small battery (which
evolves, but slowely) \- more expensive \- redundant audio processors \-
mostly low quality audio processors \- bluetooth is unstable

Cable Headset

PRO

\- good audio quality \- low price (in comparison) \- light, stays in your ear
while jogging \- usable on a range of devices \- compact design \- make use of
a huge battery, namely the one in your phone

CON

\- the cable breaks after some time \- the cable restricts you

I don't see the why I would want to change my standard headphones for a
technology that is bound to fail me over time, either by running out of juice
or by a bluetooth hickup. I wouldn't buy a phone without a headphone jack.
Period.

~~~
komali2
Good analysis, and that doesn't even include the phone itself:

Having a 3.5mm Jack on a smartphone:

PRO:

\- Compatible with nearly 100 years of audio technology

\- Inclusion does not prevent usage of other means of wired/wireless audio
transmission - usbc, bluetooth, wifi

CON

\- Phone thickness minimum is hard-set to 3.5mm (not even sure this is a con)

\- ....cost to.. design? I don't even know.

~~~
morecoffee
Not justifying, but waterproofing a phone is very hard if it has holes in it.

~~~
bliss
Microphone, speakers, charging port - lots of holes. The Sony Walkman Sport
from back in the day was waterproof, it had a standard jack

~~~
AstralStorm
The audio jack is not a hole at all. It is a sealed port with metal plates
inside. (Unless you make one for cheapening purposes.)

------
tomc1985
So stupid. What a blatant attempt at grabbing money.

Headphone ports are one of the last truly ubiquitous pieces of technology
still in use today. 1/8" headphone jacks work in EVERYTHING. And we want to
throw that all away, because technology.

~~~
oneplane
Isn't that what everyone said about RCA jacks and reel-to-reel tape machines?

~~~
donretag
My turntable still uses RCA jacks. ;)

~~~
sli
Yeah, same. The amp I used takes RCA in and banana plugs out, and it's nowhere
close to old. RCA is far from dead.

------
BinaryIdiot
While I do own a few pairs of Bluetooth headphones I have yet to have any,
from the cheap to the expensive, not have occasional hiccups. Because of this
I love using my headphone jack.

I'm sad that this is a trend especially without a good, alternative and
standard way of using headphones over, say, USB-C. I mean I would be
_completely fine_ with removing the 3.5mm if you could re-use another jack for
the same purpose but being restricted to Bluetooth or USB-C dongles, at least
to me, sucks.

~~~
acchow
Have you tried Apple's AirPods?

~~~
BinaryIdiot
No but I am interested in the ideas they're showing. I decided to try out the
bragi and I'm actually _super_ impressed; I thought they would be terrible
based on a lot of reviews I've seen (I know they're not entirely comparable as
the Air Pods have a touch interface but it's the closest I've used).

So I'm excited to see more wireless headphones like the Air Pods and what kind
of innovation they can bring.

~~~
MBCook
I've got AirPods and have since launch. I LOVE them.

To be fair: I've had to re-pair them twice after they just wouldn't connect.

Once in a while only one comes on at first and it takes a few seconds for the
other to 'kick in', but that's automatic.

A handful of times I've had one cut out and come back within a second or so.

But that's daily (at work) use since launch. I'm perfectly happy with them,
these aren't serious issues.

------
asteli
Phone connectors are rubbish, ancient technology. The only thing they have
going for them is the network buy-in from literally 140 years of legacy.[1]

They are fine in static audio applications, but their performance on mobile
devices is abysmal. Put the device in a pocket, and every time you move or sit
down, you're putting huge lateral stress on the connector. Either the contacts
get deformed and become intermittent, the plug bends and/or shears off in the
jack, or the wire on the plug side develops an open circuit from wear. I've
personally damaged or destroyed the headphone jack on every phone I've owned
that had one.

In the last couple of weeks I've transitioned most of my audio to Bluetooth.
BT isn't exactly a pleasant experience, but once paired, it's relatively
seamless. I even converted my ubiquitous ATH-M50x headphones to BT using a
module[2].

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_(audio)#Modern...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phone_connector_\(audio\)#Modern_connectors)
[2]: [https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Adapter-Amplifier-
Technica-...](https://www.amazon.com/Bluetooth-Adapter-Amplifier-Technica-
ATH-M50x/dp/B01MFFH54C)

~~~
komali2
Curious, my experience is completely the opposite of yours. Over the course of
5 smartphones from different vendors (apple, samsung, lg), I've yet to destroy
a single one. This is from _heavy_ use (near daily during lifting, running,
motorcycling, plugged into phone aux, at work).

Even if you prefer bluetooth, why not include the jack as a
backup/alternative? All the phones with 3.5mm that I know of also have
bluetooth.

~~~
tomc1985
Out of the scenarios OP listed I've only ever had problems with cables wearing
out, which is why most decent headphones come with detachable cables

------
ClassyJacket
At least in the case of the Pixel, it'll be a USB-C port instead of an Apple-
controlled Lightning port. I prefer the lightning connector but I don't like
it being only on the iPhone (you can't even use iPhone headphones on the Mac!)
and locked down to Apple's approval for everything.

------
pmoriarty
There's a right way and a wrong way to transition to a new interface
technology.

The right way is to offer the new interfaces as options or have them be there
in addition to the legacy interfaces. That way people with peripherals that
are only compatible with legacy interfaces can still use them, while allowing
early adopters to use the new interface.

This is what happened when the USB standard was released. Computers were sold
with both USB and the old serial/parallel ports. It took many years to get to
the point that serial and parallel ports were no longer standard: well, after
most every consumer had already switched to using USB for just about
everything.

The wrong way to go about this is what's happening in this instance, where a
widely-used legacy interface is being completely ignored in favor of a new
interface that has relatively little adoption.

No wonder so many consumers are upset, and that doesn't even touch issues like
DRM and the analog hole, where non-DRM-forcing legacy interfaces are clearly
better for the consumer.

~~~
tunap
Heh, to be devil's advocate, sorta, we have had BT _option_ for 17 years or
so. The problem is, BT audio quality is sketchy, seamless connections are
hit/miss, interference &, my fav, waning battery life.

My question to those who would take the jack away is: why would I want to
exercise $50+ option that is dependent on batteries when a $5 always reliable
option exists? Probably the same reasons the h/w keyboard went away: profit,
elegant fragility & control.

~~~
pasbesoin
Akin to my thinking. Bluetooth still sucks. In terms of connectivity, it is in
no way comparable to the seamless functioning of the older port. The data rate
has required compression that screws with the signal quality, and then there
are the latency issues.

If Bluetooth was "great", everyone would already be using it. They aren't.
Ergo, it's not time for the "legacy" port to go.

I am also concerned about the push to end-to-end digital delivery. Which also
gets DRM-ed up the wazoo. Sorry, I don't agree that whoever's coding up
whatever implementation gets to determine my usage rights based upon their
private project, implementation, and incentives as opposed to my actual, legal
rights (which their lawyers are simultaneously busy trying to erode).

------
git-pull
I'm a new bluetooth headset adopter. I've been growing increasingly keen with
them:

You can grab them on Amazon for $20 to $50.

\- SoundPEATS Bluetooth headphones is $19.99 with Amazon Prime. Some hiccups
on this one with connecting. I keep this one as a backup when battery runs
out.

\- Phaiser BHS-730 works like a charm. $39.99 with Amazon Prime. Nice magnet
feature that allows you to wear the unit around your neck when not using it.

They work with your smartphone and your laptop.

So the major downside? These things run out of battery power after 4-5 hours
on average. This sucks because you're typically using them on the go.

Hopefully more people using bluetooth will result in future headphones with
improved battery life.

~~~
tomc1985
Or, you know, learn to route a cable through your clothes and then there's one
less battery to be concerned with.

Outside of the RIDICULOUSLY narrow and short-sighted use-case of "I want to
listen to the tunes on my phone" and a few other like scenarios, bluetooth
headsets are is absolutely USELESS for anything else.

~~~
swift
I use my Bluetooth earbuds and headphones to listen to music and podcasts on
my phone, my tablet, and my laptop, and to connect to my TV to watch movies or
play games late at night when my roommate is sleeping. I use them at the gym,
where having a cable get in the way could be a problem. I also use them to
make phone calls when my hands are occupied. They work wonderfully for all
these uses. I'd say that covers a lot of peoples' needs, though it sounds like
it may not cover yours.

------
bliss
Horrible idea. I'm on holiday at the moment, didn't bring my headphones -
don't often use them, but on flight and occasionally lazing by the pool would
have liked to listen to my audiobook.

I decided to get a new cheap pair when I was shopping, remembering just in
time that my phone model doesn't have standard audio equipment. So from what
was available instead of a simple €5 purchase, I would be on the hook for
another little adapter cable priced at €10 or €39 for another set of Apple's
headphones with their bespoke charging port.

It's not "brave" it's shit and annoying. Also travelling with Bluetooth
speakers, which use standard cables, means I need to carry multiple cables
around because of proprietary charging port that they continue to be able to
get away with.

I like my phone, does what I need, but not being able to pick up a cheap pair
of headphones on holiday, yeah thanks Apple. Shit decision. Google... please
read this real world experience, don't make your equipment annoying too.

------
georgyo
While I am sad about this, at least it is likely to be USB C, which means my
dongle and/or head phones will work with more than just my phone.

That is the only silver lining here that I can see.

~~~
choosegoose
Your headphones would need a DAC if you want to charge your phone and use the
headphones at the same time.

Ideally you would be able to use a splitter that would male USB-C on one end
and female 3.5mm + female USB-C. Unfortunately you'll be stuck with only
500mA.

The USB-C spec calls for the negotiation of power delivery (amperage) via two
lines that are used for audio passthrough. When those lines are occupied the
device will only pull 500mA from the cable to ensure components aren't fried.

Now if your splitter had a DAC, you could get full power but it sucks you have
to spend money to listen to audio and charge your phone at the same time.

From USB Type-C Specification Release 1.3:

 _Analog audio headsets are supported by multiplexing four analog audio
signals onto pins on the USB Type-C™ connector when in the Audio Adapter
Accessory Mode. The four analog audio signals are the same as those used by a
traditional 3.5 mm headset jack. This makes it possible to use existing analog
headsets with a 3.5 mm to USB Type-C adapter. The audio adapter architecture
allows for an audio peripheral to provide up to 500 mA back to the system for
charging._

------
JoshMnem
That's terrible. I wouldn't buy a phone without a way to plug in. I would lose
headphones that are not attached with a wire.

------
mnm1
There's plenty of other phones. Bluetooth is absolute utter shit. No, it's
worse than shit. It's an atrocity. Half the time it doesn't connect. Another
third it says it's connecting but it's playing from your phone's speakers
still. And when you finally get it working--if you do before smashing the damn
phone into the ground--it has shitty sound quality. The engineers who work on
this should be ashamed of what they've put out into the world: an ugly
monstrosity that seems to be a terrible solution looking for a problem.
Reliable wireless connections would be nice, but I'm done hoping it will ever
happen as long as Bluetooth is a standard. Not a single Bluetooth product I've
ever operated has operated with any reliability whatsoever. It's just absolute
garbage.

------
firefoxd
I haven't used or tried AirPods, but every Bluetooth device i have tried has a
noticible to awkward lag when watching video on a phone.

This ranges from earphones to my sound system in the house. So unless wireless
can solve that problem, it seems like we are giving up something by making the
switch.

------
nl
I'm going to take the contrary view here.

I hate hate headphone cords. OTOH I've use 3 different cordless headphones
regularly (ironically not AirPods) and I don't have any particular problems.

Positives: The cord doesn't get tangled, the remote works properly on all
phones and laptops (unlike the multiple standards for wired remotes).

Negatives: The battery life. They cost more for similar quality (although this
isn't as clear cut anymore: eg less than $100 gets quite competent JBL BT
headphones).

Neutral: I don't find the audio any worse. Some wired headsets are better, but
many aren't.

------
whipoodle
I have one of the iPhones without the headphone jack and it's a constant pain.
I tend to agree with Apple's moves of this sort, but this particular one was a
bad idea. It just plain sucks.

------
synicalx
Good lord people, if you don't like it then don't buy it. I swear to god this
exact same reaction occurs every time something old starts getting replaced by
something new.

Same thing happened with the iPhone 7, even though it came with a very neat
little adapter so you can plug whatever headphones you want into it.

Even in some dystopian future where phones are completely wireless, I'm sure
you can still buy a little Bluetooth adapter to put on the end of your
electrostatic headphones that you wear whilst jogging each day.

~~~
ck425
Except that adapter has a max voltage of 0.5v IIRC, which significantly
reduces the quality of any high impedance headphones.

------
komali2
I believe this is an objectively stupid idea.

I want to be openminded and understand why I would buy a phone that doesn't
have a headphone jack, when there are phones that exist that do have a
headphone jack (AND bluetooth!).

I don't think I can understand these companies' motives unless I can be
convinced there's some benefit here. Can someone who likes phones without
headphone jacks tell me why they are a better product that phones that do have
headphone jacks?

------
yalogin
Not even a year since they mocked the iPhone for the lack of headphone jack
and they themselves removed it. It’s a matter of time before the rest of the
phones ditch it too. Or may be it becomes a “feature” for the high end phones.
Got to say Apple saw it first.

------
sna1l
This phone better be waterproof...

------
PhasmaFelis
I do not understand how this benefits anyone except the "must be thinner"
fetishists. With Apple it was their usual form-over-function problem, which is
at least what we expect from Apple, but why would Google follow suit?

~~~
cschep
just to play devil's advocate..

you don't see how it benefits people that use wireless headphones and are glad
the phone has more space inside for say.. memory/battery/dissipating heat for
a faster chip, etc?

we technologists have a very weird love/hate with progress. deep need to
revolutionize and move forward and make progress and not do what our parents
did and then.. they touch the wrong port and OH MY GOD

:)

~~~
tensor
So my car doesn't have bluetooth. I use a headphone adapter thing. I had a
bluetooth one that failed after less then a year and was quite expensive. My
option I guess is to play the roulette and buy another bluetooth adapter brand
hoping it works better?

Or maybe people think I should buy a new car? Obviously I need to buy new
headphones, which sucks because mine are nice. And then these bluetooth
headphones run out of batteries frequently, you need to remember to charge
them, batteries don't usually last more than 3-4 years either so you are
rebuying all your headphones every 3-4 years now?

I'm all for improved technology, but for me this is a step strictly backwards.
It doesn't improve quality, it's far less convenient, and far more expensive.

~~~
bliss
Apple's phone comes with a little adapter to connect up a 3.5mm jack - can't
charge at the same time though, but I'm pretty sure there are solutions for
that, with a bit of dongle juggling - which would be not too bad a solution in
a semi-permanent place like your car

------
sengork
It may be useful if they trade the space saved by removing the headphone
components to accomodate more battery capacity. This assumes that you're
already using BT for your phone audio needs.

------
akmarinov
Hey, remember when they specifically called out Apple for not having a
headphone jack at the first Pixel reveal? I wonder how they’re going to spin
it now.

------
arvinsim
I just don't understand why we can't have the best of both worlds. I mean,
having the headphone jack doesn't mean not having bluetooth.

------
bassman9000
The current Pixel bluetooth support is horrendous. I hope this is not true.

------
johnsmith21006
Do not believe it.

