And to say it was about "Courage". No, we all understand that it's a way for them to make more money selling their horrible headphones and licensing lightning to headphone makers.
That "courage" bit may be the most pretentious and ridiculous thing I've heard Apple say to date, and that's clearing some high bars. They're a consumer electronics company, not doctors without borders.
While from a financial standpoint this would make sense, most of the guys making the executive decisions at Apple are design focused and oriented. Dropping the headphone jack differentiates Apple even more from its competition, makes the phone sleeker, helps with water proofing, makes the wireless headphones more appealing (which not only act as headphones but also communication devices). This was much more than just a financial move for Apple, and in my opinion it looks to be a smart one.
For me i estimate my iphone use as:
80% Music 8% Calling 8% email 2% browsing 2% other stuff
With that in mind removing the 3.5 jack does not make the phone sleeker you need to see the adapter as a part of the iPhone as the phone is mostly useless without it.
The word sleek is unrelated to size, it refers to having an elegant, streamlined shape of design. Removing the 3.5mm jack does allow for a more sleek design.
This is what I'm talking about. I don't really use my phone to play music that much (although it is definitely a non-zero amount). The dealbreaker for me is that they've made a device that doesn't lay flat without a case. Although, since it has that ugly bump on the back, it's not like I'd want to have the phone outside a case anyway.
Actually, it's not really about appearances for me. It's just that it wouldn't sit flat. Like a table with 1 leg that's an inch longer than the others at a shitty diner.
Apple permanently lost their "sleek" cred when they introduced the camera bump on iPhone 6. No way in hell Steve Jobs would have released that monstrosity.
It's only smart on one hand (for the reasons you mention). On the other hand users will be pissed off at losing the convenience (yes, convenience) of plug and play headphones, along with the many other reasons why wired > wireless.
It may be a smart move in the end, but it's not obviously so at this point.
I saw it more as a push to eliminate the cord from headphones entirely. I personally hate the cord, but I hate charging bluetooth headphones even more. I hope eliminating the jack will result in better wireless headphones, but I'm not super confident that it will.
Apple of all companies knows that a dongle isn't a viable long term solution for a problem like that. They included it to ease the transition, not as a replacement.
I won't even touch a USB ethernet dongle for laptops, let alone a dongle for my iphone.
The headphone connector is already pressed close to breaking point in my pocket, I can't have something even bigger sticking out of the phone in a tight pocket.
So use wireless headphones, or get a pair of lightning headphones.
It's not really clear to me what the issue is, though, since the dongle can just be treated as an extension to the headphone cable. If anything, it should be harder to break, because the headphone jack part is on a flexible cable, and the part that's attached to the phone is the fairly durable Lightning connector (whereas 3.5mm male connectors are often somewhat flimsy).
> since the dongle can just be treated as an extension to the headphone cable
When in use, sure.
When not in use, then it becomes an extra item to carry / keep around.
> the fairly durable Lightning connector (whereas 3.5mm male connectors are often somewhat flimsy)
Citation needed. Actually, since the 3.5mm port is deeper, and the 3.5mm jack thicker, physics says the same amount of force would be better spread out via 3.5 connections than via a shorter, thinner connection as Lightning.
> When not in use, then it becomes an extra item to carry / keep around.
When not in use, why not just keep it attached to the headphones?
> Citation needed.
Uhh, personal experience? I've certainly bent my share of 3.5mm plugs, but I've yet to hear of anyone actually bending their lightning cable plug.
> […] physics says the same amount of force would be better spread out via 3.5 connections […]
This is a specious argument. Physics does not say this at all, because you haven't defined the materials you're working with. If the lightning connector and the 3.5mm plug are made out of the same material, and the 3.5mm plug is completely solid, then you could make this argument. But in my experience 3.5mm plugs are not made out of material that's as durable as the material lightning cable plugs are made from, and 3.5mm plugs also often give the impression of being hollow inside. Sure, you can probably make an extremely durable plug, and I'd guess that more expensive headphones probably have more durable plugs than cheaper headphones, but regardless I don't think you really have to worry about bending your lightning connectors.
> Uhh, personal experience? I've certainly bent my share of 3.5mm plugs, but I've yet to hear of anyone actually bending their lightning cable plug.
And in personal experience, I have never once damaged a 3.5mm plug, despite extreme rough use (and I mean the "extreme"). Can't say I have bent / never bent a lightning plug though, since I've never used an iPhone.
I wasn't worried; I was making the argument that the lightning connector is more durable (in my experience) than 3.5mm, hence anyone who's satisfied with the durability of a 3.5mm plug (as you seem to be) would have no problems with the durability of the lightning plug. If you're not worried about this, why did you try and argue against it?
By that logic, I'm not worried either. I just don't agree with your belief that the lightning plug is more durable than 3.5mm. My disagreement with your belief was the argument I was making.
Except that it is a non flexible extension that sticks out, in addition of the jack itself which already sticks out.
I won't go wireless. The last thing I want is another battery to manage, and I do care about music quality. I always saw the iphone as an ipod with internet. I stashed a spare iphone 6s so I don't need to change my habits for another 1-3 years. Then I guess I will have to learn how to use my phone again by switching to Android.
I'd be curious if the 6s starts trading at a premium to the 7. That was the case of the Galaxy Tab 1 at one point, bigger screen, better battery, looks like people preferred it to the Galaxy Tab 2.
A headphone male connector is already a non-flexible thing that sticks out. I don't see how the lightning adaptor is any different in that regard. It's a bit of non-flexible stuff that sticks out, attached to a flexible cable. The biggest difference is the cable then has another short non-flexible bit in it, but nobody complained about having short non-flexible portions of cable when headphones started including volume controls on the cable (it's just on a different part of the cable).
> I do care about music quality
It seems that AirPods aren't bluetooth but are instead something else. I'd expect the audio quality to be better than bluetooth. But I guess we have to wait until people have actually tried them out to determine how good it is.
> Then I guess I will have to learn how to use my phone again by switching to Android.
I do not believe for a second that you're going to actually change platforms simply to have an audio jack without a dongle. I bet in 1–3 years you're going to realize that there's a plethora of lightning headphones to choose from, along with an adaptor that lets you use headphones and charge simultaneously, and you'll stop thinking about this change as a problem.
You see the prices on lightning headphones? Cheapest one Apple offers is $150. Searching for best cheap bluetooth headphones finds a bunch clustered around $100.
I lose headphones like crazy, and I'm not an audiophile, so my average spend on headphones is under $20
Up until today there's been minimal demand for Lightning headphones. Once the iPhone 7 is released I'd expect cheap Lightning headphones to be pretty common, just like you can find both Lightning and Micro-USB charging cables near the cash register at pharmacies today.
I use (and keep) my headphones for years and I am an audiophile. This is a non-starter for me as well. I don't want to buy new $200 headphones after Apple inevitably obsoletes lighting and Bluetooth leaves a lot to be desired in terms of lag, pairing, charging, and audio quality.
But forcing a $200 purchase is. Your parent already has good headphones they like, has had them for years, and none of those headphones needs replacing because they broke down or are obsoleted. The $200 purchase your parent mentions is because of Apple obsoleting something.
>Also $200 isn't that expensive when talking about headphones
It absolutely is. Is it more common now than a few years ago? Yep. But it's still expensive, especially when there are excellent options below $50 and serviceable ones around $4-5.
Clearly, though my every day pair are HD650s for home/office work. Well worth the $300, but also not something I plan on ever upgrading or replacing. $200 headphones are a luxury item and, I believe, objectively expensive.
If they provide excellent sound over BT, maybe they're worth the $200 (160?), but they'd still be expensive.
The Motorola S305's are some of the best Bluetooth headphones I've ever owned and they're usually ~$20-25. Comfortable, good battery life, decent enough audio quality, build quality that lasted 3 years. After that time the foam pads started falling apart, so I ordered another pair a few weeks ago.
There are other similar models around the same price. You don't have to spend $100+ to get similar audio quality to $20 headphones that happen to have Bluetooth as well. Bluetooth chips are stupid cheap these days, pairing that with a small battery really doesn't add much to the cost of normal cheap headphone equipment and you'll find plenty of pairs <$40.
